Russia Strikes Ukraine Hours After Trump Bragged About Deal With Putin

You’ll never guess which country launched a massive attack just hours after President Donald Trump announced yet another supposed temporary ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine.

Sitting at his desk in the Oval Office Monday, Trump repeated his claim that Russian President Vladimir Putin had “agreed” to pause Moscow’s repeated strikes on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, as the temperatures in Europe dropped dangerously low.

“I asked him if he wouldn’t shoot for a period of one week, no missiles going into Kyiv or any other town, and he’s agreed to do it, so it’s something,” said Trump, the king of wishful thinking—or more just utter bullshit.

Trump had initially claimed there would be a weeklong ceasefire during a Cabinet meeting Thursday, sparking some confusion in Kyiv about when the pause would actually begin, or what it would entail. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov clarified that Russia had only agreed to pause strikes until February 1 “in order to create favorable conditions for negotiations,” which are set to resume Wednesday in Abu Dhabi.

That would mean Trump’s supposed weeklong ceasefire was only in effect for two days.

True to its word, Russia resumed strikes overnight Monday, launching 450 attack drones and more than 70 missiles, hitting power plants in at least six regions and leaving more than 1,000 residential buildings in Kyiv without power. So, as much as Trump would like to play-act like he has Putin’s ear, that’s clearly not the case.

“Taking advantage of the coldest days of winter to terrorize people is more important to Russia than turning to diplomacy,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky wrote on X, early Tuesday.

Ukraine’s Energy Minister Denys Shmyhal said the attacks on “purely civilian” targets amounted to “another Russian crime against humanity.”

The FBI’s raid of a Fulton County, Georgia, elections office last week confused local authorities and caused a dispute, despite the FBI possessing a judicial search warrant.

Body camera footage from Fulton County police reveals that officials at the Fulton County Election Hub and Operations Center were not clear on what was going on and expressed confusion about the warrant, which was shown to them on their phones instead of as a hard copy. FBI agents on camera told the officials that they were having computer problems and trying to get an updated warrant.

The agents said that when the first warrant was issued, they didn’t realize that the records they were seeking from the 2020 presidential election weren’t held by the county elections board, but by the clerk of court.

While local officials ultimately cooperated with the FBI, interactions were tense. The acting head of the FBI’s Atlanta field office, Peter Ellis, said that he was letting county officials stay in the building during the search as a courtesy, but when county attorney Soo Jo said he was there to observe, another agent pushed back. The FBI said that the media and anyone taking video weren’t welcome inside.

“I want to remind you that this is a criminal search warrant and this location is kind of restricted at this point, respectfully,” an agent said at one point.

Agents also appeared willing to take the records by force if necessary. The Fulton County clerk of courts, Che Alexander, said that she was willing to unlock the storage areas where ballots were kept, but didn’t want to hand over records without knowing “what it is you’re looking for so you’re not taking other stuff.”

“They said they’ll break the lock and take ‘em,” Alexander told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

In the end, more than 650 ballots were taken by the agents to an undisclosed location. What they will be used for is unclear, as President Trump’s claims that the 2020 election was stolen have all been debunked in court. But for some reason, he has tasked Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard with the case, raising the question of whether Trump is attempting to create a pretext to take over future elections.

White House adviser and deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller is once again attacking the judicial branch after it ruined his plans to deport thousands of Haitian immigrants.

On Monday evening, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s efforts to terminate Haitians’ temporary protected status, which was supposed to end on Tuesday night.

“An unelected judge has just ruled that elections, laws and borders don’t exist,” said Miller—perhaps the most powerful unelected individual in the country—in reaction to the judge’s ruling.

Miller was quickly rebuked.

“Nope. A judge who was nominated and confirmed according to the constitutional process just issued a ruling interpreting the law, holding that the administration was lawless,” writer David French replied. “If you disagree with the ruling, you can appeal. That’s how the law works.”

This isn’t the first time basic judicial oversight has caused Miller to throw a tantrum. Last April, as judges ruled against President Trump for suspending due process to deport people, Miller complained about the “rogue, radical left judiciary.” And when judges blocked Trump from sending the National Guard to Portland, Oregon, Miller went online and called the ruling “one of the most egregious and thunderous violations of constitutional order we have ever seen.”

The shock, awe, and indignation Miller displays every time the judicial system does the whole “checks and balances” thing it’s known for only further affirms how little he cares about that process in the first place. He makes these statements because he knows there’s nothing he can really do to remove judges who simply won’t look away from Trump’s constitutional violations.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche couldn’t care less about exposing the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse. Don’t believe us? Listen for yourself.

During an interview on Fox News Monday, Blanche was asked to answer for the thousands of redaction errors in the Department of Justice’s latest release of more than three million pages of Epstein-related documents, which allegedly exposed the names of at least 100 survivors.

“These were reportedly women who were minors at the time, or haven’t come out publicly yet,” said Fox News’s Laura Ingraham. “How did those names slip through?”

“Yeah look, you’re right. I mean there—mistakes were made by, you have really hardworking lawyers that worked for the past 60 days,” Blanche stammered. “Think about this, though, you have pieces of paper that stack from the ground to two Eiffel Towers.

“We knew that there would be mistakes, we put that—I said that to the American people on Friday. Everything we did was to protect victims,” Blanche continued. “And what we’re talking about, by the way, is 0.002 percent—”

“But it matters to them, right?” Ingraham chided.

“It should matter to them, it matters to me too. Absolutely,” Blanche said.

The many excuses furnishing Blanche’s depraved attempt to downplay DOJ “mistakes” just don’t make sense.

The Trump administration had far longer than just 60 days to review the documents, as the DOJ supposedly began the process of declassifying documents related to the investigation over a year ago. The Epstein Files Transparency Act was also passed more than 60 days ago, and the DOJ then missed the deadline to release the documents, claiming that it needed more time to make redactions.

As for his claim that everything the DOJ did was to “protect victims,” it’s clear that the DOJ cared a lot more about protecting someone else. Nearly 40 nude photos of women, possibly underage, were mistakenly released uncensored, while an innocuous photo of President Donald Trump somehow was redacted.

A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration’s efforts to upend temporary protected status for more than 350,000 Haitians.

In an unsparing 83-page decision issued late Monday, Judge Ana C. Reyes of the Federal District Court in Washington, D.C., formally denied a motion to dismiss a lawsuit that challenges the Department of Homeland Security’s attempts to terminate the TPS program entirely.

Reyes didn’t miss the opportunity to completely pick apart DHS and its leader, Secretary Kristi Noem, for doggedly pursuing a newfangled, anti-immigrant agenda even when it runs afoul of U.S. law.

Reyes noted that Noem does not have the authority to unravel TPS, which was created by Congress through the Immigration Act of 1990. The judge further determined that Noem’s arguments for ending the program were not only flawed but also fundamentally unacceptable since they failed to address the economic component of the program.

“She ignores altogether the billions Haitian TPS holders contribute to the economy,” Reyes wrote.

From the very first words of the ruling, Reyes frames Noem as the polar opposite of America’s first leader, George Washington, pitting one of her vitriolic tweets against a letter in which Washington insisted that the U.S. must receive “the oppressed and persecuted of all nations and religions.”

“Secretary Noem complains of strains unlawful immigrants place on our immigration-enforcement system. Her answer? Turn 352,959 lawful immigrants into unlawful immigrants overnight,” Reyes wrote. “She complains of strains to our economy. Her answer? Turn employed lawful immigrants who contribute billions in taxes into the legally unemployable.

“She complains of strains to our healthcare system. Her answer? Turn the insured into the uninsured,” the judge continued. “This approach is many things—in the public interest is not one of them.”

Ultimately, Reyes concluded, Noem does not have the law or facts on her side and, as a result, has done little more than “pound the table”—which, in this case, is the social media platform X.

“Kristi Noem has a First Amendment right to call immigrants killers, leeches, entitlement junkies, and any other inapt name she wants,” Reyes stated. “Secretary Noem, however, is constrained by both our Constitution and the APA to apply faithfully the facts to the law in implementing the TPS program. The record to-date shows she has yet to do that.”