Connect with us

News

Trump meets Zelensky and says it’s time to end Russia’s war

Published

on

Donald Trump met Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky at his New York base in Trump Tower on Friday and said it was time Russia’s war in Ukraine was settled.

The Republican presidential nominee has repeatedly criticised the Ukrainian leader on the US campaign trail, and a meeting between the pair had seemed unlikely until hours before.

As the two men stood side by side, Zelensky said he thought they had a “common view that the war has to be stopped and Putin can’t win”, adding that he would discuss with Trump details of his “victory plan”.

Despite years of differences, Trump insisted he had a very good relationship with Zelensky.

“I also have a very good relationship as you know with President Putin and I think if we win [the election] we’re going to get it resolved very quickly,” he said.

Afterwards, Trump and Zelensky spoke to Fox News and the former president said he “learned a lot” from the meeting.

“We both want to see this end, and we both want to see a fair deal made,” he said. “It should stop and the president (Zelensky) wants it to stop, and I’m sure President Putin wants it to stop and that’s a good combination.”

Zelensky said: “Putin killed so many people and of course we need to do everything to pressure him to stop this war. He’s on our territory.”

Zelensky invited Trump to visit Ukraine, and Trump replied: “I will”.

The Ukrainian president later posted on his Telegram channel that the pair had a “very meaningful meeting”.

“We have a common view that the war in Ukraine must be stopped. Putin cannot win. Ukrainians must win,” he wrote.

Trump, meanwhile, said on his Truth Social account that if he is not elected president, “that war will never end, and will phase into WORLD WAR III”.

The pair have long had a tumultuous relationship. Trump was impeached in 2019 over accusations that he pressured Zelensky to dig up damaging information on the Biden family.

A rough transcript of the call revealed Trump had urged Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden, as well as Biden’s son Hunter.

Standing beside Zelensky on Friday, he praised the Ukrainian leader’s handling of the issue.

Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Trump has frequently repeated Moscow’s talking points about the war. During September’s presidential debate, he sidestepped a question on whether he wanted Ukraine to emerge victorious in the conflict.

Ahead of Friday’s meeting, Trump repeated his long-standing claim that he would be able to “work out something” to settle the war if he won the presidential election, long before Joe Biden leaves office in January.

He has refused to elaborate when asked whether he believes Ukraine should cede territory to Russia as a means of ending the war.

Although Zelensky has been visiting the US since Sunday, their meeting was only confirmed on Thursday night, when Trump posted a screenshot of a text message from President Zelensky saying it was “important for us to have a personal contact and to understand each other 100%”.

There have been tensions all week between Zelensky and the Republican party ahead of November’s US presidential election.

Some Republicans were angered by Zelensky’s visit to an arms factory in Biden’s hometown of Scranton, Pennsylvania, with top Democrats, including state Governor Josh Shapiro, earlier this week.

Zelensky’s trip to the key swing state was labelled by leading Republicans as a partisan campaign event. In a public letter, House Speaker Mike Johnson said the visit was “designed to help Democrats” and claimed it amounted to “election interference”.

Trump has grown increasingly critical of continued US funding for Ukraine, and in recent days has sharpened his attacks against Zelensky, calling him the “greatest salesman on Earth” for continuing to obtain military aid.

In contrast, Zelensky recently told the New Yorker magazine that he believes Trump “doesn’t really know how to stop the war” and called Trump’s running mate JD Vance “too radical” and “dangerous” for suggesting that Ukraine should give up territory to end the war, saying it would spark conflict around the world.

When asked about Zelensky’s comments on Thursday, Trump replied: “I do believe I disagree with him. He doesn’t know me.”

On Thursday, Zelensky met US President Joe Biden and Vice-President Kamala Harris at the White House to discuss his “victory plan”, which he hopes will pressure Russia into agreeing a diplomatic end to the war.

Hours before, Biden had announced a further $7.9bn (£5.9bn) package of military assistance to Ukraine.

As Zelensky visited the US, drone attacks continued in Ukraine. On Thursday night, three people were killed and 14 others wounded in a Russian drone attack on Izmail, a port city on the River Danube.

Russia has targeted Izmail’s grain export facilities in the past. Prosecutors say two boys aged three and 13, and a girl aged 14, were among those wounded in the latest attack.

Romania’s defence ministry said it was possible that one of the Russian drones involved in the attack had crossed the border into Romania, a Nato member state, for a very short period.

Culled from the BBC

Texas Guardian News

Lifestyle

Burbank Marriage Unravels After Woman Allegedly Used Tracking Devices to Monitor Husband

Published

on

Burbank, Calif. — What began as a seemingly happy two-year marriage ended in confrontation and police involvement after a Burbank woman allegedly used multiple electronic tracking devices to monitor her husband’s movements, authorities and sources familiar with the situation said.

According to information obtained by this outlet, the marriage between Amos and Yolanda deteriorated after Yolanda allegedly placed Apple AirTags, Tile trackers, and a GPS tracking device on Amos’ vehicle and personal belongings without his knowledge. The devices reportedly allowed her to monitor his location in real time and reconstruct his daily movements across the city.

Friends of the couple said the marriage appeared stable during its early years, with the pair often seen together at community events and social gatherings. However, tensions reportedly escalated when Yolanda began confronting Amos about his whereabouts, referencing locations and timelines he had not shared with her.

The situation reached a breaking point when Yolanda allegedly tracked Amos to an apartment complex in Burbank, where she believed he had gone without informing her. Sources say she arrived at the location shortly after he did, leading to a heated confrontation in the parking area of the building. Neighbors, alarmed by raised voices, contacted local authorities.

Burbank police responded to the scene and separated the parties. While no arrests were immediately announced, the incident marked the effective end of the couple’s marriage, according to individuals close to Amos.

Legal experts note that the unauthorized use of tracking devices may raise serious privacy and stalking concerns under California law, depending on intent and consent. Law enforcement officials have not publicly disclosed whether an investigation remains ongoing.

The case underscores growing concerns about the misuse of consumer tracking technology, originally designed to help locate lost items, but increasingly implicated in domestic disputes and surveillance-related allegations.

As of publication, neither Amos nor Yolanda had publicly commented on the incident.

Texas Guardian News
Continue Reading

Africa

U.S. Signals More Strikes in Nigeria as Abuja Confirms Joint Military Campaign

Published

on

The United States has warned that further airstrikes against Islamic State targets in north-western Nigeria are imminent, as Nigerian officials confirmed that recent attacks were part of coordinated operations between both countries.

The warning came hours after U.S. forces struck militant camps in Sokoto State, an operation President Donald Trump publicly framed as a response to what he described as the killing of Christians in Nigeria. U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the strikes were only the beginning.

“The president was clear last month: the killing of innocent Christians in Nigeria (and elsewhere) must end,” Hegseth wrote on X. “The Pentagon is always ready, so ISIS found out tonight—on Christmas. More to come. Grateful for Nigerian government support & cooperation.”

Nigeria’s foreign minister, Yusuf Tuggar, confirmed on Friday that the strikes were carried out as part of “joint ongoing operations,” pushing back against earlier tensions sparked by Trump’s public criticism of Nigeria’s handling of insecurity.

The airstrikes followed a brief diplomatic rift after Trump accused Nigeria’s government of failing to protect Christians from militant violence. Nigerian officials responded by reiterating that extremist groups in the country target both Christians and Muslims, and that the conflict is driven by insurgency and criminality rather than religious persecution.

Speaking to Channels Television, Tuggar said Nigeria provided intelligence support for the strikes in Sokoto and described close coordination with Washington. He said he spoke with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio for nearly 20 minutes before briefing President Bola Tinubu and receiving approval to proceed, followed by another call with Rubio to finalize arrangements.

“We have been working closely with the Americans,” Tuggar said. “This is what we’ve always been hoping for—to work together to combat terrorism and stop the deaths of innocent Nigerians. It’s a collaborative effort.”

U.S. Africa Command later confirmed that the strikes were conducted in coordination with Nigerian authorities. An earlier statement, later removed, had suggested the operation was carried out at Nigeria’s request.

Trump, speaking in an interview with Politico, said the operation had originally been scheduled for Wednesday but was delayed at his instruction. “They were going to do it earlier,” he said. “And I said, ‘Nope, let’s give a Christmas present.’ They didn’t think that was coming, but we hit them hard. Every camp got decimated.”

Neither the U.S. nor Nigerian authorities have disclosed casualty figures or confirmed whether militants were killed. Tuggar, when asked whether additional strikes were planned, said only: “You can call it a new phase of an old conflict. For us, this is ongoing.”

Nigeria is officially a secular state, with a population split roughly between Muslims and Christians. While violence against Christian communities has drawn increasing attention from religious conservatives in the United States, Nigeria’s government maintains that extremist groups operate without regard to faith, attacking civilians across religious lines.

Trump’s public rhetoric contrasts with his 2024 campaign messaging, in which he cast himself as a “candidate of peace” who would pull the United States out of what he called endless foreign wars. Yet his second term has already seen expanded U.S. military action abroad, including strikes in Yemen, Iran, and Syria, as well as a significant military buildup in the Caribbean directed at Venezuela.

On the ground in Sokoto State, residents of Jabo village—near one of the strike sites—reported panic and confusion as missiles hit nearby areas. Local residents said no casualties had been recorded, but security forces quickly sealed off the area.

“As it approached our area, the heat became intense,” Abubakar Sani told the Associated Press. “The government should take appropriate measures to protect us. We have never experienced anything like this before.”

Another resident, farmer Sanusi Madabo, said the night sky glowed red for hours. “It was almost like daytime,” he said. “We only learned later that it was a U.S. airstrike.”

For now, both Washington and Abuja are projecting unity. Whether the strikes mark a sustained shift in strategy—or another brief escalation in a long war—remains unclear.

Texas Guardian News
Continue Reading

Houston

Turnout, Trust, and Ground Game: What Decided Houston’s Runoff Elections

Published

on

Low-turnout runoff races for Houston City Council and Houston Community College trustee seats revealed how message discipline, local credibility, and voter mobilization determined clear winners—and decisive losers.

The final ballots are counted, and Houston’s runoff elections have delivered clear outcomes in two closely watched local races, underscoring a familiar truth of municipal politics: in low-turnout elections, organization and credibility matter more than name recognition alone.

In the race for Houston City Council At-Large Position 4, Alejandra Salinas secured a decisive victory, winning 25,710 votes (59.27%) over former council member Dwight A. Boykins, who garnered 17,669 votes (40.73%). The margin was not accidental. Salinas ran a campaign tightly aligned with voter anxiety over public safety and infrastructure—two issues that consistently dominate Houston’s civic conversations. Her emphasis on keeping violent criminals off city streets and expanding Houston’s water supply spoke directly to quality-of-life concerns that resonate across districts, especially in an at-large contest where candidates must appeal to the city as a whole.

Salinas’ win reflects the advantage of message clarity. In a runoff, voters are not looking to be introduced to candidates—they are choosing between candidates they are already familiar with. Salinas presented herself as forward-looking and solutions-oriented, while Boykins, despite his experience and political history, struggled to reframe his candidacy beyond familiarity. In runoffs, nostalgia rarely outperforms momentum.

The second race—for Houston Community College District II trustee—followed a similar pattern. Renee Jefferson Patterson won with 2,497 votes (56.63%), defeating Kathleen “Kathy” Lynch Gunter, who received 1,912 votes (43.37%). Though the raw numbers were smaller, the dynamics were just as telling.

Patterson’s victory was powered by deep local ties and a clear institutional vision. As an HCC alumna, she effectively positioned herself as both a product and a steward of the system. Her pledge to expand the North Forest Campus and direct resources to Acres Home connected policy goals to place-based advocacy. In trustee races, voters often respond less to ideology and more to proximity—those who understand the campus, the students, and the neighborhood. Patterson checked all three boxes.

By contrast, Gunter’s loss highlights the challenge of overcoming a candidate with genuine community roots in a runoff scenario. Without a sharply differentiated message or a strong geographic base, turnout dynamics tend to favor candidates with existing neighborhood networks and direct institutional relevance.

What ultimately decided both races was not a surprise, but execution. Runoffs reward campaigns that can re-mobilize supporters, simplify their message, and convert familiarity into trust. Salinas and Patterson did exactly that. Their opponents, though credible, were unable to expand or energize their coalitions in a compressed electoral window.

The lesson from Houston’s runoff elections is straightforward but unforgiving: winners win because they align message, identity, and ground game. Losers lose because, in low-turnout contests, anything less than that alignment is insufficient.

Texas Guardian News
Continue Reading

Trending