Tag Archives: administration

Will Trump’s sanctions against Russian oil giants hurt Putin?

Posted on by
Reply

Washington has announced new sanctions against Russia’s two largest oil companies, Rosneft and Lukoil, in an effort to pressure Moscow to agree to a peace deal in Ukraine. This marks the first time the current Trump administration has imposed direct sanctions on Russia.

Speaking alongside Nato Secretary-General Mark Rutte in the Oval Office on Wednesday, US President Donald Trump said he hoped the sanctions would not need to be in place for long, but expressed growing frustration with stalled truce negotiations.

“Every time I speak to Vladimir [Putin], I have good conversations and then they don’t go anywhere. They just don’t go anywhere,” Trump said, shortly after a planned in-person meeting with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, in Budapest was cancelled.

Trump’s move is designed to cut off vital oil revenues that help fund Russia’s ongoing war efforts. Earlier on Wednesday, Russia unleashed a new bombardment on Ukraine’s capital, Kyiv, killing at least seven people, including children.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the new sanctions were necessary because of “Putin’s refusal to end this senseless war.” He added that Rosneft and Lukoil fund the Kremlin’s “war machine.”

### How Have Rosneft and Lukoil Been Sanctioned?

The new measures will freeze assets owned by Rosneft and Lukoil in the US and bar US entities from engaging in business with them. Additionally, thirty subsidiaries owned by Rosneft and Lukoil have also been sanctioned.

Rosneft, which is controlled by the Kremlin, is Russia’s second-largest company in terms of revenue, behind natural gas giant Gazprom. Lukoil is Russia’s third-largest company and its biggest non-state enterprise.

Together, the two companies export 3.1 million barrels of oil per day, accounting for 70 percent of Russia’s overseas crude oil sales. Rosneft alone is responsible for nearly half of Russia’s oil production, which makes up 6 percent of global output.

In recent years, both companies have been hit by ongoing European sanctions and reduced oil prices. In September, Rosneft reported a 68 percent year-on-year drop in net income for the first half of 2025. Lukoil posted an almost 27 percent fall in profits for 2024.

Meanwhile, last week the United Kingdom unveiled sanctions on the two oil majors. Elsewhere, the European Union is set to announce its 19th package of penalties on Moscow later today, including a ban on imports of Russian liquefied natural gas.

### How Much Impact Will These Sanctions Have?

In 2022, Russian oil groups, including Rosneft and Lukoil, were able to offset some of the effects of earlier sanctions by pivoting exports from Europe to Asia, and by using a “shadow fleet” of hard-to-detect tankers with no ties to Western financial or insurance groups.

China and India quickly replaced the EU as Russia’s biggest oil consumers. Last year, China imported a record 109 million tonnes of Russian crude, representing almost 20 percent of its total energy imports. India imported 88 million tonnes of Russian oil in 2024.

These figures represent a significant increase compared to pre-2022 levels, when Western countries started tightening sanctions on Russia. At the end of 2021, China imported roughly 79.6 million tonnes of Russian crude, while India imported just 0.42 million tonnes.

Trump has repeatedly urged Beijing and New Delhi to halt Russian energy purchases. In August, he levied an additional 25 percent trade tariff on India because of its continued purchase of discounted Russian oil. He has so far refrained from a similar move against China.

However, Trump’s new sanctions are likely to place pressure on foreign financial groups that do business with Rosneft and Lukoil, including banking intermediaries facilitating sales of Russian oil in China and India.

“Engaging in certain transactions involving the persons designated today may risk the imposition of secondary sanctions on participating foreign financial institutions,” the US Treasury Department’s press release on Wednesday’s sanctions states.

As a result, the new restrictions may force buyers to shift to alternative suppliers or pay higher prices. Though India and China may not be the direct targets of these latest restrictions, their oil supply chains and trading costs are likely to come under increased pressure.

“The big thing here is the secondary sanctions,” Felipe Pohlmann Gonzaga, a Switzerland-based commodity trader, told Al Jazeera. “Any bank that facilitates Russian oil sales and with exposure to the US financial system could be subject.”

However, he added, “I don’t think this will be the driver in ending the war, as Russia will continue selling oil. There are always people out there willing to take the risk to beat sanctions. These latest restrictions will make Chinese and Indian players more reluctant to buy Russian oil; many won’t want to lose access to the American financial system. But it won’t stop it completely.”

According to Bloomberg, several senior refinery executives in India, who asked not to be named due to the sensitivity of the issue, said the restrictions would make it impossible for oil purchases to continue.

On Wednesday, Trump said he would raise concerns about China’s continued purchases of Russian oil during his talk with President Xi Jinping at the 2025 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in South Korea next week.

### Have Oil Prices Been Affected?

Oil prices rallied after Trump announced the US sanctions. Brent, the international crude oil benchmark, rose nearly 4 percent to $65 a barrel on Thursday.

The US benchmark, West Texas Intermediate (WTI), jumped more than 5 percent to nearly $60 per barrel.

—

*Recommended Stories*

– Trump hits Russia’s oil giants with sanctions, EU bans Russian LNG
– EU poised to agree on using frozen Russian assets to help Ukraine in war
– Why planned Trump-Putin talks collapsed, and what it means for Ukraine
– EU moves to ban Russian energy imports by 2028
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/10/23/will-trumps-sanctions-against-russian-oil-giants-hurt-putin?traffic_source=rss

Gov. JB Pritzker and GOP House leader bickered in texts after conservative influencer filmed Pritzker’s home

Posted on by
Reply

When a right-wing provocateur last month posted a video outside Gov. JB Pritzker’s Chicago home encouraging viewers to “take action” after conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s assassination, the governor reached out to both Republican leaders of the Illinois legislature.

“I’m dealing with vastly increased threats on my family and myself in the wake of this week and this Republican Trumper went to my house, suggested that I’m taking God out of public life and encouraged people to ‘take action,’” the governor texted separately to Illinois Senate Leader John Curran and House Leader Tony McCombie. “I’d like to see condemnation of this from GOP leaders today.”

What followed was not exactly what Pritzker sought. Instead, he and McCombie, who are typically cordial in texts to each other, exchanged heated messages as McCombie rebuffed the governor’s request and called out Pritzker for some of his previous comments about Republicans. The governor shot back, sometimes in all capital letters, that her response was “absurd” and that she was playing politics.

“So you won’t condemn this guy coming to MY HOME (where my wife and children live) and calling me evil while encouraging people to ‘take action?’ GOT IT,” Pritzker wrote to McCombie.

While Senate GOP Leader Curran later issued a joint statement with Democratic Senate President Don Harmon condemning political violence more broadly, the testy back-and-forth between Pritzker and McCombie occurred just two days after Kirk’s death. Republicans and Democrats across the nation debated, discussed, and denounced political violence, while at the same time accusing the other side of perpetuating it.

President Donald Trump himself escalated the situation in the hours and days after Kirk’s death, saying publicly that rhetoric from “the radical left” was “directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today.”

It also came at an especially tense time in Chicago between Pritzker and the Trump administration, as the president was just days into his sometimes-violent crackdown on illegal immigration in and around the city.

In Illinois, the debate about political violence among top leaders was more behind the scenes, according to text messages the Tribune received through the Freedom of Information Act. While the governor and state Republican leaders, such as McCombie, often engage in public sparring, their one-on-one texts—which the Tribune regularly obtains—are typically breezy and brief. But the tone was different on Sept. 12 when Pritzker texted both Curran, of Downers Grove, and McCombie, of Savanna.

The governor sent each a link to a social media video from right-wing influencer Ben Bergquam, in which Bergquam criticized Pritzker for blaming Trump for fomenting political violence. As Bergquam spoke, the influencer pointed behind him at the governor’s home in Chicago’s Gold Coast neighborhood, including the house address number.

“If you love America and the assassination of Charlie Kirk doesn’t inspire you to take action, I don’t know what will!” the video caption said.

After decrying legal protections for transgender people, abortion rights, and immigrants in the U.S. without legal permission, Bergquam, who hosts the show “Law & Border” and had been accompanying U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents around Chicago, said, “Godless leftist policies are the problem, evil is the problem and it’s politicians like Gov. Pritzker.”

When Pritzker sent the link of Bergquam’s post and requested that Illinois GOP leaders condemn it, McCombie sent a three-paragraph response. She said she prayed for the safety of Pritzker and his family daily and has condemned political violence against Democrats before, including the shootings of Democratic lawmakers in Minnesota.

But she then turned the issue back on the governor, asking him to apologize for his own past statements. These included likening the actions of Trump’s administration in the early days of his second term to the rise of Nazism in Germany in the 1930s and saying Republicans should never “know a moment of peace.” Pritzker has repeatedly said he was talking about the public expressing their opposition to the GOP through protests, not violence.

“I would like for you to publicly apologize for your rhetoric,” she said after citing the examples.

That’s when Pritzker responded with “GOT IT” before adding: “I think you know how absurd your response is. But I suppose you have a primary to run.”

Pritzker brought up the texts publicly weeks later, at an Oct. 7 appearance in Minneapolis.

“Neither one of them—I asked them to simply post something publicly or put a statement out, anything. It seems like just common decency to just say, ‘This is wrong,’ and they wouldn’t do it,” Pritzker said onstage at a summit hosted by the Minnesota Star Tribune.

In a statement after those remarks, McCombie said she condemned violence and added of Pritzker: “If he is serious about lowering the temperature, he should stop pointing fingers and take responsibility for his own words.”

Curran did issue a statement on Sept. 12 condemning political violence, a joint release with Harmon, of Oak Park. The statement did not mention the video at Pritzker’s house or any other specific incident. When Curran responded to Pritzker’s request with a text mentioning the joint statement, the governor didn’t respond, records show.

Neither Curran’s office nor Pritzker’s office provided a comment Wednesday on the text message exchanges.

After the June shooting of the Minnesota lawmakers, Robert Pape, a University of Chicago expert on political violence, wrote in an op-ed for The New York Times that joint statements—such as the one from Harmon and Curran—are an effective tool for tamping down political violence.

“My research suggests that to de-escalate the political environment and reduce the risk of violence, America’s political leaders need to cross their political divides and make joint statements (and ideally joint appearances) that denounce all political violence, welcome all peaceful protest and call for respecting the rules, process and results of free and fair elections in the country,” Pape wrote.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/10/23/jb-pritzker-texts-gop-house-leader-influencer/

South Park Nails Depiction Of Peter Thiel’s Antichrist Obsession

Posted on by
Reply

“South Park” mocked conservative billionaire Peter Thiel over his obsession with the Antichrist in the show’s latest episode aired on October 15.

Thiel recently gave a lecture series in which he warned about the return of the Antichrist, the destruction of capitalism, and the collapse of the United States—breezy topics, to say the least. He even bizarrely called AI skeptics “legionnaires of the Antichrist.”

The satirical series, which has been poking fun at the Trump administration throughout season 27, tackled Thiel’s Antichrist fixation, his relationship with Vice President JD Vance, and a supposedly demonic TikTok trend spreading among Generation Alpha.

Thiel’s character in the episode is obsessed with the “6-7” TikTok trend and delivers a TED Talk to South Park Elementary School students about the Antichrist and demonology.

“Hello, kids, I’m Peter Thiel, and I’m here to talk to you about the Antichrist,” he says. “OK, so first, what is the Antichrist? The Antichrist is a newer, more human form of Satan that will soon walk the Earth. We don’t know how soon it will walk the Earth, but it could be within the next six to seven weeks.”

The show also pokes fun at Palantir, the data analytics company Thiel co-founded, which has faced criticism for its intrusive AI surveillance tools. At one point, Thiel’s character, dead set on uncovering the truth behind the demonic TikTok trend, uses the school’s data center to spy on students.

“I’ve downloaded all the students’ information and loaded them into an AI face detection program so the school’s security cameras can watch their every move,” Thiel’s character explains. “Now look. Two students passing each other in the hallway. They give each other the sign: six, seven. Exactly 67 seconds later, this odd parka-wearing child makes the same gesture. And then inside the girls’ bathroom, two girls doing the same thing!”

Later in the episode, referencing the classic horror movie *The Exorcist*, Thiel’s character performs an exorcism on Eric Cartman, believing him to be a spawn of Satan.

Through its trademark satire, “South Park” continues to lampoon contemporary political figures and cultural phenomena, this time highlighting Peter Thiel’s eccentric conspiracy theories and tech surveillance controversies.
https://dailycaller.com/2025/10/21/south-park-peter-thiel-antichrist-trump-jd-vance-satan/

Editorial: DTS fare hike is mostly reasonable

Posted on by
Reply

The Honolulu City Council is considering a measure to raise public transportation fares for nearly all riders. The city Department of Transportation Services (DTS) says this increase is necessary to keep up with rising operational and maintenance costs.

While the Budget Committee did not reach a consensus on Tuesday—partly due to disagreements over proposed carve-outs—Bill 54 remains very much alive and should pass.

Honolulu’s last public transit fare increase came in 2022, before the opening of Skyline, a rail system that now adds value to the already comprehensive TheBus and TheHandi-Van services. New capabilities and conveniences come with new costs, and the proposed fare increases are reasonable.

According to the latest version of Bill 54:

– Adult annual fares will increase by 12.5%, from $880 to $990.
– Monthly adult fares will go from $80 to $90.
– Annual senior rates will increase by 11% to $50.
– Monthly TheBus fares for youth riders will rise 12.5% to $45.
– Seven-day passes will increase by 28.5% to $45.
– Single fares remain steady at $3 for HOLO card users; however, cash-paying riders will be subject to a 25-cent surcharge.

So far, these changes are justifiable.

However, some more dubious proposals have emerged, including maintaining discounted pricing for residents over nonresidents, expanding discount eligibility for low-income riders, and removing the personal care attendant (PCA) fare exemption on buses and rail.

DTS Director Roger Morton opposed these particular additions—and rightly so.

Regarding resident pricing, Morton pointed out the difficulty in distinguishing residents from nonresidents. Implementing such a system would require additional time and resources and could slow transit operations. Moreover, there is “no way” to monitor cash-based transactions, which the bill allows.

While kama‘āina pricing is an attractive idea, adopting such a model without an accurate and reliable means of verification would be unwise. Morton also noted that ridership could decline if nonresidents were required to pay more, especially as tourists and visitors increasingly opt for alternatives like rideshare services. In this case, the negatives outweigh the benefits of preferential treatment for residents.

Another amendment proposes expanding reduced fares to include a new “very low income” category, beyond the current “extremely low income” threshold. This change aims to enlarge the pool of riders eligible for discounted fares, from those receiving benefits under the Social Security Administration’s Supplemental Security Income program to individuals benefitting from the federal Section 8 housing program.

Morton’s initial analysis suggests this expansion could increase the eligible population from roughly 110,000 to 180,000 people, potentially leading to a revenue loss between $6 million and $8 million. While more concrete numbers need to be determined before making a decision, that estimate is significant and raises concerns that such an expansion could be counterproductive to the bill’s goals. As it stands, the most in need are already receiving necessary breaks.

On personal care attendants, an amendment calls for removing the current fare waiver on buses and rail. Although concerns about possible abuse exist, DTS has not provided data regarding the impact of alleged fraud. Until such information is available, PCAs should continue to have fare-free access to public transit.

While it is reasonable for DTS to raise fare prices to cover increased maintenance and operations expenses, Bill 54 clearly needs refinement. This process must start with transparent rider impact assessments and accurate revenue estimates. Raising fares only to offset some of the additional income with overly generous exceptions risks maintaining the status quo—a situation that ultimately benefits no one.
https://www.staradvertiser.com/2025/10/20/editorial/our-view/editorial-dts-fare-hike-is-mostly-reasonable/

Intel’s CEO Lip-Bu Tan Meets Saudi Official For a Potential Chip Partnership — Can Gulf Capital Power Team Blue’s Semiconductor Comeback?

Posted on by
Reply

**Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan Explores Potential Partnership with Saudi Arabia on AI and Semiconductors**

Intel’s CEO, Lip-Bu Tan, has recently met with Saudi officials to discuss a potential partnership focused on semiconductors and artificial intelligence (AI). This move could open up a new “capital front” for the struggling American chipmaker as it seeks to strengthen its financial position and expand its global footprint.

Over the past few months, Intel has been actively pursuing breakthroughs in the semiconductor industry. These efforts include refining the company’s foundry division and reevaluating strategies to maintain a strong balance sheet. During this period, CEO Lip-Bu Tan has engaged in key collaborations, including partnerships with NVIDIA, SoftBank, and interactions with the former Trump administration.

Now, Intel appears to be setting its sights on the Middle East. According to Arab News, Tan met with Saudi Arabia’s Minister of Communications and Information Technology, Abdullah Al-Swaha, to explore opportunities for collaboration. The discussions centered around developing semiconductor and advanced computing technologies, as well as enhancing infrastructure for artificial intelligence and other future technologies.

While specifics of the meeting have not been disclosed, it is clear that Intel is keen on partnering with one of the largest economies in the Middle East. The Gulf nations—particularly the UAE and Saudi Arabia—are undergoing significant economic transformations, shifting their focus towards technological growth and expanding sectors like AI and semiconductors.

Saudi Arabia, despite having limited experience in semiconductor manufacturing, is known for its substantial investments in new ventures. The prospect of Intel establishing a chip manufacturing facility in Saudi Arabia is plausible, given the country’s considerable resources that could support large-scale operations.

For context, Qatar had previously approached TSMC (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company) to set up advanced chip fabrication plants in the country. However, TSMC declined, citing concerns such as higher labor costs and supply chain challenges. Intel, conversely, requires significant investments and has already collaborated with SoftBank—a group backed by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF).

Though this potential partnership remains speculative at this stage, it aligns with a broader regional trend. Gulf countries are increasingly aiming to diversify their economies and reduce reliance on traditional oil revenues. With the growing global importance of semiconductor manufacturing, it makes strategic sense for these nations to invest in this high-tech sector.

As Intel pursues these new international alliances, the developments in the Middle East could represent a crucial step toward revitalizing the company’s growth and innovation in the semiconductor and AI industries.
https://wccftech.com/intel-ceo-lip-bu-tan-meets-saudi-official-for-a-potential-chip-partnership/

Weekend Round-Up: Ford And BYD Recall Vehicles, Tesla Insurance Expands, Waymo Targets London And Starlink Wi-Fi Takes Flight

Posted on by
Reply

The auto industry has been buzzing this past week. From massive vehicle recalls to the expansion of insurance services and autonomous ride-hailing, here’s a quick recap of the top stories that made headlines.

### Ford Recalls Over 680,000 Vehicles
Ford Motor Co. has announced a recall of more than 680,000 vehicles across various models in the U.S. due to a range of issues. This marks the latest in a series of recalls issued by the Michigan-based automaker in 2025.
[Read the full article here.]

### BYD Recalls Over 115,000 Vehicles
Chinese EV giant BYD Co. Ltd. has recalled over 115,783 units of the BYD Tang and Yuan Pro vehicles due to design defects and battery issues. The recall was announced by China’s State Administration for Market Regulation.
[Read the full article here.]

**See Also:**
[EV Battery Breakthrough Hype Is Real As Microvast Spikes 2,800%]

### Tesla Insurance Expands to New State
Tesla Inc. is set to expand its insurance services to a new state for the first time in three years. With an increasing number of Tesla vehicles on the roads across America, the company may be poised to expand the number of states its insurance division operates in.
[Read the full article here.]

### Waymo Plans London Launch
Alphabet Inc.-owned Waymo announced plans to launch its fully autonomous ride-hailing service in London next year. The service will support London’s existing transport network and will be accessible through the Waymo app.
[Read the full article here.]

### Starlink Wi-Fi On United Airlines Flights
United Airlines Inc. will offer Elon Musk-owned Starlink’s WiFi onboard its mainline flights. The carrier shared the update on social media, stating, “Lightning-fast Starlink Wi-Fi is now on board our first mainline aircraft.”
[Read the full article here.]

—

**Related Commentary:**
Gary Black Predicts Elon Musk Won’t Answer This Important Robotaxi Question Amid NHTSA FSD Probe

—

*Disclaimer: This content was partially produced with the help of AI tools and was reviewed and published by Benzinga editors.*

*Image via Shutterstock.*
https://www.benzinga.com/markets/tech/25/10/48293454/weekend-round-up-ford-and-byd-recall-vehicles-tesla-insurance-expands-waymo-targets-london-and-starl

Dogecoin Finds Support Near 0.18 After Tariff-Led Selloff and Price Swing

Posted on by
Reply

**Dogecoin Trades Between $0.176 and $0.189 Amid Market Volatility**

Dogecoin (DOGE) experienced notable intraday swings on Friday, trading between $0.176 and $0.189 with a 7% fluctuation. The sharp morning decline was triggered by renewed market stress linked to fresh U.S.-China tariff news, causing significant movement in the cryptocurrency sector.

### Market Reaction to Tariff Announcement

The Trump administration’s announcement of a 100% tariff on Chinese imports pressured broader digital asset markets. The policy news sparked a quick selloff in risk assets during Asian trading hours, which extended into cryptocurrencies.

Dogecoin was among the first assets to react, experiencing a rapid drop from $0.188 to $0.176 within minutes. Trading volume surged past 1.4 billion tokens, reflecting a liquidation phase by major holders. Whales reportedly sold around 360 million DOGE, valued at approximately $74 million.

Despite this initial drop, strong buying near the $0.18 level helped stabilize the market. Buyers and liquidity providers defended this key support zone throughout the session.

### Technical Indicators Signal Consolidation

Technical analysis shows that Dogecoin has established a short-term base between $0.175 and $0.180, driven by strong buying interest in this area. Analysts noted the formation of higher lows during the afternoon sessions, indicating attempts at market stabilization.

By the end of the day, DOGE was trading near $0.186 after multiple unsuccessful attempts to break the resistance zone at $0.188-$0.189. Momentum indicators suggest a neutral stance: the Relative Strength Index (RSI) hovered around 49, indicating balanced pressure between buyers and sellers, while the MACD lines flattened, confirming limited directional momentum.

Trading volume compressed late in the session as traders paused, awaiting new market catalysts.

### Whale Activity and Market Sentiment

Whale and large-holder behavior remains a focal point following the significant $74 million DOGE sell-off. Data indicates that after this liquidation phase, wallets associated with long-term investors resumed moderate accumulation. This shift has given some confidence to short-term traders looking for a base near $0.18.

Derivative market signals showed mixed positioning. Funding rates normalized after a brief spike in short interest, suggesting sentiment is improving toward a neutral balance. Analysts interpret this return to balanced funding as an indication that aggressive bearish bets are slowing down.

Overall, the market’s stabilization is viewed as an early sign that selling pressure may be easing.

### Traders Eye Breakout and Macro Factors

With Dogecoin consolidating within a tight range, traders are closely watching the $0.18 support zone and $0.19 resistance level to determine the next directional move.

– A confirmed breakout above $0.19 could pave the way toward the $0.20-$0.21 range.
– Failure to maintain the $0.18 support might trigger another test of $0.175.

Attention also remains on broader factors that could influence weekend trading activity. These include potential shifts in whale behavior, upcoming comments from the U.S. Federal Reserve regarding trade-related inflation risks, and growing speculation about cryptocurrency ETF flows.

Some market participants expect renewed interest in meme-based assets like Dogecoin if risk sentiment improves heading into next week.

### Current Status

As of early Saturday, Dogecoin continues to hover near $0.186 within a narrow trading range. The market is now awaiting fresh economic or policy developments that could determine whether this support base can sustain a rebound.

—

*Stay tuned for further updates on Dogecoin and the cryptocurrency market as events unfold.*
https://coincentral.com/dogecoin-finds-support-near-0-18-after-tariff-led-selloff-and-price-swing/

No Kings protests against Trump administration planned across Bay Area, nationwide today

Posted on by
Reply

SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) — Millions of Americans in the Bay Area and across the country are planning to hold another No Kings Day protest on Saturday.

### No Kings Day Protests Across the Bay Area

These demonstrations come amid growing concerns over President Donald Trump potentially deploying the National Guard to San Francisco and other cities. California previously sued the Trump Administration over its deployment of the Guard to Los Angeles during ICE protests in June.

At an unrelated press conference on Thursday, Governor Gavin Newsom told reporters he believes the president is illegally trying to use federal troops as his personal police force. Newsom stated:

> “His latest assertion that he was going to come to San Francisco. On what basis? He didn’t even claim, there’s no pretext anymore. Let’s disabuse ourselves that there has to be a pretext with Donald Trump, that there’s anything that would justify that — there’s no existing protest in a federal building, there’s no operation that’s being impeded. I guess it’s just a training ground for the president of the United States. It is grossly illegal. It’s immoral. It’s rather delusional.”

There are three different “No Kings” gatherings planned in San Francisco this Saturday, along with dozens more across the Bay Area. These protests have seen massive turnouts in the past summer events.

### Reactions and Perspectives

Republican leaders have criticized the No Kings demonstrations as anti-American. House Speaker Mike Johnson called it the “hate America rally.” However, organizers expect thousands of participants at the downtown San Francisco event alone and emphasize that their goal is to peacefully push back against the White House.

Dianne McClure, Vice President of National Nurses United, expressed:

> “We do not believe in one person or one group of people, such as billionaires, controlling our country. That’s not what our nation was built upon. To threaten sending in the National Guard or anything of that matter just means that we’re effective in our organizing for our event.”

A spokesperson for the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) said the city has a long tradition of First Amendment expression, which officers will facilitate, while also preparing resources to ensure public safety if any issues arise.

### National Guard Deployment and Protests Elsewhere

Though President Trump’s calls for sending the National Guard to San Francisco do not appear directly related to the No Kings protests, it is important to note that there will be National Guard troops deployed at protests in other states. For example, Texas governor is sending Guard members to Austin on Saturday.

For a complete list of planned No Kings protests across the Bay Area and the country, visit the No Kings website [here](#).

—

### Saturday Street Closures in San Francisco

The following street closures will be in effect to accommodate the protests:

**From 1:15 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.:**

– Market Street from Beale to Steuart
– Steuart Street from Market to Howard
– Spear Street from Market to Folsom
– Main Street from Market to Howard

_All intersections with Mission Street will remain open._

**From 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.:**

– Market Street from Eighth to Steuart
– Hyde Street from McAllister to Market
– Grove Street from Market to Van Ness

Residents and visitors are encouraged to plan accordingly and monitor local traffic updates.
https://abc7news.com/post/no-kings-protests-san-francisco-bay-area-nationwide-amid-concerns-trump-will-send-national-guard-sf/18032761/

Karoline Leavitt’s 20-Second Fox News Clip Has Leftists Losing Their Minds [WATCH]

Posted on by
Reply

A short clip of White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt speaking has recently sparked widespread debate online. The 20-second segment, originally shared on X by liberal commentator Aaron Rupar, shows Leavitt delivering remarks that quickly became the subject of intense discussion. Since being reposted thousands of times across social media platforms, the clip has drawn reactions from Democratic officials and political commentators alike.

In the video, Leavitt states: “The Democrat Party’s main constituencies are made up of Hamas terrorists, illegal aliens, and violent criminals. That is who the Democrat party is catering to. Not the Trump Administration, and not the White House, and not the Republican Party who are standing up for law-abiding American citizens, not just across the country but around the world.”

These comments prompted sharp criticism from several high-profile Democrats, including Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX), former Obama adviser Dan Pfeiffer, and members of the left-leaning media organization MeidasTouch. MeidasTouch wrote on its X account, “Officials who speak this way about their fellow Americans who simply have different beliefs should not be anywhere near government.” Dan Pfeiffer also responded on X, saying, “This s##t is so f##king dangerous and everyone on the Republican side just nods along.”

Supporters of Leavitt, however, argued that her remarks were directed at specific groups associated with recent unrest and policy disputes, rather than at Democratic voters in general. Leavitt’s comments followed weeks of large-scale demonstrations organized by pro-Palestinian groups in major U.S. cities and renewed debates over illegal immigration enforcement.

The clip shared by Rupar was viewed millions of times within hours of being posted. Known for frequently curating conservative media clips, Rupar captioned the post with criticism of the White House spokesperson’s tone.

Leavitt made her remarks during a discussion about national security and the administration’s stance on immigration and foreign policy. She argued that Democrats have aligned themselves with groups she described as hostile to U.S. interests. Her comments echoed similar statements made recently by Republican lawmakers, who have accused Democratic leaders of prioritizing leniency toward foreign nationals over public safety.

Karoline Leavitt, who previously served as a communications aide to President Donald Trump, was appointed White House Press Secretary in January 2025. She has become one of the administration’s most visible spokespersons on issues related to border enforcement, public safety, and media transparency.

This controversy comes amid ongoing political clashes between the White House and Democratic lawmakers over immigration policy and foreign aid. President Trump and his administration have repeatedly emphasized their commitment to “law and order,” citing increases in illegal border crossings and violent crime in sanctuary cities as justification for stricter federal enforcement.

While Leavitt’s remarks drew criticism from Democrats, they were praised by several conservative commentators and political figures. Many defended her statement as a blunt reflection of current political realities. Conservative media personalities and Republican lawmakers quickly shared the clip, calling it a “truthful assessment” of Democratic priorities.
https://www.lifezette.com/2025/10/karoline-leavitts-20-second-fox-news-clip-has-leftists-losing-their-minds-watch/

A war on drugs or a war on terror? Trump’s military pressure on Venezuela blurs the lines

Posted on by
Reply

**U.S. Drug War Under Trump Echoes Post-9/11 War on Terror Legal Framework**

**WASHINGTON (AP)** — Under President Donald Trump, the U.S. drug war is increasingly mirroring the war on terror. To support military strikes against Latin American gangs and drug cartels, the Trump administration is relying on a legal argument that gained prominence after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. This framework allowed U.S. authorities to use lethal force against al-Qaida combatants responsible for the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks.

However, the criminal groups currently targeted by U.S. strikes represent a very different adversary. These groups, such as Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua gang, were spawned in prisons and are fueled not by anti-Western ideology but by drug trafficking and other illicit enterprises. Legal scholars warn that Trump’s use of overwhelming military force and authorization of covert action inside Venezuela—possibly aimed at ousting President Nicolás Maduro—push the limits of international law.

This shift comes as Trump expands the military’s domestic role by deploying the National Guard to U.S. cities and expressing openness to invoking the nearly 150-year-old Insurrection Act, which permits military deployment in only exceptional civil unrest cases.

—

### Lethal Strikes Without Formal War Declaration

So far, U.S. military strikes have killed at least 27 people in five separate incidents targeting vessels alleged to be carrying drugs. The most recent strike occurred on Tuesday, killing six people. These actions have taken place without any legal investigation or a formal war declaration from Congress.

Such circumstances raise questions about the legal justification for these strikes and their potential impact on diplomatic relations, especially with Latin American countries that recall the U.S.’s contentious Cold War-era military interventions.

Meanwhile, the U.S. intelligence community disputes Trump’s central claim that Maduro’s government collaborates with the Tren de Aragua gang to orchestrate drug trafficking and illegal immigration into the United States.

—

### “You Can’t Just Call Something War”

Trump’s assertion that the United States is engaged in an “armed conflict” with drug cartels hinges on the same legal authority the Bush administration used to declare a war on terror after 9/11. This authority permits the capture and detention of combatants and the use of lethal force against their leaders.

However, the United Nations Charter expressly forbids the use of force except in self-defense. Claire Finkelstein, a professor of national security law at the University of Pennsylvania, commented, “You just can’t call something war to give yourself war powers. … It makes a mockery of international law to suggest we are in a noninternational armed conflict with cartels.”

Unlike al-Qaida, which was actively plotting attacks designed to kill civilians after 9/11, the cartels’ primary goal is drug trafficking. Geoffrey Corn, a Texas Tech law professor and former senior Army adviser on law-of-war issues, described the government’s position as politically motivated: “Even if we assume there’s an armed conflict with Tren de Aragua, how do we know everyone in that boat was an enemy fighter? I think Congress needs to know that.”

—

### Trump Defends Military Strikes and Signals Possible Escalation

When asked at the White House why the U.S. does not use the Coast Guard to intercept Venezuelan vessels and seize drugs, Trump responded, “We have been doing that for 30 years and it has been totally ineffective.”

He also suggested that the U.S. might strike targets inside Venezuela, a move that would markedly escalate tensions and legal concerns. So far, the strikes have occurred in international waters outside any single country’s jurisdiction.

Trump said, “We’ve almost totally stopped it by sea. Now we’ll stop it by land.”

Regarding a New York Times report that he authorized a covert CIA operation in Venezuela, Trump declined to confirm whether he had given the CIA authority to take out Maduro, calling it “ridiculous” to answer.

—

### Legal and Historical Context of Covert Operations

Numerous U.S. laws and executive orders since the 1970s prohibit the assassination of foreign officials. Yet, by declaring Venezuelan criminals “unlawful combatants,” Trump may be attempting to circumvent these restrictions, possibly reviving a historical pattern of covert regime-change operations akin to those in Guatemala, Chile, and Iran.

Finkelstein noted, “If you pose a threat, and are making war on the U.S., you’re not a protected person.”

During Trump’s first term, Maduro was indicted on federal drug-related charges, including narcoterrorism and conspiracy to import cocaine. This year, the Justice Department doubled the reward for information leading to Maduro’s arrest to $50 million, labeling him “one of the largest narco-traffickers in the world.”

—

### Drug Trade Realities and Geographic Focus

Despite the intense focus on Venezuela, the bulk of American overdose deaths stem from fentanyl, primarily transported by land from Mexico. While Venezuela is a significant drug transit zone, about 75% of the cocaine produced in Colombia—the world’s largest producer—is smuggled through the eastern Pacific Ocean, not the Caribbean.

—

### Congressional and International Oversight Lacking

Under the U.S. Constitution, only Congress can declare war. Yet no indications suggest congressional pushback against Trump’s broad interpretation of presidential authority to target drug cartels blamed for tens of thousands of American overdose deaths annually.

The GOP-controlled Senate recently voted down a war powers resolution sponsored by Democrats, which would have required the president to seek congressional authorization for further military strikes.

Even amid calls from some Republicans for more transparency, the Trump administration has yet to provide compelling evidence to lawmakers that the targeted vessels were carrying narcotics, according to two U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

Senator Angus King (I-Maine) revealed that members of the Senate Armed Services Committee were denied access in a classified briefing to the Pentagon’s legal opinion on whether the strikes complied with U.S. law.

—

### Legal Challenges and International Court Prospects

Legal opposition is unlikely to deter the White House. A 1973 Supreme Court ruling, stemming from a lawsuit aimed at halting the Vietnam War’s spread to Laos and Cambodia, set a high legal threshold for challenging military orders.

Families of those killed in the boat strikes also confront legal hurdles after several high court decisions have limited the ability of foreign citizens to sue in U.S. courts.

The strikes occurred in international waters, which could open the door for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate, similar to its probes into alleged war crimes in Russia and Israel—both countries, like the U.S., do not recognize the ICC’s authority.

However, the ICC’s work is currently hampered by a sexual misconduct investigation that led to its chief prosecutor stepping aside. Additionally, U.S. sanctions related to the ICC’s indictment of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have complicated the court’s operations.

—

### Conclusion

President Trump’s approach to the drug war, invoking a war-on-terror legal framework to justify lethal strikes on Latin American criminal groups, challenges established international and constitutional norms. As this policy unfolds, it raises critical questions about legality, transparency, and long-term geopolitical impacts in the region.
https://ktar.com/national-news/a-war-on-drugs-or-a-war-on-terror-trumps-military-pressure-on-venezuela-blurs-the-lines/5762491/