Ukraine says it struck a Russian airbase as Russia sent hundreds of drones into Ukraine
Ukraine's military General Staff said Saturday that Ukrainian forces had struck the Borisoglebsk airbase in Russia's Voronezh region, describing it as the 'home base' of Russia's Su-34, Su-35S and Su-30SM fighter jets.
Writing on Facebook, the General Staff said it hit a depot containing glide bombs, a training aircraft and 'possibly other aircraft."
Russian officials did not immediately comment on the attack.
Russia fired 322 drones and decoys into Ukraine overnight into Saturday, Ukraine's air force said. Of these, 157 were shot down and 135 were lost, likely having been electronically jammed.
According to the air force, Ukraine's western Khmelnytskyi region was the main target of the attack. Regional Gov. Serhii Tyurin said Saturday that no damage, injuries or deaths had been reported.
Russia has been stepping up its long-range attacks on Ukraine. Waves of drones and missiles targeted Kyiv overnight into Friday in the largest aerial assault since Russia's invasion of Ukraine began, killing one person and wounding at least 26 others.
The fresh wave of attacks came after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Friday that he had a 'very important and productive' phone call with U.S. President Donald Trump.
The two leaders discussed how Ukrainian air defenses might be strengthened, possible joint weapons production between the U.S. and Ukraine, and broader U.S-led efforts to end the war with Russia, according to a statement by Zelenksyy.
Asked Friday night by reporters about the call, Trump said, 'We had a very good call, I think.'
When asked about finding a way to end the fighting, Trump said: 'I don't know. I can't tell you whether or not that's going to happen.'
The U.S. has paused some shipments of military aid to Ukraine, including crucial air defense missiles. Ukraine's main European backers are considering how they can help pick up the slack. Zelenskyy says plans are afoot to build up Ukraine's domestic arms industry, but scaling up will take time.
Russia's Defense Ministry said it shot down 94 Ukrainian drones overnight into Saturday, along with 12 further drones on Saturday morning. No casualties were reported.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Metro
43 minutes ago
- Metro
First group of detainees arrive at Trump's brutal 'alligator Alcatraz'
Footage has shown what appears to be the first group of handcuffed detainees being led into Trump's 'alligator Alcatraz'. Days ago, Trump visited the makeshift facility at the Dade-Collier Training and Transition Airport in Ochopee, Florida, which received federal approval to house thousands of undocumented immigrants. The president said that 'some of the most vicious people on the planet' will be held at the detention centre. Today, the Florida Division of Emergency Management wrote: 'The first group has arrived at Alligator Alcatraz. Florida is proud to help facilitate Trump's mission to enforce immigration law.' It will cost an estimated £330,000,000 to operate each year when it's fully established. Deep in the Florida Everglades and surrounded by miles of swampland, the facility has been likened to early-stage concentration camps by some. 'Alligator Alcatraz' was coined by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, who shared a video about it on X (formerly Twitter) a week-and-a-half ago and called it 'the one-stop shop to carry out President Trump's mass deportation agenda'. It has 3,000 beds and was built in eight days after DeSantis authorised its construction. The Trump administration said it will eventually hold up to 5,000 people. It is slated to become the biggest migrant detention facility in the country in the heart of the Everglades, which is home to alligators, pythons, mosquitoes and other dangerous wildlife. The 11,000-foot runway at the airport has recently been used for training, but officials indicated that it could soon be used for deportation flights. But the facility isn't without concerns. In an opinion article for MSNBC, author Andrea Pitzer, who researches concentration camps, wrote: 'When people think of concentration camps, they think of more than a million people murdered at Auschwitz. 'But extermination camps appeared only after nearly a decade of Nazi rule and several evolutions in wartime detention. We're still in the early stages of this arc, but Americans aren't helpless before the administration and its allies.' More Trending In addition to humanitarian concerns, historic worries and environmental issues have been brought up. The Miccosukee Tribe of Indians has also gotten involved in the matter, slamming the use of its ancestral lands in the Big Cypress National Preserve for detention purposes. Eve Samples, executive director of Friends of the Everglades, pointed out that the site posed an 'existential threat' to the national park. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: Elon Musk says he has set up a new political group – the 'America Party' MORE: At least 51 dead in Texas floods including girl, 8, 'forever living best life' MORE: 'Bear Alcatraz' floated as migrant detention center near alligators opens for Trump
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Butler by Salena Zito review – how Trump won America's heartland
The Democrats' famed blue wall is more the stuff of nostalgia than reality. On election day 2024, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin voted for Donald Trump for the second time in three elections. Barack Obama's upstairs-downstairs coalition lies in ruins, as Democrats struggle to connect with working-class voters across racial and ethnic lines. Last November, Trump came within just three points of winning a majority of Latino voters. Such Americans walked away from their presumed political home – in droves. A Trump endorsement by Roberto Clemente Jr, son of the late Pittsburgh Pirates baseball star, was a harbinger. Likewise, Trump posted double-digit gains among Catholics and Jews, once core constituencies in the Democratic party of FDR. To quote Bob Dylan, 'The times, they are a changin'.' Into the fray jumps Salena Zito with her latest book, Butler, and its dramatic subtitle, The Untold Story of the Near Assassination of Donald Trump and the Fight for America's Heartland. Zito is definitely a Trump fan, living in western Pennsylvania, a place that's become part of Trumplandia. No wonder: her analysis is sharp-eyed and her anecdotes revealing – she walks among Them. Beyond that, she possesses roots and an affinity for her 'Yinzers'. These days, she writes for the Washington Examiner and is a contributor to the Washington Post. Last time out, with The Great Revolt, co-authored with Brad Todd in 2018, she painted a portrait of Trump's base that was not standard GOP-issue and a Democratic party overly reliant on coastal elites. That take remains valid. Other than in faculty meetings, you can't win elections solely with the votes of JDs, MDs and PhDs. More voters lack four year-degrees than those who have them. Butler, turns to Butler, Pennsylvania, the site of the failed July 2024 assassination attempt on Trump, as a serendipitously fitting backdrop and fulcrum of the events that preceded and followed. She had access to the Trump, JD Vance and the senior staff of the campaign. Trump delivers bouquets of compliments. Zito is flattered, even enthusiastic. She enjoys the rapport, admires her subject. Trump is not a lab specimen or patient. She is not his psychologist. Rather, he talks to her, expresses concern about her grandchildren, and offers a lesson in politics 101: empathy goes far. On the page, Trump takes Joe Biden and Kamala Harris to task for waiting a year before appearing at the village of East Palestine, Ohio, the site of a major railcar disaster, 42 miles from Butler. 'They never showed up to see them,' Trump tells Zito. 'Never. It's a shame. I did, I came, I told them I would not forget them and I won't.' Ohio, Vance's state, went Republican by better than 10 points. All of Ohio's top elected officials are now Republicans. In polarized times, ticket-splitting grows rare. Elon Musk talked to Zito too. There's nothing like the zeal of a 12-figure convert, the world's richest person. Given the current fallout between Musk and Trump, it is memorable stuff, a bromance before it went off the rails. Butler unintentionally delivers a packet of receipts. 'I asked Musk if I could interview him, and he said: sure,' Zito recalls. ''Who are the ones that are trying to silence free speech? That's the Democrats,'' Musk advises. 'They're the ones trying to silence free speech,' he continues. 'You know who the bad guys are – the ones who want to stop you from speaking. Those are the bad guys. It's a no-brainer.' To put it mildly, irony abounds. Never mind what Musk did to X, formerly Twitter, in terms of promoting one sort of view and quashing another. Since their relationship turned to dust, Trump has threatened to deport Musk and cancel his government contracts. In hindsight, that the Trump-Musk relationship would last long would have been a bad bet. Sign up to What's On Get the best TV reviews, news and features in your inbox every Monday after newsletter promotion Musk vows to support primary challenges against Republicans who stuck with the president on his sweeping bill of cuts to taxes and spending. But whatever you think of the legislation or Musk, Trump holds a decisive advantage. Beyond the obvious, regarding simple power, Trump is a far better showman. Startling to say it, he is way less weird. Musk is the nerd who always wanted to hang with the cool kids. Zito devotes attention to the dichotomy between the 'placed' and the 'placeless' – 'people who are rooted in their places versus people who are essentially nomads' – and its relationship to politics and Trump. The placed are with him; the placeless, not so much. Such demographic faultlines are global. They played an outsized role in the fight over Brexit. Populism is not restricted to the US. In 2017, David Goodhart wrote Road to Somewhere, which examined the forces that drove Brexit. He placed a premium on describing how a sense of belonging has come to shape politics, in an uncertain world. His typology divided society between 'anywheres' and 'somewheres', with the archetypal anywhere possessing a degree or two from Oxbridge or the Ivy League, a portable skill set, and a spouse who shares similar credentials. By contrast, somewheres lack those markers, and find the world a less welcoming place. GDP figures and personal income statistics alone do not convey the entire story. In 2016, 'fuck your feelings' was a Trumpian battle cry – though those shouting it did not take kindly to being called deplorable by Hillary Clinton or, eight years later, being called 'garbage' by Biden. As expected, Zito calls out Clinton and Biden for their missteps. Trump or his base, not so much. Yeah, there's asymmetry. But if you're a Democrat, punching down is seldom a winning strategy. Butler is published in the US by Hachette
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Is Trump's expansion of presidential powers setting the stage for future Oval Office holders?
Near corn dog and cookie vendors, Ray Seeman was washing his hands on a sweltering day. He had come to the rally in a Maga cap and a T-shirt that proclaimed: Cult 45: proud member. Is this a cult? 'It seems like it,' he laughed. 'It seems like you're either in or you're out.' A cult, perhaps, but not an imperial presidency, Seeman insisted, though he does understand Donald Trump's frustrations. 'I don't like executive orders,' he said. 'I like it to go through due process. But at the same time you've got to get stuff done sometimes.' A few thousand people had gathered at the Iowa state fairgrounds on Thursday to witness the president kick off a year-long celebration of the US's 250th anniversary of independence from a tyrannical king. No one here seemed concerned that the US might now be propping up a monarch of its own. But Trump's critics warn of an expansion of presidential power unlike anything seen in modern American history. In less than six months, Trump has taken a series of executive actions that have established new norms for the authority of whoever occupies the Oval Office. Longstanding mechanisms designed to limit executive power – Congress, the judiciary and internal safeguards – are being undermined or proving ineffective in restraining him. Last month, Trump ordered a military strike on Iran without seeking congressional approval. A solitary Republican, Thomas Massie of Kentucky, spoke out to describe the move as unconstitutional because only Congress has the power to declare war. Trump scorned him and, setting another dangerous precedent, imposed a limit on classified information shared with senators and representatives. Trump took unilateral action to impose tariffs under the cover of declaring a national emergency. He dismantled agencies, fired civil servants and froze spending that was approved by Congress and assumed to be protected by law; he has, for example, blocked more than $6bn in federal funding that helps fund after-school and summer programmes. Trump shattered another norm when he took control of California's national guard and deployed it to quell mostly peaceful protests over immigration raids in Los Angeles, despite opposition from state governor Gavin Newsom and other state officials. The president has breached the justice department's traditional independence, ordering it to scrutinise his political opponents and punish his critics through measures such as stripping their Secret Service protections. At the same time, he pardoned his supporters who took part in the January 6 attack on the US Capitol, abandoning any notion that pardons be used sparingly. While courts have acted to block some executive actions, the US supreme court's recent ruling limiting nationwide injunctions and Trump's direct attacks on judges signal the weakening of another democratic guardrail. And even as Trump brazenly accepts gifts from foreign countries, seeks to profit from the presidency through a cryptocurrency venture and bullies law firms, media companies and universities – all unthinkable under his predecessors – there is only token resistance from Congress. Republicans hold the majority in both chambers and have a cultish devotion to Trump, or visceral fear of his wrath. On Thursday, they rammed through his 'big, beautiful bill' despite warnings that it will rip the social safety net from millions of Americans and add trillions of dollars to the national deficit. Hours later, a triumphant Trump was greeted in Des Moines, Iowa, by supporters in a car park festooned with 55 national flags. One man wore a T-shirt entirely covered with a photo of a bloodied Trump with fist raised after last year's assassination attempt. A bearded vendor in a red T-shirt, checked shorts and plastic flip-flops spread red Trump 2028 caps on the ground. Flags and T-shirts declared: 'Jesus is my savior. Trump is my president.' Michelle Coon, 57, a psychotherapist, denied that Trump is behaving like an autocrat. 'I don't think he has been given that kind of power,' she said. 'I see people in Congress having a voice. He's lucky enough to have both houses right now; he might not have that in two years. The supreme court has come down both on his side and against his perspective so I see it fairly balanced right now.' Coon added: 'He's a great leader but I don't think that's necessarily authoritarian. He's trying to gather a lot of people around him to get good wisdom from others. I don't think we have anything to fear here.' Josue Rodriguez, 38, a pastor who works for the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, was equally sanguine. 'We have a wonderful system called checks and balances where, if they feel that an individual has become all too powerful, too mighty, they have the right to take him to court and the supreme court will decide what is correct and not correct,' he said. Rodriguez also retains faith in political parties, saying: 'If they feel that the president is acting in a manner that goes against the American people or what is allowed legally, he will be challenged within his own party. At the end of the day, these people want to get re-elected and they're not going to allow things that will cause them to lose their re-elections.' But some analysts suggest that extreme partisanship is preventing effective congressional oversight, as members of the president's party are unwilling to challenge Trump's overreach. They are sounding the alarm about an erosion of democratic norms that could have lasting implications for future presidencies. Bill Galston, a senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution thinktank in Washington, this week initiated a new executive power project because he considers it the most important constitutional issue of the moment. 'It didn't start with President Trump but it may end there,' Galston said. 'It's hard to imagine a subsequent president seeking to advance executive power as a deliberate project to the extent that President Trump has been doing. 'This is not an accident. This was something that was carefully planned as both a political strategy and a legal strategy and I have to say I'm impressed with the administration's strategic focus on the issue of presidential power and the elimination of long-established limits to it.' Galston pointed to a drive to undermine the autonomy of so-called independent agencies. A legal challenge has been set in motion that will likely culminate in a supreme court decision next term that, Galston suspects, may effectively eliminate a 90-year precedent that guaranteed the independence of agencies. Trump is not the first American president to see how far he can go. In 1973, the historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr published The Imperial Presidency, acknowledging that, while he had cheered on Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, the expansion of executive authority now threatened to 'override the separation of powers and burst the bonds of the Constitution'. The book was timely because the Watergate scandal and the Vietnam war saw a reassertion of congressional authority in the domestic and foreign spheres. Presidential power began to expand again, however, under Ronald Reagan. Galston noted: 'Young conservatives who came of age serving in the Reagan administration chafed more and more against congressional restraints, culminating in the publication in 1989 of a collection of essays by the American Enterprise Institute called The Fettered Presidency. 'So in 16 years, the adjective switches from 'imperial' to 'fettered' and I trace a lot of the modern conservative drive to expand the powers of the president at Congress's expense to that experience.' The trend accelerated with George W Bush's aggressive response to the September 11 2001 terrorist attacks. But other factors were in play: whereas divided government was once cause for negotiation, deepening polarisation between the parties made gridlock more likely, much to the frustration of the White House occupant. Barack Obama duly used an executive action to create the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Daca) programme. He stepped up his use of such actions in 2014 as he became frustrated with how difficult it was to push legislation through Congress, saying: 'I've got a pen and I've got a phone.' Larry Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota, said: 'There's a long history here and it's not just Trump. Look at just this century. Bush expanded presidential powers in ways that Obama took advantage of and then Obama expanded presidential powers in ways that Trump then expanded on. 'You can think of this as a loaded gun that's left on the table in the Oval Office. It's quite alarming. The next president who comes in, whether Democrat or Republican, is going to see the office through the eyes of their predecessor, not through the eyes of George Washington, who was leery of using his powers.'
