Top Democrat: Shorter Trump Russia deadline ‘long overdue'
'Too many innocent lives are at stake for President Trump to let Putin continue playing him for time. This shorter deadline is a positive step, but long overdue,' Shaheen said in a statement.
Trump on Monday said he plans to shorten the timeline for Russian President Vladimir Putin to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine to 'about 10 or 12 days from today,' adding, 'We just don't see any progress being made.'
Trump on July 14 said Russia would face additional sanctions and tariffs if it did not stop fighting in Ukraine within 50 days, putting the deadline at Sept. 2. But Monday, the president indicated he would push up that time frame to early August.
'We thought we had that settled numerous times, and then President Putin goes out and starts launching rockets into some city like Kyiv and kills a lot of people in a nursing home or whatever,' Trump said standing alongside British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. 'You have bodies lying all over the street. And I say that's not the way to do it. So we'll see what happens with that. I'm very disappointed. I'm disappointed in President Putin.
'I'm going to reduce that 50 days. I gave him to a lesser number, because I think I already know the answer what's going to happen,' Trump added.
Shaheen urged the president to make good on his warning, saying Congress must also do its part in moving a sanctions package forward against Russia.
'The President needs to match his words with real action and not let Putin cross yet another red line,' Shaheen said.
'At the same time we must continue to press forward in Congress on bipartisan legislation to impose punishing sanctions on the Kremlin and ensure Ukraine has the support it needs to finally bring Putin to the negotiating table,' she continued.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's DOJ puts companies on notice: Don't evade tariffs
The Justice Department is putting American companies on notice that they could be prosecuted if they chose to evade President Trump's tariffs, even as the legality of the president's "Liberation Day" duties remain unsettled in US courts. The message came in a DOJ announcement earlier this month stipulating that prosecutors would step up investigations into suspiciously classified imports and charge those who misidentify products with fraud. 'While the DOJ has always taken some customs cases, this is a different, more aggressive, visible stance than they usually would,' said Thompson Coburn trade lawyer Robert Shapiro. Read more: 5 ways to tariff-proof your finances The plan — to be carried out by the DOJ's new Market, Government, and Consumer Fraud Unit — marks a shift in enforcement tactics from prior administrations that relied mostly on policing misconduct through administrative proceedings, even during Trump's first term in office. The new Trump administration instead wants to prioritize criminal charges against companies and individuals that try to evade US tariffs. The overarching strategy was first outlined by Matthew R. Galeotti, head of the Justice Department's Criminal Division, who wrote in a May memo that an increasing focus on white collar crime would include "trade and customs fraudsters, including those who commit tariff evasion." At the same time, the Trump administration finds itself in the unusual position of defending the legality of the duties it pledges to enforce. Oral arguments in a federal lawsuit challenging the president's tariffs are set to take place before the US Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., this Thursday. The small business importers challenging the legal standing of the duties already proved it was possible to temporarily derail Trump's global tariffs with a lower court victory in May. In a separate challenge, two toy manufacturers are scheduled to make their own arguments against Trump's tariffs before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Sept. 30, following their own lower court victory. 'We're going to raise the ante' Tariff violations can be prosecuted under civil or criminal laws. However, even fraud cases were often handled administratively by past administrations, according to Shapiro. 'I think the administration is just saying we're going to raise the ante on this,' Shapiro said. University of Kansas School of Law professor Raj Bhala said laws against customs fraud have long been in force, but the appetite for the DOJ and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to clamp down on violations has increased. Historically, Bhala and other trade lawyers said, prosecutors focused government resources on suspected tariff violations by US adversaries such as China, Iran, and North Korea, and particularly on export controls meant to keep controlled items from shipping to those countries. Producer-exporters, especially in China and other high-tariff regions, have been using evasion techniques for decades, mostly to skirt anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders, Bhala said. But now, under more imposing tariffs, incentives to evade duties have spiked 'enormously.' 'What is clear is that a lot of companies are looking for a way to limit the impact of the duties,' Shapiro said. In this new tariff and enforcement environment, trade experts suspect that corporate America and its trading partners are on high alert. Erika Trujillo, a trade attorney with customs risk management firm SEIA Compliance Technologies, said the shift toward more enforcement happening at the DOJ and less through administrative procedures could increase politically motivated targeting of companies viewed as adverse to the Trump administration's interests. 'I do think trade restrictions were used as both a sword and a shield for foreign companies, or in terms of dealing with international trade,' Trujillo said. Common tariff evasion techniques include misclassifying goods, falsely labeling a product's country of origin, making minor modifications to a product while it's in a lower-tariff jurisdiction to pass it off as manufactured there, and transhipping goods through lower-tariff jurisdictions. Read more: The latest news and updates on Trump's tariffs 'It's hard to imagine that any well-run company that has supply chains stretching across the globe — particularly in higher-tariff jurisdictions like China or Cambodia — would not be having vigorous discussions to ensure every step in the supply chain is properly documented and audited,' Bhala said. Bhala cautions that the stakes are high for importers subject to US jurisdiction. 'They're the importer of record and they're the ones who are liable for the tariffs,' he said. 'And false declarations are what we call 'go to jail stuff.'' For fraud, fines can also be assessed, up to the domestic value of the merchandise. For civil violations made based on negligent actions, maximum penalties are two times the underpayment of duties, in addition to original duties. For violations based on gross negligence, penalties increase to four times the underpayment of duties. For businesses looking to assess their risk, US Customs maintains an electronic system called the Automated Commercial Environment (ACT) that allows importers to view what their classification data looks like to customs. Small and midsize companies may find it more difficult to evaluate their compliance risks compared to multinational firms. 'If you're an SME, you probably have one or two lawyers, and they're not necessarily trade specialists,' Bhala said. Plus, there are different rules for thousands of products. For example, a typical NAFTA good, he explained, traverses the US-Canada border roughly four times. 'It's really difficult for companies of that size to be dealing with this,' Trujillo said. One major challenge is finding affordable internal expertise. 'Almost every company I know is actively hiring for both customs and export controls, and sanctions. You're basically stuck going to law firms or other external consultancy, and the small and medium-sized firms are maybe not going to have the budget to pay $1,100 an hour.' Read more: What Trump's tariffs mean for the economy and your wallet For certain suspected violations like those made by mistake, Shapiro said it doesn't make economic sense for the DOJ to get involved. 'They don't have the manpower for it,' he said. But a new enforcement policy seems to fit the Trump administration's broader tariff agenda, he added. 'If you're going to have this tariff policy, you're going to have to take a more aggressive stance, because it's a huge ocean of imports, and it's very hard for customs to enforce against everyone.' Alexis Keenan is a legal reporter for Yahoo Finance. Follow Alexis on X @alexiskweed. Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest stock market news and events moving stock prices
USA Today
29 minutes ago
- USA Today
Epstein accomplice Maxwell angles for a Trump pardon. Would she lie to help him?
Doesn't it make sense to wonder if Maxwell is willing to lie to help herself, if that also helps Trump – an old friend, who was known for hanging around with Epstein? We don't know what Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted child sex trafficker and former paramour/accomplice to the dead pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, said during a pair of prison interviews July 24-25 with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche. And we don't know how Maxwell, now serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for her despicable crimes, will respond to a subpoena issued July 23 by the Republican-controlled U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. But now seems like a good time to ask if anyone should believe anything Maxwell has to say about anything. Ghislaine Maxwell has a history of lying about Jeffrey Epstein Here's what we do know: Maxwell is in prison because she recruited girls under the age of 18, groomed them to be sexually abused by Epstein and then sometimes joined in. "The victims were as young as 14," according to the Department of Justice. Maxwell took these girls to the movies and on shopping trips. She asked them about school, while teaching them to submit to whatever Epstein desired. And then she denied all that. Here's another thing we know: The federal grand jury in New York that indicted her in July 2020 – during President Donald Trump's first term – called her a liar. That indictment included two counts of perjury for allegedly lying while testifying under oath in a civil court case about Epstein's sexual abuse of underage girls. Opinion: Republicans in Congress head home to angry voters. So much for summer break. The Department of Justice and Maxwell's lawyers mutually agreed to drop those perjury charges in 2022, soon after her conviction, if the court did not grant her a retrial. Prosecutors did that to help the victims whom Epstein and Maxwell abused avoid another public spectacle. But Maxwell's grand jury indictment cites her own words from that civil case – "I don't know what you're talking about" – as she denied the kinds of sexual abuse that the trial jury later convicted her for. It's not a stretch to think the trial jury would have convicted her for perjury, too, if those charges had not been spun off into a separate case. Why should we believe Maxwell now? So why believe what she has to say now, as she sits behind bars in a Florida prison with a projected release date of July 17, 2037? Doesn't it make more sense to wonder if Maxwell is willing to lie to help herself, if that also helps Trump, who was known for hanging around with Epstein, a politician who is again president and now is talking about how he has the power to pardon Maxwell? Trump, who once exploited conspiracy theories about Epstein's 2019 suicide in federal prison – also during his first term – for political benefit, is now trapped in a quagmire of his own making. He and the people he appointed to run the Department of Justice tried to back out of a promise to release documents about Epstein's crimes, infuriating his MAGA base and prompting a bipartisan call from Congress for more transparency. So it's worth a close look at what Trump has said over the years about Maxwell, whom he socialized with in New York and Palm Beach, along with Epstein. Trump, speaking at the White House in July 2020, just 19 days after the horrible allegations were made public in Maxwell's indictment, was asked if she might "turn in powerful men" while seeking leniency in court. Trump pretended that he didn't know much about Maxwell case while twice saying "I wish her well." Opinion: MAGA is realizing Trump lies. How can they trust anything he says on Epstein? Trump's kind regards for an accused child sex trafficker drew bipartisan rebukes from Congress. That didn't stop him from offering the same sentiment two weeks later, again offering good wishes for Maxwell in an HBO interview. Will Trump's administation protect, believe Maxwell? Five years later, Trump is still playing dumb about Maxwell – and hoping his supporters play dumb as well – as he openly floats talk of a pardon while also claiming to be out of loop in a scandal that is consuming his presidency. Trump on July 25 noted that he has the power to pardon Maxwell while also claiming "it's something I have not thought about." Three days later, on a golfing trip to Scotland, Trump repeated that he has the power to pardon Maxwell, while adding that "nobody's approached me with it. Nobody's asked me about it.' Well, check your social media feed, Mr. President, because Maxwell's lawyer, the same guy who sat with her for two full days of interviews by the Department of Justice, filed an appeal of her conviction on July 28 with the U.S. Supreme Court while making a direct appeal in a social media post aimed at you. Attorney David Oscar Markus, posting on X, wrote, "We are appealing not only to the Supreme Court but to the President himself to recognize how profoundly unjust it is to scapegoat Ghislaine Maxwell for Epstein's crimes." The appeal is based on the theory that a 2007 plea agreement that won Epstein a lenient prison sentence for soliciting minors for prostitution should have also protected Maxwell from prosecution. If Maxwell is going to win some kind of protection right now, Trump is her best bet. But this scandal has metastasized for the president, and the very people he wishes to quiet down will certainly raise another ruckus if he pardons her. This is what passes for bipartisanship now: People on the left, right and center of the political spectrum are all wondering at once why anyone would believe anything Maxwell has to say. Follow USA TODAY columnist Chris Brennan on X, formerly known as Twitter: @ByChrisBrennan. Sign up for his weekly newsletter, Translating Politics, here.
Boston Globe
29 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Russia kills 21 civilians in Ukraine as the Kremlin remains defiant over Trump threats
Trump said Monday he is giving Russian President Vladimir Putin 10 to 12 days to stop the killing in Ukraine after three years of war, moving up a 50-day deadline he had given the Russian leader two weeks ago. The move meant Trump wants peace efforts to make progress by Aug. 7-9. Advertisement Trump has repeatedly rebuked Putin for talking about ending the war but continuing to bombard Ukrainian civilians. But the Kremlin hasn't changed its tactics. 'I'm disappointed in President Putin,' Trump said during a visit to Scotland. The Kremlin pushed back, however, with a top Putin lieutenant warned Trump against 'playing the ultimatum game with Russia.' 'Russia isn't Israel or even Iran,' former president Dmitry Medvedev, who is deputy head of the country's Security Council, wrote on social platform X. 'Each new ultimatum is a threat and a step towards war. Not between Russia and Ukraine, but with his own country,' Medvedev said. Since Russia's full-scale invasion of its neighbor, the Kremlin has warned Kyiv's Western backers that their involvement could end up broadening the war to NATO countries. Advertisement 'Kremlin officials continue to frame Russia as in direct geopolitical confrontation with the West in order to generate domestic support for the war in Ukraine and future Russian aggression against NATO,' the Institute for the Study of War, a Washington think tank, said late Monday. The Ukrainian air force said Russia launched two Iskander-M ballistic missiles along with 37 Shahed-type strike drones and decoys at Ukraine overnight. They say 32 Shahed drones were intercepted or neutralized by Ukrainian air defenses. The Russian attack close to midnight Monday hit the Bilenkivska Correctional Facility with four guided aerial bombs, according to the State Criminal Executive Service of Ukraine. At least 42 inmates were hospitalized with serious injuries, while another 40 people, including one staff member, sustained various injuries. The strike destroyed the prison's dining hall, damaged administrative and quarantine buildings, but the perimeter fence held and no escapes were reported, authorities said. Ukrainian officials condemned the attack, saying that targeting civilian infrastructure, such as prisons, is a war crime under international conventions. In Dnipro, missiles hit the city of Kamianske, partially destroying a three-story building and damaging nearby medical facilities including a maternity hospital and a city hospital ward. Two people were killed and five were wounded, including a pregnant woman who is now in a serious condition, according to regional head Serhii Lysak. Further Russian attacks hit communities in Synelnykivskyi district with FPV drones and aerial bombs, killing at least one person and injuring two others. According to Lysak, Russian forces also targeted the community of Velykomykhailivska, killing a 75-year-old woman and injuring a 68-year-old man.
