European defense leaders are meeting in Paris this week to discuss their plans to provide Ukraine with security guarantees as the continent steps up after decades of relying on the U.S.

French President Emmanuel Macron led with an address to the Tuesday gathering of defense chiefs from 30 European and NATO countries after the U.S.’ new ‘America first’ policy direction jolted the Europeans into action. 

Macron said it was time to ‘move from concept to plan,’ and told French newspaper Le Figaro that France would boost its defense spending from 2% to 3.5% of GDP, amounting to around €30 billion annually. 

Details of any peacekeeping force are still widely in flux, but some officials said to expect a targeted deterrence force aimed at protecting key infrastructure rather than a wide blockade of the front lines. 

Europeans were dismayed last week when the U.S. announced it would pause all aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine, but that pause was lifted Tuesday after Ukraine agreed to a 30-day ceasefire. All eyes are now on Russia to see if Russian President Vladimir Putin accepts the deal, which came after U.S.-brokered talks in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on Tuesday. 

The U.S. has insisted that it is Europe’s responsibility to offer military resources to help Ukraine deter Russia from invading again once a ceasefire is reached. President Donald Trump has flirted with the idea of not protecting European nations under NATO’s Article 5 if they refuse to meet their defense spending obligations under the treaty.

The new call for Europe’s defense was a welcome development for NATO’s eastern flank, where tiny nations have for years beaten out their larger European counterparts in defense spending as a percentage of their GDP. 

‘We should not be panicking about [Trump statements],’ said Giedrimas Jeglinskas, chairman of the Lithuanian parliament’s national security committee.

‘Europeans need to think about what sort of troops to put in Ukraine,’ he told Fox News Digital. ‘Europeans need to hold most of [our security] now. We need to show good will. Next to good will, you need to show numbers. How many troops can we generate, what sort of troops can we generate, what support we’re going to need from the U.S.’ 

‘I’m not going to provide security guarantees beyond very much,’ Trump had said at his first Cabinet meeting on Feb. 26. ‘We’re going to have Europe do that.’

The United States – NATO’s most militarily powerful member – wasn’t invited to the Paris talks because European nations wanted to show that they are able to shoulder a large part of the job of safeguarding Ukraine once a truce is in effect, a French military official told the Associated Press.

But Jeglinskas said Europe should acquiesce to U.S. demands to pour more into its own defenses as it needs the U.S. for air defenses like the Patriot missile. 

‘People who are complaining about the U.S. – there’s an abundance of that in Europe – yeah, show me the alternative. There’s nothing.’ 

Over the weekend, top Trump advisor Elon Musk posted on X that the U.S. ‘really should’ leave NATO. ‘Doesn’t make sense for America to pay for the defense of Europe,’ he wrote. 

‘It’s common sense, right,’ Trump told reporters of the NATO alliance last week. ‘If they don’t pay, I’m not going to defend them. No, I’m not going to defend them.’

Jeglinskas said that in his meetings behind closed doors, U.S. officials have expressed America’s commitment to Article 5 is ‘as strong as ever.’ 

‘Sometimes Trump goes way over to get people to come to a position of reality,’ said Jonathan Bass, foreign affairs expert and Argent LNG CEO. ‘The fact that he went so far to what they considered crazy, [the Europeans] actually took him seriously and did what they needed to do.’

Lithuania is currently spending 4% on defense and plans to bump that figure to 5-6% next year, which is why Defense Minister Dovile Šakalienė told reporters her nation plans to pay U.S. defense manufacturers ‘at least $8 billion’ more in ‘the coming years’ to boost defenses. 

Russian aggression that could extend beyond Ukraine, including potentially into Baltic States like Lithuania, ‘worries us,’ she said.

‘That’s why we are really pushing forward with our military capability plans, with our defense capacity-building, infrastructure and personnel and acquisitions, from weapons to ammo, building factories, defense industries.’

Europe has offered Ukraine around $139 billion in aid since the start of the war, while the U.S. has offered around $128 billion. 

But the European Union last week proposed an $841 billion plan to ‘rearm Europe,’ which included a $158 billion emergency loan proposal to arm European capacities in vulnerable areas like air defense and ammunition. The plan also calls for relaxing strict debt ceilings agreed to by the bloc for defense spending. 

‘This is a moment for Europe, and we are ready to step up,’ said European Commissioner Ursula von der Leyen last week. 

Šakalienė said ‘strengthening the northeastern flank’ of Europe was the ‘joint goal,’ which could mean stationing hypersonic missiles aimed at Russia in Baltic states like Lithuania.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

House Republicans passed a federal funding bill backed by President Donald Trump largely on their own Tuesday.

It also marked one of the rare occasions in recent memory that a majority of House Democrats voted against a bill that would prevent a government shutdown.

The bill passed largely along partisan lines. 

The measure, a short-term extension of fiscal year (FY) 2024 funding known as a continuing resolution (CR), will now head to the Senate. It must pass there and get to Trump’s desk before the end of Friday, March 14, to avert a partial shutdown.

In a major victory for Trump and House GOP leaders, however, several House Republicans who professed to never have voted for a CR supported the current bill.

Among them was Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., who fully credited Trump with his decision to ‘barely’ support the bill.

‘The ‘barely’ is Donald Trump,’ Burlison said. ‘He is the difference maker. I would never support this language, but I do trust Donald Trump.’

Rep. Greg Steube, R-Fla., was in a similar boat. He told reporters, ‘I’ll be the first guy to tell you I don’t like CRs. I’ve never voted for one.’

‘But the Democrats aren’t going to help us. And the Democrats are just going to put any shutdown on the president, which obviously isn’t good for for the party,’ Steube said. ‘So I think it’s important that we give the party, the president and the conference time to come up with a good budget.’

It includes an additional $8 billion in defense dollars in an apparent bid to ease national security hawks’ concerns, while non-defense spending that Congress annually appropriates would decrease by about $13 billion.

There’s also an added $6 billion for healthcare for veterans.

The White House has requested additional spending in areas that were not present in the last government funding extension, known as ‘anomalies.’

Among the anomalies are some added funding for the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) federal benefits program, and nearly $1 billion to aid with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deportations.

There is also some added funding for defense in a bid to ease national security hawks’ concerns, and about $13 billion in cuts to non-defense spending.

Rosie O’Donnell has been sparring with President Trump since 2006, and now the frequent Trump critic has confirmed she fled the country after his return to the Oval Office. 

The comedian said she is living in Ireland and is in the process of applying for Irish citizenship.

‘It’s been pretty wonderful, I have to say,’ the 62-year-old said in a video on TikTok. ‘And the people have been so loving, so kind and so welcoming. And I’m very grateful.’ 

O’Donnell said she left the country Jan. 15, five days before President Trump’s inauguration. 

‘Although I was someone who never thought I would move to another country, that’s what I decided would be the best for myself and my 12-year-old child,’ she explained. 

O’Donnell disagrees with Trump not only politically. The two have also been involved in a feud since 2006 after she criticized him on ‘The View’ about his decision to be lenient toward a Miss USA winner who had been accused of drug use and other bad behavior. 

Trump responded to the criticism by calling O’Donnell a ‘real loser.’ 

At the time, he said of Miss USA Tara Conner that he is a ‘believer in second chances. Tara is a good person. Tara has tried hard. Tara is going to be given a second chance.’ 

The pair continued to spar back and forth, with O’Donnell telling People magazine in 2014 their feud involved the ‘most bullying I ever experienced in my life.’

O’Donnell stepped up her Trump critiques during his first presidential run and win, jokingly telling Seth Meyers in 2017 that she spends ‘about 90% of my working hours tweeting hatred toward this administration.’

The actress even came up in a 2015 Republican primary debate when Trump was asked about having called women disparaging names like ‘fat pigs’ and ‘slob,’ and he answered, ‘Only Rosie O’Donnell,’ to laughter. 

‘I’m trying to find a home here in this beautiful country, and when it is safe for all citizens to have equal rights there in America, that’s when we will consider coming back.’

— Rosie O’Donnell

Trump also brought up O’Donnell during last year’s election when he told a crowd at the October Al Smith dinner that ‘The View’ had gotten ‘so bad’ that showrunners ‘really need to bring Rosie O’Donnell back.’ 

The ‘Now and Then’ star stayed engaged during the election, frequently posting videos on TikTok, including an especially fiery one on Thanksgiving when she warned people, ‘You can’t forget what he’s capable of. … This is not a sane person. This is a madman. You gotta get ready for what’s coming.

‘When democracy falls, fascism takes its place.’ 

Aside from all of her political reasons for leaving the U.S., O’Donnell says she and her daughter are ‘happy’ in Ireland and enjoy exploring the country. 

‘I miss my other kids,’ she added of her five grown children. ‘I miss my friends. I miss many things about life there at home. And I’m trying to find a home here in this beautiful country. And when it is safe for all citizens to have equal rights there in America, that’s when we will consider coming back.’

The ‘A League of Their Own’ star added that it’s ‘heartbreaking to see what’s happening politically and hard for me personally as well. The personal is political, as we all know.’

She added that she was ‘sorry’ to her fans who were worried about her and missed her. 

‘I just felt like we needed to take care of ourselves and make some hard decisions and follow through and now, as we’re getting settled, I was ready to post this and tell everybody what’s going on.’ 

‘The Flintstones’ star said she encourages everyone to ‘stand up, to use their voice, to protest, to demand that we follow the Constitution in our country and not a king, not a man and we don’t have cruelty as part of our governing style.

‘Protect your sanity as much as you can and try not to swim in the chaos if possible, but I know it’s nearly impossible when you’re there in the middle of it.’

The comedian said she thinks about the U.S. every day, and ‘I am hoping that we can turn things around. I’m counting on you, all of you, to do what’s right. And I think deep down inside we all know what that is.’ 
 

The House Freedom Caucus could force a vote on a bill to strip Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, of his committee assignments if Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., does not announce a punishment for the Democrat that conservatives see as sufficient.

‘He will see what he deems appropriate, and then if that’s adequate, that’s fine,’ House Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris, R-Md., told Fox News Digital. ‘If not, then we likely will file our privileged resolution to strip him of his committees.’

Freedom Caucus members told Fox News Digital that the group was in touch with Johnson’s office about the issue.

The conservative caucus threatened to file a resolution to remove Green from all committees last week after his disruption during President Donald Trump’s speech to Congress. 

The protest got the Texas Democrat thrown out of the House chamber minutes after the address began.

‘We’re gonna ask what Mike Johnson wants to do moving forward. We talked about a lot of things, but different people had different thoughts. But I guess what weighed on our minds is, he said he’s going to do it again,’ Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., told Fox News Digital. ‘My one thing, that kind of action needs consequences.’

Rep. Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., said, ‘There’s all sorts of options, and I don’t think any of them have been decided upon yet.’

Green was censured in a 224 to 198 vote on Thursday morning after repeatedly disrupting the beginning of Trump’s primetime speech.

He shouted, ‘You have no mandate to cut Medicaid!’ at Trump and shook his cane in the air as the president touted Republican victories in the House, Senate and White House. Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., after giving a warning, had Green removed from the chamber

The 77-year-old Democrat was unrepentant, posting on X on Thursday afternoon, ‘Today, the House GOP censured me for speaking out for the American people against [Trump’s] plan to cut Medicaid. I accept the consequences of my actions, but I refuse to stay silent in the face of injustice.’

But members of the House Freedom Caucus want to go further, floating everything from fining Green to making good on their resolution threat.

Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., told Fox News Digital he didn’t want to give the Green issue ‘any more oxygen’ but suggested a suitable punishment would be stripping the Texas lawmaker of any seniority privileges. 

‘No seniority on offices, no seniority on parking spots, on committees – all of that,’ Burlison described.

Meanwhile, Green’s House Democratic allies briefly plunged the House floor into chaos after the censure vote. They crowded Green as he stood ready for Johnson to read out the censure, another formal part of the process, and sang ‘We shall overcome.’

Johnson was forced to pause House floor proceedings after trying and failing multiple times to call the Democrats to order.,

Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., another Freedom Caucus member, filed a resolution in response to strip all the offending Democrats from their committees.

Harris and Clyde signaled the current discussions with leadership were focused on Green alone, however.

‘No one [else] waved a cane at the president and didn’t accept…having a censure resolution read without interruption,’ Harris said.

Clyde added, ‘And nobody else had to be thrown out.’

Johnson, for his part, confirmed in an interview on Fox News on Friday that he was in talks with the House Freedom Caucus on a punishment for Green.

‘I talked to Freedom Caucus members and other Republicans who are deeply concerned about this,’ Johnson told ‘Outnumbered.’ ‘They say we have to restore control one way or the other and there need to be real consequences, and it’s something that we’ll be looking at early next week.’

Green currently serves on the House Financial Services Committee, where he is the top Democrat on the subcommittee for oversight.

Fox News Digital reached out to representatives for Johnson and Green for comment but did not immediately hear back.

Democratic New York Rep. Tom Suozzi said Tuesday that there is a catastrophe brewing for the country’s aging population, and he wants to do something about it.

Alongside Republican Rep. John Moolenaar, Suozzi introduced the ‘Well-Being Insurance for Seniors to be at Home Act’ on Tuesday, which seeks to help more of the country’s increasingly older population obtain long-term home care insurance.

‘Currently, 10,000 Americans every day are turning 65-years-old,’ Suozzi told reporters during a press call on Tuesday, and, in five years, 6,000 Americans will turn 85 every day. Suozzi also noted that right now, only about 4% of seniors are covered by long-term care insurance.

‘One of the main causes of people becoming homeless — new homeless people — is turning 80 years old, because a lot of people are becoming destitute as they get old, and they face what are called, ‘Their inability to conduct daily activities of living,” Suozzi said. ‘And right now, very few people have long-term care insurance, and people will end up going into nursing homes. And not only can the nursing homes not handle this volume of people, but the Medicaid system will go bust, and two thirds of the people in America that are in nursing homes are paid for with Medicaid.’

In addition to the increasingly growing senior population in the U.S., Suozzi also cited societal factors that are making it harder for aging and disabled seniors to receive the at-home care they need. One is the fact that Americans are having fewer kids, so there will be fewer of them to take care of their aging or disabled parents. Another was the fact that kids are increasingly moving to other parts of the country away from their parents, again increasing the burden for seniors to figure things out on their own.

‘There’s a lot of people becoming senior citizens right now because the baby boomers, there’s less kids available to take care of them, and the kids that are alive don’t necessarily live where their parents live. So we’ve got this big perfect storm brewing, and Medicaid will never be able to solve this problem,’ according to Suozzi. ‘And nursing homes — there’s just not enough nursing homes. There’s not enough money to pay for the nursing homes for all these people. So my legislation is designed to try and encourage the private sector to create long-term care insurance that is affordable.’

Known by its acronym, WISH, Suozzi and Moolenaar’s new bill seeks to create a federal ‘Catastrophic Care Fund’ that will help cover some of the cost-burden of long-term care. The goal is to encourage private insurers to develop and market affordable and accessible long-term care insurance, which, overtime, they have ceased providing more broadly. The reason, Suozzi said, is it was just not profitable enough for them, as most seniors with long-term care insurance were outliving their expected life terms and costing insurance companies a lot of money as a result.

Suozzi likened his new plan to Medicare Part B, another similar cost-sharing program that has pushed insurers to incentivize customers to enroll. Seniors would be able to benefit from the newly created fund on a tiered basis, according to each person’s income level.

The Democrat lawmaker pointed out how the WISH Act will help reduce the cost burden of federal healthcare programs like Medicare and Medicaid, which can help pay for the fund. He also suggested a payment plan involving an increased income tax shared by both employees and employers, but Suozzi noted that plan was unlikely to get the GOP support necessary. Another potential payment option for the new long-term care fund could stem from reforms to Social Security, the congressman added.

Besides the ‘perfect storm’ that is brewing for seniors, a second storm is also brewing on Capitol Hill right now in regard to how to fund the federal government. Republicans are ramping up reconciliation efforts and, as part of that framework, they are looking for roughly $800 billion in Medicaid cuts. While the Wish Act could help lower the amount of necessary cuts during reconciliation, Suozzi said he feared it was too tight of a window to get enough lawmakers on board. 

‘I guess there’s an argument that it could go in there, if we could demonstrate between now and then that it’ll be a big savings in Medicaid,’ Suozzi told reporters. ‘I see this is taking the full term of getting people educated about the issue, getting more people interested in the issue, and getting senior advocacy groups and private insurers to advocate on behalf of this idea. So it’s not going to happen on its own. It will have to be part of something bigger, but not, I think, until we’ve educated people about the seriousness of the issue.’

Rep. Ashley Hinson and Sen. Pete Ricketts are rolling out a bicameral bill with bipartisan support that would secure agriculture supply chains in the United States from vulnerabilities and potential Chinese Communist Party exploitation, Fox News Digital has learned. 

Hinson, R-Iowa, will introduce the Securing American Agriculture Act in the House of Representatives, while Ricketts, R-Neb., will introduce the measure in the Senate. 

The Securing American Agriculture Act would require the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to conduct an annual assessment to identify supply chain vulnerabilities, domestic production gaps and potential CCP exploitation. 

It also would direct the secretary of Agriculture to recommend ways to strengthen U.S. reliance and reduce China’s influence in the industry to mitigate potential threats. 

The bill would ensure that the USDA accurately accounts for U.S. dependence on China for critical agricultural inputs and guarantee access for American producers. 

‘China has intentionally captured a significant market share of America’s agricultural inputs — which is vital to our food supply chain — ceding leverage to our top adversary,’ Hinson told Fox News Digital Tuesday. ‘Iowa farmers have told me firsthand that if China decides to shut off U.S. access to these critical inputs, our food production would be in jeopardy. I’m proud to reintroduce this bipartisan bill that exposes and counters China’s grip on agricultural inputs to strengthen domestic manufacturing and food security.’ 

Hinson added: ‘Plain and simple: We should bring our agriculture supply chain home.’ 

And Ricketts told Fox News Digital Tuesday that ‘Communist China’s strategic control over crucial sectors of our food and agricultural supply chains poses a serious national security threat.’

‘Losing access to key inputs could reduce productivity, increase food prices and undermine food security,’ Ricketts told Fox News Digital. ‘My bill will bolster and protect these supply chains and reduce our reliance on foreign adversaries.’

The bill is also supported by House China Committee Ranking Member Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., who said the bipartisan bill is ‘a critical step forward in protecting our nation’s food supply and farmers from foreign adversaries, including the Chinese Communist Party, who threaten our agricultural security.’ 

‘America’s farmers are the backbone of our economy, and we must ensure they have the resources and safeguards needed to compete on a level playing field while securing our nation’s agricultural supply chains,’ Krishnamoorthi told Fox News Digital.

The bill is also supported by House China Committee Chairman John Moolenaar, R-Mich.; Rep, Jill Tokuda, D-Hawaii; Rep. Sharice Davids, D-Kansas; and Rep. Scott Franklin, R-Fla., among others. 

In the Senate, Democrat Sen. Elissa Slotkin; Republican Sens. James Risch, R-Idaho; Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.V.; Eric Schmitt, R-Mo.; Mike Crapo, R-Idaho; Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo.; Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb.; and Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., also support the bill. 

Slotkin told Fox News Digital that ‘food security is national security.’ 

‘We need to treat threats to our food supply chain just like any other security risk,’ Slotkin said. ‘This legislation requires us to assess those risks so we can protect our food supply. Bottom line: We need to make sure America’s agriculture supply chain is secure and stays right here at home.’ 

Ukraine on Tuesday agreed to a preliminary proposal put forward by the Trump administration that called for a 30-day ceasefire contingent on Russia’s acceptance of the terms in a major step toward ending the brutal war.

But even if the Trump administration is able to get Moscow to the negotiating table and end the three-year war under a new treaty, which several security experts say Russian President Vladimir Putin is under no real pressure to do, can the Kremlin chief be trusted?

Russia under Putin has repeatedly violated formal international agreements intended to protect Ukraine’s sovereignty, chiefly from its former Soviet overlord.

These agreements include the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, in which Ukraine agreed to relinquish its nuclear arsenal in exchange for assurances over its territorial integrity after its 1991 withdrawal from the Soviet Union, as well as the 1997 Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership by which Moscow and Kyiv agreed to respect one another’s existing borders. Both deals were first violated in 2014 when Putin seized Crimea and backed Russian separatist forces in the Donbas region. 

The 2014-2015 Minsk Agreements, though criticized as ‘weak,’ attempted to end Russia’s aggression in eastern Ukraine, an agreement that was never fully achieved and was again violated by Putin’s 2022 invasion. 

Some world leaders and security officials, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, have cautioned that a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine is unlikely to be achieved in the near term and against Putin’s reliability in adhering to any international agreement without serious security commitments from the West.

‘The problem here is that the Russians only understand win-lose outcomes, which means that to prevent them from ever attacking Ukraine again, they must see themselves to be the losers in the war just as they did at the end of the Cold War,’ Michael Ryan, former deputy assistant secretary of Defense for European and NATO Policy and former acting assistant secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, told Fox News Digital.

Security officials interviewed by Fox News Digital argued that securing Ukraine’s future is not about ‘trusting’ Putin. It’s about actually putting Russia in a position where any future violations would hinder Moscow more than it could be enticed by unchecked opportunity.

‘Even if a deal is concluded, Russia will continue clandestine operations across the world to expand its footprint in terms of geopolitical influence,’ Rebekah Koffler, a former DIA intelligence officer, told Fox News Digital, noting the former KGB operative can be counted on to ‘continue election interference campaigns, cyber warfare, espionage and destabilization operations across the globe.

‘There’s no such thing as peace in Russia’s strategic military thinking. You are in a constant confrontation.’

Ryan argued a Trump-brokered peace deal needs to reflect on the lessons learned from previously failed agreements, like the post-WWI Treaty of Versailles, which arguably led to the rise of Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany.

‘How to solve this conundrum? Just as we did after World War II … reconstruction of Ukraine must include economic reconciliation with Russia,’ Ryan said. ‘The Russians saw how we rebuilt the losing side in World War II Germany and Japan. They expected us to do the same for Russia after the Cold War, but we did not.  

‘We can’t make that same mistake if we want lasting peace for Ukraine and if we want to split Russia from China,’ he added, noting other adversaries are watching how the West handles this geopolitical hurdle.

There are numerous obstacles when it comes to the Trump administration’s attempt to negotiate with Putin, including arguments over occupied territory, international recognition of occupied lands, international aid and support for Ukraine, international confiscation of frozen Russian assets, Zelenskyy’s standing at home, the return of prisoners of war and the return of abducted Ukrainian children, according to Peter Rough, senior fellow and director of the Center on Europe and Eurasia at the Hudson Institute.

‘Putin has officially annexed four Ukrainian oblasts as well as Crimea. But Moscow has yet to conquer any of the four entirely,’ Rough told Fox News Digital while traveling to Ukraine. ‘I can’t imagine that Ukraine will withdraw from the areas they control, having fought tooth and nail to defend those regions. 

‘I also doubt that the West will offer de jure recognition to the areas Moscow controls,’ he added. ‘So, Putin would have to swallow all of that in a peace deal.’

Each issue alone is a massive undertaking to negotiate, and while Ukraine this week may be outlining concessions it could make to secure a deal coordinated by the U.S., Putin is unlikely to do the same, according to Koffler, who briefed NATO years ahead of the 2022 invasion on Putin’s plans.

‘Putin is unlikely to make any concessions as he believes he is in a strong position,’ Koffler told Fox News Digital. ‘The disparity in combat potential dramatically favors Russia over Ukraine, which is out-manned and outgunned because Putin transitioned the Russian military and economy on a wartime footing seven years prior to the invasion of Ukraine.’

‘Putin believes he has prepared Russia to fight till the last Ukrainian and till the last missile in NATO’s arsenal,’ she added, echoing a January warning issued by NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, who said Russia’s defense industry output over a three-month period equates to what all of NATO produces an entire year.

‘Putin is highly unlikely to agree to a ceasefire because he doesn’t want to give a strategic pause to Ukraine, the U.S., and NATO to re-arm,’ Koffler said. ‘He doesn’t trust Washington. He doesn’t trust President Trump any more than we trust Putin. 

‘He trusts Trump even less than Biden because he could read Biden and predict his behavior. He cannot read Trump because Trump is unpredictable.’

The experts argued there are too many variables that could play out during negotiations that will determine whether Putin can be adequately held accountable or ‘trusted’ regarding future agreements.

Ultimately, Koffler said, Putin will not leave eastern Ukraine.

‘Ukraine has always been a red line for Putin, in terms of who has geopolitical control of it, Russia or the West. And he will continue to enforce this red line,’ she said. ‘The only way to ensure that Putin doesn’t invade another country is to make NATO strong again, beef up force posture, increase defense spending, secure its command-and-control networks and develop actual deterrence and counter-strategy that addresses every prong of Putin’s strategy.’ 

— The House GOP’s campaign committee is taking aim at congressional Democrats for voting against a measure to fund the federal government through Sept. 30 and avoid a government shutdown at the end of this week. 

The National Republican Congressional Committee is launching digital ads against 35 House Democrats who may face challenging or competitive races in the 2026 midterms, when the GOP aims to defend its fragile majority in the chamber.

The spots, shared first with Fox News Wednesday morning, are going up hours after the House, almost entirely along party lines, voted 217-213 to pass a Republican-crafted bill that cuts non-defense spending by roughly $13 billion, boosts defense spending by around $6 billion and gives President Donald Trump more leeway in how to spend the funds.

Thanks to heavy last-minute lobbying by Trump and his allies inside and outside the chamber, the House GOP didn’t need a single Democrat’s vote to pass the bill.

One Democrat, moderate Jared Golden of Maine, who represents a district carried by Trump the past three presidential elections, voted for the Republican measure.

And the one Republican to vote against the bill, far right Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, is being threatened by Trump and his allies with a possible primary challenge next year when he’s up for re-election.

The digital ads by the NRCC, which are identical for all the targets, will run online in the districts of Democratic representatives Josh Harder (CA-09), Adam Gray (CA-13), Jim Costa, (CA-21), Raul Ruiz (CA-25), George Whitesides (CA-27), Derek Tran (CA-45), Dave Min (CA-47) and Mike Levin (CA-49) of California; Darren Soto (FL-09) and Jared Moskowitz (FL-23) of Florida; Eric Sorensen (IL-17) of Illinois; Frank Mrvan (IN-01) of Indiana; Kristen McDonald Rivet (MN-08) of Michigan; Don Davis (NC-01) of North Carolina; Chris Pappas (NH-01) and Maggie Goodlander (NH-02) of New Hampshire; Josh Gottheimer (NJ-05) and Nellie Pou (NJ-09) of New Jersey; Gabe Vasquez (NM-02) of New Mexico; Dina Titus (NV-01), Susie Lee (NV-03) and Steven Horsford (NV-04) of Nevada; Tom Suozzi (NY-03), Laura Gillen (NY-04), Pat Ryan (NY-18) and Josh Riley (NY-19) of New York; Greg Landsman (OH-01), Marcy Kaptur (OH-09), and Emilia Syles (OH-13) of Ohio; Janelle Bynum (OR-05) of Oregon; Henry Cuellar (TX-28) and Vicente Gonzalez (TX-34) of Texas; Eugene Vindman (VA-07) of Virginia; and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA-03) of Washington state.

The NRCC says there’s a modest ad buy behind the digital spots.

‘House Democrats threw a tantrum at the expense of the American people, shutting down the government just to score political points. After months of failure, they’ve learned nothing and doubled down on their embarrassing dysfunction.’ NRCC spokesman Mike Marinella said.

Democrats disagree.

‘The strong House Democratic vote in opposition to this reckless Republican spending bill speaks for itself,’ House Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the top Democrat in the chamber, told reporters after the vote.

And House Democratic Caucus Chair Rep. Pete Aguilar of California took aim at what he called a ‘partisan’ measure and emphasized that ‘we put up a strong vote in opposition of this bill because this hurts families.’