US news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares79 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump officials fume at Zelenskyy for disregarding advice before meeting

      by

      Inside the Trump White House, officials blamed the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, for the meltdown in the Oval Office on Friday, and expressed frustration that he pushed for security guarantees even though the US had made clear they wanted to negotiate that later, according to people familiar with the matter.The officials had told their Ukrainian counterparts in advance of the meeting that Trump wanted to sign an economic partnership this week at a ministerial level, as aides worked on the details about security guarantees.Trump saw the minerals deal as the first phase of a broader economic partnership and told aides it showed the US was effectively making a commitment on security guarantees, because the agreement deal would mean the US had a vested interest in Ukraine’s economic prosperity.The officials believed that had all been communicated to Ukraine, as was the advice that senators gave Zelenskyy on Friday morning to praise Trump and not litigate the issue of wanting stronger security guarantees to his face.To Trump’s aides, Zelenskyy did not heed that advice when he expressed skepticism at JD Vance’s view of making peace with Russia and, in their view, lectured the US vice-president on the history of Russia’s aggression towards Ukraine that started in 2014 with the annexation of Crimea.That set off a downward spiral in the Oval Office as Vance took issue with being questioned about his description of diplomacy, and clapped back at Zelenskyy: “I’m talking about the kind of diplomacy that’s going to end the destruction of your country.”Vance cut into Zelenskyy with opprobrium that would have been objectively harsh for an adversary, much less for a putative ally. He appeared to interpret Zelenskyy’s remarks to him as an insult to the US.But the fury with which Vance castigated Zelenskyy for being ungrateful appears to have been the moment when Vance and his team’s personal views about the Ukraine conflict came to the fore.On Thursday, when the prospect of completing the minerals deal was considered more of a probability, Trump had played down his comment calling Zelenskyy a dictator last week. “Did I say that? I can’t believe I said that. Next question,” Trump told reporters.That brief moment of levity masked the reality that Trump had workshopped the “dictator” post on Truth Social with Vance before it was sent out last week, according to two people briefed on the matter.Vance had settled on the insult on the basis that Zelenskyy had suspended elections, the two people said, apparently ignoring the fact that Ukraine’s constitution decrees that elections cannot be held during a period of martial law, like the one Zelenskyy declared when Russia launched its full-scale invasion in 2022.While other US allies, such as the UK prime minister, Keir Starmer, and the French president, Emmanuel Macron, effusively praised Trump in the Oval Office this week, Zelenskyy took a different approach and perhaps unknowingly careened headfirst into Vance’s personal skepticism of him.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTrump officials said privately on Saturday that Trump still wants to sign the minerals deal, but an immediate reset appeared unlikely with Trump scheduled to attend a fundraising dinner for the Maga Inc super political action committee in Palm Beach and Zelenskyy’s departure from the US for the UK.There had been one attempt by Ukraine to save the deal after the meeting blew up when Zelenskyy’s aides suggested that Trump meet with Zelenskyy one-on-one to calm tensions. But Trump officials declined the offer, according to two people familiar with the matter.Trump’s view immediately after the meeting was that it was unproductive to engage in further talks because, to him, Zelenskyy was unwilling to sign a peace agreement with Russia.In the end, Trump’s national security adviser, Mike Waltz, and the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, informed the members of the Ukrainian delegation, who were waiting in the Roosevelt Room, that they needed to leave. Minutes later, Zelenskyy stepped into a black SUV that drove off the White House grounds.Appearing on Fox News that evening, Zelenskyy referred to Ronald Reagan’s dictum that “peace is more than just an absence of war” and suggested that because Putin had broken dozens of ceasefire agreements already, more work was needed to reach “a just and lasting peace”. Trump appeared unimpressed when he boarded Marine One en route to Palm Beach, telling reporters that Zelenskyy needed to say publicly that he wanted to make peace and stop saying “negative things” about Putin. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Andrew Cuomo announces run for mayor of New York City

      by

      Former New York state governor Andrew Cuomo on Saturday announced a run for mayor of New York City, an attempt to come back from a sexual harassment scandal that forced him to resign more than three years earlier.Cuomo, 77, served as governor from 2011 to 2021, guiding the state through the worst, deadliest months of the Covid-19 crisis. But he was forced to resign in August of his final year as governor when an investigation commissioned by the New York attorney general, Letitia James, found he had sexually harassed at least 11 women during his time in office.The former governor, a Democrat, is aiming to unseat incumbent the New York City mayor, Eric Adams, who has been grappling with criminal corruption charges that the US justice department is seeking to have lifted – pending a judicial sign-off – at the behest of Donald Trump’s second presidential administration.In a campaign video announcing his mayoral candidacy, Cuomo verbally painted the so-called Big Apple as a city in crisis.“The first to solving a problem is having the strength, having the courage, to recognize it, and we know that today our New York City is in trouble,” he said, pointing to empty stores fronts, graffiti, grime, an influx of migrants that has taxed municipal infrastructure, and violent crime in some instances carried out by people who are mentally ill and lack access to treatment.“The city just feels threatening, out of control,” Cuomo said in his more than 17-minute announcement video. “These conditions exist not as an act of God, but rather as an act of our political leaders, or more precisely the lack of intelligent action by our political leaders.”The city faces a ranked-choice Democratic primary in April now dominated by two political figures with tarnished reputations, both betting that voters will overlook claims against them as politically motivated – or, in Cuomo’s case, that sexual harassment allegations which he vigorously denied have lost their power to derail political careers several years since the dawn of the #MeToo era.“How can you have a report that says 11 cases [of sexual harassment], and then it goes through law enforcement and they find no cases?” Cuomo said at a South Bronx church in March 2022, calling the report “a fraud”.A former staffer, Charlotte Bennett, later dropped her sexual harassment lawsuit against Cuomo, shortly before she was set to give her deposition in the case.A former Cuomo top aide who claims Cuomo made unwanted sexual advances towards her in 2000 told the New York Post that “women’s rights” will suffer if he is elected NYC’s next mayor.“Women haven’t done enough to toughen laws to protect women from such immoral, unethical and what should be illegal behavior by men in positions of power, such as Cuomo,” Karen Hinton said Saturday, adding that the mayoral election “should be an opportunity … to give women a strong, powerful voice” in city government that it “won’t get it if Adams or Cuomo is elected”.In his statement, Cuomo briefly addressed the end of his governorship, which included claims that he had allowed Covid-19 to fatally tear through state nursing homes and then attempted to cover it up.“Did I always do everything right in my years of government service? Of course not,” he said. “Would I do some things differently knowing what I know now? Certainly. Did I make mistakes? Some painfully. Definitely. And I believe I learned from them and that I am a better person for. And I hope to show you that every day.”He added: “I will fight Washington and Albany to make sure we get our fair share of funding, and to protect the rights and values that New Yorkers hold dear: that we believe that any discrimination by race, color or creed is anti-American.”Adams, a Democratic star when elected in 2021, has seen his support dwindle amid a swirl of scandals that ensnared some of his closest confidantes.Four deputy mayors recently resigned after it was claimed that the justice department’s request to drop its criminal indictment against Adams amounted to a “quid pro quo” with the Trump administration leaning on the mayor to help with federal deportation efforts.In a crowded field of mayoral candidates, Cuomo benefits from high name recognition, with 32% of those polled picking him as their favorite candidate. Other candidates – including former city comptroller Scott Stringer, incumbent city comptroller Brad Lander, state senator Jessica Ramos and Adams – are at 10% or less.There’s a dynastic component to Cuomo’s entry into the race. His father, Mario Cuomo, also served as New York governor, but he failed to win a bid for New York City mayor in 1977.Since stepping down as governor, the younger Cuomo has maintained his public profile, visiting Black churches and Jewish community groups. Both are constituencies where Adams and Cuomo are bound to seek key voter support.“Leading in practically every public poll so far, even before announcing his candidacy, Cuomo appears poised to prove that he has managed to overcome scandals that may have felled other politicians after his yearslong dedication to staying in politics and a series of legal victories that he has framed as vindication,” the journal City and State recently opined. More

    • 175 Shares106 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s style of petty domination was in full display with Zelenskyy | Moira Donegan

      by

      The last time Donald Trump did this, it was in secret, and he got impeached over it. In 2019, Donald Trump, on a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy, demanded that the Ukrainian president produce – or fabricate – evidence of wrongdoing by Hunter Biden, the son of Trump’s eventual opponent in the 2020 election, in exchange for continued US military aide.At the time, Russia had already seized control of the Ukrainian region of Crimea, and was funding violent insurgent groups in the country’s east; it was increasingly clear that a full-scale Russian invasion was coming, as it finally did in 2022. Since the end of second world war, it has been America that checks Russian expansionist ambitions in Europe – America that provided the backstop to the Nato alliance, America that secured the independence of eastern Europe. Trump wanted to condition that longstanding role on Zelenskyy doing him a personal political favor. The international order could be ended, he suggested, if those who depended on him didn’t do enough to indulge his vanity, self-interest and impulsive whims.Something similar was already afoot earlier this week, when Trump summoned Zelenskyy to Washington at the last minute to pressure him to sign a mineral rights deal. Trump wanted to make continued American support for Ukraine’s military effort contingent on American involvement in the country’s mineral industry. But the deal that was offered to Zelenskyy in fact contained no security guarantees: it offered something less like a bilateral agreement and more like a shakedown. Nevertheless Zelenskyy, who is leading a besieged people in danger of losing their country, seemed willing to take it – even after Trump called him a “dictator” last week.But things went downhill from there. Trump seemed determined to antagonize Zelenksyy, making a passive aggressive remark about what the Ukrainian president was wearing when he arrived at the White House. (Sources close to Trump leaked to Semafor that the administration was also displeased with Zelenskyy’s “body language”.) In a meeting in the Oval Office, with film crews and reporters present, the US vice-president, JD Vance, began berating Zelenskyy for what he alleged was the Ukrainian president’s disinterest in diplomacy, by which he seems to have meant a Ukrainian surrender on Russia’s terms.When Zelenskyy countered that Russia has not been a reliable partner, breaking promises to Ukraine repeatedly in past ceasefires, Vance began berating him that he was not grateful enough for US support. “I think it’s disrespectful for you to come into the Oval Office and try to litigate this in front of the American media,” said Vance, who had initiated the confrontation with cameras in the room, in a practiced cadence. “Have you said thank you once?” Zelenskyy has in fact said “thank you” to the United States many times, including at the outset of the meeting. Both Trump and Vance began raising their voices, ignoring Zelenskyy’s attempts to speak and impugning both his leadership and his personal character. Zelenskyy was soon kicked out, and left the White House without signing the minerals agreement that Trump had nominally summoned him from Ukraine to conclude.It is clear that the post-second world war international order is over. It is clear that Europe will have to look elsewhere, and not to the United States, for its security, and that America will increasingly be isolated among nations, without allies to advance its interests abroad and without friends to share the benefits of science, culture and commerce. Few world leaders, after all, are willing to make deals with such a mercurial partner; fewer still are willing to try, if the attempt will be met with public humiliation in such brutish and bullying style.It is clear that other great powers, including those who do not share what were once America’s stated principles of justice, democracy and human dignity, will fill this vacuum, to America’s detriment. It is clear that Donald Trump does not intend to check Vladimir Putin’s expansionist ambitions – that he will force a deal in the Ukraine war on Russia’s terms, that Zelenskyy himself will likely be exiled or killed in the aftermath, and that other countries in Europe are in danger.In the hours after the meeting, many world leaders publicly voiced their support for Zelenskyy, including the Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk. Like him, they stand on the edge of an uncertain future. Russia is on the march, indifferent to borders, laws and freedoms, and the United States will no longer stop them. As an American, I was embarrassed by the display. I am also, now, very scared.Because what Trump did to Zelenskyy on Friday is not a departure from his style: it is entirely typical of his domineering approach to politics – one in which violence or harm is threatened to extort his preferred outcomes, and in which good faith negotiation or even basic dignity is shrugged off in favor of petty displays of domination and cruelty.Trump and Vance, I now think, never really intended to have a conversation with Zelenskky: they intended, instead, to try to make themselves look tough on TV by humiliating him. Jake Paul, a boxer, influencer and alleged crypto scammer who has been a booster of Donald Trump, said of the televised shouting match against a head of state, “This isn’t attacking. This is called being a MAN.”Manliness seems to be all that Trump aspires to: and he defines it, almost exclusively as cruelty. Both on the international stage and on the domestic one, Trump and the crowd of racist, misogynist and endlessly immature idiots who surround him will stop at nothing to prove what men they are – no matter how much America suffers, or how many people die, in the process. At the meeting, when Zelenskky tried to persuade Trump to feel differently about the prospect of Russian expansion, Trump cut him off. “Don’t tell us what we’re going to feel,” he said. “We’re going to feel very good. We’re going to feel very good and very strong.” Maybe he does.

      Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More

    • 150 Shares112 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Bewildering’: US media and politicians react to Trump’s televised attack on Zelenskyy

      by

      One television star turned president visits another far more powerful one on a stage set and attempts to introduce a plot twist of sorts. What could go wrong?The high-stakes White House showdown that unfolded on Friday after the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, demanded US security guarantees was deemed a damaging setback to Donald Trump’s goal of forging a peace deal – and a win for Russian dictator Vladimir Putin – by some US political commentators.And others in the US who are closely aligned with Trump cast the president’s meeting with Zelenskyy as a win for his “America first” realignment goals.“It is bewildering to see Mr Trump’s allies defending this debacle as some show of American strength,” the conservative-leaning Wall Street Journal editorial board said on Saturday, noting that US aims of limiting Russian expansionism without the use of US forces was now “harder to achieve”.The outlet warned that “turning Ukraine over to Mr Putin would be catastrophic for that country and Europe, but it would be a political calamity for Mr Trump too.“Friday’s spectacle won’t make [Putin] any more willing to stop his onslaught” after invading Ukraine in 2022.The New York Times assessed that the derailed Oval Office meeting pointed to Trump’s “determination to scrap America’s traditional sources of power – its alliances among like-minded democracies – and return the country to an era of raw great-power negotiations.”“The three-year wartime partnership between Washington and Kyiv was shattered,” the paper added.Some conservative political figures also hit out at their fellow Republicans Trump and Vance for their handling over the meeting. “I hate to say this … but the United States right now is not the good guys in this,” said Adam Kinzinger, the former Republican congressman from Illinois who once served on a House committee that investigated Trump supporters’ attack on the US Capitol in early 2021.Whether diplomatic relations between Ukraine and the US can be repaired remained an open question Saturday. But the dispute points to the dangers of conducting diplomacy in public, despite the assessment from Trump – a former reality-TV host – that the clash with his Ukrainian counterpart, an ex-actor, made “great television”.“It is going to be incredibly hard to walk back from the kind of animosity we saw in that room today and to walk back some of those statements,” Republican strategist Karl Rove told Fox News. “It could have been done if cameras had not been running, but the only winner out of today is Vladimir Putin.”The US treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, revealed after the showdown that his meeting with Zelenskyy in Kviv days earlier resulted in a similar outburst. After Friday’s meltdown, Bessent called Zelenskyy’s approach “one of the great diplomatic own goals in history”.“Clearly it very difficult to do an economic deal with a leader that doesn’t want to do a peace deal,” Bessent told Bloomberg.“I’m not sure what he was thinking,” Bessent said of Zelenskyy, who was ultimately asked to leave the White House by the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, after Ukrainian diplomatic aides texted that they were prepared to sign the agreed economic rare earth minerals deal.The White House deputy chief of staff for policy, Stephen Miller, called out what he termed Zelenskyy’s “impertinence” and described the showdown as “one of the great moments in the history of American diplomacy”.“Millions of American hearts swelled with overflowing pride today to watch President Trump put Zelenskyy in his place,” Miller said, without elaborating on what public opinion information he had to justify that belief.Foreign Policy’s Ravi Agrawal wrote: “For a former comedian used to the cameras, it was strange that Zelensky got the script wrong.” Agawal noted that Trump had been testing the boundaries of press attention all week with “freewheeling” discussions in front of the world’s cameras.Such commentary came as Fox News host Bret Baier asked Zelenskyy whether he wanted to apologize to Trump, to which the Ukraine president said: “I’m not sure we did something bad.”“I respect [the] president and I respect [the] American people, and … I think that we have to be very open and very honest,” Zelenskyy told Baier.But arriving in London on Saturday ahead of a summit of British and European leaders, Zelenskyy thanked the US and its leadership while voicing hope for strong relations. “We want only strong relations with America, and I really hope we will have them,” he said.European leaders have stood behind Zelenskyy, with the German president, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, saying he “would never have believed that we would one day have to protect Ukraine from the USA”.The French president, Emmanuel Macron, said if someone is gambling with the third world war – as Trump accused Zelenskyy of doing on Friday – it was not Zelenskyy.“If anyone is gambling with World War III, his name is Vladimir Putin,” said Macron, after Trump complained that Zelenskyy had been overly negative about the Russian dictator. More

    • 213 Shares112 Views

      in US Politics

      Email shows that Musk ally is moving to close office behind free tax filing program at IRS

      by

      An Elon Musk ally installed in the US government said in a late night email going into Saturday that the office behind a popular free online tax filing option would be shuttered – and its employees would be let go.The 18F office within the General Services Administration (GSA) created the IRS Direct File program that allows for free online tax filings. It has been a frequent target of Musk, and one of the billionaire businessman’s close associates who holds a key position in the GSA informed staffers that the agency would close 18F in an email to staffers that arrived around 1am on Saturday morning.According to the message, the firings were in support of the executive order Donald Trump issued after beginning his second US presidency, which has empowered Musk’s so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) taskforce to cut federal workers.“The 18F Office has been identified as part of this phase of the GSA’s Reduction in Force (RIF) as non-critical,” the email states. “This decision was made with explicit direction from the top levels of leadership within both the Administration and GSA. There are no other TTS programs impacted at this time, however we anticipate more change in the future.”The email came from Thomas Shedd, a 28-year-old former Tesla software engineer who took over in late January as head of the GSA’s Technology Transformation Services. It’s not immediately clear what may happen to 18F programs such as the direct filing system or the total number of workers that the GSA is firing from the office, which has about 90 employees.Musk claimed in early February that he had “deleted” 18F while responding on X to a rightwing influencer who accused the agency of being “far left”. Musk didn’t elaborate on his statement, which caused confusion as the 18F website and services like its direct file program remained online.In addition to working on the free tax return program, the 18F office worked across government agencies to update technology and launch new software products. It worked on more than 31 projects across different government agencies in 2024, including the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (Cisa). It has been part of the GSA since 2014.Shortly after taking over TTS, Shedd told staffers that he planned to run the agency like a tech startup and that he wanted to implement artificial intelligence programs throughout the government. The GSA is one of the major agencies that Musk and his allies have taken over as part of their wider and potentially illegal dismantling of the federal government, which has cut services such as humanitarian aid and disease prevention while attempting to reshape agencies along ideological grounds. More

    • 225 Shares132 Views

      in US Politics

      It might be a small consolation, but Elon Musk is getting poorer by the day | John Naughton

      by

      Extreme wealth has always played a role in democracies. Money has always talked, especially in the US. Years ago, Lawrence Lessig, the great legal scholar, calculated that most of the campaign funding for members of Congress and aspiring politicians came from one-twentieth of the richest 1% of Americans – about 150,000 people. This is about the same number as those who are named “Lester” and explains the title of his book: The USA Is Lesterland.But that particular corruption of American politics only involved billionaires like the Koch brothers playing organ-grinders to congressional monkeys. The obscene wealth generated by the tech industry has catapulted a new organ-grinder into the heart of the machine. He was able to pay his way in with a spare quarter of a billion dollars that he happened to have lying around. And now the wretched citizens of the US find themselves living in Muskland.At the time he made the decision to ensure that Trump got elected, Musk was estimated to be worth $244bn. That didn’t mean, of course, that he had that amount of hard cash in his possession, just that he owned millions of shares in a number of companies that he had founded which were judged by investors to be valuable liquid assets that could be sold if necessary.Hold on to that thought: it may come in useful.How did Musk become so rich? It started, really, with PayPal, of which he was one of the founders, and from the sale of which he emerged with enough money ($175.8m) to become an early investor in Tesla and chair of its board. In 2002, he founded the rocket company SpaceX and, later, Starlink – which has launched thousands of low-orbit satellites for providing internet connectivity to remote regions. In 2015, he founded a solar power company, Tesla Energy, and Neuralink, a company aiming to integrate the human brain with AI the following year. In 2017, he founded The Boring Company, which did what it said on the tin, namely digging tunnels.And then in October 2022 he lost his mind, bought Twitter, and renamed it X. This last decision was a commercial disaster, but it gave him a huge megaphone which he deployed to support Trump’s campaign. It also got him a place right at the heart of the US government, with a mandate to dig deep into the machine, find out how it worked and – allegedly – to detect fraud and eliminate waste.As his goons were rooting through the innards of the federal payment system, one wonders if they came across some of the disbursements that the government has made to his companies. Payments from Nasa to SpaceX, for example, for launching stuff into orbit – or eventually bringing home astronauts from the International Space Station. Or subsidies and tax refunds to Tesla, whose early survival was ensured by government loans.There are some rich ironies to be found here. Could the Elon Musk who ranted that the US should “get rid of all subsidies” be the same Elon Musk who decided to build SpaceX, Tesla, Neuralink and Starlink in the US rather than in his native South Africa? For, as the tech pundit Scott Galloway puts it: “There would be no SpaceX without Nasa, its largest customer. Tesla built its Fremont factory with a $465m DoE loan in 2010, and its first 200,000 cars benefited from tax credit subsidies of up to $7,500. For years the company was able to report profits thanks to the ‘sale’ of emissions credits to other carmakers. All told, the company has accepted an estimated $2.5bn in government support.” And all of those subsidies went through the federal payments machine.At the moment, Musk looks unstoppable because he hasn’t yet triggered Trump’s narcissistic envy, and his wealth isolates from the consequences of his actions. But nothing lasts for ever and there are some encouraging straws in the wind. One is that Tesla is no longer looking as good as it once did. Sales of its cars are down 45% in Europe – at a time when EV sales there are generally up by 37%. And Muskwagens are losing ground to increasingly more attractive EVs from Kia and the Chinese challenger BYD.And then there’s what Tesla owners are ruefully calling “the Musk factor”. Owners of the company’s hideous Cybertruck, for example are finding red swastikas spray-painted on them in car parks. One sometimes sees Tesla saloons with embarrassed notices on their side windows saying “I bought this before we knew Elon was crazy”. There’s even a poster showing Musk standing in a Tesla giving a Nazi salute with the caption “0 to 1939 in 3 Seconds”. And Tesla stock is now on a downward track, which means that Musk’s net worth is not what it was. Who knows, maybe one day Trump will be richer than him after he’s finished looting Ukraine.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWhat I’ve been readingTalking to ourselves
      A fine essay by Renée DiResta on what’s happened to democracies’ public sphere.Herd mentality
      A really sombre Substack post by Charles Arthur.How Europe was left in the cold
      Nicholas Colin is back online. This post shows why he was missed. More

    • 175 Shares92 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘A bigger victory for Putin than any military battle’: Russia gleeful after Trump-Zelenskyy clash

      by

      Russian officials and Moscow’s media outlets reacted with predictable glee to the dramatic clash between Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Donald Trump at the White House on Friday.Posting on social media, Dmitry Medvedev, Putin’s deputy on the security council and former president, called the exchange “a brutal dressing-down in the Oval Office”.He wrote: “Trump told the … clown [Zelenskyy] the truth to his face: the Kyiv regime is playing with the third world war … This is useful. But it’s not enough – we need to stop military support [to Ukraine].”In recent days, concern grew in Moscow as Trump seemed to lean toward a more Zelenskyy-friendly position following visits to Washington by the leaders of Poland, France and Britain, who urged support for Ukraine. Trump had indicated a willingness to back European peacekeepers in Ukraine – a move Kyiv and European governments saw as essential to preventing Moscow from reigniting the war, as it had after previous ceasefires.But any worries the Kremlin may have had faded when Zelenskyy found himself ambushed by Trump and his vice-president, JD Vance.“How Trump and Vance held back from hitting that scumbag is a miracle of restraint,” wrote Maria Zakharova, Russia’s foreign ministry spokesperson, on Telegram.There has been no comment so far from Putin, who has instead taken a backseat, likely watching the fallout unfold with satisfaction. “Putin doesn’t have to say much right now,” said a source familiar with the Kremlin’s thinking.“It’s clear that he enjoyed the show and now believes he can push for even greater demands in Ukraine. That meeting was a bigger victory for Putin than any of his military battles since the start of the war.”The source predicted that Putin is likely to call Trump in the coming days to argue that Zelenskyy is not someone who can be reasoned with and must be replaced – a sentiment already echoed by some in Moscow as well as Washington.“The White House will now start looking more closely at other candidates for Ukraine’s presidency,” wrote Alexey Pushkov, a member of the upper house of the Russian parliament, on Telegram.View image in fullscreenRegime change in Ukraine has long been a goal for Putin, who has never hidden his desire to install a new leadership in Kyiv which is friendly to Moscow. On Telegram – the primary platform for political discourse in Russia – many influential pro-war bloggers echoed the rhetoric of Trump’s inner circle that portrayed Zelenskyy as an ungrateful child.“Overall, the meeting in the Oval Office once again revealed the true face of Zelenskyy: ungrateful, arrogant, brazen, and boundless,” wrote Rybar, a popular account with links to the Russian defence ministry.For Kremlin insiders, the incident also signified a fundamental shift in the global order, with a White House no longer seen as an enemy but rather as a partner to Moscow – one with whom business and politics can be conducted.“Volodymyr Zelenskyy underestimated the scale of the shift that took place in American politics after Donald Trump’s arrival,” said Fyodor Lukyanov, a prominent Russian foreign-policy analyst who heads a council that advises the Kremlin.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionLukyanov highlighted Friday’s moment when Trump declared that he was not on Ukraine’s side but viewed himself as a mediator in the conflict. “This is a fundamental shift,” Lukyanov added.But there were also warnings in Moscow that, given Trump’s unpredictable nature, it was too early to declare victory.“In the short term, this tragicomic exchange will undoubtedly weaken Zelenskyy’s position within Ukraine and give Russian diplomacy additional leverage in its dealings with the US,” said Anton Grishanov, a researcher at a thinktank affiliated with Russia’s foreign ministry.“That said, Moscow and Washington still have divergent views on the settlement process, and Trump’s unpredictable temperament could bring plenty of surprises on the path to ending the conflict,” he added.As the dust settles, it’s clear that Friday’s meeting delivered a major blow to Trump’s efforts to negotiate a peace deal between Kyiv and Moscow, while Russia prepares to escalate its offensive against a Ukraine on the verge of losing its most vital military support.“The war continues,” Lukyanov concluded. More

    • 188 Shares132 Views

      in US Politics

      Medicaid recipients fear ‘buzzsaw cuts’ for Trump’s agenda: ‘We’re not going to be alive forever’

      by

      At the age of 62, Marya Parral knows that her, and her husband’s, years of being able to care for their two developmentally disabled sons are numbered, and so they have done everything they can to ensure their children can continue to live independently.For their oldest, Ian, that’s meant placing him in a program on an organic farm that caters to people diagnosed with autism. For Joey, their youngest, who has both autism and Down syndrome, Parral has found a caregiver who can help him deliver newspapers and run errands around their community of Ocean City, New Jersey.Parral said none of this would be affordable without help from Medicaid, the federal government’s insurance program for poor and disabled Americans. But this week, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives approved a budget framework that would make deep cuts to the program, and Parral worries her sons will lose what she has worked so hard to build.“We’re not going to be alive forever. We’re trying to set up a life for them, but that entire life that we’re working so hard to set up for them is dependent on Medicaid,” Parral said. “So it’s really devastating to think about cuts.”Producing a budget is the first step in the Republican-controlled Congress’s drive to enact legislation that will pay for Donald Trump’s priorities. House lawmakers will now spend weeks working to write and pass a bill that is expected to approve $4.5tn in extended tax cuts, as well as funding for Trump’s plan for mass deportations of undocumented immigrants.To pay for it, Republicans are considering a rollback of the federal social safety net, particularly Medicaid, which has nearly 80 million enrollees in all 50 states. The budget plan proposes an $880bn reduction in funding for the insurance over the next 10 years, an amount that experts warn would hollow out the program and have ripple effects across the entire American healthcare system.Megan Cole Brahim, a professor at Boston University School of Public Health and an expert on Medicaid, said the cut was the largest ever proposed, and if enacted would “have far-reaching impacts not just for those who rely on Medicaid, but for entire communities and economies”.“These changes mean millions of Americans – including the low-income, elderly, persons with disabilities, children – will lose health insurance coverage,” she said. “Others may see significant reductions in benefits or limited access to care. The impact on hospitals and health systems will be significant, particularly for safety-net and rural hospitals, which are already on the brink of closure. Patient revenues will fall, uncompensated care will rise. There will be staff layoffs and site closures.”John Driscoll, a healthcare executive and chair of the board of UConn Health in Connecticut, said: “The scale of the buzzsaw cuts to Medicaid would undermine every hospital’s ability to actually support its mission to care for the community, and would be a dangerous cut to the nursing-home infrastructure in the country.”Republican leaders backed the cuts to Medicaid, as well as to similar programs such as one that helps poor Americans afford food, as a way to mollify lawmakers in their party who want the US’s large budget deficit addressed. Still, not everyone is pleased. As the budget was being debated, eight Republican representatives, some of whom Democrats are keen to unseat in next year’s midterm elections, wrote to the House speaker, Mike Johnson, warning that their districts’ large Hispanic populations would be harmed.“Slashing Medicaid would have serious consequences, particularly in rural and predominantly Hispanic communities where hospitals and nursing homes are already struggling to keep their doors open,” they said.All eight ultimately voted for the resolution, but the dissent may be a warning sign for the budget’s prospects of enactment, particularly in the House, where the GOP has a mere three-seat majority. It also remains unclear whether Republicans will try to pass all of Trump’s priorities in one bill, or split them into two.The GOP has made clear they want to fully pay for the extension of Trump’s tax cuts, and Elyssa Schmier, vice-president of government relations for advocacy group MomsRising, said Medicaid and social safety programs are the party’s prime targets for cost savings.“If you’re not going to go after, say, the Pentagon budget, if they’re only going to go to some of these big mandatory spending programs, there’s only so many places that Republicans feel that they can go,” she said.In the days since the budget’s approval, Johnson and Trump have scrambled to downplay the possibility of slashing Medicaid, insisting they intend only to root out “fraud, waste and abuse.”“The president said over and over and over: ‘We’re not going to touch social security, Medicare or Medicaid.’ We’ve made the same commitment,” Johnson told CNN in an interview.Democrats have little leverage to stop the budget, which can be passed with simple majorities in both chambers. But the Democratic senator Ruben Gallego warned that gutting the social safety net to extend tax cuts that have mostly benefited the rich will alienate voters who sided with the GOP last November.“It will be on Donald Trump and Republicans, the fact that he’s going to side with the ultra-rich versus the working poor,” said Gallego, who won election to his seat in Arizona even as Trump captured the state’s electoral votes. “Families that are barely making a living, scratching a living, they’re now going to get kicked off healthcare to give tax cuts to the mega-rich.”The proposed cut to Medicaid would remove billions of dollars in funding from congressional districts nationwide that are represented by lawmakers from both parties, according to an analysis by the liberal Center for American Progress.In California’s San Joaquin valley, the Democratic representative Jim Costa’s district would lose the third-largest amount of funding, according to the data, and Medicaid coverage would be imperiled for more than 450,000 residents.“This reckless budget prioritizes the wealthy while devastating those who need help the most,” Costa said. “I voted no because this resolution is bad for our valley and a threat to the wellbeing of the people I represent.” More