Cyberattacks on American infrastructure by a country we are at war with is getting the Trump fantasy treatment. That is a far bigger deal than a few million dollars of corruption and a catfight between Pirro and Burgum.

Initial Iranian attacks on US infrastructure started in November of 2023 with a little test. An Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)-affiliated hacking persona called “CyberAv3ngers” breached a water pressure booster station in Aliquippa, Pennsylvania. The hackers left a message reading “You have been hacked, down with Israel” because the compromised equipment was Israeli-made. The device was exposed directly to the internet with the default password “1111”. No water supply was contaminated, but similar Unitronics devices were compromised at facilities across multiple US states and other countries. The US Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), under Biden, issued a security alert.

https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/cybersecurity-advisories/aa23-335a

The Biden administration responded. In February 2024, the Treasury Department sanctioned six IRGC Cyber-Electronic Command (IRGC-CEC) officials, including unit head Hamid Reza Lashgarian, for directing the campaign. In August 2024, the State Department offered a $10 million reward for information on the named individuals.

https://www.nextgov.com/cybersecurity/2024/02/treasury-sanctions-iranian-cyber-officials-tied-2023-water-system-hacks/393877/

New, more serious attacks began in 2026. CyberAv3ngers up their game beyond exploiting default passwords to deploying custom ICS malware (”IOCONTROL”) and, from March 2026 onward, actively exploiting an unpatched authentication-bypass vulnerability in Rockwell Automation/Allen-Bradley controllers. A joint six-agency advisory (CISA AA26-097A) in April 2026 confirmed actual operational disruption and financial losses at US water, energy, and government-services victims, and a July 22 update expanded the warning to also cover Schneider Electric and Siemens equipment.

The hackers are now coupling their intrusions with a sophisticated propaganda campaign to spread fear. According to Domain Technologies, a cybersecurity firm, “This dual-track strategy of blending genuine industrial control systems (ICS) operations with fabricated claims is not early-phase immaturity that the group outgrew. It is a standing operational doctrine that persists alongside the group’s increasingly sophisticated technical campaigns. When CyberAv3ngers claim a new compromise, organizations should look for corroborating technical evidence before treating the claim as confirmed.”

https://www.tenable.com/blog/what-to-know-about-cyberav3ngers-the-irgc-linked-group-targeting-critical-infrastructure

That evidence of control capture of US municipal water systems came last week. Just days after the advisory, a coordinated attack hit more than 30-36 community water systems across Minnesota, disrupting automated controls and briefly taking a well/treatment facility offline in Braham, Minnesota for about two hours; some systems had to switch to manual operation, and some areas saw water-pressure drops. Officials stressed drinking water was never contaminated or unsafe. The FBI subsequently confirmed similar incidents at water utilities in at least seven states, with Michigan and South Dakota also named alongside Minnesota and Wisconsin

US intelligence and state officials tentatively attributed the attacks to Iran, citing the absence of any ransom demand, the disruption-focused (not financially motivated) methods, and consistency with Iran’s known playbook — though they emphasized this preliminary assessment could change and no group has publicly claimed responsibility.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/minnesota-it-officials-disclose-coordinated-cyberattack-more-than-30-local-water-2026-07-28/

https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/fbi-warns-of-cyberattacks-on-water-systems-in-7-states-267611717585?playlist=mmlsnnd_bestofnbc-nnd

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/30/us/politics/minnesota-water-cyberattack-iran.html

So how did Trump respond? According to the NYTimes, he “publicly rejected the Iran attribution on July 31, instead blaming Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, calling the state “grossly incompetent” and saying “Iran’s got bigger problems than worrying about Minnesota”. Walz pushed back, saying Trump “knows exactly who is responsible” and that other states were hit too.”

On August 1, Trump TACOed on further US military strikes on Iran “pending a possible nuclear deal.” Interesting, after all of the tough talk on Thursday and Friday about planning major strikes on Iranian infrastructure.

The FBI and CISA are urging water utilities nationwide to disconnect programmable logic controllers that run equipment from the public internet and move to manual/segmented controls, though experts note the vulnerable equipment (especially Rockwell/Allen-Bradley controllers) is widely used, so more states may be quietly affected beyond the seven confirmed so far.

https://www.npr.org/2026/08/02/nx-s1-5917113/trump-says-hes-cancelling-iran-strikes-deal-pending

This is what modern warfare is. We are not safe because we are an ocean away from an enemy. That was proved 25 years ago with 9/11. But now, Iran doesn’t need jihadists. It just needs hackers. Think about disrupting water flow to nuclear reactors, or opening dam flood gates. A lot of damage can be done for very little cost compared to the price of a ballistic missile. Hackers are cheap, and with access to AI hosted in an ally like China, a bot could do the grunt work of detecting vulnerabilities and writing custom code after penetration.

The Trump regime has cut the CISA workforce by roughly a third since January 2025 (from about 3,400 employees), and the agency has not had a Senate-confirmed director throughout Trump’s second term.

You might want to tell your MAGA neighbors about how safe they can feel knowing how well Trump is protecting us.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

Trump first announced the Patriot licensing deal on July 8-9, 2026, at the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey, where he told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy alongside him that the U.S. would give Ukraine a license to manufacture Patriot air-defense interceptor missiles domestically — saying “We’re going to give a license to you to make Patriots... That’s pretty cool, right? This way, he can’t complain that we’re not giving them enough” . Zelenskyy said the next day that a political-level agreement had been reached on licensing PAC-3 interceptor production.

On July 28, when Zelenskyy met with Trump at the White House ahead of Lindsey Graham’s funeral, Trump reaffirmed the deal.

Trump walked it back yesterday, July 31. Apparently, Graham’s pro-Ukrainian influence on Trump did not last past his burial. During a Cabinet meeting at Camp David, Trump said “we have not agreed to that,” and he wasn’t sure whether the U.S. would actually grant the license, calling it “a hard thing to give away that kind of technology” and stressing the need to be “very careful” since the recipient of such technology “can someday turn it on you.”

I doubt that Zelenskyy was Charlie Brown while Trump, as Lucy, played “pull away the football” yet one more time. Zelenskyy took the opportunity after his meeting with Trump to stage DJT’s “mercurial” reversal, one that he expected, for maximum effect. Zelenskyy recognized he had to bolster the Coalition of the Willing’s resolve in the face of Putin’s incursions into Romanian and Polish airspace. The timeline to organize the parallel structures for NATO’s replacement in a world with an unreliable America as a declining world power is shortening as Trump devolves. The country that “can someday turn it on you” is here now with the US under Trump.

What the opposition to Trump must recognize is that there will be no going back to America as the world’s leader of democracy and beacon of freedom for decades. The damage Trump has wrought to democratic norms is too severe, the corruption goes too deep, for trust to return quickly. And even Trump realizes that payback will be coming, and not necessarily from within the US. He is terrified of international justice through the ICC.

The big winner here is Xi. He is well on his way to turning Russia into a Chinese vassal state as Russia’s economy implodes and American influence erodes. We are watching the destruction of American power by the manipulation of Trump’s fragile ego and the diminution of Russia’s because of Putin’s delusions of empire. Mind wars are killing hundreds of thousands, while Xi waits.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/trump-says-both-sides-ukraine-war-want-settlement-2026-07-08/

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-welcomes-zelenskiy-ahead-funeral-senate-ally-who-championed-ukraine-2026-07-28/

https://politicalwire.com/2026/07/31/trump-backtracks-on-ukraine-patriot-pledge/

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/31/us/politics/trump-ukraine-patriot-missiles.html

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

Bears Ears and Grand Staircase‑Escalante national monuments in Utah have coal and uranium resources. Trump is all-in on bringing back “clean coal” but the real prize is the uranium. The Bears Ears deposits are close to the only uranium mill in the US. The White Mesa Mill (Energy Fuels Inc., NYSE American: UUUU) uranium mill sits immediately east of Bears Ears and is the only operating conventional uranium mill in the U.S., making any nearby uranium deposits especially valuable due to low haulage costs.

This matters because there have recently been proposals to use small-scale nuclear reactors to power hyperscale AI data centers off the grid. Many of these data centers are proposed to be located near indigenous and minority communities, supposedly to provide jobs, but the data centers themselves require few personnel, and the nuclear reactor jobs would require highly skilled workers. Currently, there is no active plan for disposal of nuclear waste in the United States. Nuclear waste is being held in concrete storage pools on reactor sites across the country. Leakage from deteriorating pool liners poses a threat of groundwater contamination at nuclear power plant sites.

The only general disposal site in the country was supposed to be at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. It was first proposed in 1987, approved 15 years later, and halted in 2012 after being defunded following opposition from Nevada lawmakers, voters, and indigenous groups.

The other shoe dropped today when Politico reported that a leaked White House document is seeking to have willing states process and store nuclear waste.

The Trump administration is seeking changes to federal law to allow the Department of Energy to partner with states willing to store waste generated at the nation’s nuclear reactors, according to the document laying out “legislative principles.” It has been circulating on Capitol Hill and among nuclear industry leaders.

In exchange for bolstering nuclear fuel production and storing waste, the White House indicated states could see a surge of new business, including nuclear power plants and energy-intensive data centers.

Further, the administration wants Congress to allow the federal government to “provide interim storage for reprocessing at the” campus sites, according to the draft.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright earlier this year said that 28 states had weighed in on the department’s life-cycle innovation campuses request. Utah and Tennessee both submitted proposals that included potential for waste storage and fuel reprocessing.

Bears Ears National Monument is located in Utah. The White Mesa processing mill is close to a Ute Community.

Besides Westinghouse, which Trump is bailing out with the potential Saudi reactor deal, there are four companies designing small-scale reactors for the hyperscale data center market. Companies engaging in new reactor construction include TerraPower, X-energy, Kairos Power, and Oklo.

Oklo is publicly traded, while X-Energy had its IPO on April 24, 2026. Major shareholders in Oklo include Sam Altman, Morgan Stanley, BlackRock, Vanguard, Mirae Asset, Jane Street, Susquehanna, Citadel Advisors (Ken Griffin), and State Street. Chris Wright, Trump’s energy secretary, was a director at Oklo, raising concerns that the company could benefit improperly from government nuclear permits and programs.

Major backers of X-energy include Amazon’s Climate Pledge Fund, Ares Management funds, Jane Street, Segra Capital Management, Emerson Collective, and OPG, ARK Invest, Point72, NGP, Stack Capital, and affiliates tied to Citadel founder Ken Griffin. The company received development grants from the Department of Energy.

TerraPower and Kairos Power are still private. Bill Gates/Cascade Investments, NV Ventures, Nvidia’s investment firm, and SK Group, the parent of semiconductor manufacturer SK Hynix, are involved in TerraPower. Kairos Power has received major DOE support through a Technology Investment Agreement under the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program.

The NYTimes has reported on the regime’s foray into nuclear energy projects, both through the Saudi deal that benefits Westinghouse and through US-based hyperscale datacenters. The Saudi deal is now involved in controversy after there was pushback from members of Congress on allowing them to enrich uranium for potential weapons development. Trump then added a new requirement for the deal that the Saudis sign on to the Abraham Accords.

There is no evidence at this point that Mr. Trump’s friends or family helped orchestrate the Saudi nuclear deal. Yet a number of the president’s allies and relatives, including members of his cabinet, stand to benefit if his big bet on nuclear power pays off. Certain investors with ties to these deals are positioned to profit, even if the delivery of large new loads of nuclear-powered electricity remains years away.

The overarching goal is to generate more electricity as the demand surges worldwide, driven by a data-center building boom and growing consumer consumption. Investors are financing traditional, large-scale nuclear power plants along with a new technical approach called small modular reactors. Others are mining the uranium needed to power nuclear plants. Some others are vying to build those plants.

In some cases, how the Trump family or the president’s allies could potentially gain from the president’s nuclear plans is straightforward. In others, no direct line can be drawn, but there are such overlapping business ties that it is hard to separate the policy decisions from the potential personal benefits.

Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., are part owners through an investment partnership in Quantum Leap Energy, which is working to develop certain isotopes that can be used as nuclear fuel at a combined small-scale nuclear powerplant and hyperscale datacenter in Amarillo, TX with a Texas-based FermiAmerica co-founded by Rick Perry, who was energy secretary during Mr. Trump’s first term and is now seeking federal assistance to build nuclear power plants in Texas. Mr. Perry did not respond to requests for comment. The deal was negotiated by Howard Lutnick’s son.

Other members of Trump’s inner circle are also investing in nuclear projects as well. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is advocating for tax money to be invested in the nuclear sector. Meanwhile, Cantor Fitzgerald, the investment bank that Lutnick headed and is now run by his sons, has helped companies in the nuclear sector to raise money, generating millions of dollars in fees. The companies include Oklo, Energy Fuels Inc and enCore Energy. Each is seeking permits, financial assistance or Trump administration contracts for its nuclear projects.

According to the NYTimes

Energy Fuels, which Cantor helped last year raise money to expand its mining efforts, disclosed in June it is slated to get a $725 million federal loan from the Pentagon.

The company — one of the top U.S. producers of natural uranium concentrate sold to nuclear plants — has noted to The Times that it began working with Cantor before Mr. Trump’s second presidency. It declined to comment.

Whatever the ultimate outcome of the Saudi deal, Westinghouse has other irons in the fire.

In October, the Trump administration announced plans to partner with Westinghouse to build $80 billion worth of its nuclear reactors across the United States, in a deal negotiated in part by Mr. Lutnick.

“Together with Westinghouse we will unleash American energy,” Mr. Lutnick said in a statement then. “This partnership embodies the bold vision of President Trump — to rebuild our energy sovereignty, create high-paying jobs, and drive America to the forefront of the nuclear renaissance.”

Blake Ruppe, a Commerce Department spokesman, said that Mr. Lutnick has complied with all requirements that he divest from his family companies. “There is no conflict of interest,” he said in a statement. “It is knowingly false to suggest otherwise.”

And of course, the oligarchs are set to be directly enriched by enrichment. Enter Peter Thiel. According to the NYTimes:

Mr. Thiel is a major investor in General Matter, a U.S. nuclear fuel company focused on producing what is known as high-assay low-enriched uranium. A giant load of new nuclear fuel will be needed if all these new nuclear power plants are built, and General Matter is positioned to benefit.

The Energy Department in January awarded General Matter a $900 million contract to build out its nuclear fuel effort. The U.S. Export-Import Bank, where Mr. Lutnick is a board member, also issued up to $4.2 billion in “letters of interest” to finance the export of General Matter’s domestically enriched uranium to nuclear operators in South Korea and Japan.

Mr. Thiel did not respond to a request for comment. A spokesman for General Matter said that the federal support started under the Biden administration and that the company had not engaged with Mr. Vance since he became vice president.

Let’s be clear—solar and wind facilities can power these data centers without the potential environmental hazards. Solar farms can now be designed to have agricultural understories to grow crops and reverse desertification by conserving water, reducing evaporation, and improving crop yields. But as we all know, Trump hates clean energy, especially mature clean energy technologies like solar and wind. There is so much more opportunity for huge stock market gains by hyping speculative nuclear power-related companies that are getting government funding tied to meeting the power requirements of hyperscale datacenters needed to keep the AI bubble expanding.

Personally, I want to see a cost-benefit analysis of solar- and wind-powered data centers, which can be built NOW with environmental benefits, versus the development costs of unproven small-scale nuclear reactors and their potential adverse environmental impacts, including those from mining, processing, and handling spent fuel.

And then there is the issue of whether China’s pragmatic AI models, with their lower “compute” requirements, will prevail, sticking a pin in the US AI quest for a general-intelligence model that mimics human thought processes. The Chinese approach may prove easier to keep from going rogue, as the latest AI models here just did. Just a thought…

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/27/leaked-document-reveals-white-house-nuclear-waste-plan-01012663
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/20/us/politics/howard-lutnick-family-ai.html

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Rick Wilson’s Against All Enemies

Gerrymander Harder Daddy: Throw-Pillow Democrats, Get Your Sh*t Together

Read more

3 months ago · 199 likes · 56 comments · Rick Wilson

The messages are simple in the face of the Republican onslaught: we can still win seats despite the gerrymandering, and we have to bring our own guns to the gunfight and redistrict Republican seats out of every Democratic state in response by using the same argument to the courts that got the “wins” for Republicans.

My list for what you have to do to protect individual Democratic votes hasn’t changed (see below), and it’s even more imperative now. But there is something else you MUST do today. Write to your state representatives and shame them if they are Republicans, and if they are Democrats in a blue state, tell them you are wholeheartedly behind their doing an emergency redistricting before the midterms. If you don’t like the take guns to a gunfight analogy, say we need to fight fire with fire. You light backfires to burn the land, preventing a larger fire from spreading and destroying more valuable property by creating a buffer zone with no fuel.

DEMOCRACY is the valuable property. Democratic redistricting is the backfire. There is no choice here—non-partisan maps can be rebuilt to be indestructible when we win veto-proof majorities. They aren’t now—and that is a brutal lesson we are having to learn this minute.

**********************************************************************************

Make sure your vote will count. Remember that last-minute changes to the rules could occur--the Trump plan is to maximize chaos.

1. Check that you are registered and that your name on the voter roll matches your required photo ID and passport. Do it now, in 3 months and two weeks before Election Day.

2. Be sure you have documentation proving citizenship easily available- a copy of your birth certificate, a US passport, proof of name changes. A marriage certificate may not be sufficient. If SAVE America is passed by Congress, or a clone is passed by your state, you could be required to provide proof of citizenship as well as a valid photo ID. Student IDs may not be considered a valid photo ID.

3. Know what district you will now be voting in and who the candidates are, given the massive last-minute redistricting efforts that may be occurring.

4. Make sure you know where and how you will vote in case mail-in ballots are suddenly disallowed either nationally or in your state.

5. Join community outreach groups to get people registered and to the polls. The next few weeks have a lot of groups registering soon-to-be high school graduates.

6. Talk to your neighbors who lean Republican, or who are uninvolved or undecided, or who are just leaning Dem about what is at stake. Give yourself a goal of getting one other person to vote Democratic in the midterms.

7. Talk to your college-age kids who live at school and help them decide where and how they will vote. They need to have a plan for registration and voting, and their documentation assembled.

8. When you vote in the primaries, vote for the Democratic candidate who will be most electable. The more of your neighbors you talk to, the better you will be able to identify that person. Hold your nose if you have to. I know that is a big ask. But the time to fix the broken system with ranked-choice voting isn’t here yet. R’s are counting on us to splinter and worry about purity tests on a few controversial issues. In the meantime, Indiana just showed us that they are choosing to be monolithic behind the money.

WE CAN DO THIS. Hungary did. But we have to work our butts off for the primaries and the midterms. EVERY VOTE in EVERY ELECTION!!!

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

Primaries for the midterms are upon us; the Democratic Party platform is still the one from 2024, unrevised. It is 92-pages long. It is a plan for a more equitable America, one I would love to see. But it does not meet the moment.

An American version of Magyar’s success is what is required here. Implementing any reform through legislation will be difficult unless veto-proof majorities can be obtained in both the House and Senate by the Democrats themselves, or in a coalition with those Republicans who are elected, despite the expected blue wave, who have a bipartisan bent. I think it is more likely that and Republican winners will be oligarch-funded Trump cult worshippers who prevailed in their primaries. The oligarchs will see this as a last chance to enact their agenda. They will want to maintain the current environment of extreme polarization to prevent any of Trump’s vetoes of Democratic legislative reform from being overridden. Their long game is to deny Democrats any legislative wins before 2028, so that they can be portrayed as incompetent. Democrats will have to rely on two years of accountability hearings for their track record.

The likelihood of a veto-proof majority of 67 in the Senate, which would also be sufficient to convict Trump in a third impeachment, is slim. It would require that all 20 Republican Senate seats up for election in 2026 be flipped, and that no Democratic seats be lost, to add to the current 45 Democrats and 2 Independent seats to reach 67, and that still leaves DINO John Fetterman in play.

Democrats will have to play the accountability card after the midterms. That means they will need to focus on restoring public integrity and trust in government. How can that be done?

The solution has to address both ensuring that the individuals we elect will act ethically and with integrity to represent their constituents’ best interests, and that stronger institutional safeguards are put in place to protect.

The idea developed in yesterday’s thread focused on ensuring the personal integrity of public servants by “licensing” people entering government service. It would apply to the president and vice president, political appointees, legislators, the judiciary, and career civil servants at all levels of government, with varying requirements for federal, state, and local public servants. Free education in ethics, basic governance, and the Constitution would be provided, and a licensing exam would be administered with appropriate security measures to prevent cheating. Background checks akin to security clearances and full financial disclosures would be required. The evaluations would be conducted by a nonpartisan body. Licensing would be required to be a candidate for elective office.

I did some additional research, which indicates that this can be done legislatively for political appointees and career civil servants, but it would require amending the Constitution in light of two prior SCOTUS decisions on election qualifications. They ruled that adding the requirement that a person not have been convicted of a crime, or imposing additional age limits, violated the intent of the founders. At the time the opinions were written, the more liberal justices were in the majority.

The Constitution itself sets a very short list of qualifications for members of Congress.

For the House (Article I, Section 2, Clause 2):

• At least 25 years old

• At least 7 years a U.S. citizen

• An inhabitant of the state in which elected at the time of electionlaw.cornell+2

For the Senate (Article I, Section 3, Clause 3):

• At least 30 years old

• At least 9 years a U.S. citizen

• An inhabitant of the state from which elected at the time of election to the Senate.

In Powell v. McCormack (1969), the House excluded Rep. Adam Clayton Powell Jr. for alleged misconduct even though he met the age, citizenship, and residency requirements and had been duly elected. The Court held Congress may not add to the qualifications listed in the Constitution; if a member‑elect meets those constitutional qualifications and was properly elected, the House must seat him and can only then discipline him under its own rules.

In U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995), Arkansas tried to impose term limits by barring long‑serving members from appearing on the ballot as congressional candidates. The Court extended Powell and held that states likewise cannot add qualifications for congressional service beyond the constitutional list. Justice Stevens’ majority emphasized that the Framers intended congressional qualifications to be fixed in the Constitution and uniform across the nation; any change requires a constitutional amendment, not state or federal statute.

Does this mean the concept of licensing for elected officials is dead in the water? No!

Instead of being a government-issued “license,” it could be framed as a “certification” by a national, nonpartisan group like the League of Women Voters. Political parties could choose to nominate, fund, or endorse only candidates who were certified. Independents could choose to complete certification to enhance their qualifications for office. It would drive home the expectation that elected officials act with integrity, are knowledgeable about how government works, and represent the best interests of their constituents, not their donors.

Though time-consuming and cumbersome, an amendment to the Constitution could be written, approved by Congress, and ratified by the states.

A new case could be brought before SCOTUS that would revisit the previous opinions and reject them as flawed, as they did with Roe v. Wade. In light of current political realities, a court with a majority of justices who view the Constitution as a living document could prevail.

The latter two possibilities are for the long game. The non-governmental certification route can be implemented relatively quickly and can put the concept of public integrity in the spotlight. Hungary will be a laboratory for restoring public integrity in individuals and institutions alike. We should be looking there for further inspiration.

It is important to remember that this concept only covers personal integrity. Rebuilding integrity in our governmental institutions and politics also has to be addressed and integrated with our approach to personal integrity.

I want to acknowledge the many contributors to yesterday’s thread for their thoughtful commentary. It has given me a deeper understanding of both the potential and the challenges in restoring public integrity.

Subscribe now

Leave a comment

Share A view from the porch...

Trump has been insisting that Congress pass the SAVE Act as his first priority and that Republicans use the chaos caused by the shutdown of DHS as leverage on the Democrats to do that. Democrats have been refusing to fund DHS unless there are specific, reasonable reforms to ICE and CBP operations. They have said they would fund the rest of DHS and then deal with ICE and CBP in a separate funding/reforms package. Republicans have refused that offer.

The debates continue because there have not been 60 Senators willing to vote for cloture (closing the debate) to stop the filibusters. In a previous post, I discussed how the filibuster rule has been modified in the past to exempt nominations to SCOTUS and for executive branch positions, such as cabinet secretaries. It uses a strategy that requires only a simple majority, with the Vice President serving as a tiebreaker if needed. Neither party wants to neuter the filibuster rule in the Senate because the supermajority requirement to end debate gives the minority party considerable power. Republicans envision a near future where they are in the minority, and they want to have that power. Altering the rules (for nominations, for specific bill types, or across the board) can permanently reset the Senate’s operating baseline; while rules can be changed again, each shift lowers the barrier to future erosion. Changing the filibuster can be seen as a direct institutional power move, often described as “going nuclear,” and can alarm moderates worried about precedent and what the other party will do with the same tool later.

Trump has been pushing hard to eliminate the filibuster so that he can more easily implement his authoritarian agenda. And then Republicans would always remain in the majority; they wouldn’t need the filibuster. Remember, he has promised his supporters that they wouldn’t have to vote again.

The breaking news is that Republicans have come up with a strategy to get their way on both funding DHS and getting their voter suppression wish list in the SAVE Act by using a pair of different Senate rules, budget reconciliation and the Byrd Rule, to tie the SAVE Act provisions to specific funding initiatives in a budget reconciliation bill that bundles DHS funding and the SAVE Act. Trump has tentatively agreed to the strategy.

The strategy consists of two steps:

1. Using a standard bipartisan appropriations bill to fund DHS except for ICE and CBP. This is something the Democrats have proposed multiple times, but Republicans have rejected up to now. Most Republicans and many Democrats are now open to funding “non‑ICE” DHS components (TSA, FEMA, CISA, Coast Guard ops, Secret Service functions, etc.) in a standard appropriations bill to end visible shutdown pain like TSA lines and FEMA disruptions. Some GOP senators (e.g., Kennedy) have explicitly floated funding everything but ICE enforcement now, then handle ICE later via reconciliation; Thune has said that option is “on the table.” cbsnews

2. ICE/CBP‑related policy changes plus SAVE Act provisions are moved into a budget reconciliation bill that can pass the Senate with a simple majority, but have to be tied to significant budget effects to pass “Byrd Rule scrutiny.”

   1. Funding levels and program design for ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations and related CBP activities will potentially be structured as mandatory spending or changes in fee‑funded programs to give reconciliation jurisdiction.

   2. SAVE Act‑style requirements (proof of citizenship to register, voter ID mandates, verification systems) are to be tied to new federal grants for state election administration, changes in federal fee structures, or offsets elsewhere in mandatory spending, so that the package has measurable budget effects and can be ruled germane under reconciliation.

Budget reconciliation bills are not subject to filibuster because the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 created a special “fast‑track” procedure that limits debate time. For reconciliation bills, the Budget Act and related Senate rules cap debate at 20 hours; once that time expires, the Senate must move to final votes, so there is no way to prolong debate indefinitely and thus no filibuster.

The Wonky Bits

Budget Reconciliation works for taxes, mandatory spending, and debt‑limit changes; it is perfect for dealing with funding DHS. It is more difficult to fit the SAVE Act wish list into the reconciliation framework because structural policy changes, such as requiring proof of citizenship, are not primarily budgetary; they risk being struck as “extraneous” under the Byrd Rule.

The Byrd Rule is a Senate rule that limits what can be put in a budget reconciliation bill by allowing “extraneous” provisions to be struck so reconciliation stays focused on budget changes. The rule’s purpose is to prevent the Senate from using reconciliation for general policymaking unrelated to the budget, which is exactly what the Republicans are trying to do!!! The Byrd Rule applies only in the Senate and only to reconciliation bills, amendments, and conference reports; the House has no equivalent rule but must draft legislation with it in mind or risk having provisions stripped in the Senate. Remember that whatever comes out of this Senate forced merger of DHS and the SAVE Act will have to go back to the House to be voted on and passed by a simple majority, and then signed by Trump.

The budget resolution can include reconciliation instructions directing committees to change spending, revenues, or the debt limit, and the resulting reconciliation bill is then considered under these expedited procedures. Because debate is time‑limited and amendments must be germane under the Byrd Rule, the bill can pass with a simple majority rather than the usual 60‑vote threshold needed to overcome a filibuster on ordinary legislation.

The big issue of whether the Republicans’ strategy can succeed hinges on who determines what is “extraneous.” Any senator may raise a Byrd Rule point of order against a provision they claim is “extraneous”; the presiding officer rules based on the parliamentarian’s advice. If the point of order is sustained, the offending provision is automatically removed from the bill unless 60 senators vote to waive the rule, which is rare. The rule is not self‑executing: if no one objects, an extraneous provision can technically remain. In practice, majority and minority staffers go through a “Byrd bath” with the parliamentarian, provision by provision, before the bill hits the floor to see what will likely be ruled extraneous.

There are six categories of “extraneous” in section 313 of the Budget Act, which controls what can be in various types of bills.

1. No budgetary effect – It does not change outlays or revenues, and is not a term or condition of a provision that does.

2. Violates instructions – It increases outlays or cuts revenues but causes the instructed committee to miss its deficit target.

3. Outside jurisdiction – It deals with matters outside the jurisdiction of the committee that received reconciliation instructions.

4. Merely incidental budget effect – It changes outlays or revenues, but those effects are “merely incidental” compared to the non‑budgetary policy change.

5. Outside the budget window – It increases the deficit beyond the years covered by the reconciliation bill in a way not offset within that title (this is why many tax cuts have sunsets)

6. Affects Social Security – It changes Social Security’s old‑age and survivors or disability insurance programs, which reconciliation cannot alter.

The key judgment calls are around the “merely incidental” test, where the parliamentarian weighs whether a section is essentially a policy change with budgetary effects as a side effect; the legalization of immigrants and a federal minimum wage hike are examples that have been deemed to fail this test. This is clearly going to be the case here, where significant funding is going to have to be tied to implementing the SAVE Act provisions.

Satisfying the Wonky Bits to Suppress the Vote

The SAVE Act wants states to require documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration and voter ID at the polls. That does not, by itself, change federal outlays or revenues. As‑is, these are classic “no budgetary effect” provisions and would be vulnerable to a point of order under the Bryd rule. The GOP workaround would be to attach them as conditions on mandatory federal election‑assistance grants: “The Secretary shall pay states X dollars if, and only if, their systems require proof of citizenship and voter ID,” with explicit appropriations or changes to existing mandatory accounts.

Violating reconciliation instructions, which tell each committee to hit a deficit target (e.g., reduce deficit by Y) could cause a SAVE Act provision to be struck if it worsens the deficit in that committee’s title, without offsets. SAVE‑style grants would likely increase mandatory spending (to fund state systems, databases, ID issuance); whether they pass this test depends on how the budget resolution is written and whether they are offset elsewhere in that committee’s jurisdiction. There would have to be a net deficit reduction target large enough to absorb the grants or paired cuts or fees in the same committee’s jurisdiction.

Election‑administration rules generally fall under Rules/Administration and possibly Judiciary; Homeland Security or Finance might get reconciliation instructions instead, depending on how the GOP writes the budget resolution. That makes it vulnerable to the “outside the appropriate committee” extraneous rule. The GOP workaround would be to assign reconciliation instructions to the committee(s) that clearly own federal election grants (e.g., Rules/Administration) and build SAVE‑style conditions only into programs that are plainly within that committee’s remit.

The “merely incidental budget effects” extraneous rule is the big one. Analysts across the spectrum point out that this is the core Byrd problem for SAVE: its primary purpose is to change who can vote and how elections are run, not to manage federal spending. Even if Republicans attach proof-of-citizenship/voter‑ID mandates to grant formulas, critics argue the money is incidental—used as leverage to force a non‑budgetary policy, rather than the policy being a side effect of a funding program. Democracy Docket’s expert summary says conditioning grants on SAVE‑style rules is “legislative sophistry” that would likely fail the incidental‑effects test and “blow a massive hole” in the Byrd Rule if accepted, something the parliamentarian and institutionalists are unlikely to allow. democracydocket In the past, narrow, technical conditions closely tied to how funds are spent (e.g., requiring certain audit procedures for grant‑financed systems) sometimes survived Byrd review.

Sundowning financial provisions are not something you would think you would want to occur that would affect who could vote. If SAVE‑linked grants or tax changes are written as permanent and increase the deficit beyond the 10‑year window, those pieces can be struck unless offset. But the GOP wouldn’t care about this if Trump’s authoritarian agenda were in place, so why not go ahead and just do it? The GOP could sunset funding (e.g., grants for only 10 years or fees that rise later) to avoid long‑run increases in the deficit, just as prior reconciliation bills have sunset tax cuts. This test is manageable with standard drafting tricks; it’s a constraint on the financing of SAVE mechanisms, not on the underlying election policy itself.

The “can’t change Social Security” Byrd rule is unlikely to apply to anything related to SAVE unless the GOP also tries to pull in their giant one-government database to rule them all, which seeks to combine Social Security data with voting data. You never know…

The Bottom Line

The forced merger of the SAVE Act with DHS funding faces a lot of hurdles:

• Tests 1, 3, and especially 4 are the real obstacles: SAVE’s core voter‑eligibility and ballot‑access rules are not budget provisions, and re‑labeling them as grant conditions is unlikely to convince the parliamentarian that their budget effects are anything more than “incidental.”

• Tests 2 and 5 are about how big the SAVE‑linked spending/fees are and whether they are offset; those can be engineered around, but at the cost of either shrinking the program or adding unpopular pay‑fors.

• Test 6 is avoidable if drafters keep their hands off Social Security law, which they have so far.

However, Trump and the GOP are facing an existential crisis and, in their desperation, they are willing to try anything to maintain their majorities in Congress, includeing voter suppression. Even given that, Republicans have not been united on this approach. A specific objection from Freedom Caucus‑type members is that the “fund DHS now, do ICE/SAVE later in reconciliation” approach could become a political trap: Democrats may block or gut the later reconciliation bill, leaving enforcement and SAVE Act goals unfulfilled after Republicans give up shutdown leverage. yahoo

Trump has oscillated between insisting on “welding” the SAVE Act into DHS funding and tentatively backing an emerging deal to reopen DHS while betting everything on a later “Big Beautiful” reconciliation bill that includes SAVE and immigration priorities. Two weeks ago, he said that he would not sign any other legislation until the SAVE Act was passed.

There is still a lot to be done to reach a vote in the Senate using this Republican strategy.

• As of today, there is no released reconciliation draft text that shows exactly which SAVE Act sections would be written in budget‑relevant form and which ICE/CBP accounts would be shifted to mandatory status or otherwise modified.

• Final reconciliation instructions allocating savings or costs to specific committees (Homeland Security, Judiciary, etc.) for a SAVE‑ICE package have not yet been published in official trackers; current trackers only describe aggregate targets.

• Reporting indicates a “solution” exists after Trump’s meeting with GOP leaders, but senators have not disclosed whether it guarantees a future reconciliation vote on SAVE‑linked provisions or just leaves that as a leadership promise. Recall how those leadership promises worked out with the Affordable Care Act subsidies. youtubecbsnews

• Congress goes on a two-week recess on Friday, while paid ICE agents are in airports doing nothing since they aren’t trained to replace unpaid TSA workers who are calling out in droves. I sure do hope that members of Congress aren’t inconvenienced during their holiday travels. I wish even more that unpaid TSA workers can buy chocolate bunnies for their kids to celebrate spring break.

This post was researched using Perplexity AI Pro. Sources were checked and verified.

UPDATE: The Axios story just popped up on my feedly screener. Republicans and Democrats, at least those talking to the press, hate the idea for welding together the SAVE Act and DHS funding for the issues discussed above.

I am not sure that means that the approach is dead. There may be agreement that both sides hate it. But that means there is something in it that each side could frame as a win for their side. The alternative is still carving out an exemption to the filibuster, and neither side really wants to do that either as long as both sides believe there is a chance they will be in the minority in the future.

https://www.axios.com/2026/03/24/dhs-funding-deal-ice-senate-talks-trump-thune

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

The ruling was more broadly about splits among the justices about interpretations of the “major questions doctrine.” Under the doctrine, courts ask two questions:

• Is the executive branch or agency action addressing a “major” issue, meaning one of vast economic and political significance?

• If so, does the statute contain a clear, explicit grant of authority for the executive branch or agency to do what it is doing?

If the issue is “major” and Congress has not clearly delegated that specific power, the court will reject the executive branch’s or agency’s interpretation and invalidate the action.

There are two sides to the argument. Supporters see the doctrine as protecting democratic accountability by forcing Congress to clearly decide and authorize big policy moves instead of letting agencies effectively make new law. Critics argue it lacks firm constitutional grounding, gives unelected judges broad discretion to label issues “major,” and can significantly constrain the modern administrative state.

There were 2 dissenting opinions and 4 concurring opinions in addition to the majority ruling authored by Roberts for Gorsuch, Barrett, Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson. The concurrences and dissent differed on the applicability and interpretation of the major questions doctrine.

What came out of the ruling is that, on major questions like worldwide tariffs, Congress must write legislation that clearly and specifically delegates powers to the executive branch. Roberts writing for a plurality also did not allow a carve-out for actions that could be classified as being related to foreign affairs or “emergencies.”

Essentially, SCOTUS threw the ball back to Congress and told them that they had to do their job and write new laws if Trump was to get the expansion of powers he has been trying to effectuate through executive orders and Truth Social posts. Now, more of Trump’s actions initiated by executive order may be open to litigation.

This requires a major change in the Republican leadership’s strategy, which has focused on doing as little as possible beyond the necessary work on appropriations and nominations. Both of those categories have workarounds to the filibuster in the Senate, nominations through 2013 and 2017 carve outs to the filibuster rule, and budgetary items through the process of reconciliation. Reconciliation was the process that got the One Big Beautiful Bill Act through the Senate on a 51-50 vote with Vance casting the tie breaker.

It is important to remember that the filibuster is not a law; it is simply a long-standing rule (Rule XXII) in how the Senate conducts its business. As a rule, it could be eliminated entirely, or on a subclass of legislation, or brought back in the future. The Constitution allows Congress to make its own rules.

With the current extremely narrow majorities in the House, Republican caucus discipline is essential. Johnson can only afford one defection if all Republicans and Democrats are present for a vote.

The 60-vote requirement to end debate in the Senate creates a larger obstacle. Majority Leader John Thune has said he would not go for the “nuclear option” to get rid of the filibuster. In fact, it is straightforward to do through a series of procedural votes that any Senator could initiate and require only a simple majority, including Vance’s vote in the event of a tie.

Here is the set of steps that was used in 2017 to approve Gorsuch’s nomination to SCOTUS, and all subsequent SCOTUS nominations brought to the floor.

1. A cloture motion on the Gorsuch nomination was filed and then rejected because it did not obtain the three‑fifths majority then required by Rule XXII to end debate on Supreme Court nominations.

2. Immediately after the failed cloture vote, any Senator (in this case Mitch McConnell) raised a point of order that, under the Senate’s rules, cloture on Supreme Court nominations should be considered invoked by a simple majority of senators voting, a quorum being present.

3. The presiding officer (applying the text of Rule XXII as previously interpreted) ruled that this point of order was not sustained, i.e., that the existing three‑fifths requirement still applied.

4. McConnell then appealed the ruling of the chair to the full Senate, a move that turns the question of how Rule XXII applies into a majority‑vote decision.

5. By a 52–48 vote, the Senate rejected (did not sustain) the chair’s ruling, thereby establishing a new precedent that cloture on Supreme Court nominations can be invoked by a simple majority.

6. With the new precedent in place, the Senate immediately held another cloture vote on the Gorsuch nomination, and cloture was deemed invoked with only a simple majority in favor.

7. Debate time was then limited under Rule XXII’s post‑cloture provisions, and Gorsuch was confirmed the next day by majority vote.

In the new political landscape following the tariff ruling and with Trump’s sinking poll numbers, retaining control of Congress after the midterms is now an existential issue for him. He publicly said he wanted to eliminate (“do away with”/“abolish”/“terminate”) the Senate filibuster so that Republicans can pass legislation with a simple majority.

Trump needs to blunt the coming blue wave in the midterms. While legislation to suppress the vote is being enacted in the states, Trump needs to tip the balance in purple districts in blue states. That can only be done with “voting integrity” legislation at the federal level, namely the SAVE Act for voter registration and the SAVE America Act, which also covers proof of citizenship when you go to vote or vote by mail.

Trump is exploring every avenue to see that the rest of his authoritarian project is implemented ahead of the midterms. He also needs to ensure that the legislation he promised his oligarchic bros is in place. No authoritarian would want to keep the filibuster in place, as it gives power to the minority. SCOTUS just made it more likely that Trump will need to enact his policies through legislation.

In my opinion, the survival of the filibuster is becoming less likely, especially as a guard against federal legislation that will suppress the vote in the midterms.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

I have seen my district deprived of quality representation in Congress by a Democrat redistricting that made neighboring districts “safer” for Democrats, my district not so much. I am now represented by Republican Tom Kean Jr., a man who has not had a face-to-face Town Hall meeting in years and got a lot of funding from Elon Musk’s PAC.

On Thursday, Tom Malinowski was in an 13-person Democratic special election primary to represent NJ11, the neighboring precinct that had been vacated when Mikie Sherrill was elected governor. As I write this on very early Sunday morning, the election is still too close to call, with the most recent results below.

Which of the candidates best represents the sum total of the viewpoints of the Democrats in NJ11 on the critical issues in the midterms? I don’t know. I don’t even think the winner of the primary can make a solid case given the split among the top 4 candidates.

If their candidate hadn’t run, the voters for Way, Gill, Bartlett, Strickland, Grayzal, or Beecher would have been enough to change the outcome. And so could the combination of all of the voters for Croft, Williams, Cauvin, Dafis, and Chaaban.

NJ11 Democratic politics is complex. There is a strong progressive wing, centrists, machine-anointeds, and advocates for women’s and minority rights. All of those groups need to feel their interests are represented under the Democratic big tent if we are to win back the House and Senate win at the midterms. ALL of them need to feel that their interests are well-represented by the winner of the primary. And that candidate also has to appeal to enough independents to win in the general election.

There is a way out of this predicament, as shown in the New York mayoral election, which used an instant-runoff form of rank-choice voting. Voters could rank up to five candidates, and the last‑place candidate was eliminated in successive rounds, with votes transferring to the next-ranked choice each round until one candidate held a majority of votes in the final round.

Mamdani won because he convinced enough of the electorate that he aligned with enough of their issues, to make him the best choice overall for his constituency. That guaranteed majority under ranked-choice voting turned the vote into a mandate to govern.

Whoever wins the NJ11 special primary cannot make that kind of claim. That is a major detriment in a race against a single Republican candidate in the general election who faced no primary challenger and who is going to be backed by a shit ton of money from PACs. I can see the Republican campaign ads already, claiming there was internecine warfare among Democrats with no one getting even a 30% of the vote.

What ranked-choice voting requires is an educated electorate, one that is able to identify what issues are important to them, and has easy access to information on where the candidates stand on those issues. It is the opposite of clickbait media clips. It requires a different style of campaign outreach.

The great gift at the end is cohesion and a message to the candidate about what his constituency cares about, not just what his donors care about. Every voter has undiluted power to influence the outcome. And that is something worth fighting for.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/how-ranked-choice-voting-in-new-yorks-democratic-mayoral-primary-works

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

At the end of his first administration, Trump signed Executive Order 13957 on October 21, 2020, creating a new job classification known as Schedule F. It aimed to reclassify tens of thousands of career civil service positions—potentially up to 50,000 or more—in policy-influencing roles (e.g., those involving regulation drafting, policy advocacy, or supervising attorneys) into a new “excepted service” category.
The new classification would strip employees of standard Title 5 civil service protections, including due process for removals, appeal rights to the Merit Systems Protection Board, and some whistleblower channels, making them easier to fire at will like political appointees.

Russell Vought, as OMB Director in Trump 1.0, was a big proponent of Schedule F, arguing it boosted accountability for carrying out presidential policy in accord with the unitary executive theory of government; critics called it a step toward politicizing the nonpartisan bureaucracy.

Agencies were directed to identify eligible positions by January 19, 2021, but the order was never fully implemented—no one was reclassified before Joe Biden revoked it via Executive Order 14003 on his first day in office.

Biden codified barriers against similar moves with a regulation titled “Upholding Civil Service Protections and Merit System Principles. It was finalized by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) on April 9, 2024 (89 Fed. Reg. 25722).

On Trump’s first day in office in his second term on January 20, 2025, he signed Executive Order 14171, which revoked EO 14003 and directed OPM to rescind the 2024 rule, paving the way for the February 2026 Schedule Policy/Career finalization of the new incarnation of Schedule F.

The lesson to be learned here is that Executive Orders and Federal Regulations do not provide protection for anything, since they are essentially at the president’s will and whim. The only potentially binding constraint on executive power is legislation, and that only with the concurrence of SCOTUS.

The War is Won for Now

On February 5, 2026, the Office of Personnel Management finalized a 255‑page rule titled "Improving Performance, Accountability and Responsiveness in the Civil Service" creating the new “Schedule Policy/Career” category (a rebranded version of Schedule F) for “policy‑related” civil service positions, estimated at about 50,000 jobs, roughly 2% of the federal workforce. It rescinds the protections in the Biden 2024 rule. 94% of over 40,000 public comments on the rule opposed the proposal.

The rule will take effect on March 8, 2026, and will amend various parts of Title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

Despite its title, the rule does not improve performance, accountability and responsiveness of the civil service to we, the American people, those that government is supposed to serve. Instead, it does those things in service to Trump and his cronies. It removes the obstacles of professionalism and respect for the common good present in the civil service, and greases the skids with servility and mindless obedience.

The government workers most affected will be in mid- to senior-level GS-13+ positions such as those drafting regulations, supervising attorneys, or advising on policy. Larger cabinet departments with extensive regulatory duties will see the most absolute numbers affected, including DOJ, DHS, Treasury, HHS, and DOE, based on prior Schedule F agency reports from 2020.​

While “Schedule Policy/Career” jobs remain formally classified as career positions, they will effectively become at‑will: employees lose normal Title 5 civil service removal protections, independent appeal rights, and standard whistleblower channels, bringing their job security closer to that of political appointees. Vought’s wishlist from Trump 1.0 is perfectly intact.

Critics, including unions and good‑government groups, argue this effectively politicizes these roles and enables the replacement of neutral experts with ideologically loyal personnel, even though the rule nominally bans explicit political favoritism. It degrades institutional knowledge and expertise. It will also create recruitment and retention challenges for policy roles due to fears of arbitrary firings. The best candidates will no longer be drawn to government service.

Legal challenges from unions on behalf of federal workers in affected roles are expected. Unions lose much of their bargaining leverage and enforcement power over these “at-will” positions, as they become easier to fire without cause or due process. Major unions like the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and the AFL-CIO have vowed to file “imminent” lawsuits against the rule, coordinating with allies like Protect Democracy.

The final rule is expected to take effect in early March; agencies have already submitted lists of positions they want converted, after which Trump will issue a follow‑on order specifying which jobs move into the new category.

The Bottom Line

This is one of those stealth attacks on government by the Project 2025 gang that will gut domestic policies and weaken US power abroad. Every aspect of life in America will be affected, every diplomatic relationship will be subject to presidential whim. Essentially, an entire generation of adults in the room can be swept away and be replaced by Trump sycophants.

This is about silencing dissent. It is about muzzling free speech in the place it most needs to be, inside government.

This is another reason why just gaining majorities in both Houses of Congress is not enough. We must have a Blue Wave big enough to override Trump’s veto of reform legislation.

Day One of the 120th Congress has to have legislation ready to be introduced to reverse this Rule.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

The statement below is by the attorney for one of the people being held by ICE. The emphasis is mine. Clarifications are in square brackets and italics. The question referred to in the first sentence was asked by the judge.

First, I’d just like to revisit your question earlier of whether the unitary executive’s [ICE, DHS and DOJ and the executive branch] behavior in Operation Metro Surge has outpaced the system’s capacity to ensure that the Constitution is being complied with. And this is abundantly clear that the answer is yes. We see from this hearing today and from the abundant cases before this Court and the other judges in this district that attorneys [SAUSA attorneys] are -- they’re not being credentialed or properly trained or supervised, nor are officers or agents of respondents from supervisors on down, Mr. Easterwood on down. There are problems with supervision and training that have resulted in immense violence to our communities. That we hear that it is pulling teeth for counsel of record [SAUSA attorney] to get her own client [ICE, DHS and DOJ and the executive branch] to fix these constitutional violations. It should not be pulling teeth to get compliance from the Government with the Constitution.

And a question I have for the Court is: Is the party [ICE and DOJ and the executive branch] making it impossible for counsel [SAUSA attorney]to comply? Are they [ICE, DHS, and DOJ and the executive branch] acting in blatant disregard of court orders so much so that their counsel [SAUSA attorney] sees her own self as a bridge between the Court and the party here? That this is not -- this is unprecedented, and we know that counsel for respondents don’t have the power to get their clients under control. An e-mail with bold font is not going to change the widespread, systemic pattern of disregard for court orders and honestly for basic human rights in this situation.

Detain first, find authority later, this is exactly their strategy, and we’ve seen this from all of our cases where there’s no warrant, there’s no probable cause. Most of my clients, they report that respondents, upon detaining them, have no idea who they are. They are pulled over for how they look or for where they are or for any number of things that don’t amount to probable cause under the U.S. Constitution.

And I would point Your Honor to two declarations in a recent filing, which if Your Honor would permit, I could file in a supplement in this case. The first is a petitioner -- is a affidavit written by my client Oscar. And that was filed at Docket 67, The Advocates for Human Rights, et al., v. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, et al., Case Number 26-cv-749.

And Oscar’s declaration is important for a few reasons. One, it articulates just his horrific experience throughout this proceeding. And it’s easy for us to see court orders not being complied with and the e-mails back and forth on the computer, but his affidavit really just shows what it’s like to experience that and in ways that were personally for me just sickening to read as his attorney.

That he was without food. He was without clean clothes. He was subject to physical danger, both through reckless driving of ICE agents transporting him from one location to another, watching people screaming in pain with medical neglect, being exposed to COVID. Just the conditions of his confinement; eating food that he conflated with dog food. That people are just being treated like less than human. And all of this was happening while he had a court order for his release.

And while all of this is happening, ICE agents are telling him to self-deport because he’s got no chance to get out of there other than self-deport, so he’s being deprived of access, and this is all in his affidavit. Myself and his immigration attorney, who’s here in the courtroom today, were not able to talk to him. His immigration attorney in particular made diligent efforts to ensure compliance with the court order, and these are e-mails that are in Oscar’s case. I think you’ve seen these. We’re trying to get ahold of him. We’re trying to get access to him. We’re trying to bring him home. And, meanwhile, he is sleeping on the floor, if he gets to sleep at all, and he’s being lied to, denied access to phone calls to call his loved ones or his attorneys. I would encourage Your Honor to read this declaration, and I would defer to the Court if you would like me to submit it formally in Oscar’s own case.

And the second declaration also in The Advocates for Human Rights proceeding, Docket Number 29, was an affidavit that I filed, and that details my own efforts to work collaboratively with counsel, with respondents’ counsel, with -- I’ve been e-mailing and calling and trying to figure out how can we get these court orders complied with.

There’s an e-mail in that Docket 29 that I sent eight days ago to ERO, to attorneys from the DOJ, the Assistant U.S. Attorneys and attorneys representing ICE, Jim Stolley; still haven’t received a response. I’m begging for a means of clear communication, and I’m flexible. I’m sharing my personal cell phone. I’m saying, Whatever I can do to work with you all to get my clients home, let me know; to work with you all to get my clients’ belongings returned, let me know, and I receive no response.

And I think just this question of the overwork of counsel here -- and I know we’re all working above and beyond and not sleeping as much as we need to be, so I appreciate everybody for putting that effort in. And I invite the Court to think about the root cause of the problem, the root cause of our collective overwork here and the strain on our system with these repeated, repeated constitutional violations.

We shouldn’t need a specific court order to ask the DOJ not to put somebody’s life in danger. But I can’t tell you how many clients I’ve had to go find who were left on the side of the road with no coat, no phone, no wallet, no hat. They’re wearing Crocs or whatever they got pulled out of their house or their car while they were wearing, and it’s zero degrees outside. And we shouldn’t need a court order saying, Don’t put someone’s life in danger.

But here we are, and we need court orders -- or orders to show cause to show compliance with court orders that shouldn’t have had to have been issued in the first place. I think this would be a different story if these habeas petitions were frivolous, but we’re filing so many because there are just so many people being detained without any semblance of a lawful basis.

And there’s no indication here that any new systems or bolded e-mails or any instructions to ICE are going to fix any of this. Like we need -- we need judicial intervention, and it has to be -- it has to be more than just having -- having counsel be the go-between here, because we’re -- I think we can see that counsel are being put in a position where they’re working 20 hours a week -- 20 hours a day and it’s not enough.

If our system cannot keep up with processing these petitions to have rights vindicated, then we need to see what here is outside of the control of these attorneys, where does the root of the problem lie. And sanctions to the party are within your inherent authority and are appropriate to bring this -- this situation, this egregious, widespread pattern -- you’ve referenced the 96 court order violations and counting just in part of January -- and we need this to be brought back into the Court’s control and into the Constitution’s control. Thank you.

The problem lies with ICE, DHS, and DOJ. With the individual agents violating detainees human and constitutional rights, and with the at best lack of supervision of everyone in the ICE, DHS and DOJ lines of command, and at worst, at their specific instruction to violate those constitutional and human rights.

Jeffries and Schumer announced their list of 10 guardrails needed for ICE today as well. You can judge for yourself if they are enough to end the constitutional and human rights abuses described above.

1. Targeted Enforcement – DHS officers cannot enter private property without a judicial warrant. End indiscriminate arrests and improve warrant procedures and standards. Require verification that a person is not a U.S. citizen before holding them in immigration detention.

2. No Masks – Prohibit ICE and immigration enforcement agents from wearing face coverings.

3. Require ID – Require DHS officers conducting immigration enforcement to display their agency, unique ID number and last name. Require them to verbalize their ID number and last name if asked.

4. Protect Sensitive Locations – Prohibit funds from being used to conduct enforcement near sensitive locations, including medical facilities, schools, child-care facilities, churches, polling places, courts, etc.

5. Stop Racial Profiling – Prohibit DHS officers from conducting stops, questioning and searches based on an individual’s presence at certain locations, their job, their spoken language and accent or their race and ethnicity.

6. Uphold Use of Force Standards – Place into law a reasonable use of force policy, expand training and require certification of officers. In the case of an incident, the officer must be removed from the field until an investigation is conducted.

7. Ensure State and Local Coordination and Oversight – Preserve the ability of State and local jurisdictions to investigate and prosecute potential crimes and use of excessive force incidents. Require that evidence is preserved and shared with jurisdictions. Require the consent of States and localities to conduct large-scale operations outside of targeted immigration enforcement.

8. Build Safeguards into the System – Make clear that all buildings where people are detained must abide by the same basic detention standards that require immediate access to a person’s attorney to prevent citizen arrests or detention. Allow states to sue DHS for violations of all requirements. Prohibit limitations on Member visits to ICE facilities regardless of how those facilities are funded.

9. Body Cameras for Accountability, Not Tracking – Require use of body-worn cameras when interacting with the public and mandate requirements for the storage and access of footage. Prohibit tracking, creating or maintaining databases of individuals participating in First Amendment activities.

10. No Paramilitary Police – Regulate and standardize the type of uniforms and equipment DHS officers carry during enforcement operations to bring them in line with civil enforcement.

Jeffries’ and Schumer’s list is solid on curbing the abuses in the ICE sweeps, but it is thin on the constitutional and human rights abuses that are occurring in the detention camps. In case you missed it, it is point 8 in the list. Nothing is in there about food, clothing, or access to medical care, or protection from intimidation. Nothing is in there about how detainees who are released are left on the side of the road, hundreds of miles from their homes.

Jeffries’ and Schumer’s list is not enough. It needs to address the humanitarian and constitutional rights issues, and it has to cut most of the multi-year ICE funding in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) to stop the construction of more detention facilities and the expansion of ICE. Some of that money has to be redirected to reform and expand the immigration courts.

ICE as an institution has to be abolished. It is corrupt beyond repair. But the reality is that a bill doing that, even if passed by both houses, would be vetoed by Trump, and there are enough virulent anti-immigrant racist supporters in the House to prevent a veto override. It has to be done in a way to let Trump believe he isn’t losing, and something he can feed to his base that his war against immigrants can still go according to plan. If any of you readers have ideas on how to do this that could override a veto, add them to the comments, because I am admittedly stretching here.

One way to do that could be to fold ICE into CBP, apply the expanded list of reforms to CBP, and require that all agents hired since January 1, 2025, be retrained and vetted against the standards in force on December 31, 2024.

The heads of all federal law enforcement agencies would still be presidential appointees and require Senate confirmation, but they would have to have come up through the civil service within their agency.

Because ICE would no longer exist as a separate agency, the OBBBA would have to be amended separately to cut the multiyear funding.

Bondi, Noem, and all of those in the chain of command for ICE who are political appointees get impeached.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

Edsall is planting his flag as the consolidator of Democratic policy initiatives, at least the centrist ones. That’s a warning flag already. Quote

My suggestions are subject to challenge and dispute, and as usual, I have sought out comments from strategists and political experts. In the expectation that this will turn out to be a more-than-one-column project, I welcome comments, critiques and suggestions from readers. What did I miss? What did I overemphasize?

This is an improvement over the original Project 2028 in terms of transparency. According to Newsweek,

The group recently announced its leader, Chad Maisel, and said it has already enlisted 200 people for its working groups, according to the news outlet Axios, although these participants will reportedly remain secret unless they write a proposal.

According to Axios, Maisel worked at the Biden Domestic Policy Council and for New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker.

The other groups are working on their own policy documents:

• Searchlight Institute launched last year with the goal of pushing the Democratic Party to reject progressive positions the group believes have alienated voters.

• Larger, more established think tanks such as The Roosevelt Institute and The Center for American Progress also have their own efforts to try to influence the next Democratic president.

Having four different groups working in parallel sounds like an invitation to total dysfunction. Crafting policy initiatives must come from discussions with input from all party factions. The result needs to be cohesive and balanced, or the messaging will be fragmented and confusing. At least Edsall appears to be trying to avoid the lack of transparency issue by publishing the feedback he gets. It is not clear that his self-selected panel of experts is inviting members from all the clique tables in the high school cafeteria that is the current Democratic Party.

I have one critique right off the bat: timing. The Democrats need a compelling policy platform for the midterms, one that goes beyond just being anti-Trump. Constraining Trump and reversing the slide into full-on authoritarianism requires veto-proof majorities in both the House and Senate. Any less, and whoever the Republican president is can stymie reform legislation with a veto. Conviction following impeachment and subsequent removal from office by the Senate requires a 2/3 majority. America cannot afford to wait until 2028 as Trump gets more desperate and erratic and broligarchs grasp at their chance at power. The best shot to save democracy demands an all-out effort to win both chambers with enough margin to control the legislative agenda and block presidential appointments at the midterms.

The bottom line is that urgency is required. These are extraordinary times, and Edsall is stuck in outdated thinking that politics is driven by the presidential cycle. As the success of the Republicans has amply demonstrated, you win power by putting up candidates who obey the grand plan in EVERY election from dog catcher on up. We are where we are because Republicans successively took over local and then state governments until they got their trifectas and veto-proof majorities and elected members of the judiciary. The state trifectas and veto-proof majorities have to be busted as quickly as possible to protect and restore voting rights and abortion rights. Democrats will not regain the presidency in 2028, if red states have time to prevent free and fair elections by then.

It is necessary to get a rapid reversal of Trump’s most dangerous policies as well as strategies and tactics to make that happen. Democrats can’t wait until after the midterms and waste time arguing about what to do and how to do it. To win the presidency in 2028, Democrats need to demonstrate cohesion and the ability to govern even with a hostile president in the next Congress.

The effort lacks one of the most important features Democrats need—visibility of a deep bench of young party leaders working together as a shadow cabinet. The shadow cabinet is the body that will provide immediate and authoritative responses to Republican messaging and explanations for the balancing made in the Democratic platform. To bring together the party’s various wings, Democrats have to explain the choices they are making as they balance competing interests. How do you balance young Democrats’ concerns about childcare, affordable housing, and student loans against seniors’ worries about funding for Medicare and keeping Social Security stable? To foster cohesion and solidarity, different constituencies need to feel heard and see progress on the issues that matter to them. To build trust, there has to be transparency about the tradeoffs.

And now for Edsall’s mission statement. It is perhaps the longest mission statement I have ever seen. It definitely will not fit on a button, or a bumper sticker, or even the side of a semi. It seems to be going for radical inclusivity. It is in no way inspiring; rather, it is boring.

It has a notable lack of active verbs, leaning heavily towards intellectual pursuits. It is committed, it supports it believes, it welcomes, it holds, it rejects, it recognizes, it affirms, it should enable, it will restore.

It gets really tired towards the end, going passive. “Access to affordable health care is a civil right.”

But what the f*ck are you going to DO FOR ME? How the f*ck are you going to DO IT?

Please feel free to post your reactions in the comments. You will definitely need time to digest it, and likely a long nap after. I know I do. I will return with further thoughts tomorrow.

Spoiler. My mission statement for the the Democratic party is “Provide each person with the freedoms and opportunities to achieve their best life.” The button version is “FREEDOM & OPPORTUNITY”

Edsall’s Mission Statement

The Democratic Party is committed to equality of opportunity and to democratic, competitive markets in which discrimination by race, creed, sex or ethnicity is prohibited and the chance to get ahead is broadly shared.

The party’s focus will be on supporting the aspirations of working men and women rather than privileging the interests of those who have accumulated extraordinary wealth through market power, inheritance or political influence.

The Democratic Party believes government has a substantial obligation to secure this equality through access to education, housing, public safety and protection from poverty, especially in childhood.

The party rejects a politics that seeks to guarantee equality of outcomes, which risks undermining growth, productivity, innovation and beneficial competition.

The party believes that economic growth is essential to the maintenance of public support for policies promoting fairness, equality, better schools and more housing.

The party is committed to ensuring an equal chance for all people to succeed to the best of their ability while making sure everyone who wants to work can get a job that pays enough to live a secure, middle-class life.

The Democratic Party welcomes proposals to better the lives and opportunities of Americans, particularly the working and middle classes, from all sources, regardless of ideology or party affiliation, including Republicans.

Foreign Policy

The Democratic Party holds that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was an unjustifiable act of war and aggression. The United States should stand firmly with Ukraine — militarily, economically and diplomatically — until Russia withdraws its forces and Ukraine’s sovereignty is secured.

The Democratic Party supports American participation in NATO and the obligation under Article 5 to treat an attack on any member as an attack on all members.

A basic premise of Democratic foreign policy is support for democracies when they are in conflict with dictatorships.

Government Commitments

The Democratic Party believes the government has an obligation to ensure equality of opportunity through the provision of education, housing, safety and security from poverty. This is a very substantial obligation.

Sex and Gender

The Democratic Party recognizes the legal and policy precedence of biological sex in certain contexts. Transgender Americans should not, however, face discrimination in employment, education, housing or public life, and they should be free to live in accordance with their gender identity, including their choice of names, dress and pronouns.

At the same time, in settings where physical differences materially affect fairness, safety or privacy — such as competitive sports and certain custodial settings — the party believes policy should be grounded in biological sex.

Corruption

The Democratic Party will do everything it can to halt corrupt profiteering by those in public office, including reforms of the presidential power to pardon and prohibitions on presidential ownership of businesses that allow special interests and foreign countries to channel cash to the ruling family. The party will pursue constitutional, legislative and judicial avenues to limit the effects of Supreme Court decisions — including Citizens United v. F.E.C. and Trump v. United States — that have weakened anticorruption safeguards and accountability for public officials.

The Democratic Party will restore the independence and integrity of the Department of Justice, reject the use of law enforcement to harass political opponents and ensure that investigations and prosecutions are initiated without regard to partisan interest.

Immigration

The Democratic Party supports a lawful, orderly and humane immigration system. The United States must control its borders, enforce immigration law consistently and rapidly adjudicate asylum claims. The party supports the deportation of those illegally entering this country.

The millions of long-settled, law-abiding undocumented immigrants should have a conditional path to legal status, while employers who exploit unauthorized labor must face serious penalties.

Labor

Unions are essential to leveling the playing field in the contest between workers and management over pay and fringe benefits.

Cancel Culture, D.E.I., Diversity Statements

The Democratic Party rejects ideological conformity, performative diversity statements and institutional practices that reduce individuals to group identity or encourage a culture of grievance and victimhood.

Equality should be pursued through fair rules, vigorous enforcement of civil rights law and investment in human capital, not through compelled speech, loyalty oaths or bureaucratic box checking.

The Democratic Party affirms freedom of inquiry, open debate and academic freedom. The pursuit of truth must not be subordinated to ideological protectionism or fear of offense. A democratic society depends on the ability to question orthodoxies, test evidence and revise beliefs. An excessive emphasis on harm cannot be allowed to constrain open discussion and open inquiry.

Risk Taking

The Democratic Party believes a fundamental principle of American exceptionalism is the freedom to take risks. The party embraces responsible risk taking in science, technology, entrepreneurship and regulation. Excessive risk aversion — in permitting, litigation and public administration — has slowed innovation, infrastructure and growth.

Government should enable experimentation, accept the possibility of failure and focus on results rather than process while maintaining essential safeguards for health, safety and the environment.

The Free Market

The Democratic Party recognizes the crucial role played by the free market in the nation’s growth, productivity gains and continuing prosperity. Market competition has been a major factor in the reduction of discriminatory policies by giving nondiscriminatory businesses and institutions a competitive advantage.

The Democratic Party believes that if a needed reform can be accomplished through government intervention or market policies, it’s preferable to choose the market.

Government must be able to build, administer and deliver. Permit reform, procurement reform and civil service modernization are essential to restoring public trust. Parallel reforms are needed in the regulation of the private sector to accelerate building and reduce the costs of housing and infrastructure.

Crime and Public Safety

Public safety is a civil right. The party supports evidence-based policing, accountability for misconduct and adequate staffing to protect communities from violent crime.

Health Care

Access to affordable health care is a civil right.

Education

Schools should emphasize literacy, numeracy, civic knowledge and career readiness, not ideological instruction.

Fiscal Responsibility

Long-term deficits threaten economic stability and intergenerational fairness.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

Last night was the eve of three-way peace talks in Abu Dhabi between the US, Ukraine, and Russia. Temperatures in Kyiv reached lows of -4 F. Trump had claimed that Russia agreed it would temporarily pause attacks on Ukraine’s energy systems between the initial round of talks in Abu Dhabi in late January and the new rounds beginning on February 4.

The graph above from the Institute for the Study of War shows the daily number of Russian drone and missile strikes on Ukraine over the past year. The assault last night, consisting of 450 drones and 71 missiles, had a larger-than-usual number of missiles in a continuation of Russia’s “weaponization of winter” campaign. The missiles are in red. You can recognize a definite pattern where missiles and drones are stockpiled for several days, followed by large attacks designed to overwhelm Ukrainian air defenses.

The missile package was unusual, containing significantly more expensive ballistic missiles compared to cruise missiles. Ballistic missiles can only be taken out by Patriot missiles.

Ukrainian air defense was able to down 412 drones and 38 missiles. The remaining 27 missiles and 31 drones hit 27 energy infrastructure in Kyiv, Kharkiv, Dnipropetrovsk, Vinnytsia, and Odesa. The majority of the successful attacks were clearly directed at civilian energy infrastructure, in violation of Trump’s supposed agreement with Putin on a strike moratorium.

But what about the effect on the Ukrainian people?

Ukrainian sources reported that Russian forces struck combined heat and power plants (CHPP) and substations in Kyiv City and caused complete heat outages in the city’s Darnytskyi and Dniprovskyi raions that affected 1,170 high-rise buildings. Russian forces reportedly struck energy infrastructure in Kharkiv Oblast, including CHPP-5 and two substations in Kharkiv City, prompting Ukrainian officials to declare a local state of emergency and leaving over 200,000 consumers without power. Russian forces also reportedly struck thermal power plants in Dnipropetrovsk, Vinnytsia, and Odesa oblasts. Ukrainian officials reported that the Russian strikes against energy infrastructure left 50 settlements in Vinnytsia Oblast and over 50,000 energy consumers in Odesa Oblast without power.

This is the reality of life in Ukraine.

In his nightly address, President Zelenskyy was clear about why the Russian attack was so devastatingly successful. Zelenskyy continually asks for more Patriot missiles through the PURL initiative, which allows allies like Germany to buy U.S. weapons, including Patriot missiles and systems, directly from American stockpiles for rapid transfer to Ukraine.

Today has been a full day of work following the Russian strike. Recovery efforts are underway in all regions affected by this attack. The strike was massive – a record in ballistic missiles. There were 28 cruise missiles and another 43 of various types coming specifically on ballistic trajectories, which can only be intercepted by systems like the Patriots. The defense was tough, and some missiles were intercepted – but not all. Unfortunately. There were hits specifically on energy facilities. The Russians also deployed 450 drones, a significant number of them “shaheds.”

Also today, Mark Rutte, the NATO Secretary General, was in Ukraine. Among other sites, he also visited a thermal power plant destroyed by missiles. We agreed that Mark will help us ensure that leaders understand what is happening and why Ukraine needs immediate support. This includes, in particular, air defense missiles – missiles for the Patriots – because we see the tactics the Russians have chosen. They spare no means of attack. We need new contributions from partners to the PURL initiative, which enables us to procure weapons from the United States. We agreed with Mark on the countries that should respond and can provide the swiftest assistance.

We await the reaction of the United States of America to the Russian strikes. It was specifically the U.S. proposal – to halt strikes on energy during diplomacy and such severe winter weather. The President of the United States made the request personally. We see that Russia responded to this request with a record number of ballistic missiles – barely four days have passed of the week Russia was asked to hold off. This also speaks volumes about any other promises Russia has made or might still make. If their word doesn’t hold even now, what can be expected next? They lied before this war as well, and Russia launched the full-scale war, trying to deceive everyone about their intentions and about Ukraine. Even now, in these details, in these agreements with the United States, Russia resorts to deception again. They are incorrigible in Moscow and are trying to take advantage specifically of the cold because they cannot subdue us, Ukraine, through their assaults.

Russia’s bet on war must receive a response from the world. The U.S. Congress has long been working on a new sanctions bill, and it is important that there be progress on it. Our European partners – and I discussed this with President Macron and Ursula von der Leyen – can take decisive steps regarding Russian oil tankers earning for the war. Europe needs the same strong capabilities the United States now has, not simply to stop tankers carrying oil for Russia – or not only to stop them – but to confiscate both the tankers and the oil. We respectfully ask for this. Russia must feel pressure so that it complies with partners’ requests and genuinely moves in negotiations toward peace. So far, only Ukraine is expected to make concessions. Russia must make concessions, the foremost being to end its aggression. Those who started the war must take steps toward de-escalation and stopping the war. If this is not happening, and until it happens, every Russian strike hits not just our energy infrastructure, not just our cities and communities in –20 °C, but every strike also targets the leaders negotiating with Russia and receiving only further war in response.

Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia, Dnipro, Kyiv, and the communities of the Donetsk and Kherson regions remain under constant attack. Today, in Zaporizhzhia, a Russian drone killed two passersby right on the street – both were only 18 years old. My condolences to their families. The war must be stopped. But if the world – the United States, Europe – lacks the power to stop Russian strikes, who will believe it has the power to truly prevent the war from flaring up again? Steps are needed to build trust in everything happening between the different parties right now. And pressure is needed to create incentives for Russia to invest in diplomacy rather than a war of destruction.

Most of the ballistic missiles in the attack were Iskander-Ms.

Zelenskyy first publicly requested Patriot missile systems in a video address to Congress from the Biden administration in late May 2022, approximately 100 days after the Russian invasion began. Biden authorized delivery of the Patriot system on December 21, 2022, 2 weeks before the Republicans took control of the House. The package included one vehicle-mounted Patriot air-defense battery and its munitions. According to The Hill back then:

Until now, the United States had held off on sending the Patriot system to Ukraine over fears it could escalate the war. But the Biden administration has changed its position after weeks of deliberation over the highly classified technology the weapon contains.

So what’s the current status of critical Patriot Systems in Ukraine? Ukraine has ~10-12 Patriot batteries total, but missile stocks remain critically low, forcing rationing against Iskander threats.

Below is a table of who has supplied Ukraine’s Patriot launchers, put together by Perplexity AI. Note that few of the launchers have been supplied directly to Ukraine by the US.

On Novvember 25 2025, Stars and Stripes reported that the State Department has approved a potential sale of equipment to Ukraine to sustain and upgrade its Patriot missile systems for up to $105 million. The contract includes:

upgrade of M901 launchers to M903 configuration, classified and unclassified prescribed load lists, which specify the types and quantities of missiles to be carried, an all other necessary services, spare parts, support, training and accessories. M903 launchers allow the deployment of various Patriot missiles, including the PAC-3 MSE, which has superior targeting and interception capabilities. “The proposed sale will improve Ukraine’s ability to meet current and future threats by further equipping it to conduct self-defense and regional security missions with a more robust local sustainment capability,” the release said.

On December 18, 2025, United24 Media reported that a new version of the ballistic Iskander-M was in production. (United24 Media is an official Ukrainian government media platform.) It is a modernized version of the 9M723 known internally as 9M723-2, has moved beyond experimental testing and entered serial production. The missiles can use different warhead types, such as cluster, thermonuclear, penetration, and thermobaric.

Leaked Russian production and financial documents show that Moscow is manufacturing a new Iskander 1000 ballistic missile with a range of up to 1,000 kilometers, capable of striking Oslo, Hamburg and other numerous European cities. Despite existing sanctions, the missile continues to rely on a wide range of Western-made components, and not all companies involved in its production are currently sanctioned.

“NATO reconnaissance won't help. American HBTSS and PWSA satellites are unable to distinguish between a 500-kilometer Iskander-M launch and a 1,000-kilometer missile. The enemy will have to respond throughout the entire operational rear area, revealing the positions and locations of aircraft (killing their aircraft)” - says russian open sources.

In January 2025, Russia announced it would begin manufacturing these missiles and deploy them in Kaliningrad. This enclave forms the most Western part of Russian territory, bordering Lithuania and Poland. This would put various European locations at risk of attack, such as:

• Entirety of Poland

• Much of Germany

• Copenhagen and the shipping straits of Denmark

• Southern Norway

• Southern Sweden

• Helsinki

• Entireity of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania

• Parts of the Netherlands

• Czechia

• Slovakia

• Romania

• Moldova

Even if the range was less even, within 500km, the position from Kalingrad still threatens much of Central and Eastern Europe, notably key NATO positions around the Suwalki gap, the Baltic countries, Poland, and parts of Germany.

What is most troubling is the wide range of Western-made parts from major companies, meaning there is a secondary transfer of these components to Russia.

On January 7, 2026, the Kyiv Independent announced that the US was going to triple its production of its Lockheed-Martin Patriot PAC-3 missiles due to “increasing global demand.” Emphasis is mine.

Under the agreement, annual production of PAC-3 MSE interceptors is set to increase from about 600 missiles to roughly 2,000 per year, significantly expanding U.S. and allied air defense capabilities.

The U.S. currently makes around 600 yearly, but Iran, for example, is believed to have a stockpile of over 1,000 ballistic missiles.

Yet experts warn that the U.S. itself may not currently have even 25% of the interceptors needed to meet Pentagon plans, as many have been used in recent conflicts across the Middle East, the Guardian reported in summer 2025. The shortfall prompted the Trump administration to temporarily freeze the summer’s transfer of munitions to Ukraine.

Ukraine places particular importance on the PAC-3 MSE interceptors due to their unmatched precision against high-speed ballistic missiles.

While a typical Patriot battery includes a mix of interceptors capable of downing aircraft, cruise, and ballistic missiles, the PAC-3 MSE is specifically engineered for the most advanced threats.

Though its range is shorter than earlier models — typically around 35 to 50 kilometers — the PAC-3 MSE can reach higher altitudes and engage faster-moving targets thanks to its dual-pulse motor and enhanced maneuverability.

These capabilities make it one of the few systems capable of reliably intercepting modern Russian missiles, such as Iskander and Kinzhal, as well as North Korea’s KN-23.

This makes the US Defense Department seem a little slow on the uptake, given the missile barrages on Ukraine in the graph above over the past year. Since the start of the war, the US has not supported Ukraine at levels necessary to match the Russian onslaught. That has been a choice made by the US—to accept the destruction of Ukraine and the suffering of the Ukrainian people to avoid offending Putin. This is at best timidity under Biden and complicity under Trump.

It is also important to recognize that US adventurism around the world is likely to take priority above Ukraine’s needs. According to Defense News,

…the U.S. and other partner nations also need Patriot batteries elsewhere, including in the Middle East and Taiwan, which would use them against a potential Chinese invasion. Patriot production faces bottlenecks that limit production, which can make nations reluctant to part with many of their systems, and they need to maintain their own stockpiles.

I am going to make some back-of-the-envelope calculations for how many PAC-3 MSE patriot missiles are needed based on estimates of Russian Iskander-M missiles and a ratio of 2+ PAC-3 MSE’s to kill 1 Iskander-M. Estimating kill ratios is difficult, given that Ukraine does not have enough Patriot systems to cover all targets. There are many other factors that complicate the analysis, including the presence of radar decoys and the effectiveness of detection and tracking radars.

Deftech Times has reported that Russia’s Iskander-M (9M723) missile production has significantly ramped up to about 40-50 missiles per month by late 2025, largely due to Chinese imports of dual-use components such as rocket fuel chemicals and electronics. I’ve written about Trump’s deal to sell advanced Nvidia dual-use H200 chips here. The Deftech Times article lists several other dual-use components supplied by China in exchange for Russian oil that have enabled increases in Iskander production. That leads to an estimate of 600 annually if the production rate can be sustained. Army Recognition reports that Russia plans to reach 1,200 produced per year by 2027 amid ongoing war demands. Production relies on the Votkinsk Plant, facing sanctions but bolstered by foreign inputs, with stockpiles estimated at 200 units recently.​

Let’s split the difference and assume 900 Iskander-Ms are produced in 2026. That would require at least 1800 PAC-3 MSEs and likely closer to 2400 given inevitable advances in the Iskander-M tech. Given the 2000 a year production targets from Lockheed Martin’s ramp up of PAC-3 MSE interceptors, that is not even sufficient to cover Ukraine’s needs.

There are two alternatives—either to shut down the Iskander-M production facilities or to impose strict export controls on dual-use tech. Trump just showed he has little interest in controls on dual-use tech option by allowing the sale of the Nvidia H200 chips to China.

The Bottom Line for Ukraine

Zelenskyy is begging. He can’t make it any clearer to Trump that Putin is playing him in the peace negotiations. But Trump has always known he was being played, especially now that the Epstein/Russia connection is coming out into the open. The question is how long Trump can stay afloat. But if Trump sinks, JD steps in, and he is rabidly anti-Ukraine.

The US has not adequately supported Ukraine since the start of the war when it comes to ballistic missile defense. Biden’s hesitancy in supplying the right defense technology to combat Russian missile technology at the beginning of the war was contributory. Trump’s cutting back aid to Ukraine to pre-war levels for 2026 and 2027 is unconscionable. The ramp-up in PAC-3 MSE production is inadequate to fill even Ukraine’s basic needs, and definitely won’t, given Trump’s military adventurism.

Trump is giving a gift to Russia by allowing China to buy advanced dual-use chips that can likely be used in the Iskanders. Sanctions on dual-use tech and export controls are high on Zelenskyy’s priority list. DefTechNews and United24 Media analyses point to China’s provision of dual-use tech as the main factor in Russia’s ability to increase production of the Iskander-M. The list from United24 Media, the Ukrainian government website, contains specific US-manufactured parts being used in the new generation Iskanders. While the Nvidia H200s are not listed, they could potentially be used in upgrades.

Ukraine is in a box. One way out is to destroy the Iskander assembly facilities in Votkinsk, approximately 1800 km from Kyiv. Explosions in Votkinsk were reported on February 7, 2024. But the other way is to stop US chips from being used in Russian missiles that are killing Ukrainian civilians in attacks that constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Please write your Representatives and Senators about this. Ukraine is defending democracy in a time when America is not.

Glory to Ukraine!

Slava Ukraini!

Слава Україні!

I am a second-generation Ukrainian American. I have skin in the game.

Please restack this post if you feel coverage of the Ukraine War in the mainstream media is insufficient, biased, or inaccurate. Restacking daily will help me reach a wider audience. There is no paywall currently. I am trying to make this the most comprehensive coverage of the US/Ukraine relationship on Substack.

If you find my work valuable, please donate to the official fundraising platform of the Ukrainian government UNITED24. All money that you donate goes to supporting Ukraine.

This is especially important now, as Russia intensifies its attacks to weaponize winter.

The idea is simple:

To unite the world around supporting Ukraine; to protect, save, and rebuild.

You can direct your donation to 5 options: Defense, Humanitarian Demining, Medical Aid, Rebuilding Ukraine, or Education and Science.

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Medvedev used the three-way interview to reach the Russian domestic and ultra-nationalist audiences, the US and COTW allies, and international media.

As a reminder, here is a list of Putin’s demands:

that Ukraine and NATO capitulate to Russia’s original war demands and cede the illegally annexed Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts — including unoccupied areas of these regions. Russia’s original war demands include Ukraine’s neutrality (the Kremlin’s ability to dictate Ukraine’s international alignment), demilitarization (reductions in the Ukrainian military such that Ukraine cannot defend itself), and denazification (the replacement of the current Ukrainian government with a pro-Russian puppet government). Medvedev also stated that Russia considers the “dismantling” of the Ukrainian government to be an “extremely important task” and that the current Ukrainian government “must disappear.” Medvedev questioned the legitimacy of the current Ukrainian government and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Kremlin officials have repeatedly exploited the lack of clarity about the outcome of the 2025 Alaska Summit, including by claiming that the United States and Russia agreed to principles based on Putin’s June 2024 MFA speech during the summit.

Medvedev added that British and French troops on Ukrainian soil as part of a post-conflict “reassurance force” was unacceptable; they would be considered legitimate targets. He went on to say that Russia demanded its own “security guarantees” that would prohibit NATO from deploying forces to any member that had joined since 1997.

He went on to dangle a one-year extension of the START nuclear treaty with the US, which expires on February 5, if the US did the same, while then immediately threatening to use nuclear force if Russia felt itself threatened. This is a standard Russian negotiating tactic: to throw in new, unrelated topics while adding unrelated threats. He was handing some new distractions to add to Trump’s grab bag.

Medvedev then went on a rant about NATO member Finland and how it had destroyed its positive relationship with Russia, intermingled with threats to crush it. Finland has been upping its border defenses as Russia has been building supply depots and military infrastructure near the border.

Meanwhile, Russia is also putting pressure on NATO member Poland with continuing balloon incursions over Polish territory launched from Belarus. ISW believes this is part of a psychological warfare effort preparatory to a conflict with NATO. ISW sees the

Medvedev then turned to comments directed at this domestic audience. Russia who are indifferent to Russian soldiers on the front, who are unwilling to help their own state, and who “lack basic patriotism” are Russia’s “internal enemies.” This is an attempt to suppress growing internal dissent because of Russia’s deteriorating domestic economic condition. According to the International Study of War:

Medvedev’s statements about external enemies and the Second World War aim to justify to the Russian population the sacrifices the Kremlin has been demanding of them and the need to maintain a war footing for the protracted war in Ukraine or even a possible conflict with NATO in the future. Medvedev’s statements about internal enemies likely aim to threaten those Russians who either oppose the war or the Kremlin itself, and to evoke memories of the Soviet-era “enemies of the people” to set a behavioral standard the Kremlin expects all Russians to adhere to. ISW continues to assess that the Kremlin is transforming Russia into a Soviet-style police state, likely in preparation for expected anti-war sentiment in the Russian population, and continued Kremlin discussion about alleged internal enemies aims to justify these increased repressions.

Zelenskyy is not surprised. His purpose behind carrying on the “peace plan” is to keep US sanctions on Russian oil and US-manufactured arms still available to Ukraine via Coalition of the Willing (COTW) purchases through the PURL program. Meanwhile, he is using negotiations with COTW to organize a new multilateral mutual-defense structure to replace NATO as the US walks away from its international commitments.

Trump’s periodic opining that a deal was getting close is just one of the distractions he pulls out of his grab bag to deflect attention from some other disaster. The latest distraction was a Trump announcement that he had brokered a temporary ceasefire on Kyiv’s energy infrastructure. According to Forbes, despite the supposed ceasefire,

A Russian drone strike killed 15 miners in eastern Dnipropetrovsk region on Feb. 1. The attack hit a bus transporting workers from a coal mine operated by DTEK, one of Ukraine’s largest power producers, after the miners finished their shift. The strike, the deadliest in more than a year, was part of a wave of Russian attacks on energy-related infrastructure in the region, home to resources valued at $3.5 trillion, according to Forbes Ukraine’s estimate.

The incident highlights the limits of a short-term truce that Russia agreed to at the request of U.S. President Donald Trump last week. While the Kremlin said it would pause attacks on Kyiv, Russian forces have continued strikes in eastern Ukraine, hitting logistics and energy facilities. By targeting mines and railways transporting coal, Moscow can degrade Ukraine’s power grid without technically violating its pledge to spare Kyiv.

In his nightly address, Zelenskyy continued to damn America with faint praise.

It is important that today, throughout the day, there were no missile strikes or “shaheds” targeting infrastructure, and this demonstrates that when the United States has the motive to really change the situation, the situation can change.

Our team continues working with the American side so that real decisions for the sake of peace can be scaled up. Today, there was a meeting with our delegation – the guys are already en route. The meetings will take place on Wednesday and Thursday. And not only in a trilateral format, but we will also have our own bilateral format with the United States. There are issues to be agreed upon; there is substance that requires further work. On security guarantees – we are ready. On Ukraine’s recovery and further development – government officials are working, and our teams are actively engaged. It is important that during this time the United States also decisively supports dialogue – all available opportunities for dialogue – and works with the Russian side accordingly, so that Russian strikes and Russian terror do not derail what can be achieved.

Zelenskyy is facing a new threat. China is providing Russia with dual-use advanced technology from its own and likely from pass-through Western nations that is being used in drones and missile systems. Zelenskyy must get the COTW and the US to place sanctions on and export controls on that technology. The latest example was Trump’s deal to allow the sale of Nvidia H200 dual-use chips to China. The Trump administration greenlit exports of Nvidia’s H200 (Hopper-generation AI chips) starting January 13, 2026, with a 25% US government surcharge on sales. Chinese firms placed orders exceeding 2 million units—worth billions at ~$27,000 each—surpassing Nvidia’s initial stock.

These chips are manufactured using the latest-generation export-controlled extreme ultraviolet lithography from ASML. China is estimated to be several years away from scalable production of its homegrown version of the technology. This is a gift to Russia.

In positive news on the technology front, ISW reported that Ukraine has been working with Elon Musk to prevent Russian drones from using Starlink. “Russian drones equipped with Starlink terminals fly at low altitudes, are resistant to Ukrainian electronic warfare (EW), and are controllable in real time at long distances.”

To pay for the drone tech, Russia has inked deals with China for Russian energy resources. Russia’s economy is under stress from the oil sanctions and financial controls. To evade those financial controls, Russia could be turning to barter or crypto transactions like those used by Iran, another supplier of tech to Russia, to support its war efforts.

In his nightly speech on February 2, 2026, Zelenskyy said:

Work is also ongoing in Europe on new sanctions against Russia for this war – sanctions that are not merely punitive, but that can also limit Russia’s ability to wage war. We are doing everything to make diplomacy work, but it is Russia that must abandon the war.

Meanwhile, the advanced Russian drones and missiles are being used extensively in the “weaponization of winter” campaign against Ukrainian civilian infrastructure. Preparatory strikes began in early October 2025, with the first major strikes hitting critical power and gas facilities. On October 3, 2025, Russia launched its largest‑ever attack on Ukraine’s natural gas sector, targeting Naftogaz assets in Kharkiv and Poltava regions, described as aimed at disrupting the heating season.​ On October 7–10, 2025, a massive drone and missile barrage struck energy infrastructure, knocking out power in Kyiv and nine regions; officials called it a “massive assault” timed for winter. Strikes continued nearly daily from late September/early October, shifting from electric grid to gas production/storage, distributed heating infrastructure and water supply systems, building to the brutal January 2026 phase with blackouts amid subzero temperatures. By January 2026, the campaign had caused rolling blackouts in major cities like Kyiv during extreme cold (down to -4°F).

The disruption and suffering of the people is enormous. Russian strikes on January 9 and 24, 2026, caused massive power and heating outages across Kyiv during subzero temperatures. Reports confirm more than 800,000 people lost electricity, with nearly 6,000 buildings left without heat. Kyiv’s population stood at about 3.6 million at the end of 2025. Up to 600,000 residents reportedly fled the city due to the outages, based on cellphone data, though exact numbers vary.

In his nightly speech, Zelenskyy noted new EU support for generators to help restore power while infrastructure repairs continue. In what remains gut-wrenchingly sad, Zelenskyy noted that the EU will support hot meals for children.

Today, I spoke with President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen – I would like to express gratitude for her support. I informed Ursula about the current situation – and there will be a new energy support package from the European Union for Ukraine, including generators. Thank you very much, Ursula – thank you, and thanks to colleagues. We are preparing new formats of cooperation with the European Union, including financing hot meals in schools in Ukraine. We have reached agreements, and we expect that everything will be successfully implemented.

In contrast to Trump’s failure to provide promised support to Iranian protestors, Zelenskyy closed his nightly speech by showing solidarity with them. He is providing leadership for an EU response.

Ukraine supports peoples who value freedom and are truly willing to fight for it. The whole world sees what is happening in Iran, the scale of the killings and how the Iranian regime has invested heavily in spreading war and violence across the region and the world. Ukraine will not forget a single one of the thousands of “shaheds” that have struck our cities and villages, our people. We see that, on the issue of Iran, others in Europe have heard us, Ukraine, those Europeans who called for greater engagement and a more principled stance, and the Iranians themselves. The European Union has practically agreed on a decision to designate one of the main organizations of the regime in Iran as terrorist – the so-called Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. European procedures are currently underway. In Ukraine, we have already adopted such a decision and designated this organization as terrorist. For us, this issue is closed. All terrorists in the world deserve the same treatment and condemnation – none should prevail. Thank you to everyone who helps protect lives! Thank you to everyone who stands with Ukraine!

Protecting lives is Zelenskyy’s theme as Ukraine nears the 12th anniversary of the Russian invasion of Crimea that began on February 20, 2014, and the 4th anniversary of the full-scale war that began on February 24, 2022. Putin attends to these anniversaries, pushing his generals to deliver wins for domestic consumption. It is likely to be an even harsher onslaught on Ukraine during the next few weeks.

Glory to Ukraine!

Slava Ukraini!

Слава Україні!

I am a second-generation Ukrainian American. I have skin in the game.

Please restack this post if you feel coverage of the Ukraine War in the mainstream media is insufficient, biased, or inaccurate. Restacking daily will help me reach a wider audience. There is no paywall currently. I am trying to make this the most comprehensive coverage of the US/Ukraine relationship on Substack.

If you find my work valuable, please donate to the official fundraising platform of the Ukrainian government UNITED24. All money that you donate goes to supporting Ukraine.

This is especially important now, as Russia intensifies its attacks to weaponize winter.

The idea is simple:

To unite the world around supporting Ukraine; to protect, save, and rebuild.

You can direct your donation to 5 options: Defense, Humanitarian Demining, Medical Aid, Rebuilding Ukraine, or Education and Science.

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

According to Newsweek:

The group recently announced its leader, Chad Maisel, and said it has already enlisted 200 people for its working groups, according to the news outlet Axios, although these participants will reportedly remain secret unless they write a proposal.

According to Axios, Maisel worked at the Biden Domestic Policy Council and for New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker,

This is necessary to get a rapid reversal of Trump’s most dangerous policies as well as strategies and tactics to make that happen. Democrats can’t wait until after the midterms and waste time arguing about what to do and how to do it. To win the presidency in 2028, they need to demonstrate the ability to govern even with a hostile president.

But the effort lacks one of the most important features Democrats need—visibility of a deep bench of young party leaders working together as a shadow cabinet. This may be addressed by the group’s newly announced plan to establish an advisory panel within the next few weeks.

According to Axios, several other groups are working on their own policy documents:

• Searchlight Institute launched last year with the goal of pushing the Democratic Party to reject progressive positions the group believes have alienated voters.

• Larger, more established think tanks such as The Roosevelt Institute and The Center for American Progress also have their own efforts to try to influence the next Democratic president.

This sounds like an invitation to blatant dysfunction. Crafting policy initiatives has to come from internal discussions with input from all party factions. The result needs to be cohesive and balanced or the messaging will be fragmented and confusing.

But at least it is a beginning, though 14 months later than it should have been.

https://www.newsweek.com/democrats-project-2029-plans-spark-criticism-online-11451709

https://www.axios.com/2026/02/01/scoop-democrats-project-2029-names-leader

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/03/dems-are-quietly-forming-a-think-tank-to-help-them-win-again-00381601that

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

This is one of the few pressure points Democrats have on the administration, and, according to the NY Times, all Schumer has negotiated is a 2-week window to negotiate unspecified “guardrails” for ICE.

How did this work out on ACA subsidies for the American people????

Call your Senators and Representatives and tell them to vote NO!

THE COUNTRY DEMANDS AN END TO THESE IMMORAL GESTAPO TACTICS.

Schumer cannot be the one to negotiate this.

Here is my list of what needs to be done to restore faith in immigration control in this country, given the human rights violations that ICE and CBP have committed in the past year. Legislation addressing DACA and long-term residents without legal status should be handled separately.

We won’t get it all, but Democrats have to make clear to the American people all the things that are wrong with how these agencies work now.

NO 5 SPENDING BILLS and a government shutdown until:

1. Noem resigns

2. Bovino resigns

3. Homan resigns

4. NO ICE—the agency is disbanded

5. No searches without judicial warrants

6. No additional funding for CPB

7. Current ICE/CBP Funding is to be used for settlements for those killed/died in custody or due to ICE/CBP actions and those whose rights were violated, and for renovation of detention centers so they are brought to humane standards, including onsite medical staff and emergency care.

8. Investigations of all deaths and injuries in ICE/CBP custody will be done by local authorities.

9. 24/7 access to social workers and translators to deal with family/children issues at detention centers

10. All US citizen children are to be assigned immediate legal representation.

11. 24/7 access to immigration lawyers and translators at detention centers

12. Review of all contracts with private suppliers of detention services to ensure they meet minimum standards and agree to random inspections.

13. Return of Congressional oversight procedures and standards as of 12/31/2024

14. No CBP signing bonuses

15. All ICE/CBP hired since 1/20/2025 must go through standard vetting procedures as of 12/31/2024 and must pass before they can be returned to duty

16. No shortened CBP training—a return to 12/31/2024 training standards and retraining of all CBP agents hired since 1/1/2025

17. No military fatigues

18. Mandatory body cams are on during any contact with the public and potential or current immigrant detainees.

19. Mandatory identification is worn, including visible ID numbers and nametags

20. No masks

21. Mandatory vehicle roof identification

22. No stops/searches without a return to 12/31/2024 standards of probable cause.

23. Current ICE/CPB funding is to be used to pay for trained local police presence to assist in the apprehension of immigrants with criminal records for deportation

24. All CPB operations are to be coordinated with local authorities

25. No assault rifles unless on raids with coordinated local police presence.

26. No pepper spray, tear gas, rubber bullets, watercannon. Crowd control is to be the responsibility of local police and paid for with current ICE/CPB funds

Democrats have to make it clear to the American people how far off the rails the current administration’s Gestapo tactics are.

Renee Good and Alex Pretti and a long list of others have died or been brutalized over the last year under these inhumane tactics. We can’t dishonor them by not fighting for major reform of the system.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/01/29/us/trump-news?unlocked_article_code=1.IFA.vsTS.RsYIrXSfcA8z&smid=url-share

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

The Institute for the Study of War, in its newsletter, reported the following tonight, confirming that China was indeed the supplier to the Russian defense industrial base (DIB) of the drones and missiles being used in the Russian “weaponization of winter” campaign:

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) continues to provide critical support to Russia’s weapons production, including Oreshnik missiles and Shahed long-range drones. The Telegraph reported on January 28 that it has identified $10.3 billion worth of technology and advanced equipment that the PRC has sent to Russia during an unspecified time frame. The Telegraph reported that Russia is using Chinese computer numerical control machines (CNC) to produce Oreshnik intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs) at the Votkinsk Plant in the Republic of Udmurtia and to produce Shahed-type drones at the Alabuga Special Economic Zone (ASEZ) in the Republic of Tatarstan. The Telegraph found that the PRC also supplies millions of dollars’ worth of microchips, memory boards, ball bearings, telescopic sights, and mounted piezoelectric crystals to Russia. The PRC continues to refrain from directly supplying Russia with weapons but is supplying components and equipment, many of which are dual-use, to the Russian DIB instead. ISW continues to assess that the PRC’s supplies to the Russian DIB have enabled Russia to improve and scale up its production of drones that Russian forces use to launch long-range strikes against the Ukrainian rear and to strike the Ukrainian near rear to generate battlefield air interdiction (BAI) effects along the front line.

This comes on the heels of Trump’s approval of the sale of Nvidia’s H200 dual-use chips to China, one generation behind the current Blackwell chips, both of which use new extreme-UV technology developed by ASML in their manufacture. The Netherlands has placed strict export controls ASML’s EUV lithography equipment. Chinese efforts to produce homegrown EUV tech is only at the prototype stage. Experts have suggested that it will take up to two years before the lithography equipment is in full production.

The Nvidia H200 chips can be used in drones and missile guidance systems. To be clear, Trump is allowing the sale of technology to China that likely will be passed on to Russia to build the drones that are used by Russia in a campaign of war crimes and crimes against humanity against the Ukrainian people.

According to Reuters, the Nvidia deal with China places some extraordinarily weak export controls on the chips, and has raised national security concerns with China hawks. The amount of computing power involved is enormous.

According to the regulations, the chips will be reviewed by a third-party testing lab to confirm their technical AI capabilities before they can be shipped to China, which cannot receive more than 50% of the total amount of chips sold to American customers.

Nvidia will need to certify there are enough H200s in the U.S., while Chinese customers must demonstrate "sufficient security procedures" and cannot use the chips for military purposes. Those conditions had not been established previously.

Trump announced last month that he would allow the chip sales in exchange for a 25% fee for the U.S. government. The decision drew fire from China hawks across the U.S. political spectrum over concerns the chips would supercharge Beijing’s military and erode the U.S. advantage in artificial intelligence.

Jay Goldberg, an equities analyst with Seaport Research, said the caps on exports appeared to be a compromise that put some restrictions on Nvidia’s China sales but might be difficult to enforce.

"As we have seen, (Chinese) companies have found ways to get access to those chips, and the U.S. government appears highly transactional in their approach to chip exports," Goldberg said. "Put another way, this looks like a Band-Aid, a temporary attempt to cover the huge gap among the U.S. government’s export policy makers."

Chinese technology companies have placed orders for more than 2 million H200 chips that are priced at around $27,000 each, Reuters reported last month, exceeding Nvidia’s inventory of 700,000 of the chips.

At the Consumer Electronics Show last week in Las Vegas, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang said the company was ramping up production of H200 chips amid strong demand both from China and the rest of the world that was driving up the price to rent the H200 chips currently sitting in cloud computing data centers.

Saif Khan, who served as director of technology and national security on the White House National Security Council under former President Joe Biden, said the rule would substantially boost China’s AI capabilities.

“The rule would allow about 2 million advanced AI chips like the H200 to China, an amount equal to the compute owned today by a typical U.S. frontier AI company,” Khan said. “The administration will also face challenges enforcing the rule’s know-your-customer requirements that restrict Chinese cloud providers from supporting nefarious uses.”

I am sure Ukraine feels comforted to know that Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick will vet the Chinese customers for the H200s.

Zelenskyy, in his speeches at Davos and the Fair Play Conference, has emphasized the need for US and EU sanctions on dual-use technology exports to Russia, in addition to the effective sanctions on Russian oil. Chinese-made Tenefly turbojet engines and Raspberry Pi controllers made in Wales have been identified in debris from Russian drone strikes.

Zelenskyy said, “We must already be working to ensure that cutting-edge technologies - particularly in the field of artificial intelligence - are prioritised in export control policies by partner states, as AI is increasingly being integrated into weaponry. It is necessary to immediately impose restrictions on the supply to Russia of ready-made artificial intelligence models suitable for military use; also, tools and services for training AI, including cloud-based solutions; high-performance computing equipment, as well as specialised data sets, including commercial satellite imagery.”

“Therefore, our sanctions must be highly specific in each area and as up-to-date as possible. A new international platform for controlling the export of dual-use goods must be established, which should help us not only to defend ourselves directly against Russia, but also indirectly against its accomplices, such as the regimes in Pyongyang and Tehran.

He said, “Russian missiles, drones, nearly all the equipment on the battlefield that is actually effective, Russian finances, their tech companies and communications - all of this depends on how Russia trades with the world, how Russia sells oil and other goods, and imports technologies, equipment, and components. Russian weapons production directly depends on access to modern machine tools. Russian missiles and drones are made up of dozens of critical components that they import from other countries through various schemes. The Russian budget is critically dependent on oil and gas revenues.”

Tonight’s reporting just closes the loop on this example of Trump’s perfidy in his dealings with Ukraine and his enabling of Putin’s war crimes and crimes against humanity.

As an American, I am ashamed of my government daily.

Glory to Ukraine!

Slava Ukraini!

Слава Україні!

I am a second-generation Ukrainian American. I have skin in the game.

Please restack this post if you feel coverage of the Ukraine War in the mainstream media is insufficient, biased, or inaccurate. Restacking daily will help me reach a wider audience. There is no paywall currently. I am trying to make this the most comprehensive coverage of the US/Ukraine relationship on Substack.

If you find my work valuable, please donate to the official fundraising platform of the Ukrainian government UNITED24. All money that you donate goes to supporting Ukraine.

This is especially important now, as Russia intensifies its attacks to weaponize winter.

The idea is simple:

To unite the world around supporting Ukraine; to protect, save, and rebuild.

You can direct your donation to 5 options: Defense, Humanitarian Demining, Medical Aid, Rebuilding Ukraine, or Education and Science.

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

On the whole, it is a statement of old-time conservative pre-MAGA policies. But this is something that is very rare today, a Republican demonstrating what looks like public integrity. That has to be brought back into American politics. Is this the first green shoot of what it looks like to make a principled decision to stand by personal values and morality? Heather Cox Richardson found it significant. I wanted to go beyond the soundbites and do a deep dive on what Madel said.

I am sure that a lot of us will question whether this is real or just a stunt, a way to save his political skin and wait out the coming blue wave. Maybe that is partly underlying this. But this is the first new Republican voice repudiating the party in a while. The Never-Trumpers have been around on Substack for a long time. Some are changing parties to run as Democrats, like George Conway. But this feels different to me, so I think it is worth a detailed look. I could not find a verified transcript, so I worked off the video.

Madel starts off by saying he is proud of the campaign he ran and that he entered the race because he felt Minnesota had “lost its way” — citing fraud, unsafe streets, the need for more respect for law enforcement, a lagging education system, too much regulation, and “absurdly high” taxes. That’s a more or less standard old-time conservative laundry list of campaign issues. It is devoid of the usual Christo-Nationalist hard-core MAGA rhetoric.

In his video, Madel announces that he is ending his campaign for Minnesota governor and explains that he can no longer support the national GOP’s “stated retribution on the citizens of our state, nor can I count myself a member of a party that would do so.” He frames the decision as a matter of conscience and constitutional principle, not simple political strategy. He is clearly saying that he is disavowing the Republican Party. That is definitely in the integrity column.

Madel says he initially supported the stated goals of ICE’s “Operation Metro Surge” in Minnesota, especially deporting undocumented immigrants with serious criminal records, but argues that the operation has “expanded far beyond its stated focus on true public safety threats.” He states that “United States citizens, particularly those of color, live in fear” and that citizens are “carrying papers to prove their citizenship,” which he calls “wrong.”

He goes on to say that weaponizing criminal investigations against political opponents is wrong, no matter which political party you belong to. I would definitely put that into the integrity column.

He adds that too many U.S. citizens in Minnesota have been detained “due to the color of their skin” and denounces warrantless or quasi-warrantless home entries, saying it is unconstitutional for ICE or DHS to raid homes without a criminal warrant. He summarizes this with the line, “Driving while Hispanic is not a crime. Neither is driving while Asian.”

The acknowledgement of people of color being targeted is surprising if Madel is looking to keep a future MAGA-allied political life. It is a disavowal of Steven Miller and the racist base. It didn’t have to be there. It is definitely not “politically correct” for any Republican currently in elected office.

Madel returns to a personal moral frame, with his duties as a father. Near the end of the video, he says he has to look his daughters in the eye and tell them, ‘I believe I did what was right.’ And I am doing that today.” This is a standard political trope.

He says national Republicans have made it “nearly impossible for a Republican to win a statewide election in Minnesota,” both because of the substance of these policies and the way they are being sold. He is basically saying the party has thrown him overboard, tied to an anchor.

Madel makes clear that he still credits Trump for certain policies, including getting NATO countries to increase defense spending, brokering a ceasefire in Gaza, and proposing a cap on credit card interest rates. He thought universities didn’t do enough to protect Jewish students from pro-Palestinian protesters. But there are none of the hot-button MAGA issues. There was no mention of abortion, or socialists, or woke coastal elites.

He argues, however, that Trump’s wins cannot justify what he calls an “unmitigated disaster” in the way Operation Metro Surge has been carried out and the broader push for “retribution” against Minnesota. He says Minnesota Republicans have screwed up, doing little to investigate the fraud. He is all in on Nick Shirley’s discredited investigation into Somali fraud. That is definitely not in the public integrity column.

He says that Amy Klobuchar’s anticipated run for governor did not drive his decision, and notes that if he had “many millions of dollars” he would consider an independent bid, but “reality guides my decision.” Klobucher has $1.8 million on hand for the race from her Q3 filing. i would not have expected him to say otherwise.

Then he defends his prior legal work for ICE agent Jonathan Ross (who shot Renee Good) as grounded in the “sacrosanct” constitutional right to counsel. Here he is putting a fence around a landmine. It is necessary disclosure and truth-telling if he is to craft a political life after Trump.

Madel outlined how he supported Ross following the shooting of Good, and said he helped him “fill out a form” to obtain legal representation from the Justice Department if he is ever sued or charged with a crime.“I did this just like I have helped hundreds of other people find good lawyers, including on immigration matters,” he said.He put up a really high fence around his decision to help Ross. “Would Jesus Christ be a prosecutor or a public defender? We all know the answer to that.” This was clearly the emotional hot button for him in the speech.

He goes on to ask for support for the Minneapolis police. He takes a dig at Walz and Frey for prohibiting the police from helping their “federal counterparts.” He asks the public to remember the cops are trying to protect them but they are between a rock and a hard place. Protect the blue is another political trope. He did not ask to protect the Minnesota National Guard called out by Walz, but that might be because he recorded this before Walz did it. I have no way of verifying the timing.

He closes by thanking supporters, promising to return “every penny” donated to his campaign, and saying he will not forget their “help, encouragement, and service.” That’s definitely something you would never ever hear from Trump.

He ends with “God bless Minnesota. We certainly need it.” That is definitely a true statement.

As in all things political, there is a mix of motives: altruism vs. self-interest. That’s true in Chris Mandel’s speech. I think the balance tipped towards altruism, which gives me hope. Going through the whole speech, it is not as strongly altruistic as the sound bites make it seem.

But in the end, it is a start,

https://www.facebook.com/lounewsman/posts/remarkable-video-statement-here-from-attorney-chris-madel-as-he-withdraws-his-ca/1324881079448321/

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

That happened when the first person of color died in ICE/CBD custody. Keith Porter, Jr. was one of the victims.

The massive protests occurred when the majority of Americans looked in the mirror and said, “It could be me.”

Think about what that means about the reality of racism in America.

It is time to end racism and hate. We are here now because Trump has done what all authoritarians do, leveraged our differences to divide us. There always has to be an “other” in a repressive state.

As we take back America from Trump and his soulless thugs, as we rebuild our nation, laws, and institutions, it is time to build them back better.

It is time to make diversity respected and honored, equality a reality, and inclusion celebrated. It is time to finally create a society where the rights and freedoms in our founding documents are equally true for everyone.

It is the only way we can keep this from happening again.

JUSTICE: WE WILL REMEMBER

AMERICANS AGAINST ICE

Justice for Keith Porter Jr.: Why Silence Is Not an Option

On New Year’s Eve, Keith Porter Jr., a 43-year-old African American father of two, was fatally shot by an off-duty ICE agent in Los Angeles. His family is still waiting for transparency. His community is still demanding accountability. And the institutions charged with oversight have, so far, offered silence…

Read more

7 months ago · 5041 likes · 124 comments · RESIST | FIGHT

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

The new Trump-aligned government of the Czech Republic, led by populist Andrej Babiš, won a mandatory vote of confidence after forming a coalition with two smaller right-wing parties, the Freedom Party and the Motorists.

Unlike the previous pro-Western government, Babiš has rejected any financial aid for Ukraine and guarantees for EU loans to the country fighting the Russian invasion, joining the ranks of Viktor Orbán of Hungary and Robert Fico of Slovakia.

But his government would not abandon a Czech initiative that managed to acquire some 1.8 million much-needed artillery shells for Ukraine only last year on markets outside the EU on condition the Czechs would only administer it but would not contribute money.

The pro-Putin Freedom party sees no future for the Czechs in the EU and NATO, and wants to expel most of 380,000 Ukrainian refugees in the country.

The Motorists, who are in charge of the environment and foreign ministries, rejected the EU Green Deal and proposed the revival of the coal industry.

According to the Kyiv Independent;

The anti-Ukrainian rhetoric of Tomio Okamura, chairman of the Czech parliament’s lower chamber and leader of the far-right Freedom and Direct Democracy (SPD) party, arguably surpasses even that of Hungary‘s Viktor Orban and Slovakia‘s Robert Fico.

In his New Year address, the Czech far-right politician accused “Ukrainian thieves around (President Volodymyr) Zelensky’s junta, who built themselves golden toilets,” of siphoning off aid flowing to the war-torn country.

In Hungary, far-right Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party in Hungary faces parliamentary elections on April 12, 2026. He is trailing in recent polling vs. Peter Magyar, a former ally. Orban faces mounting criticism at home and abroad over democratic backsliding, curbs on media freedom, and the erosion of the rule of law. He has been a darling of MAGA Republicans in the US.

Magyar positions himself as a pro-democracy challenger to Viktor Orbán's authoritarian rule in Hungary, advocating for pro-European policies, accountability, and systemic reforms ahead of the 2026 elections. His Respect and Freedom (TISZA) party has surged in polls, overtaking Fidesz by emphasizing transparency, healthcare improvements, and term limits for leaders, while criticizing Orbán's corruption and isolationism.

To bolster his bona fides with his constituents, Orban released a campaign video with endorsements from a panoply of right-wing superstars, including Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, her deputy Matteo Salvini, French far-right leader Marine Le Pen, Alternative for Germany (AfD) co-leader Alice Weidel, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Spain’s Vox chief Santiago Abascal, Austria’s Freedom Party (FPÖ) leader Herbert Kickl, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić, and Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš, and Argentine President Javier Milei. Trump is notably missing.

“Together we stand for a Europe that respects national sovereignty, is proud of its cultural and religious roots,” Meloni said in the video, as she endorsed Hungary’s incumbent leader.

“Security cannot be taken for granted, it must be won. And I think Viktor Orbán has all those qualities. He has the tenacity, the courage, the wisdom to protect his country,” Netanyahu added.

Meanwhile, Keir Starmer is in a spat with Emmanuel Macron and Giorgia Meloni over whether the EU should try to engage in direct negotiations with Putin. Macron and Meloni are worried they will not have a seat at the table if Trump is the sole negotiator with Putin. The UK Foreign Secretary, Yvette Cooper, warned that Moscow has shown no credible interest in peace.

Cooper argued that for now, the diplomatic center of gravity lies with Ukraine and its closest backers.

“What we’ve seen is the huge commitment to work being done by Ukraine, with the U.S. and supported by Europe to draw up plans for peace including security guarantees,” she said. “But so far, I don’t see the evidence that Putin is yet willing to come to the table, or yet willing to have discussions.”

In the absence of that evidence, she said, pressure on Moscow must intensify rather than ease, through sanctions and military support.

“I think we’ve still got to be ready alongside this really important work to put increased pressure, economic pressure, and also through the military support to Ukraine, that military pressure on Russia as well,” Cooper added.

The UK is in agreement with the EU in targeting Putin’s shadow tanker fleet.

Promising “stronger action” to break the shadow fleet’s “chokehold,” she added: “It means a more robust response, and it means as we see operations by shadow fleet vessels, standing ready to be able to act.”

Officials believe that the U.K. government has identified a legal basis for the military to board shadow fleet vessels in international shipping lanes, in certain cases.

Cooper did not rule out the prospect of British forces boarding vessels, telling POLITICO: “It means looking at whatever is appropriate, depending on the circumstances that we face.”

She also did not rule out using oil from seized vessels to fund the Ukrainian war effort — but cautioned that the prospect was of a different order to using frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine. That idea hit a wall in discussions between EU countries in December.

The foreign secretary said: “As you know, we’ve had all sorts of discussions in the past about different Russian sovereign assets. That’s a different set of circumstances. So we take the approach that it always has to be done within an international legal framework and on a case-by-case basis.”

Asked directly if she was talking about joint shadow fleet operations with European allies, Cooper said: “We stand ready to work with allies on stronger enforcement around the shadow fleet.”

This is the best piece of news of the day. Zelenskyy’s strategy has been to attack Russian oil tankers and production and refining infrastructure to cut off its main source of revenue to support its war efforts. Since it has no navy, Ukraine just disables the tankers with sea baby drones. Ukraine has a sanction list of 656 vessels in the shadow fleet.

The UK appears ready to consider seizing vessels instead of disabling them, so that the oil can be transferred and sold, and the proceeds will go to Ukraine. If Trump can take the oil off sanctioned oil tankers that the US Coast Guard seizes, and sell it and keep the profits for his own slush fund, why can’t the UK do the same, but give the proceeds to Ukraine?

In some more good news, Poland approved the transfer of nine old Russian MiG-29 fighter jets to Ukraine.

Pressed on whether Ukraine had agreed to accept Poland’s offer, [Polish Deputy Defense Minister] Zalewski indicated that Kyiv appeared open to the transfer. “I believe... Ukrainians made the decision to accept this offer. Of course, there are some technical aspects which shall be clarified, as always,” he added.

Poland was the first country to supply Kyiv with warplanes after Russia launched its full-scale invasion in 2022. Warsaw has been one of Ukraine’s strongest allies throughout the war, providing extensive military assistance and serving as a key logistics hub for Western aid flowing into the country.

The Nightly Speech

Zelenskyy’s January 15 nightly speech was unusually short. He and Ukraine are being pressed to the wall by the Russian air bombardments in the Russian “weaponizing winter” campaign that is directed at civilian infrastructure.

As usual, the key statements are in bold, and my commentary is in square brackets and italics.

It Is Russian Missiles, “Shaheds,” and Attempts to Destroy Ukraine That Are Clear Evidence That It Is Not Agreements at All That Russia Is Seeking

Fellow Ukrainians!

I started the day with a special format – this will be the case every day now, with everyone staying in touch – a special coordination call with everyone responsible for recovery and management under such an emergency. Energy, provision of services in cities and villages. From the Government and the military to the regions, regional authorities and community leaders. Kyiv and the region, Kharkiv and the region, Dnipro region – Dnipro, Kryvyi Rih; Zaporizhzhia, Sumy, Chernihiv. Tasks have been defined, and throughout the day the Government must deliver solutions. First and foremost, to increase electricity imports and all possible options for backup supply and support. As for assistance points in cities, there are separate tasks for the Ministry of Internal Affairs, including in terms of keeping people really informed. Everyone must be able to contact the 112 hotline and receive assistance, and get information on heating and electricity supply. It is important that state institutions and local authorities maintain full communication with businesses and energy companies – with everyone who can now provide additional resources for our collective resilience. There must be decisions regarding the curfew so that it is easier for entrepreneurs to plan their work. And so that business facilities can be used as assistance points for people. In particular, government officials have already spoken with retail chains. I instructed the Prime Minister of Ukraine and the First Deputy Prime Minister – the Minister of Energy – as well as other government officials to be as active as possible in communicating with the public and to provide maximum support to communities.

[The situation in Kyiv is horrific, as described in an article by the AP. Hundreds of thousands of residents face intermittent electricity, heating, and water access, with some areas blacked out for over 10 hours daily. Repair crews are working around the clock, with daytime temperatures forecast in the low teens and overnight temperatures below 5F. Russian drone attacks are hitting some areas twice a day, focusing on electrical substations. Retail businesses are now being used as invincibility points, but it is difficult to keep people informed of local conditions as the power grid keeps getting hit again and again.]

[Under the Rome Treaty, attacking civilian infrastructure is considered a war crime and can be a crime against humanity.

The government is setting up “Invincivibility Points” which are warming stations where people can get a hot meal, charge their phones, and get relief from the cold. A major problem occurs in high-rise buildings without elevator service. ]

Separately, we spoke with the Minister of Defense of Ukraine and the Commander of the Air Force regarding the protection of energy facilities and the needs we have. Today there were again severe strikes on Kharkiv – specifically on critical infrastructure, missile strikes. “Shaheds” targeted Kyiv in the morning and are now attacking it again in the evening. The situation is difficult in the border regions. It is important to strengthen the Dnipro region and Odesa as well – we will intensify our engagement with partners.

[Zelenskyy keeps begging for more air defense, especially Tomahawks, but Trump has refused to provide them. Over the last few days, Zelenskyy has indicated that missiles are in depots in members of the COTW, but they are not being delivered to where they are needed in Ukraine in a timely fashion. Zelenskyy has been begging the COTW for more commitments to the PURL initiative to buy more US-manufactured air defense systems as well.

Shaheds are Iranian-designed drones. Iran has been offering weapons for crypto to evade Western banking restrictions. Crypto is coming into the Russia/Iran/North Korea/China military trading consortium through North Korean crypto hacking schemes that are used to buy Russian access to advanced weapons designs, which then pays for the Iranian “shaheds”.]

I just spoke with Mark Rutte – in particular, about the PURL initiative and our ability to purchase missiles for air defense. We also discussed diplomatic efforts with America – Ukraine has never been and will never be a stumbling block to peace. It is Russian missiles, Russian “shaheds,” and Russia’s attempts to destroy Ukraine that are clear evidence that it is not agreements at all that Russia is seeking. When Ukrainians are left without power for 20–30 hours because of Russia, and when Russian strikes are aimed at breaking our energy system and our people, it is Russia that must be put under pressure. I am grateful to everyone who supports Ukraine in this. We will conduct our diplomatic work far more actively – both public and official, and non-public and unofficial.

[Mark Rutte serves as the 14th Secretary General of NATO, a position he has held since October 2024. Before that, he was the longest-serving prime minister of the Netherlands, leading four coalition governments from 2010 to 2024 as head of the liberal People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD).

PURL is the Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List, which is administered by NATO. Members of the COTW donate to a fund that is then used to purchase US-manufactured equipment. The US does NOT contribute funds to PURL.

Zelenskyy is back to telling Trump that Ukraine is not the obstacle to peace. Russia is with its incessant attacks on civilians. Zelenskyy is being blunt that it is Russia that should be punished, and Ukraine, aided by its supposed ally, America. But, as discussed in yesterday’s post, Trump is pivoting back to Russia, likely because he sees Ukraine as the weaker party at this moment. You can read an analysis here.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia agreed with Mr Trump. He added that Putin and the Russian side were open to talks, and Zelensky was the problem.

Trump’s pivot puts his greenlighting of Lindsey Graham’s Russian oil sanction bill in question. Graham co-authored the Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025 (S.1241) with Sen. Richard Blumenthal, targeting Russia's energy exports amid the Ukraine conflict. In early January 2026, The bill enables tariffs up to 500% and secondary sanctions on countries like China, India, and Brazil buying Russian oil, gas, uranium, and related products. As of mid-January 2026, the bill awaits a Senate vote but faces hurdles, including House priorities on revenue measures and Democratic resistance to expanded tariff powers.]

Glory to Ukraine!

In Closing

It has been another day of suffering for the Ukrainian people.

Trump’s pivot back towards Russia may endanger the stronger sanctions against Russian oil in Lindsey Graham/s bill.

Czechia’s new government is decidedly pro-Putin, although it has agreed to continue administering its ammunition acquisitions for Ukraine, but will not contribute to funding it. The most serious issue is whether the 380,000 Ukrainian refugees in Czechia will be uprooted and transferred to other countries.

Viktor Orbán’s illiberal democracy is trailing in the polls ahead of the April elections. I would be greatly heartened to see Orban voted out of office. It would give me hope that America might return to a stable democracy in my lifetime.

Meloni and Macron are in La La Land, believing that Putin will come to the table and actually negotiate. I would say this is highly unlikely. Yesterday, Lavrov upped Russian territorial demands.

Putin will keep up the war crimes for as long as possible, hoping that Zelenskyy will capitulate. Iran’s move into crypto payments for weapons will keep Russia afloat for longer.

The best news of the day is that the UK appears ready to join Ukraine in actions against Russia's shadow tanker fleet.

Polymarket says there is a 42% chance of a ceasefire in the war by the end of 2026 with $6 million bet. (Don Jr. is an investor in Polymarket.)

Glory to Ukraine!

Slava Ukraini!

Слава Україні!

I am a second-generation Ukrainian American. I have skin in the game.

Please restack this post if you feel coverage of the Ukraine War in the mainstream media is insufficient, biased, or inaccurate. Restacking daily will help me reach a wider audience. There is no paywall currently. I am trying to make this the most comprehensive coverage of the US/Ukraine relationship on Substack.

If you find my work valuable, please donate to the official fundraising platform of the Ukrainian government UNITED24. All money that you donate goes to supporting Ukraine.

This is especially important now, as Russia intensifies its attacks to weaponize winter.

The idea is simple:

To unite the world around supporting Ukraine; to protect, save, and rebuild.

You can direct your donation to 5 options: Defense, Humanitarian Demining, Medical Aid, Rebuilding Ukraine, or Education and Science.

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

U.S. President Donald Trump told Reuters that Ukraine - not Russia - is holding up a potential peace deal.

“I think he’s ready to make a deal,” Trump said of the Russian president. “I think Ukraine is less ready to make a deal.”

Asked why U.S.-led negotiations had not yet resolved Europe’s largest land conflict since World War Two, Trump responded: “Zelenskiy.”

Trump told Reuters he was not aware of a potential upcoming trip to Moscow by Witkoff and Kushner, which Bloomberg reported earlier on Wednesday.

Asked if he would meet Zelenskiy at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, next week, Trump said he would but implied no plans were set.

“I would - if he’s there,” Trump said. “I’m going to be there.”

Asked why he believed Zelenskiy was holding back on negotiations, Trump did not elaborate, saying only: “I just think he’s, you know, having a hard time getting there.”

The dismissive tone in response to the question about a meeting on the sidelines of Davos is confirmation that Zelenskyy is now seen as a “loser.”

The last publicly acknowledged direct conversation between President Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin occurred on December 29, 2025. The call focused on progress in U.S.-Ukraine negotiations, Ukraine's alleged drone attack on a Russian site, and broader bilateral issues. Putin duped Trump about the drone attack, which was subsequently proven bogus by the CIA. That marked the positive pivot towards Ukraine.
The last reported talks between the US and Russia on the Ukraine peace plan occurred in early January 2026 in Paris. These followed December 2025 discussions at Mar-a-Lago involving US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, Ukrainian officials, and prior Trump-Putin calls on December 28-29, 2025.

On January 14, 2026, Russian FM Sergei Lavrov dismissed US ceasefire proposals as unserious, insisting that any settlement must address the status of Crimea, “Novorossiya,” and Donbas, signaling maximalist territorial demands including Kharkiv, Dnipropetrovsk, Mykolaiv, and Odesa oblasts, all in Ukrainian-occupied sovereign territory. He argued that ceasefire proposals would only buy time for Western support to Kyiv. Lavrov welcomed potential visits by U.S. figures like Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner to discuss peace, provided they engage substantively.
Trump has shown his disregard for the central principle of the UN Charter: national sovereignty. His advocacy for Ukraine to give up territory will weaken the central tenet of the post-World War II order, that territorial boundaries are sacrosanct. If Trump succeeds in forcing the other side to give up territory, the “peace” will only be temporary, and Russian aggression will be rewarded.

According to Modern Diplomacy the remarks in the Reuters interview

come as the war approaches its fourth year, making it Europe’s largest land conflict since World War II. Trump’s framing signals a notable shift in U.S. rhetoric at a moment when Washington remains central to any viable diplomatic settlement.

The comments reflect renewed frustration with the Ukrainian leader, despite signs that relations between the two presidents had stabilised during Trump’s first year back in office. Trump has repeatedly demonstrated a greater willingness than many U.S. allies to accept Putin’s statements at face value, a stance that has unsettled Kyiv, European capitals, and lawmakers in Washington.

Trump’s optimism about Putin contrasts sharply with U.S. intelligence assessments. In December, Reuters reported that American intelligence agencies continued to warn that Putin had not abandoned maximalist objectives, including control over all of Ukraine and influence over former Soviet territories. That assessment was publicly disputed by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.

This divergence highlights a broader split between political leadership and intelligence analysis, reinforcing European concerns that Russia may be using negotiations to consolidate territorial gains rather than seek lasting peace.

Trump’s comments risk widening the transatlantic divide over Ukraine. By publicly shifting blame onto Kyiv, Washington may weaken Ukraine’s negotiating position while emboldening Moscow. The rhetoric also signals a possible recalibration of U.S. priorities from defending Ukrainian territorial integrity toward securing a rapid, deal-based end to the conflict.

For Europe, the remarks raise concerns that U.S. pressure could force Ukraine into an agreement that freezes the conflict on Russia’s terms rather than resolves it.

In the background, plans for the visit of four members of the Russian DUMA to Congress, initiated by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, the pro-Putin Republican, and approved by the State Department, are still under negotiation.

Luna previously met Kirill Dmitriev, a Putin envoy, in October 2025, which sparked the parliamentary dialogue idea. She has opposed U.S. aid to Ukraine and introduced a NATO withdrawal bill. Luna announced on January 7, 2026, that she invited the Duma members to discuss peace talks on Ukraine, U.S.-Russia trade, and bilateral ties. She thanked Secretary of State Marco Rubio for assistance, emphasizing dialogue led by "reasonable persons."

As of January 15, 2026, preparations continue, but no meeting has occurred; details like exact date, location, and security guarantees remain under negotiation. Duma's Alexey Chepa confirmed ongoing work, but the event is planned for later this month.

According to a January 14, 2026 article in Izvestia:

The State Duma explained to Izvestia that one of the topics should be the Venezuelan track and potential cooperation in the oil sector. These may be joint mining projects, given the complexity of processing Venezuelan raw materials, but experts have different assessments of the likelihood of such cooperation. In January, Anna Paulina Luna, a member of the US House of Representatives, sent an official invitation to some State Duma deputies after coordination with the State Department. However, cooperation between Russia and the United States largely depends on whether the parties can find a compromise in resolving the Ukrainian crisis. According to Luna, this topic will be the main topic of future consultations. What difficulties remain in organizing the meeting can be found in the Izvestia article.

The issue of resolving the crisis in Ukraine will be the main topic of consultations at the upcoming meeting of parliamentarians, said Anna Paulina Luna. In October 2025, the congresswoman held a meeting with the special representative of the President of Russia Kirill Dmitriev. According to him, contacts with Luna are very important because "this is an example of people who advocate dialogue with Russia and want to understand the Russian position."

Rubio’s permission for this opportunity for backdoor diplomacy is deeply concerning to me. Luna act as a private go-between for Trump and Putin.

The Nightly Speech

Zelenskyy’s January 14 nightly speech at 1:01 PM EST occurred before the Reuters story broke at 8:11 PM EST.

In the speech, Zelenskyy declared that a state of emergency in the energy sector exists, caused by Russia’s “weaponization of winter” air bombardments. He also discusses what is being done in response.

As usual, the key statements are in bold, and my commentary is in square brackets and italics.

I Have Tasked a Review of Curfew Regulation: During This State of Emergency, Curfews Can Be Lifted for Some Cities and Communities

Dear Ukrainians!

It’s been a long day. I just held an energy-sector meeting – the most important one today. Many issues have been discussed. Denys Shmyhal has been appointed First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Energy of Ukraine; his key task is to handle the current emergency situation in the energy sector caused by Russian strikes and the harsh winter weather. We separately analyzed the situation in some of our cities – it’s especially difficult in Kyiv, as well as Odesa, Dnipro region – Dnipro, Kryvyi Rih – and several other cities and regions. We can see that much has been done, particularly in Kharkiv, where local authorities were prepared.

[The announcement of the energy emergency speaks to the successof the Russian “weaponization of winter” campaign to break the spirit of the Ukrainian people. It is devastating. You can read about it in my post from yesterday.

The mention of Shmyhal is important; you can read about Zelenskyy’s cabinet reshuffle in my post

here.

Ukraine's former prime minister and defense minister was appointed First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Energy by Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada (parliament) on January 14, 2026, after a failed vote on January 13. In the first vote, opposition parties abstained, citing risks of wartime disruption and concerns about energy sector mismanagement amid Russian attacks and shortages. Zelensky faction members expressed dissatisfaction, falling 16 votes short despite Shmyhal's loyalty and prior roles as PM and defense minister.

According to Reuters, the initial vote against Shmyhal reflected infighting in Zelenskyy’s party.

Around two dozen lawmakers from Zelenskiy’s ruling party did not vote, reflecting what Kyiv-based political analyst Volodymyr Fesenko said was flagging discipline within the ranks.

Since Russia’s February 2022 invasion, the legislature had effectively functioned as a rubber-stamp body keeping wartime Ukraine running.

“This is a sign that he’s losing control over parliament,” Fesenko said. Unease within the party is not new, but leaders in the past had been able to rally needed votes, he added.

Shmyhal had been proposed for the job as part of a wide-ranging government reshuffle with Kyiv facing mounting Russian pressure as the fourth anniversary of Moscow’s invasion approaches next month.

Lawmakers on Tuesday had also been expected to tap Ukraine’s digital chief Mykhailo Fedorov to lead the defence ministry before the legislative session was closed.

Parliament will reconvene on Wednesday for another attempt to appoint both Shmyhal and Fedorov, lawmakers said. Both had already been dismissed by the legislature amid expectations of a smooth vote.

Opposition lawmakers had criticised the wartime reshuffle as potentially disruptive at a critical juncture in the war.

Some took aim particularly at Shmyhal, saying he had failed to successfully manage the energy sector as Ukraine’s longest-serving premier.

His candidacy for the third cabinet job under Zelenskiy also highlights the critical shortage of managers who are seen as capable of leading key sectors.

“You can’t replace absolutely all positions with the same person when the situation is at a boiling point,” said Solomiia Bobrovska, a member of the liberal opposition Holos party that abstained.

Mykhailo Fedorov was also confirmed as Ukraine's Defense Minister yesterday, January 14, 2026. Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada approved his nomination on the second vote with 277 votes in favor, exceeding the 226 required, after an initial failure with 206 votes on January 13.

Fedorov, previously Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Digital Transformation, replaces Denys Shmyhal, who shifted to energy minister. He pledged audits of the Defense Ministry, Armed Forces, and recruitment centers, plus reforms against corruption, mobilization issues (citing 2 million draft evaders and 200,000 deserters), air defenses, and drone production. ]

Kyiv, unfortunately, has done much less – far too little has been done in the capital. And even these past few days, I haven’t seen sufficient effort – all of this must be urgently corrected. Decisions must be made. Legally, the state of emergency in the energy sector will be officially declared – this will provide more possibilities. The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine will simplify to the maximum all processes related to connecting backup energy equipment to the grid. Zero bureaucracy. I have instructed them to increase electricity import capacities – using all business opportunities. In Kyiv and other cities, there must be more, much more, assistance points for people – Points of Invincibility. I have tasked a review of curfew regulations: during this state of emergency, curfews can be lifted for some cities and communities where the security situation allows it. The government officials must present the corresponding proposals. So that people have access to all necessary support at any time, and that businesses can plan their operations more rationally.I would like to especially thank all energy companies, regional and local authorities, and everyone ready to work together with us, with the state institutions. Unity must be maximized for the sake of shared results.

[Russian strikes are the primary factor holding up energy sector repairs in Kyiv. Recent ballistic missile and drone attacks since January 9, 2026, have repeatedly damaged substations, thermal plants, and grid infrastructure, leaving around 70% of the city without power and hundreds of buildings without heat amid freezing temperatures down to -19°C.

According to Relief Web:

Around 800 residential buildings in Kyiv City are without heating and electricity, affecting around 200,000 people. Other hard-hit regions include Bucha, Irpin, and Hostomel, where heating systems are almost completely down.

The Ukrainian Red Cross, supported by IFRC and other partners, is scaling up its emergency response to support people who have been left in the dark and cold. Red Cross teams, in close coordination with the State Emergency Service, serve hot meals and warm drinks and provide phone charging stations in heating points across the capital and its suburbs, serving around 700 people daily. Psychosocial support is also available, with 10 psychologists and several trained volunteers deployed to assist people.

Emergency repairs to energy systems are ongoing, but further attacks on energy infrastructure are likely, meaning humanitarian support will continue to be critical.

The Points of Invincibility are designated warming and feeding centers, and places with emergency power to charge phones.

Members of the Coalitionof the Willing are stepping up to provide emergency aid. Notably, the US is not. Ireland and Norway lead recent emergency humanitarian aid to Ukraine against Russia’s “weaponization of winter” through targeted energy and heating support. Ireland allocated funds on January 13, 2026, to NGOs like Concern, Irish Red Cross, and Trócaire for cash assistance, heating repairs, shelter, and evacuation in frontline areas like Kharkiv and Odesa.​

Norway committed NOK 15 billion ($1.4 billion) under its 2026 Nansen Programme for humanitarian aid, including NOK 3.5 billion for life-saving assistance amid escalated attacks, plus €340 million ($397 million) specifically for Ukraine’s energy sector on January 12. UN agencies (UNHCR, WFP, etc.) and partners like Caritas facilitate broader winterization via the $2.3 billion 2026 appeal targeting 4.1 million, focusing on power outages and cold.

You can donate to the Ukrainian government relief efforts through the link at the end of the article.]

I held a meeting with the new Minister of Defense of Ukraine, Mykhailo Fedorov. The top priority is the protection of the skies. Decisions, tasks – he’s got everything. We must support the front. Provisioning for brigades, funding, drone supplies – transformation is coming. There are specific tasks for our diplomats – the entire Ukrainian diplomatic corps, which must live with the same problems, the same emotions, the same goals as all Ukrainians. We need more support for our state and our people, for our resilience, for recovery. The necessary requests to partners have been made.

[This is a standard part of the speech, a call for the diplomats to press the members of the COTW to ramp up support. The call is also to the soldiers on the front. Zelenskyy’s usual remarks are that the strength of the front is behind the strength of the Ukrainian diplomacy. ]

And one more thing.

Today, I spoke with Rustem Umerov and other members of our negotiating team. Work on the documents – security guarantees, economic agreements, and the political document – needs to be swift. On our end, we are being as productive as possible. We also expect energy from the American side in their work. I personally am very much expecting this. I thank everyone who stands with us, who stands with Ukraine.

[The world knows that Russia is stonewalling. I am sure Trump knows as well. It is sadism on a national scale.]

In Closing

Zelenskyy has been pushing for speed in interactions with the US to capitalize on the thaw with Trump. Unfortunately, in the hours after Zelenskyy’s speech, that window of opportunity appears to be closing. That is devastating for the Ukrainian people and potentially for the rule of law in geopolitics.

Glory to Ukraine!

Slava Ukraini!

Слава Україні!

I am a second-generation Ukrainian American. I have skin in the game.

Please restack this post if you feel coverage of the Ukraine War in the mainstream media is insufficient, biased, or inaccurate. Restacking daily will help me reach a wider audience. There is no paywall currently. I am trying to make this the most comprehensive coverage of the US/Ukraine relationship on Substack.

If you find my work valuable, please donate to the official fundraising platform of the Ukrainian government UNITED24. All money that you donate goes to supporting Ukraine.

This is especially important now, as Russia intensifies its attacks to weaponize winter.

The idea is simple:

To unite the world around supporting Ukraine; to protect, save, and rebuild.

You can direct your donation to 5 options: Defense, Humanitarian Demining, Medical Aid, Rebuilding Ukraine, or Education and Science.

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now