Williams, SGA score big as OKC beat Pacers to take 3-2 NBA Finals lead

Jalen Williams erupted for 40 points as the Oklahoma City Thunder held off the Indiana Pacers to score a 120-109 victory and move to within one win of clinching the NBA Finals.

An enthralling Game 5 battle in Oklahoma on Monday saw the Pacers climb out of an 18-point first-half hole to get within two points of the Thunder in the fourth quarter.

But just as Indiana threatened the latest in a series of trademark comebacks, the Thunder found an extra gear with Williams and NBA Most Valuable Player Shai Gilgeous-Alexander steering the team to a pivotal victory.

The win leaves the Thunder 3-2 up in the best-of-seven series, meaning they can seal the NBA crown with victory in Game 6 in Indianapolis on Thursday.

Williams finished with 40 points, six rebounds and four assists while Gilgeous-Alexander co-starred with 31 points and 10 assists, four blocks and two steals.

“My teammates instil a lot of confidence in me to go out and be me,” Williams said. “And [coach] Mark [Daigneault] has done a good job of telling me to just be myself.”

Williams said Oklahoma City’s experience in Game 1 – when they blew a 15-point fourth-quarter lead to lose – had helped them close out victory.

“Tonight was the exact same game as game one, to be honest,” Williams said. “Learning through these finals is what makes this team good and we were able to do that.”

Jalen Williams, left, and Shai Gilgeous-Alexander led the Oklahoma City Thunder’s attack against the Indiana Pacers in Game 5 [Adam Pantozzi/Getty Images via AFP]

Pascal Siakam led the Indiana charge with 28 points but the Pacers were left sweating on the health of star point guard Tyrese Haliburton after the loss.

Haliburton, whose fitness has been under a cloud since game two of the series, left the game in the first quarter with a right calf problem before returning later in the contest.

The Pacers talisman finished with just four points from a bitterly disappointing outing – all of them coming from free throws – as the Thunder’s vaunted defence clamped down on the Pacers.

“He’s not 100 percent, it’s pretty clear,” Pacers head coach Rick Carlisle said. “But I don’t think he’s going to miss the next game.

Trump’s cabinet is less hawkish. Will that affect his Israel-Iran response?

Washington, DC – United States President Donald Trump has surrounded himself with a cabinet and inner circle that is markedly less hawkish on Iran than during his first term.

But analysts told Al Jazeera that it remains unclear whether the composition of Trump’s new cabinet will make a difference when it comes to how the administration responds to the escalating conflict between Iran and Israel.

Last week, fighting erupted when Israel launched surprise strikes on Tehran, prompting Iran to retaliate. That exchange of missiles and blasts has threatened to spiral into a wider regional war.

“I think there are fewer of the traditional Republican hawks in this administration,” said Brian Finucane, a senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, a think tank. “And you do have more prominent restraint-oriented or restraint-adjacent people.”

“The question is: How loud are they going to be?”

So far, the Trump administration has taken a relatively hands-off approach to Israel’s attacks, which Secretary of State Marco Rubio stressed were “unilateral”.

While the US has surged military assets to the region, it has avoided being directly involved in the confrontation. Trump also publicly opposed an Israeli strike on Iran in the weeks leading up to the attacks, saying he preferred diplomacy.

However, on Sunday, Trump told ABC News, “It’s possible we could get involved,” citing the risk to US forces in the region.

He has even framed Israel’s bombing campaign as an asset in the ongoing talks to curtail Iran’s nuclear programme, despite several top negotiators being killed by Israeli strikes.

Iran’s foreign minister, meanwhile, accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of “playing” Trump and US taxpayers for “fools”, saying the US president could end the fighting with “one phone call” to the Israeli leader.

‘Our interest very much is in not going to war with Iran’

Analysts agree that any course of action Trump takes will likely transform the conflict. It will also reveal how Trump is responding to the deep ideological rift within his Republican base.

One side of that divide embraces Trump’s “America First” ideology: the idea that the US’s domestic interests come before all others. That perspective largely eschews foreign intervention.

The other side of Trump’s base supports a neoconservative approach to foreign policy: one that is more eager to pursue military intervention, sometimes with the aim of forcing regime change abroad.

Both viewpoints are represented among Trump’s closest advisers. Vice President JD Vance, for instance, stands out as an example of a Trump official who has called for restraint, both in terms of Iran and US support for Israel.

In March, Vance notably objected to US strikes on Yemen’s Houthis, as evidenced in leaked messages from a private chat with other officials on the app Signal. In that conversation, Vance argued that the bombing campaign was a “mistake” and “inconsistent” with Trump’s message of global disengagement.

During the 2024 presidential campaign, Vance also warned that the US and Israel’s interests are “sometimes distinct… and our interest very much is in not going to war with Iran”.

According to experts, that kind of statement is rare to hear from a top official in the Republican Party, where support for Israel remains largely sacrosanct. Finucane, for instance, called Vance’s statements “very notable”.

“I think his office may be a critical one in pushing for restraint,” he added.

Other Trump officials have similarly built careers railing against foreign intervention, including Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who testified in March that the US “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon”.

Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, who had virtually no previous diplomatic experience, had also floated the possibility of normalising relations with Tehran in the early days of the US-led nuclear talks.

By contrast, Secretary of State and acting National Security Adviser Marco Rubio established himself as a traditional neoconservative, with a “tough on Iran” stance, during his years-long tenure in the Senate. But since joining the Trump administration, Rubio has not broken ranks with the president’s “America First” foreign policy platform.

That loyalty is indicative of a wider tendency among Trump’s inner circle during his second term, according to Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute.

“I think Trump 2.0 has a cabinet of chameleons whose primary qualification is loyalty and fealty to Trump more than anything else,” he told Al Jazeera.

Katulis noted that the days of officials who stood up to Trump, like former Secretary of Defense James Mattis, were mostly gone — a relic of Trump’s first term, from 2017 to 2021.

The current defence secretary, former Fox News host Pete Hegseth, has shown an appetite for conducting aerial strikes on groups aligned with Iran, including the Houthis in Yemen.

But Hegseth told Fox News on Saturday that the president continues to send the message “that he prefers peace, he prefers a solution to this that is resolved at the table”.

‘More hawkish than MAGA antiwar’

All told, Trump continues to operate in an administration that is “probably more hawkish than MAGA antiwar”, according to Ryan Costello, the policy director at the National Iranian American Council, a lobby group.

At least one official, US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, has sought to equate Iran’s retaliation against Israel with the targeting of US interests, highlighting the large number of US citizens who live in Israel.

Costello acknowledges that Trump’s first term likewise had its fair share of foreign policy hawks. Back then, former National Security Adviser John Bolton, his replacement Robert O’Brien and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo all advocated for militarised strategies to deal with Tehran.

“But there’s a big difference between Trump’s first term, when he elevated and very hawkish voices on Iran, and Trump’s second term,” Costello said.

He believes that this time, scepticism over US involvement in the Middle East extends throughout the ranks of the administration.

Costello pointed to a recent conflict between the head of US Central Command, General Michael Kurilla, and Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby. The news outlet Semafor reported on Sunday that Kurilla was pushing to shift more military assets to the Middle East to defend Israel, but that Colby had opposed the move.

That schism, Costello argues, is part of a bigger shift in Trump’s administration and in the Republican Party at large.

“You have many prominent voices making the case that these wars of choice pursued by neoconservatives have been bankrupting Republican administrations and preventing them from focusing on issues that really matter,” Costello said.

Finucane has also observed a pivot from Trump’s first term to his second. In 2019, during his first four years as president, Finucane said that Trump’s national security team gave an “apparently unanimous recommendation” to strike Iran after it targeted a US surveillance drone.

Trump ultimately backed away from the plan in the final hours, according to multiple reports.

But a year later, the Trump administration assassinated Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in a drone strike in Iraq, another instance that brought the US to the brink of war.

Who will Trump listen to?

To be sure, experts say Trump has a notoriously mercurial approach to policy. The last person to speak to the president, observers have long said, will likely wield the most influence.

Trump also regularly seeks guidance from outside the White House when faced with consequential decisions, consulting mainstream media like Fox News, breakaway far-right pundits, social media personalities and top donors.

That was the case ahead of the possible 2019 US strike on Iran, with then-Fox News host Tucker Carlson reportedly among those urging Trump to back away from the attack.

Carlson has since been a leading voice calling for Trump to drop support for the “war-hungry government” of Netanyahu, urging the president to let Israeli officials “fight their own wars”.

But Carlson is not the only conservative media figure with influence over Trump. Conservative media host Mark Levin has advocated for military action against Iran, saying in recent days that Israel’s attacks should be the beginning of a campaign to overthrow Iran’s government.

Politico reported that Levin visited the White House for a private lunch with Trump in early June, just days before the US president offered his support for Iran’s strikes.

But Katulis at the Middle East Institute predicted that neither Trump’s cabinet nor media figures like Levin would prove to be the most consequential in guiding the president’s choices. Instead, Trump’s decision on whether to engage in the Israel-Iran conflict is likely to come down to which world leader gets his ear, and when.

“It’s a favourite Washington parlour game to pretend like the cabinet members and staffers matter more than they actually do,” Katulis told Al Jazeera.

“But I think, in the second Trump administration, it’s less who’s on his team formally and more who has he talked to most recently – whether it’s Netanyahu in Israel or some other leader in the region,” he said.

American Bar Association sues to block Trump’s attacks on law firms

The American Bar Association (ABA) has sued the administration of US President Donald Trump, seeking an order that would prevent the White House from pursuing what it called a campaign of intimidation against major law firms.

The lawsuit, filed on Monday in a federal court in Washington, DC, alleged that the administration violated the United States Constitution by issuing a series of executive orders targeting law firms over their past clients and employees.

According to the complaint, those executive orders were used to “to coerce lawyers and law firms to abandon clients, causes, and policy positions the President does not like”.

Dozens of executive agencies and US officials are named in the suit, including Attorney General Pam Bondi, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Kash Patel and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

In a statement, the ABA — the country’s largest voluntary association for lawyers — called Trump’s attacks on law firms “uniquely destructive”.

“Without skilled lawyers to bring and argue cases, the judiciary cannot function as a meaningful check on the executive branch,” the association wrote.

Four law firms have separately sued the administration over President Trump’s orders, which stripped their lawyers of security clearances and restricted their access to government officials and federal contracting work.

Four different judges in Washington have sided with the firms and temporarily or permanently barred Trump’s orders against them. One of the firms that sued and won a preliminary victory, Susman Godfrey, is representing the ABA in Monday’s lawsuit.

White House spokesperson Harrison Fields responded to Monday’s lawsuit with a statement calling it “clearly frivolous”.

He added that the ABA has no power over the president’s discretion to award government contracts and security clearances to law firms.

“The Administration looks forward to ultimate victory on this issue,” Fields said.

Despite Trump’s court losses, nine law firms have struck deals with the president, pledging to offer nearly $1bn in free legal services to stave off similar executive orders.

Monday’s lawsuit escalates a clash between the ABA and the Trump administration, which has cut some government funding to the group and has moved to restrict its role in vetting federal judicial nominees.

Shooting victim Colombia Senator Uribe Turbay critical after brain surgery

Colombian Senator Miguel Uribe Turbay is reported to be in extremely critical condition after undergoing surgery to tend to a brain bleed, just more than a week after being shot in the head during a campaign event.

The attack was part of an eruption of violence that has stoked fears of a return to the darker days of assassinations and bombings.

The Santa Fe Foundation hospital on Monday said that Uribe was stable after undergoing a “complementary” operation to his original surgery, but remained in serious critical condition.

It added that an urgent neurological procedure had been necessary because of clinical evidence and imaging showing an acute inter-cerebral bleed, but that the brain swelling persisted and bleeding remained difficult to control.

The 39-year-old potential presidential candidate from the right-wing opposition was shot in the head twice on June 7 during a rally in Bogota.

The assassination attempt, which was caught on video, recalled a streak of candidate assassinations in the 1980s and 1990s, a time when fighting between armed rebels, paramilitary groups, drug traffickers and state security forces touched the lives of many Colombians.

Three suspects, including a 15-year-old alleged shooter, are in custody. An adult man and woman are also being held.

The 15-year-old boy, who police believe was a “sicario” or hitman working for money, was charged last week with the attempted murder of Uribe, to which he pleaded not guilty. He was also charged with carrying a firearm.

The adult man, Carlos Eduardo Mora, has been charged for alleged involvement in planning the attack, providing the gun and being in the vehicle where the shooter changed his clothes after the attack, according to the attorney general’s office.

Uribe is a senator for the conservative Democratic Centre party and one of several candidates who hope to succeed left-wing President Gustavo Petro in the 2026 presidential vote.

He comes from a prominent political family. His grandfather, Julio Cesar Turbay, was president from 1978 to 1982, and his mother, journalist Diana Turbay, was killed in 1991 in a botched rescue attempt after being kidnapped by an armed group led by drug cartel lord Pablo Escobar.

The main dissident faction of the former Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) rebel group on Friday denied responsibility for the attack on Uribe, though it did accept responsibility for a series of unrelated bomb attacks.

Southwest Colombia was rocked by a series of explosions and gun attacks last week which has left at least seven people dead. The attacks hit Cali, the country’s third-largest city, and the nearby towns of Corinto, El Bordo and Jamundi, targeting police stations and other municipal buildings with car and motorcycle bombs, rifle fire and a suspected drone.

Colombia’s government has struggled to contain violence in urban and rural areas as several rebel groups try to take over territory abandoned by the FARC after its peace deal with the government.

US judge declares Trump’s cuts to NIH grants ‘illegal’

A Massachusetts federal judge has declared that cuts to National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants made by the administration of US President Donald Trump are “illegal” and “void,” and ordered that many of the grants be restored.

In a ruling issued on Monday, Judge William Young vacated the terminations that began in late February and said the NIH violated federal law by arbitrarily cancelling more than $1bn in research grants because of their perceived connection to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

Young told the court there could be little doubt the cuts represent “racial discrimination and discrimination against America’s LGBTQ community”, according to quotes published on X by Politico reporter Kyle Cheney.

In April, a group of researchers sued the NIH, saying hundreds of critical research projects were halted due to an “ideological purge”. The plaintiffs argued that the reasons given for the terminations – connections with “diversity, equity, and inclusion” and “gender identity” – were vague and lacking in concrete explanation.

Terminated grants included programmes focusing on women, racial minorities and the health of health of gay, lesbian and transgender people, but also included studies on cancer, youth suicide and bone health. The government has argued that the court lacks jurisdiction and that the NIH has discretion to set its own priorities.

Young said he was reinstating grants that had been awarded to organisations and Democratic-led states that sued over the terminations. And the judge strongly suggested that as the case proceeds, he could issue a more sweeping decision.

Young, who was appointed by US President Ronald Reagan, offered a harsh rebuke to the government, saying that in his 40 years on the bench, he had “never seen evidence of racial discrimination like this”.

‘Didn’t take job to terminate grants’

The ruling comes almost a week after Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), admitted that the Trump administration had gone too far in slashing biomedical research grants and said efforts were under way to restore some of the funding

Bhattacharya made the remarks Tuesday during a Senate committee hearing examining both recent cuts to his agency and deeper reductions proposed by the White House in next year’s budget.

“I didn’t take this job to terminate grants,” said the physician and health economist, who left a professorship at Stanford University to join the Trump administration.

G7 leaders push Trump on trade as talks continue

World leaders assembled at this week’s Group of Seven summit in Canada will try to push United States President Donald Trump to back away from his punishing trade war, which experts say poses a risk to global economic stability.

Most countries represented at the G7 are already subject to Trump’s 10 percent baseline tariff with threats of more to come. European countries and Japan face additional levies on cars and steel and aluminium. The G7 consists of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the US.

Arriving for a meeting with the host, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Trump said trade would be the “primary focus” of the summit, which began on Sunday and runs until Tuesday.

The trade issue is of particular interest to Canada after the Trump administration announced several extra levies on Canadian goods in recent months.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has been invited to the summit and will have her own face-to-face time with Trump as her country tries to renegotiate its three-way North American free trade agreement, which also includes Canada.

While there is little expectation that the summit will end with a breakthrough in the trade negotiations between the US and the rest of the world, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer is part of Trump’s delegation.

Dozens of countries are locked in negotiations with the Trump administration to clinch some sort of trade deal before the US imposes stinging “reciprocal” tariffs, threatened for July.

Last week, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the date could be pushed back later for countries thought to be negotiating in good faith.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz told reporters he would team up with his counterparts from France and Italy to discuss the US trade threat with Trump directly.

“[French President] Emmanuel Macron, [Italian Prime Minister] Giorgia Meloni and I are firmly resolved to try, over the next two days, to talk again with the US government to see if we can find a solution,” Merz told reporters.

“There will be no solution at this summit, but we may be able to get closer to a solution in small steps,” he added.

The European Commission handles trade negotiations for the 27-country European Union and the bloc’s trade chief, Maros Sefcovic, was also attending the summit, accompanying the delegation of commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

Shortly after arriving at the summit, von der Leyen on Monday made an appeal to “keep trade between us fair, predictable and open” in a veiled plea for Trump to back off from his tariff onslaught.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he will talk about implementing the UK’s trade deal with the US during his one-on-one with Trump.

The UK in May was the first country to sign a preliminary deal with Washington to avoid deeper tariffs although the 10 percent baseline levy stays in place.

Starmer said the deal was in its final stages and he expects it to be completed “very soon”.

Trade talks underscored by Iran and Israel

The trade talks come alongside increasing tensions between Israel and Iran as the two countries exchange attacks. On Monday, an Israeli air strike hit an Iranian state TV station midbroadcast. Calls for de-escalation have been a point of contention at the meeting, according to Al Jazeera’s James Bay.

“The problem with the G7 is that you have a range of views. You have President Trump on one end, who it seems will not even sign a statement on de-escalation. You have the Europeans, who have been saying ‘de-escalation’ since this current situation started on Friday,” Bay said.