Sean Hannity: Democrats have picked the wrong side of an issue once again
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fast Company
a few seconds ago
- Fast Company
Trump and Putin meet on military base in Alaska for summit on Russia-Ukraine war
U.S. President Donald Trump is meeting face-to-face with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday for a high-stakes summit that could determine not only the trajectory of the war in Ukraine but also the fate of European security. The sit-down offers Trump a chance to prove to the world that he is both a master dealmaker and a global peacemaker. He and his allies have cast him as a heavyweight negotiator who can find a way to bring the slaughter to a close, something he used to boast he could do quickly. For Putin, a summit with Trump offers a long-sought opportunity to try to negotiate a deal that would cement Russia's gains, block Kyiv's bid to join the NATO military alliance and eventually pull Ukraine back into Moscow's orbit. There are significant risks for Trump. By bringing Putin onto U.S. soil, the president is giving Russia's leader the validation he desires after his ostracization following his invasion of Ukraine 3 1/2 years ago. The exclusion of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy from the summit also deals a heavy blow to the West's policy of 'nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine' and invites the possibility that Trump could agree to a deal that Ukraine does not want. Any success is far from assured, especially as Russia and Ukraine remain far apart in their demands for peace. Putin has long resisted any temporary ceasefire, linking it to a halt in Western arms supplies and a freeze on Ukraine's mobilization efforts, which were conditions rejected by Kyiv and its Western allies. Trump on Thursday said there was a 25% chance that the summit would fail, but also floated the idea that if the meeting succeeds he could bring Zelenskyy to Alaska for a subsequent, three-way meeting, a possibility that Russia hasn't agreed to. When asked in Anchorage about Trump's estimate of a 25% chance of failure, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told reporters that Russia 'never plans ahead.' 'We know that we have arguments, a clear, understandable position. We will state it,' he said in footage posted to the Russian Foreign Ministry's Telegram channel. Trump said in a Fox News radio interview Thursday that he didn't know if they would get 'an immediate ceasefire' but he wanted a broad peace deal done quickly. That seemingly echoes Putin's longtime argument that Russia favors a comprehensive deal to end the fighting, reflecting its demands, not a temporary halt to hostilities. The Kremlin said Trump and Putin will first sit down for a one-on-one discussion, followed by the two delegations meeting and talks continuing over 'a working breakfast.' They are then expected to hold a joint press conference. Trump has offered shifting explanations for his meeting goals In the days leading up to the summit, set for a military base near Anchorage, Trump described it as ' really a feel-out meeting.' But he's also warned of 'very severe consequences' for Russia if Putin doesn't agree to end the war and said that though Putin might bully other leaders, 'He's not going to mess around with me.' Trump's repeated suggestions that a deal would likely involve 'some swapping of territories' — which disappointed Ukraine and European allies — along with his controversial history with Putin have some skeptical about what kind of agreement can be reached. Ian Kelly, a retired career foreign service officer who served as the U.S. ambassador to Georgia during the Obama and first Trump administrations, said he sees 'no upside for the U.S., only an upside for Putin.' 'The best that can happen is nothing, and the worst that can happen is that Putin entices Trump into putting more pressure on Zelenskyy,' Kelly said. George Beebe, the former director of the CIA's Russia analysis team who is now affiliated with the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said there's a serious risk of blown expectations or misunderstandings for a high-level summit pulled together so quickly. 'That said, I doubt President Trump would be going into a meeting like this unless there had been enough work done behind the scenes for him to feel that there is a decent chance that something concrete will come out of it,' Beebe said. Zelenskyy has time and again cast doubts on Putin's willingness to negotiate in good faith. His European allies, who've held increasingly urgent meetings with U.S. leaders over the past week, have stressed the need for Ukraine to be involved in any peace talks. Political commentators in Moscow, meanwhile, have relished that the summit leaves Ukraine and its European allies on the sidelines. Dmitry Suslov, a pro-Kremlin voice, expressed hope that the summit will 'deepen a trans-Atlantic rift and weaken Europe's position as the toughest enemy of Russia.' The summit could have far-reaching implications On his way to Anchorage Thursday, Putin arrived in Magadan in Russia's Far East, according to Russian state news agency Interfax. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the visit would include meetings with the regional governor and stops at several key sites, including a stop to lay flowers at a WWII-era memorial honoring Soviet-American aviation cooperation. Foreign governments will be watching closely to see how Trump reacts to Putin, likely gauging what the interaction might mean for their own dealings with the U.S. president, who has eschewed traditional diplomacy for his own transactional approach to relationships. The meeting comes as the war has caused heavy losses on both sides and drained resources. Ukraine has held on far longer than some initially expected since the February 2022 invasion, but it is straining to hold off Russia's much larger army, grappling with bombardments of its cities and fighting for every inch on the over 600-mile (1,000-kilometer) front line. Andrea Kendall-Taylor, a senior fellow and director of the Transatlantic Security Program at the Center for a New American Security, said U.S. antagonists like China, Iran and North Korea will be paying attention to Trump's posture to see 'whether or not the threats that he continues to make against Putin are indeed credible.' 'Or, if has been the past track record, he continues to back down and look for ways to wiggle out of the kind of threats and pressure he has promised to apply,' said Kendall-Taylor, who is also a former senior intelligence officer. While some have objected to the location of the summit, Trump has said he thought it was 'very respectful' of Putin to come to the U.S. instead of a meeting in Russia. Sergei Markov, a pro-Kremlin Moscow-based analyst, observed that the choice of Alaska as the summit's venue 'underlined the distancing from Europe and Ukraine.' Being on a military base allows the leaders to avoid protests and meet more securely, but the location carries its own significance because of its history and location. Alaska, which the U.S. purchased from Russia in 1867, is separated from Russia at its closest point by just 3 miles (less than 5 kilometers) and the international date line. Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson was crucial to countering the Soviet Union during the Cold War. It continues to play a role today, as planes from the base still intercept Russian aircraft that regularly fly into U.S. airspace.
Fox News
2 minutes ago
- Fox News
Trump doubles down on 'very severe' consequences threat if Putin blocks peace process
President Donald Trump doubled down on his threat of Russian President Vladimir Putin facing "very severe" economic consequences if he blocks the Ukraine peace process. He reiterated the warning when speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One while on his way to Alaska for a high-stakes talk with Putin. The meeting in Alaska marks the first U.S.-Russia summit since 2021, and is expected to focus on ending Moscow's war on Ukraine. Additionally, Putin hinted that Russia could be open to reaching a nuclear arms deal with the U.S., though it is unclear if that would be on the agenda for Friday. This is a developing story, please check back for updates.
Forbes
2 minutes ago
- Forbes
University Of Chicago Cutting Back Admissions In Several PhD Programs
The University of Chicago is pausing or cutting back admissions in several of its PhD programs as the institution continues to struggle with its finances. The suspension or reduction of new graduate student admits includes multiple programs in the arts and humanities as well as the Crown Family School of Social Work, Policy, and Practice and the Harris School of Public Policy. In a email obtained by both The Chicago Tribune and Inside Higher Education, Arts and Humanities dean Deborah Nelson informed faculty and others in the division that 'we will accept a smaller overall Ph.D. cohort across seven departments: Art History, Cinema and Media Studies, East Asian Languages and Civilizations, English Language and Literature, Linguistics, Music (composition), and Philosophy.' How large the reduction in new Ph.D. students will be in those departments was not specified. In addition, several other departments in the division will not accept new PhD students for the 2026-27 academic year. Citing Andrew Ollett, an associate professor of South Asian languages and civilizations at the university, Inside Higher Education reported that means there will be no new Ph.D. students for the following departments: classics, comparative literature, Germanic studies, Middle Eastern studies, Romance languages and literatures, Slavic languages and literatures, and South Asian languages and civilizations, plus the ethnomusicology and history and theory of music programs in the music department. The cutbacks come about two months after Nelson had warned the division that federal policy changes and the university's ongoing financial difficulties would necessitate a reorganization, possible departmental consolidation and other changes to cut its costs. 'The status quo is not an option,' Nelson wrote to division faculty in a June 18 email reported by the Chicago Maroon, adding that, without making changes, the division risked becoming 'a pale, indecipherable version of what we once aspired to be.' In that email, Nelson charged five working groups, involving 40 faculty and staff, to make recommendations for changes in the divisions's structure, language instruction, and graduate programs. However, according to Nelson's email this week, curtailing PhD admissions was not a recommendation made by any of those committees. The decision to cut doctoral student admissions met with an outcry from many faculty. Clifford Ando, a professor of classics and history and a sharp critic of the university's spending priorities, wrote in the online magazine Compact that while it may be convenient to blame the university's financial struggles on the Trump administration's campaign against higher education, 'the true problem is the debased ideals of the university's leadership and the extraordinary debt it has taken on in pursuit of them. The university's trustees and leaders view it preeminently as a tax-free technology incubator, and its debt load is so great that it is abandoning ideals it once held dear in order to sustain that goal. We are simply choosing not to be a university." On its website, the university's Crown Family School of Social Work, Policy, and Practice posted a message that is was pausing admissions to its doctoral program 'for one year while we undertake a comprehensive review.' Although a new cohort of PhD students will not be admitted for the 2026-27 academic year, the school plans to resume admissions for the 2027-2028 academic year. 'This pause will allow for a thoughtful and thorough review of the program, led by our faculty with the intention of strengthening the program to better serve future students and reflect the changing landscape of higher education and research careers,' the message added. The Harris School of Public Policy will also not admit new graduate students in some of its programs for the 2026-2027 year. It will pause admissions for the Harris PhD, the PhD in political economy, and its master of arts in public policy with certificate in research methods. 'All existing commitments and support for current students will remain in place,' it posted. The University of Chicago's cutbacks to PhD education will have many ramifications, not just for its faculty and students, but for higher education in general. Long respected for its scholarly rigor and commitment to a challenging undergraduate curriculum, the institution has become one of America's finest research universities. For it to take this large of a step back from doctoral education in the humanities and other fields will be viewed — at least symbolically — as a substantial diminishment of what great universities can and should represent.
