Zelenskyy Awards Trump’s Wife the Title of 'Hero of Ukraine' — Female Machine Gunner 'Vilva'

Yesterday, a netizen who had previously insisted that 'the Trump camp would win the midterm elections—and at least retain control of the Senate' admitted: 'I underestimated the impact of inflation on the midterm elections; it seems I was wrong.' I have no intention of mocking this netizen—in fact, I even admire him, since not everyone has the courage to admit they were mistaken. Let us begin today’s article with the topic of 'inflation.' Before the midterms, U.S. media outlets listed some of Trump’s purported 'achievements' in 'curbing inflation' should he assume the U.S. presidency again: On January 20, 2025, the average price of regular gasoline in the United States stood at $3.11 per gallon; on November 2—the day before the midterm elections—it rose to $4.27, an increase of 37%. From the time Trump assumed the U.S. presidency through September this year, data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics showed that the overall Consumer Price Index (CPI) rose by 6.1%. Fuel prices surged most sharply: heating oil increased by 63.9%, diesel by 75.6%, and gasoline by 39.1%. Airfares, coffee, beef, tobacco and tobacco products, natural gas, electricity, and automobile maintenance and repair—all also rose in price. Among these, healthcare saw the smallest increase: just 2.5%. No matter how eloquently or persuasively one speaks, if people’s daily lives grow increasingly difficult, all such rhetoric is meaningless. Trump attempted to curb inflation—sparked by soaring fuel prices—by seeking to import Russian diesel into the U.S. Alternatively, this may merely be a pretext, with the real aim being to ease sanctions against Russia and open a crack in the existing sanctions regime. This attempt is expected to collapse swiftly upon the inauguration of the new Congress. As for lowering domestic diesel prices via Russian diesel imports, that effort was doomed to fail from the outset. Just now, an oil tanker loaded with Russian diesel and departing from St. Petersburg has changed its destination—not heading to New York, but instead diverting to Brazil. Two other tankers have likewise indicated readiness to accept new orders. Warned by multiple members of Congress, no U.S. company is willing to take the unnecessary risk of accepting this Russian diesel—this 'blood-stained' diesel. As a non-professional, I find it somewhat puzzling why these shipments are being sold off rather than returned to Russia. After all, under Ukraine’s fierce strikes, Russia itself faces a severe diesel shortage. At the end of last month, the Russian government issued a notice extending its export ban on diesel, marine fuel, and gasoil for three months—to January 31, 2027. (Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak emphasized that separate exemption clauses would be established for exports to international markets, to accommodate transactions with Trump.) Here, I must mention one thing. Earlier—before the midterms—New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy sent an open letter to all port and terminal operators in the state, warning that importing Russian diesel violates federal law and carries serious civil and criminal consequences. 'New Jersey will not stand idly by while Donald Trump supports Vladimir Putin at the expense of American citizens. Importing this diesel is not about lowering fuel prices—it is about helping finance Putin’s war against Ukraine, and a violent, terror-driven campaign threatening the safety of our service members overseas.'

Sudden Shift in Policy Winds! With Democrats Just Securing Control of Both Chambers of Congress, They Plan $15 Billion in Military Aid to Ukraine!

Packaging aid within the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) embeds it within a broader policy framework—but that does not guarantee passage. Trump remains president; once the bill reaches the White House, he retains the authority to veto it. Democrats still hold one procedural option: Congress can override a presidential veto—but only if both the Senate and the House separately secure two-thirds majorities in favor. That threshold is extremely high. Democrats must therefore persuade a bloc of establishment Republicans—those supportive of Ukraine and tough on Russia—to cross party lines and vote in favor. The difficulty lies precisely here. Republicans are far from unified: some veteran lawmakers remain willing to continue supporting Ukraine, while others—particularly conservative members—align more closely with Trump’s agenda, arguing that U.S. funds should prioritize border security and domestic welfare. Lawmakers must also weigh their constituents’ views: taking a stance openly opposed to their own party risks jeopardizing their political futures. Thus, the significance of this proposal extends beyond mere passage or failure. Democrats are also using it to draw a clear policy red line—blocking Trump from further easing sanctions on Russia, signaling to Ukraine that congressional support remains firm, and turning budgetary authority and oversight powers into tools of leverage. The proposal also includes constraints on Starlink, aiming to prevent Elon Musk from unilaterally adjusting communication resources in ways that could disrupt Ukrainian military communications. Democrats also plan to scrutinize Trump’s special envoys for Ukraine-Russia negotiations—Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. Aid, sanctions, communications infrastructure, and the negotiation team—all have been drawn into this high-stakes contest between Congress and the White House. Policy shifts began rippling outward even before formal voting commenced—reaching as far as the high seas. Trump had authorized Russian diesel imports into the U.S. market. Three tankers carrying Russian diesel departed Baltic Sea ports, originally bound for the U.S. East Coast—but their courses have now shifted. The vessel 'LERUO' has diverted to Brazil; 'TALISMAN' has turned toward the Mediterranean; and 'AGIOI FANENDES' remains in the North Atlantic, its destination marked as 'awaiting instructions,' with its next course still undetermined. The White House’s waiver authorization has not eliminated transactional risk. Cargo aboard these vessels remains highly sensitive under secondary sanctions. Port operators, traders, insurers, and settlement institutions all fear that, should Congress tighten rules, goods accepted today could become liabilities subject to accountability tomorrow. Energy trading dreads policy volatility above all else—and maritime transport takes many days. Commercial actors won’t wait until legislation formally takes effect before hedging risk. Once the wind shifts, cutting losses and pausing to observe is often the most pragmatic response. Thus, even before the Democratic bill becomes law, the channel for Russian diesel entering the U.S. market has already grown uncertain—and Trump’s energy-based leverage for advancing U.S.-Russia rapprochement has correspondingly diminished.

Russian Diesel Tanker Diverts from US Destination

16 hours ago

A tanker carrying 40,000 metric tons of Russian diesel diverted from its intended US destination, creating uncertainty over fuel deliveries following a recent Putin-Trump agreement.

bloomberg

2026-08-26

Putin Moves to Escalate War in Ukraine With Talks at Dead End

2026-09-01

Putin Says Ukraine Strikes Cost Russia 1% of GDP

2026-10-02

Wealthiest Russians Fund 1% of Russia's State Spending Through 'Voluntary' Donations in 2026

2026-11-10

Russian Diesel Tanker Diverts from US Destination

Russian Diesel Tanker Diverts from US Destination

FAQ