← Back to Dashboard

Scrape Result #9317 — cnn.com

Success · 5 headlines · 2026-06-25T18:01:46Z → 2026-06-25T18:02:15Z

Senate walks back rebuke of Trump over Iran war

One day after adopting a resolution aimed at removing US military forces from the conflict with Iran, the Senate walked back its rebuke of President Donald Trump’s handling of the war, rejecting an attempt to advance a similar war powers measure. Wednesday’s late-night vote came after Trump expressed frustration with Senate Republicans who voted for an Iran war powers resolution on Tuesday, as well as Republicans who missed that vote, arguing that Congress had undermined his position at the negotiating table with Iran. GOP Sens. Rand Paul and Bill Cassidy, who had previously voted to rein in the president’s war powers on Iran, changed their votes; Paul voted present and Cassidy voted against advancing the resolution. GOP Sens. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski once again voted for the resolution, while Democratic Sen. John Fetterman again voted against it. The final tally was 47-50-1.

Financial: 1 Sport: 1 War: 8 Sentiment: 4 Humor: 1 Season: 1 Social: 3 Local: 1 Global: 9 Clickbait: 2
The article primarily discusses the political implications of the US Senate's actions regarding the Iran conflict, scoring high on war and global relevance, while lacking elements of finance, sport, and humor.

Emotional moment Gisèle Pelicot meets UK survivors raped by their partners while sedated

Financial: 1 Sport: 1 War: 1 Sentiment: 2 Humor: 1 Season: 1 Social: 9 Local: 1 Global: 8 Clickbait: 6
The article focuses on a sensitive social issue involving survivors of sexual abuse, scoring high in social and global relevance, while having a very negative sentiment and minimal financial, sport, or humorous content.

Is the secret to the perfect kimchi in this lab?

Financial: 3 Sport: 1 War: 1 Sentiment: 7 Humor: 1 Season: 2 Social: 4 Local: 2 Global: 6 Clickbait: 8
The article focuses on the research and development of kimchi, which has a moderate financial aspect and global significance, but is presented in a way that encourages clicks due to its intriguing title.

Supreme Court strikes Hawaii’s ‘default’ ban on guns on private property that’s open to the public

The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a Hawaii law that banned guns on private property open to the public where the owner hadn’t explicitly condoned the carrying of firearms. In the ruling, the conservative majority said the law – passed after a blockbuster 2022 ruling from the high court expanding gun rights – was unconstitutional. “This regime hobbles what the Second Amendment protects: the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives. We hold that the law is unconstitutional,” Justice Samuel Alito said in the majority opinion for the court.

Financial: 1 Sport: 1 War: 1 Sentiment: 6 Humor: 1 Season: 1 Social: 3 Local: 1 Global: 8 Clickbait: 4
The article discusses a significant Supreme Court ruling on gun rights, which has global implications, but lacks humor, local focus, and financial aspects, resulting in a mixed sentiment score.

Supreme Court tosses $1.25 million verdict for man who says Roundup caused his cancer

The Supreme Court on Thursday sided against a Missouri man who claimed that the herbicide Roundup caused his cancer. The majority of the court backed an argument from the product’s manufacturer that the lawsuit should have been barred because the federal government does not require a cancer warning on the label. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the opinion for a 7-2 court. Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Neil Gorsuch dissented. The lawsuit was filed by John Durnell, who became known as “spray man” in his St. Louis neighborhood for using Roundup in the parks around his home. Years later, after Durnell was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma, he sued Monsanto, claiming his exposure to the pesticide was to blame. A jury awarded him $1.25 million.

Financial: 8 Sport: 1 War: 1 Sentiment: 3 Humor: 1 Season: 1 Social: 5 Local: 1 Global: 7 Clickbait: 6
The article primarily focuses on a legal case involving financial implications and a significant court ruling, with a negative sentiment due to the outcome for the plaintiff, while it has some global relevance due to the implications for product liability and health regulations.