Trumps

McALLEN, Texas — On a quiet corner of downtown McAllen, past shops selling quinceañera gowns and perfumes, about 30 people trickled into a small brewery on Wednesday evening to watch James Talarico, the Democratic Senate nominee in Texas, take questions from voters in a CNN town hall.

With beers and tacos, they gathered in front of a large projector screen. Karyme Segura, 18, sat at the front, listening closely as Talarico said federal immigration agents should be going after violent criminals, not “terrorizing our communities” and breaking up families.

Segura clapped. The message was personal to her. A day earlier, her stepfather had been deported to Mexico. Since his detention, her mother has been afraid to leave the house, she said. Now Segura has turned to politics, hoping to change the conditions that have left her family fractured and rattled.

“I just have to do something,” Segura said. “I am hoping that after the election my mom will feel more secure. That if Texas turns blue, Trump will feel threatened.”

Segura is the kind of voter Democrats are counting on as Talarico, a state representative from Austin, tries to defeat Ken Paxton, the state’s Republican attorney general, to become the first Democrat to win a statewide race in Texas since 1994. The race could decide control of the Senate, and has become one of the most high-profile and bitterly fought contests this year.

Talarico, a former teacher and Presbyterian seminarian, has courted voters with a populist economic pitch blended with an overlay of Christian messaging to “love thy neighbor.” Paxton, an ally of President Trump, has focused on rallying his party’s base by portraying Talarico as too progressive for Texas, including his past opposition to transgender sports restrictions.

Since late June, Talarico has led narrowly in most polls, alarming Republicans who have poured hundreds of millions of dollars into ads meant to boost Paxton. Elon Musk, the world’s richest person with significant operations in Texas, has helped buoy that GOP political rescue mission by dropping nearly $190 million into the race, according to federal campaign finance records filed Thursday.

Alyssa Cantu and Antonio Reyna, owners of the Gremlin Bar at their club Thursday in McAllen, Texas.

(Delcia Lopez / For The Times)

Democrats have spent heavily, too. In total, ad spending in the race has surpassed $500 million, according AdImpact, an ad-tracking firm, making it one of the most expensive non-presidential contests in U.S. history.

The Wednesday town hall amounted to free national airtime for Talarico too, who showed up on stage alone despite Paxton —who had so far refused to commit to any debate — being invited. In McAllen, the owners of the brewery, Tony Reyna and Alyssa Cantu, said they bought a projector screen just for the event.

“Any information we can bring out to the community, we try to make it happen,” Reyna said. “And if there is not going to be a debate, we are showing the town hall.”

In recent weeks, conspiracy theories, leaks and attacks have been constant in the lead-up to the election.

When Talarico spent a week away from the campaign trail, conservatives promoted a story that he had been at a mental health facility in Ohio (a rumor that was later debunked). Paxton, who was impeached by the Texas House in 2023, has led a campaign beset by scandal, including a report that he partied in Dubai with fugitives wanted on federal fraud charges. One of the fugitives donated to Paxton’s campaign.

Both campaigns are courting independents and right-leaning voters, including Latinos who swung sharply toward Trump in 2024. But Trump’s unpopularity has complicated Paxton’s task. The latest polls show Trump’s approval rating at 32%, the lowest of his political career, as voters struggle with rising prices tied to tariffs and the war in Iran.

In Texas, about half of likely voters in a recent Fox News poll said they worried Paxton was too close to the president; nearly as many were concerned Talarico was too liberal.

Mario Guerrero, a 33-year-old home builder and executive director of the South Texas Builders Assn.

(Delcia Lopez / For The Times)

Along the border in the Rio Grande Valley, an overwhelmingly Latino region, there are signs that voters who backed Trump two years ago are now open to voting for Talarico — and Democrats as a whole. In interviews with more than a dozen voters across the region, many described the Trump administration’s approach to immigration enforcement as inhumane and morally wrong, as well as detrimental to the local economy.

“I didn’t think he was going to do what he is doing now. I don’t think anybody thought it would be like this,” said Mario Guerrero, chief executive of the South Texas Builders Assn. “I think they have gone too far.”

Guerrero voted for Trump all three times. Now he is voting for Democrats, he said.

Residents talked about how in July, a local nun from Nigeria was detained by federal immigration agents after walking from her home on her way to Mass. They talk about their small businesses hurting because people are afraid to be out in public shopping. Others say it is impossible to find workers in the region.

A candidate’s campaign sign marked with graffiti in McAllen, Texas.

(Delcia Lopez / For The Times)

Ariel Salinas, 50, a longtime builder in McAllen, said he has voted for Trump all three times he has been on the ballot. Now, he is voting for Democrats because he is furious at this administration’s approach to immigration, which he says has hurt the entire region’s economy.

“Everyone is hurting right now. Builders, the subcontractors, their families and their friends,” he said. “It’s a trickle effect down. If there are no homes being built, nobody gets paid and in turn no one goes to spend money at local groceries, at mom-and-pop shops, and so forth.”

On Thursday morning, at a housing development on the north edge of McAllen, about 10 homes stood unfinished, and there were no workers in sight. A house that once took four and a half months to build now takes a year, Salinas said. Laborers, whether undocumented or with work permits, have stopped showing up, afraid of being questioned by immigration agents.

“This shouldn’t be reality,” Salinas said. “It is a nightmare.”

Salinas still does not consider himself a Democrat, but said he plans to cast his ballot for them this year because he is so angered by how Republicans and Trump have handled immigration and mistreated hard-working people, many of whom are his neighbors.

“That doesn’t mean that in two years, we are going to vote Democrat again,” he noted. “We are going to vote for them and watch if they keep their promises to us.”

President Trump listens as Texas Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton, the Republican candidate for Senate, speaks at a campaign rally in San Antonio this month.

(Eric Gay / Associated Press)

Opinions on the race are “pretty baked in” by now, so the heavy spending in the final stretch may be hitting diminishing returns, said Brendan Steinhauser, a longtime Texas GOP strategist who previously worked for Sen. John Cornyn, whom Paxton defeated in the GOP primary.

“There are a few undecideds, but not many,” Steinhauser said. “And if they are undecided, the longer they go, I am guessing they are going to break away from the GOP.”

Most Texans appear to have made up their minds.

A University of Texas/Texas Politics Project poll released Wednesday showed 83% of Talarico’s supporters and 69% of Paxton’s said they were unlikely to change their minds. The poll also showed 72% of Democrats were extremely or very enthusiastic about voting, 10 points more than Republicans. In that poll, Talarico led among Latinos, women, suburban and urban voters, while Paxton had the edge with men and rural voters.

Fernando Salinas, 54, the owner of eight dress shops in McAllen, has always voted for Democrats, and after seeing how immigration raids have affected the local community, he believes this year will bring what many in the Valley call a “voto de castigo,” a punishment vote for the party in power.

“I think Texas is going to turn blue,” he said. “People are that upset.”

Republicans are already bracing for a possible loss. In a social media post Thursday, Trump blamed fellow Republicans for the struggles Paxton is facing in the race. He said Cornyn and GOP strategist Karl Rove were doing “everything possible to make it hard” for Paxton to win.

“They are hurting Texas and, more importantly, hurting the United States of America!” Trump wrote. “If Ken Paxton loses, it will be because of WEAK and INEFFECTIVE Political Hacks like John Cornyn and Karl Rove, who have ineffectively opposed me for my entire political career.”

In a September discussion during the Texas Tribune Festival, Rove said the contest “would be over” if Cornyn had defeated Paxton in the primary. Trump, who endorsed Paxton, has campaigned in Texas in recent weeks to rally the Republican base and urge them to vote. Vice President JD Vance has also stumped in the red state.

Texas state Rep. James Talarico, the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate, speaks Thursday at a campaign event in San Marcos.

(Eric Gay / Associated Press)

In those campaign rallies, Trump has attacked Talarico — whom he calls “Talafreako” — for being a vegan, which Talarico say he is not. Vance has also jokingly questioned Talarico’s sexuality, a comment the campaign has dismissed as irrelevant to the issues that matter to Texans.

But in the Rio Grande Valley, some voters say they feel forgotten by Republicans.

Aaron Garza, 56, a business associate of Salinas, has watched immigration raids hurt business and the community. He has voted for Trump every time he has been on the ballot. But with early voting set to begin Monday, he has not decided whom to support yet.

Garza said he feels no loyalty to either party and wishes there were a third party that showed it actually cared about Latinos and their interests. Still, one thing has him leaning toward Democrats this year: They have shown up.

“The Republicans haven’t been here,” Garza said. “How come you are not here talking to us?”

Oct. 17, 2026 8:31 AM PT

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s abrupt decision to waive sanctions on Russia days before they were to take effect drew outrage Saturday from members of Congress, which had overwhelmingly passed the legislation in a bipartisan display of American support for Ukraine in the war with Russia.

Lawmakers from both parties blasted the executive order late Friday, the latest in a series of steps that the Republican president has taken drawing the United States closer to Russia’s Vladimir Putin. Trump recently announced a diesel deal with Putin to import Russian energy in a long-shot effort to curb high gas prices in the U.S. that are roiling the midterm elections on Nov. 3.

“Beyond irresponsible,” said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), on social media, hours after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky expressed hope that the sanctions that were supposed to take effect Sunday targeting Russian’s economy could be revived.

“What part of enforcing a law passed 86-11 by the Senate does the President and his advisors not understand?” Tillis said. “It’s unconscionable that this administration is capitulating to a Russian dictator who illegally invaded Ukraine.”

Tillis said that if Trump wants to actually bring down energy prices, he should resolve the Iran war, which is largely blamed for the spike at the pump, and “not by doing a solid for Vladimir Putin.”

Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas said, “Lindsey would be appalled,” referring to the late Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who worked endlessly on the bill before he died this summer. The bill is known as the Lindsey Graham Russian Sanctions Act.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said Trump is “thumbing his nose” at Congress and “enabling Vladimir Putin to continue his war of aggression.” She urged her colleagues to take action to reverse course.

Trump’s actions come as Ukraine is bracing for a stark winter confronting Russia’s ongoing attacks on its energy infrastructure to heat homes and keep the lights on. Zelensky, who has endured a rocky relationship with Trump but stayed close to the U.S. lawmakers, urged supporters to speak out on behalf of the sanctions.

The next steps are highly uncertain with the House and Senate on recess until after election day. Trump said he was waiving the sanctions indefinitely, citing national security concerns. It is unlikely Congress would be in a position to take any action to challenge Trump’s moves until lawmakers return to Washington.

It took almost a year for Graham to persuade Trump to agree to the Russian sanctions package. It was designed to impose steep tariffs on countries that import large amounts of Russian oil and energy products and was promoted as way to halt the flow of funds fueling Putin’s four-year war against Ukraine.

But even as Zelensky had watched from the visitor gallery as the Senate advanced the package after Graham’s death, skeptics in Congress warned Trump would be unlikely to follow the bill once he had signed it into law a month ago.

Last week, a bipartisan group of senators urged the Trump administration to more quickly clamp down on Russia, particularly the “shadow fleet” of tankers that Moscow is using to transport oil and bypass America’s sanctions. The senators noted that the bulk of the new law’s provisions were to be effective Sunday.

Instead, Trump soon announced the diesel deal with Putin, saying that Russia had agreed to supply tons of fuel to the U.S., where gas prices have skyrocketed in some areas and voters saying affordability issues are a top concern.

Outraged lawmakers have pledged to stop the Trump-Putin deal.

New York Rep. Gregory Meeks, the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee who had led opposition to the Graham bill — warning that Trump would flout the law — introduced legislation Friday that would block Trump’s diesel deal with Putin.

“At a time when the United States should be increasing pressure on the Kremlin, Donald Trump is cozying up to Putin and striking self-enriching deals instead of standing with Ukraine,” Meeks said in a statement.

He called the deal “corrupt” and said it “goes against everything the United States stands for.”

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press. Associated Press writers Kevin Freking and Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

Five days. That’s how long President Trump’s latest press secretary, Katie Zacharia, lasted before she was fired Friday.

Her stint, which was about as long as the recommended shelf life for an open can of beans (if refrigerated), broke the previous record set by Anthony Scaramucci.

During Trump’s first term, Scaramucci lasted 11 days as White House communications director — the suggested length of time before a sealed pack of hot dogs expires.

Their minuscule tenures represent an impressive race to the bottom in a once-prestigious role that was created just under a century ago, during the Great Depression.

The press secretary typically stuck in the job for years or entire terms, rather than days or weeks. For reference, Scaramucci’s dizzying 2017 arrival and departure broke a 72-year-old record.

Jonathan Daniels served just 19 days (recommended expiration time for a tub of sour cream) in 1945. He at least had a valid excuse for his short run: President Franklin D. Roosevelt died.

Trump told reporters Friday that Zacharia might continue to work for him “in some form, but maybe a more pleasant form.”

He sowed further confusion when he recounted his conversation with Zacharia, claiming that he told her, “Honestly, if I were you, I’d reconsider” and asked her, “Katie, do you need this? I don’t think you need this.”

With verbal chops like those, who needs an articulate press secretary? Apparently not Trump, judging by his appointment of someone whose debut was anything but professional.

Let’s take a trip down memory lane and recall her first day on the job. It was Monday.

Zacharia appeared wholly unprepared when she took the lectern to address the press corps. She looked down and read nervously from a script, took just three questions and embarrassingly mixed up references to “her husband” and “her president.” She abruptly exited the briefing after just 11 minutes.

Zacharia previously worked as a conservative commentator and senior communications advisor for Trump Media & Technology Group (Truth Social). She monitored the president’s social media posts to discern what was of importance to him, then would go on air to talk about those topics. In essence, she was a press secretary, just not in the White House.

She told the conservative outlet Human Events on Thursday that she had been aiming for a job within the administration, frequently appearing as an expert voice on conservative platforms such as Fox News.

“My philosophy is, I’m on TV enough where if he sees me and he likes me, then I will be recruited for the job,” she said. “I do not believe that lobbying for that job would have been successful, and I wanted to work for it. I wanted to audition for it.”

She succeeded Karoline Leavitt, who served quite a long time — 19 months — before leaving to “spend more time with my family,” then immediately signed on with Fox News as an on-air contributor.

The revolving door of Trump administration press secretaries has at least been entertaining. Most stayed on significantly longer than Zacharia (the bar is low, after all), and at least a few managed to leave a lasting impression.

Sean Spicer kicked off the parade in 2017, scolding journalists his first day on the job when defending the size of Trump’s inauguration crowd. It was record-breaking, he claimed. It was not.

Spicer became the inspiration for one of the best recurring “SNL” sketches ever when Melissa McCarthy transformed into him, embodying the new administration’s disdain toward the press: “I’m not here to be your buddy!” she screamed at befuddled reporters.

McCarthy’s “Spicy” is hard to beat, but a Zacharia parody could come in a close second should it end up as the premise for “SNL’s” cold open this weekend.

When Trump announced her appointment last week in a social media post, he referred to her as “an attorney.” She referred to herself as a lawyer.

But when a reporter asked Trump on Monday where she had passed her bar exam, the president threw the question to Zacharia, who was standing behind him on the South Lawn. She stepped up to the mic and answered, “When I moved to China.”

By Wednesday, reporting surfaced that Zacharia sat for the California bar exam after graduating from Pepperdine University’s law school in 2011, but did not pass. In China, she worked in international transaction law, which didn’t require admission to a state bar.

If history is any indicator, whoever replaces Zacharia as Trump’s press secretary should have a go bag packed and stashed directly behind the lectern.

The once-respected position has been degraded by six years of poor decisions and a volatile president who prefers to communicate with the electorate at 3 a.m. in ALL CAPS via his own social media platform.

Here’s to the next White House press secretary. May you outlast the shelf life of a carton of milk.

WASHINGTON — President Trump bypassed his White House chief of staff last week in selecting Katie Zacharia as his press secretary and chief messenger, triggering days of scathing headlines about her credentials and abilities before her ignominious resignation on Friday.

Susie Wiles, that senior-most aide ostensibly in charge of the president’s team, is facing his scrutiny over a different set of problems: widespread public anxiety over corruption in government under the Trump administration. The issue has surpassed the economy as the top concern of voters entering next month’s election, according a Fox News poll released this week.

Marco Rubio, the president’s secretary of State and national security advisor, has been silent on Trump’s decision to cut a deal with Moscow on diesel sales that could fuel Russia’s war against Ukraine. The president’s poll numbers have been below water across the board, but especially so on foreign policy, where over two-thirds of Americans disapprove of his job performance and support Kyiv’s fight for freedom.

Trump aides walk to board Air Force One on Tuesday: Natalie Harp, Trump’s executive assistant, left; Walt Nauta, director of Oval Office operations (in sunglasses); Chief of Staff Susie Wiles; and then-Press Secretary Katie Zacharia.

(Alex Wong / Getty Images)

And on Thursday, the president was forced to reverse a course set out by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the Pentagon to live-stream the execution of a convicted mass shooter by firing squad.

In the final stretch of the 2026 midterms, nearly two weeks out from election day, a White House that has enjoyed relative stability over the past two years has returned to the state of disarray that characterized much of Trump’s early political career, anticipating sweeping losses to Democrats in the House and Senate.

Staff upheaval is expected as officials brace for a blame game over Republican performance, with some distancing themselves from what they see as a fading political movement.

Polls suggest that Republicans are likely to lose control of the House, setting up two years of relentless congressional probes through the twilight of the Trump era, and that Democrats could even flip the Senate, winning in ruby red states from Ohio to Alaska.

It is historically a time for closing arguments, when politicians deliver their final pitches to voters in neat, disciplined packages.

Yet Trump’s campaign blitz across the country in recent weeks has generated a muddled message, dismissing the importance of the election itself at the risk of depressing Republican votes, overshadowing local candidates seeking distance from his record and touting an economy unrecognizable to most Americans.

President Trump walks ahead of Katie Zacharia at the White House.

(Win McNamee / Getty Images)

The president’s selection of Zacharia, who lasted just five days on the job, raised fresh questions about his message discipline in the final stretch.

And infighting within the White House has reinforced a narrative among political pundits that Democratic gains are a fait accompli, despite Zacharia, in her first and only press briefing, foretelling of Republican energy and excitement “never seen before in the history of midterms thanks to President Trump.”

Election officials across the country fear that, anticipating inevitable losses, Trump may be laying the ground to challenge the authenticity of the election results themselves.

“You know, this is the only guy that — it’s ‘promises made, promises kept,’ but he did more things than he promised,” Trump said Thursday, referring to himself in the third person. “I think we did. We did much more than we promised.”

The extent of the coming West Wing shakeup could be extensive, reaching into a Cabinet that has had far less turnover than Trump experienced in his first term.

Zacharia is the second senior official forced out by Trump in just three days, after Kimberly Guilfoyle, the former fiancée of one of Trump’s sons who served as U.S. ambassador to Greece, was revealed by the Wall Street Journal to have asked a Trump donor to pay off her $100,000 credit card bill.

Now, the president has begun asking political allies and donors about Wiles’ job performance, according to a recent Politico report, and several top administration officials are vying for her role, anticipating her resignation after the elections next month.

The conclusion of the midterms will also kick off the start of the 2028 presidential election season, when Republican hopefuls — including many from Trump’s Cabinet — are expected to launch exploratory committees.

British Defense Secretary Wes Streeting and U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stand for anthems at the Pentagon on Thursday.

(Finn Gomez / Getty Images)

“We have to get through the midterms first,” Trump said at the end of August, asked about Hegseth reportedly considering a run. “I bet there’s a lot of people considering it that you don’t know about. You have a lot of people.”

The party of incumbent presidents regularly loses seats in midterm elections, and it is common for presidents to shake up their staffs halfway through a term.

But the last time a term-limited Republican president faced voters in midterm elections, in 2006, Democrats swept into power in both houses of Congress — and President George W. Bush’s political capital never recovered.

That year, 37% of voters said they approved of Bush’s job performance. Polls published this month by AP and Reuters have found Trump already below that threshold.

In the GOP presidential primaries that followed, candidates jockeying to replace Bush distanced themselves from his legacy. He ultimately left office with an approval rating of 25%.

Gas prices are high. Diesel prices are higher — about $8 a gallon in California, $2 more than the national average.

For truckers, that’s a crisis. Their big rigs get about a paltry six miles to the gallon and filling their tanks in the Golden State now costs up to $2,500 a pop. For the guys who own a single truck or the small companies (which is the majority of trucking businesses), it can be hard to pass along those extra fuel costs to customers — which, as my colleague Nilesh Christoper wrote about, is causing a lot of pain in the industry.

Truckers everywhere are stomping mad, and it’s a problem for President Trump and Republicans heading into the midterms. Eventually, higher diesel prices are going to mean higher prices on the goods those trucks are transporting, and that’s an even bigger problem.

Trump has been throwing spaghetti at the wall trying out one limp solution after another to bring prices down — cutting taxes, brokering deals with Russia, telling us it’s just not a problem. But of course, it is.

Truck drivers fill they diesel tanks at United Oil in Long Beach on Wednesday, Oct. 7, 2026.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

One Southern California energy expert has spent recent days in Washington, D.C., trying to convince the administration that the solution lies in California, in the vast oil reserves under our cities and farms that we largely leave untapped for environmental reasons. Environment aside, it’s a long-running and compelling (to some, anyway) argument that may have found its moment, meaning California might become Trump’s next solution — or at least scapegoat — to a costly problem.

More on that, but first, a recap of where we are.

The red dye ploy

Three thousand years ago in Trump time, but which I mean earlier this month, the president signed an executive order that allowed truckers to use red dye diesel as a way to lower costs.

Red dye diesel is, you guessed it, my genius readers, diesel that has been dyed red — to differentiate it from the stuff at truck stops. Farmers and other agricultural types are allowed to buy red dye diesel without certain taxes to use in tractors and other equipment that doesn’t run on our roads.

The Trump order allows truckers to buy red dye and defer paying the roughly 25-cent-per-gallon federal tax on it. So it’s not really saving them money, just delaying payment.

“It’s a small step, but nonetheless, it’s a positive step,” said Michael Mische, a professor at the USC Marshall School of Business whose conservative-leaning take on energy policy has often raised the ire of the Newsom administration.

President Trump signs an executive order to lower the cost of diesel fuel during a campaign rally on Oct. 5, 2026, in Grand Island, Neb.

(Win McNamee / Getty Images)

But there’s a problem with Trump’s red dye plan. States have their own laws about red dye diesel, and the feds can’t change them. So even if truckers could find a place to buy red dye diesel (again, not sold at regular gas stations), and even if the incentive of paying taxes later made the search seem worthwhile, they would often be breaking state laws.

Eric Sauer, chief executive of the California Trucking Assn., a trade group that advocates for the industry, said his group has been advising members not to use the crimson fuel until it’s clear that states are going to change their rules. Some, like Missouri, have. California has not.

Either way, Sauer said, allowing truckers to use diesel dyed red really doesn’t increase the overall supply, just shifts it around — which is unlikely to bring prices down.

“It’s still the same supply of diesel fuel out there,” Sauer said.

Global supply

The global supply of crude oil, has been, shall we say, negatively affected by our war with Iran. Despite Trump’s assurances that the conflict is winding down, two container ships in the Strait of Hormuz were attacked this week, highlighting that perhaps Iran is unaware the war is over. Fears of that conflict and others sent energy prices soaring even higher.

Faced with that unpleasant reality, Trump this week also announced he was lifting sanctions on diesel exports from Russia, a move that shocked his own party and most of the world.

The PCK petroleum refinery stands illuminated at twilight on April 28, 2026, in Schwedt, Germany. The refinery, which produces gasoline, diesel, kerosene and bitumen, receives 20% of its oil from Kazakhstan through the Russian Druzhba pipeline.

(Sean Gallup / Getty Images)

That deal could bring 36 million barrels of Russian diesel, at most, to American shores, which sounds like a lot until you realize we use about 4 million barrels of the stuff every day. So Trump essentially sold out Ukraine and demolished what was left of our European standing for nine days of diesel — an amount unlikely to lower prices.

In California, that’s especially true because, as UC Berkeley professor Aaron Smith points out, about 70% of our diesel “is actually not made from crude oil and coming from oil refineries. It’s made from vegetable oils and animal fats.”

Yes, the Golden State relies heavily on so-called renewable diesel that, Smith says, “introduces, I think, another wrinkle” when trying to lower costs.

California’s fault

But let’s get back to Mische, the USC professor. For years, he’s been arguing that California’s refusal to pump more oil should be viewed as a national security concern.

California actually imports the majority of its crude oil, more than 60% from other countries, and our refineries for a number of debated reasons have been closing. Our imports have been growing in recent years. We also have no pipelines connecting us to the rest of the U.S., unlike many other states. That means we can’t easily get oil except what’s shipped in through our ports.

At the same time, the West Coast with its many military installations is undeniably pivotal to national security. Mische argues that without adequate fuel reserves for a shortage — like during a war — our military readiness could be jeopardized. He wants to see California not only pump more, but for the federal government to store more of that California crude.

A train of tank cars enters the Chevron EL Segundo refinery, one of the largest petroleum processing facilities in California, on April 8, 2026. California imports approximately 75% of its crude oil, with nearly one-third of the crude supplied from the Middle East. Prices at the pump in the state are averaging $5.93 per gallon today amid the war in Iran.

(Mario Tama / Getty Images)

These arguments haven’t gained much traction in our heavily Democratic state, which has moved forcefully away from fossil fuels and toward renewable sources in recent years and which has little interest in increasing drilling. But Mische and his colleagues may have found their moment.

Earlier this year, they wrote draft executive orders about California’s oil industry that he says the Trump administration is considering — one would attempt to force California to pump more oil using the authority of the Defense Production Act of 1950.

Trump has used that wartime act several times in the last few months, and Tuesday, Vice President JD Vance announced it would be used to expand production at a Texas oil refinery.

Mische said he spent last week in conversations with the administration on the proposed orders and is “confident” Trump will “issue additional executive orders under the Defense Production Act for California” by the end of the year.

Beyond the national security argument, such orders could please Trump because they do two things. First, if California pumps its own oil, it could free up some imported oil for other states, which could lower prices — though it would certainly take time and require more refinery capacity.

Second, and likely of more interest to the White House, it makes California — and Newsom — the villain for this sticky Republican problem. California will sue, of course, which would just help the Trump political narrative.

Kevin de León, a California Senate president emeritus and author of SB 100, California’s landmark 100% clean energy law, said he can easily envision Trump claiming that “we have lots of cheap oil in the United States that can lower your gas prices — but crazy lefty California is blocking us.”

Actually, it’s hard to imagine Trump not grabbing the chance to blame gas prices on the Golden State — or Newsom.

What else you should be reading:

The must-read: ‘Very few people out in the streets’: ICE surge rattles California’s Central Valley

The California angle: Justice Dept. demands California prove citizenship for lists of voters or withhold ballots

The L.A. Times Special: The U.S is in the death business. Newsom can change that, and win votes
Stay Golden,

Anita Chabria

—

Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s ambassador to Greece, Kimberly Guilfoyle, resigned on Tuesday after allegations of improper conduct but insisted she’ll “vigorously defend” herself.

Trump’s administration said earlier Tuesday it had asked Guilfoyle to leave her post after she faced severe criticism over allegations she engaged in improper and possibly illegal conduct before and during her tenure in Athens.

The announcement, after days of comments and speculation, came in response to a question to freshly minted White House press secretary Katie Zacharia at her first media briefing Tuesday morning. Zacharia said Guilfoyle “has been a wonderful asset to the team, and we wish her well.”

Guilfoyle’s departure comes after its possibility was previewed to the Associated Press over the weekend and Trump registered his unhappiness on Monday at reports about her alleged conduct.

“Well, we’re looking at it,” Trump told reporters at the White House when asked if he was considering firing Guilfoyle. “We’re not happy.”

Those comments came a day after the AP, citing a senior U.S. official, reported that Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio are “extremely pissed off” by Guilfoyle’s reported conduct and would likely decide on her future this week.

In a series of stories dating to late last month, The Wall Street Journal has reported questionable conduct by Guilfoyle, including an alleged threat to a host country official, accepting improper gifts and services and offering to use her influence inside the Republican administration in return for the payment of a large credit card bill.

White House press secretary Katie Zacharia speaks with reporters in the James Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House, Tuesday, Oct. 13, 2026, in Washington.

(Julia Demaree Nikhinson / Associated Press)

Guilfoyle addressed the allegations directly in a post on X, saying, “These allegations are false, and I intend to vigorously defend my name, my reputation, and my integrity.”

“I have dedicated my professional life to fighting for justice, standing up for what is right, and defending the values that make America exceptional,” she said. “I will not allow false accusations to define my decades of public service.”

In a statement released late Sunday, Guilfoyle’s lawyers denied she had done anything wrong and claimed that the money she was seeking from a Trump donor was payment for services — public appearances and speaking engagements that predate her ambassadorial nomination — that had not been paid.

The lawyers, David Schwartz and Jesse Binnall, also rejected allegations of impropriety related to Guilfoyle’s travel on private planes, saying that before every such trip she “sought, obtained and followed State Department guidance and followed the Department’s travel regulations.”

The allegations began surfacing weeks ago

After defending Guilfoyle following the first report, Rubio has declined to comment publicly on the growing allegations. Last week, Rubio said: “Our ambassador has been a strong ambassador here.”

But after another report appeared later, Rubio — speaking Thursday before leaving Athens — berated journalists for asking about the allegations. He said that he didn’t know if they were true and that he would not respond if he could not confirm them.

“You guys walk around thinking that because some source told you something and you reported it, it’s the gospel. It’s not the gospel. It’s not the gospel for me. That’s not the way we do things,” Rubio said at the foot of his plane as Guilfoyle, who was there to see him depart, looked on.

A second U.S. official, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss personnel matters, said the State Department’s inspector general was looking into the allegations, which first began surfacing in the Journal late last month and have since multiplied.

The second official could not say if a formal IG probe had begun. Inspectors general often conduct informal inquiries into complaints against staffers, and many times those inquiries do not result in a full-on investigation, which can result in disciplinary action up to and including dismissal.

The State Department has declined to comment on a potential IG investigation.

There was no immediate response to Zacharia’s statement from the Greek government or Cabinet members.

Ahead of Tuesday’s announcement, Greek opposition parties had called on the Foreign Ministry to summon Guilfoyle to respond to the allegations made against her. “This, most importantly, is an issue of national dignity,” Sia Anagnostopoulou, a former deputy foreign minister, said in parliament Friday. Foreign Minister Giorgos Gerapetritis responded that Guilfoyle had been treated “the same way as every other ambassador” and argued that an official summons had not been necessary.

Hours earlier, Guilfoyle had posted photos of her meeting this week with the Spanish ambassador to Athens as well as birthday wishes for Lara Trump, the president’s daughter-in-law, accompanied by Dua Lipa’s “Dance the Night,” from the 2023 soundtrack of the movie “Barbie.”

Democrats call for an investigation

The top two Democrats on the House Foreign Affairs and Senate Foreign Relations committees, Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, as well as the ranking member on the House Committee for Oversight and Government Reform, Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., have already called for an investigation into Guilfoyle.

Since late September, the Journal has detailed numerous accounts of questionable conduct by Guilfoyle. Its first report said that she had told guests at a reception that the United States could undermine the Greek government if it chose to, promoted the business interests of one particular Greek construction and energy company and allowed its lobbyist into private diplomatic meetings.

While Rubio was in Athens, the Journal reported — citing text messages — that Guilfoyle had asked a Trump donor and supporter to pay a $100,000 credit card bill just before her confirmation hearing, promising him access to administration officials if he did.

The Journal then reported that Guilfoyle had been enraged about not being invited to a Greek-themed event at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, earlier this year and demanded to attend while boasting about luxury travel to France with energy company executives.

Another report, from the British tabloid The Daily Mail, said that Guilfoyle had alienated staff at the U.S. Embassy in Athens and had pushed the bounds of behavior appropriate for the top representative of the U.S. government to Greece.

Guilfoyle is a former Fox News Channel host and California prosecutor who was once married to California’s Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom and was engaged to Trump’s son Donald Jr.

Lee writes for the Associated Press. AP journalist Derek Gatapoulos in Athens contributed to this report.

Oct. 13, 2026 9:33 AM PT

WASHINGTON — Katie Zacharia, the new White House press secretary, faced reporters for the first time on Tuesday for a very brief turn at the lectern, taking a handful of questions before abruptly wrapping it up.

Zacharia, a conservative commentator who most recently worked for President Trump’s social media company, was named to the job on Friday, succeeding Karoline Leavitt, who left in August and is taking a job with Fox News Channel.

Zacharia told reporters her goal is to “amplify” what Trump is doing and that the president is “his own best spokesperson.”

She quickly proved that Tuesday, appearing for only 14 minutes and taking questions from just three outlets before telling reporters they could go ask the president their questions on the South Lawn of the White House as he prepared to leave for a campaign trip.

“In fact, I am going to end it because President Trump is heading out to Marine One for our historic trip to Alaska, and we can ask him all of the questions out there,” she said.

As Trump left the White House for his trip, he praised Zacharia’s performance to reporters.

“I thought she did excellent,” he said. “She did very good.”

Before taking the questions, Zacharia read slowly from an opening statement that began with a focus on Trump’s recent campaign rallies ahead of the midterm elections and his policies on energy, tariffs, immigration and more since he returned to office.

In naming Zacharia, who has a law degree from Pepperdine University, Trump described her as “a loyal and brilliant supporter, right from the beginning.” She briefly worked as a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security earlier this year and has been a commentator for Fox News and Newsmax.

She told reporters that she viewed her role as press secretary to be no different than the way she advocated for Trump while outside the government.

“I get to do what I was doing on the outside already, which was hoping to amplify, multiply and expand upon President Trump’s incredible agenda for the American people,” she said.

She also thanked Trump and said, “I have wanted to work for him for a very long time.”

She took her first question from Breitbart News, the right-wing outlet which has become more influential in the Trump era, and committed to keeping the “new media” rotation created under her predecessor to bring additional media outlets into news briefings and the White House press pool.

But Zacharia did make some big news: she said that Trump had asked for the resignation of Kimberly Guilfoyle, the U.S. ambassador to Greece, after a series of reports alleging she has engaged in improper and possibly illegal conduct before and during her tenure in Athens.

“She has been a wonderful asset to the team and we wish her well,” Zacharia said.

Price and Superville write for the Associated Press. AP writers Seung Min Kim, Josh Boak and Collin Binkley in Washington and Mike Catalini in Morrisville, Pa., contributed to this report.

Kimberly Guilfoyle has faced mounting allegations, including offering access to Trump officials in exchange for money.

United States President Donald Trump’s administration has asked the US ambassador to Greece, Kimberly Guilfoyle, to resign following a series of allegations of misconduct, including claims that she offered a political donor access to senior administration officials in exchange for money.

“We have asked Ambassador Guilfoyle to resign,” White House press secretary Katie Zacharia told reporters on Tuesday. “She has been a wonderful asset to the team, and we wish her well.”

The announcement comes after weeks of damaging reports about Guilfoyle’s conduct.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Guilfoyle asked a Trump donor to cover a $100,000 credit card bill shortly before her congressional confirmation hearing, promising him access to administration officials in return.

The newspaper also reported that she told guests at a reception that she could use US influence to undermine the Greek government, promoted the interests of a Greek construction and energy company and allowed one of its lobbyists to attend private diplomatic meetings.

Guilfoyle’s lawyers have denied any wrongdoing, saying the money she sought was payment for previous speaking engagements and public appearances that she had not received.

Trump had signalled on Monday that he was considering removing her from the post.

“Well, we’re looking at it,” he told reporters. “We’re not happy.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio initially defended Guilfoyle, calling her a “strong ambassador,” but later declined to comment on the allegations and criticised reporters for asking about them.

Guilfoyle is a former Fox News host and California prosecutor. She is the former wife of California Governor Gavin Newsom and was previously engaged to Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr.

WASHINGTON — Federal agents on Monday searched the home of Democratic U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, a startling escalation in a criminal investigation that brings renewed scrutiny to the frequent target of Trump administration derision in the final weeks of her reelection bid.

Omar said she will “not be silenced” and called the search of her home the “latest escalation” in President Trump’s ‘‘intimidation” campaign.

The search of the Minnesota congresswoman’s home so close to next month’s midterm contests that will determine control of the House and the Senate was swiftly condemned by top Democrats in Congress and raised questions about the timing given longstanding Justice Department protocol to avoid overt investigative steps involving political candidates in the direct run-up to an election.

The Justice Department confirmed in a statement that Homeland Security Investigations agents executed a judicially authorized search warrant in the Washington, D.C., area in connection with an ongoing federal criminal investigation but provided no other details.

The nature and scope of the investigation were unclear, though officials in Trump’s administration have repeatedly hinted at the existence of an inquiry targeting Omar, a Somali-born Democrat whose status as an immigrant to the U.S. and left-wing views have repeatedly drawn criticism from Republicans and senior Trump officials.

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said last month that there was an “ongoing investigation” related in part to whether Omar lied on her immigration forms and that “something’s going to happen.”

Though the Republican focus on Omar’s background dates back years, the search of her home took place three weeks before the November midterms, in which Omar is on the ballot for reelection. The Justice Department has historically sought to avoid public investigative actions involving a candidate within 60 days of a primary or general election.

“For years, Donald Trump and far-right extremists have relentlessly targeted Congresswoman Omar with vile personal attacks and baseless accusations,” top House Democratic leaders said in a statement. “Now, less than 30 days until the midterm election, his violent mass deportation machine has descended upon the home of a duly elected Member of Congress and her family.”

A Homeland Security officer walks out of the Washington residence of Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., during a search, Monday.

(J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

Trump has frequently targeted Omar

Trump as recently as this past weekend brought up Omar at a rally in Tennessee, where he attacked her upbringing and suggested that Vice President JD Vance “and our people” were investigating her.

Vance has in the past accused Omar of committing immigration fraud — an allegation she has denied — and has said he and a top White House official were trying to figure out how to investigate her.

On Monday morning, the street
in Washington where Omar lives was blocked off as HSI agents remained near the home.

“This enforcement action is part of an ongoing federal criminal investigation,” the department said.

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, of which Homeland Security Investigations is part, referred questions about the search to the Justice Department.

Omar has long been a target for Republicans

Omar, who was first elected to the House in 2018, represents Minnesota’s 5th District, including Minneapolis. She is part of “The Squad,” progressive lawmakers who are a vibrant political force on the left wing of Congress but have also endured repeated attacks from Trump, dating to his first term. She was one of the first two Muslim American women in the House and the first African refugee to be elected to Congress.

When Republicans swept control of the House in 2023, they voted to oust Omar from the Foreign Affairs Committee, citing her anti-Israel remarks.

In January, Trump lashed out at Omar during a rally in Iowa hours before an assailant sprayed the congresswoman during a town hall meeting in Minneapolis with a substance that turned out to be vinegar. The attacker was sentenced to 14 months in prison.

Republicans have raised questions about Omar’s past since before she was elected, including asserting that she had married her brother and committed immigration fraud. Omar has broadly denied the allegations as “disgusting lies.”

“It certainly seems like something fishy is there, but everybody’s entitled to equal justice under the laws,” Vance told reporters in May. “So we’re going to investigate it. We’re going to take a look at it. If we think there’s a crime, we’re going to prosecute that crime.”

In a separate interview with conservative podcaster Benny Johnson, Vance said without offering evidence that “we actually think that Ilhan Omar definitely committed immigration fraud against the United States of America.”

He said that he and deputy White House chief of staff Stephen Miller had been discussing it.

“That’s the thing that we’re trying to figure out,” he said. “What are the legal remedies now that we know that she’s committed immigration fraud? … How do you build the case necessary to get some, some, some justice for the American people?”

Omar’s office has defended her against past allegations

Omar’s office in March dismissed Vance’s claims as fabricated and defamatory.

“This is rich coming from someone who literally said they were willing to ‘create stories’ to redirect the media,” Omar’s chief of staff, Connor McNutt, said in a statement.

“This is a ridiculous lie and desperate attempt to distract from the pedophile protection party’s unpopular war of choice, increasing gas prices, and rapidly dropping polling numbers,” McNutt said.

Tucker and Richer write for the Associated Press. AP writers Lisa Mascaro, Michelle L. Price and River Zhang in Washington, Kathy McCormack in Concord, N.H., Mike Catalini in Morrisville, Pa., and Meg Kinnard in Columbia, S.C., contributed to this report.

President Trump has pushed Congress to pass a proof-of-citizenship law, signed an executive order seeking a national voter ID requirement and tried to limit mail voting through U.S. Postal Service changes.

None of those moves succeeded in time to affect this year’s midterm elections. It’s a different matter in the states.

More than three dozen voting laws passed in Republican-controlled states are taking effect for the first time this year, many of them containing elements of Trump’s stalled proposals. They include changes to what IDs are acceptable to register for the first time and requirements to show proof of citizenship, an issue the Republican president has tried but failed to get through Congress.

“Trump’s attacks on our elections are deeply damaging, but they are not happening in isolation,” said Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Voting Rights Project. ”Across the country, states are also advancing restrictions that make it harder for eligible voters to cast a ballot.”

Republican lawmakers who support the tighter voting laws, especially around voter ID, describe them as common sense changes that help build trust in elections.

Trump and other Republicans have been pushing for more restrictive rules since the president’s false claims of widespread fraud in his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden. Trump’s false claims have resonated with Republican voters, a majority of whom believe Biden was not legitimately elected despite all evidence to the contrary. Trump lost dozens of court challenges, his own attorney general found no evidence of widespread fraud, and reviews, audits and recounts in the battleground states where he contested his loss all affirmed Biden’s victory.

Among the changes confronting voters as early voting gets underway: Students in New Hampshire can no longer use student IDs; Utah voters returning mail ballots must include more information on the envelope; and some voters in Mississippi might need birth certificates or passports to verify their identities.

Changes to voter ID requirements are challenged

New Hampshire state Rep. Donald McFarlane said he sponsored the bill to eliminate student IDs as acceptable for voting because colleges don’t have the same controls when issuing those cards as government agencies.

“The change removes a special exception and applies the same government-issued ID standard to all voters,” he said, adding that his bill had bipartisan support.

Students, he said, can still get state IDs free of charge.

The new requirements have not gone unchallenged.

In South Dakota, the ACLU has filed a lawsuit seeking to halt a new law that includes requiring voters registering for the first time to present the most common forms of ID — driver’s licenses, Tribal IDs and non-driver state IDs. They must be presented in person at places that accept registration.

“Proof of citizenship in itself is not terrible,” said Kathryn Johnson, president of the League of Women Voters of South Dakota.

Her concern is the requirement to present the IDs in person.

“We’re kind of a remote state, so sometimes it takes a drive, and you have to coordinate, you have to take off work, and all of these kinds of things,” she said.

Some Democrats also have expressed support for voter ID during recent debates. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro said he was open to the idea as long as it wasn’t based on “conspiracy theories.” When legislatures change their state’s voting laws, they typically give election offices and voters time to adjust. Trump wanted federal voter ID and proof-of-citizenship legislation to take effect immediately, forcing election officials and voters to comply in the middle of the midterms.

Ohio seeks to scrub voter rolls

Ohio has a proof of citizenship requirement in effect for the first time this year for those registering to vote or updating their voter registration information at a Bureau of Motor Vehicles location. The state also eliminated its four-day grace period for mail ballots, which now must be received at local election offices by Election Day.

Yet the biggest concern for voting rights groups is an ongoing purge of the state’s voter rolls. The databases used to check citizenship against voter registration lists can be outdated, said Freda Levenson, legal director of the ACLU of Ohio, which has sued to overturn the law.

“Vast numbers of perfectly eligible voters are vulnerable to being disenfranchised,” she said.

Republican state Sen. Theresa Gavarone, one of the primary sponsors of the bill, challenged the ACLU’s legal action and said the problem it addresses is a real one.

“In the past two years, hundreds of noncitizens have been removed from Ohio’s voter rolls,” she said in an email. “Every single vote cast by a noncitizen disenfranchises a lawful Ohio voter.”

Voters have mixed views on the changes

Outside an early voting center in Wayne County, Ohio, retired steel worker Dan Walter, an independent voter, said he opposes requiring documentary proof of citizenship to vote.

“It’s to keep people from voting, it sounds to me like,” he said.

His wife, Jody, a retired aerospace executive and a Democrat, said she felt the same way about Ohio’s new requirement for registering to vote.

“A driver’s license doesn’t prove citizenship, and that’s all they ask for now,” she said. “It’s going to be an obstacle for so many people.”

Genia Fortune had a different view. A nurse, the Millersburg resident described herself as an independent and said she voted for President Barack Obama, a Democrat, and later for Trump. She believes Trump’s false claims that the 2020 election was stolen and sees requiring documentary proof of citizenship as a necessary precaution.

“I just feel like you need to be a citizen and show proof of ID,” she said.

Voting and election laws have become a regular target for legislatures

The Trump administration has pushed multiple strategies to influence this year’s midterm elections, most of them stymied by Congress or the courts.

Chris Diaz, director of legislative tracking at the Voting Rights Lab, said the group has seen several versions of the Republican president’s proposals passed by his allies in the states.

A recently released report by the group highlighted some of the key areas drawing Republican lawmakers’ attention, including mail balloting, voter ID and the hunt for noncitizens on voter rolls.

Noncitizen voting has been a focus of the Trump administration despite it being a rare problem. The U.S. Department of Justice recently announced it had brought charges in roughly 90 cases for various types of election misconduct, including 50 against people who are alleged to have voted as noncitizens. The U.S. had 227 million registered voters for the 2024 presidential election.

The Brennan Center for Justice has identified nearly 40 laws in 21 states taking effect this election season that will make it harder for eligible voters to register, stay on the rolls or cast ballots.

The report from the center, part of the New York University School of Law, found that many of the new laws target subsets of voters.

“What I want voters to take away from this is that elections are still run by the states and there are still people in many states who are trying to make it harder for you to vote,” said Sean Morales-Doyle, senior director of the center’s Voting Rights and Elections Program. “But that’s all the more reason to go make a plan to vote and participate.”

Fields and Smyth write for the Associated Press. Fields reported from Washington and Smyth reported from Wooster and Millersburg, Ohio.

New restrictions have stripped Medicaid coverage from certain legal immigrants, including refugees and victims of human trafficking, as part of broader federal changes to the health insurance program that are expected to force millions off their coverage.

The change effective Oct. 1 cut from Medicaid what is estimated to be hundreds of thousands of people who legally immigrated to the United States, many of whom work and pay taxes, in the latest Trump administration policy to target foreigners.

The move is part of sweeping changes to Medicaid under President Donald Trump’s 2025 tax cut and policy law, with many set to take effect early next year. The Medicaid changes are projected to result in 7.5 million fewer people with health insurance, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s 2025 estimate.

Advocates say that without Medicaid, people will not be able to afford private insurance and will either delay care or end up in emergency rooms, adding pressure to a strained health system. For immigrants, the cuts could be felt more acutely, compounding the effects of other administration efforts to restrict their access to public assistance as part of a broader immigration crackdown.

“This is about telling every immigrant in the United States that they are not welcome here and that they should leave,” said Ben D’Avanzo, a senior strategist at the National Immigration Law Center, which has pursued litigation against the Republican administration over its immigration agenda.

Refugees, asylum seekers, victims of human trafficking and domestic violence are among those who have lost coverage. Green-card holders were not impacted.

Lauren Bis, a White House spokesperson, said in a statement that “immigrants must be able to support themselves without taking from overburdened benefits programs paid for by hard-working American taxpayers.”

D’Avanzo said many people who have lost coverage will likely only realize when they need medical care. But for some, the change has been felt immediately.

Dwindling supplies of lifesaving medication

In Tucson, Arizona, María Chacon has been caring for her son Jesus for almost five years since a car accident at 17 left him unable to breathe on his own. He requires a ventilator, a feeding tube and daily medication, and must be turned once every two hours to stop sores from forming. Chacon said he sometimes opens his eyes.

The family is originally from Mexico and entered the U.S. on a T visa, offered to victims of human trafficking, in 2018.

Chacon said Medicaid has helped cover almost $25,000 per month of care for her son, which includes a small stipend for her and her husband as compensation for being long-term caregivers. She said doctors have explained that even if they both worked 24 hours a day, they would not be able to cover the cost of his care.

“Since that day I haven’t been able to sleep. We haven’t been able to eat or anything. We’re wondering what we’re going to do?” Chacon said.

Jesus takes medication that Chacon estimates costs $7,000 a month. The supply runs out in mid-October. Without coverage, she does not know how her son is going to survive.

Chacon found out just days before the cuts that she was losing care. She called the state’s Medicaid offices to appeal. Although she is in the process of obtaining a green card, Medicaid coverage would only kick in five years after she is approved.

Steven Camarota, research director for the Center for Immigration Studies, a right-leaning think tank that seeks less immigration, said the administration “is trying to nibble around the edges” with the Oct. 1 cuts, finding piecemeal ways to curb immigration into the U.S.

Camarota believes the government should screen legal immigrants for income potential and education, reducing the number who might rely on public benefits once they cross the border.

“You need immigrants who are unlikely to need welfare,” he said, or those with high educational attainment.

The administration recently revived a federal rule that could deny green cards to immigrants who use public benefits that could include food stamps, Medicaid, housing vouchers and others.

Chacon believes the cuts to Medicaid coverage are part of the administration’s clampdown on immigrants. She said her son is in no condition to travel.

“I know that’s what he’s doing, but, as my son is, I couldn’t go to Mexico,” Chacon said.

Millions more will be dropped from Medicaid

Medicaid, jointly funded by states and the federal government, has become a political focal point during Trump’s second term. The president has pushed to root out what he describes as fraud in the program. In July, the administration deferred over $1 billion in Medicaid payments to California and Minnesota, claiming there was suspected fraud; critics argued the move targeted Democratic-led states.

As more people are cut from Medicaid, the federal government is predicted to reduce program spending by $911 billion, according to healthcare research nonprofit KFF.

In Arizona, officials said 29,000 legal immigrants were cut from Medicaid rolls on Oct. 1. In Florida, estimates are closer to 177,000. Overall, more than 281,000 immigrants from nine states and the District of Columbia are estimated to lose Medicaid coverage, according to KFF.

As more states implement various restrictions to coverage, 7.5 million people are expected to lose coverage by 2034, according to analysis by the Congressional Budget Office.

Without coverage, people will turn to emergency rooms for care. When people delay seeing a doctor, conditions can worsen and become even more expensive to treat.

“At the end of the day, it does raise the cost for the states because once you get these people in for something that could have been prevented, they could not go to the doctor because they were uninsured; they most likely will end up at a hospital in an emergency room,” said Carmen Feliciano, the vice president of policy and advocacy at UnidosUS, a Latino civil rights organization.

UnidosUS partners with community organizations to help provide medical care, but Feliciano said they already are overwhelmed and would not be able to support the number of people who are going to lose medical coverage in the coming months.

“We are not going to have the capacity to serve all the people who need it,” Feliciano said.

Schuettler and Hussein write for the Associated Press.

US President Donald Trump has announced an immediate “energy ceasefire” between Russia and Ukraine, days after easing sanctions on Russian fuel to tackle soaring domestic and global fuel prices.

The energy truce, announced on Sunday, marks another shift in Washington’s approach to Russian energy, as the Iran-US war and recent Ukrainian strikes on Russian energy facilities disrupted global oil supplies and pushed up fuel prices. Trump has even asked Ukraine not to attack Russian oil facilities, as Moscow remains a major exporter of diesel.

The spike in diesel prices in recent weeks has particularly put pressure on Trump’s Republican Party ahead of November’s midterm elections. Surveys show Americans hold the Trump administration responsible for the soaring fuel prices amid the unpopular US war on Iran.

“Attacks on refineries and energy facilities have taken capacity out of an already stretched global fuel market, pushing up costs for transport, agriculture and businesses, with the pain ultimately passed on to consumers,” Susannah Streeter, chief investment strategist at Wealth Club, told Al Jazeera, referring to the mutual attacks on energy sites by Ukraine and Russia.

“A genuine ceasefire could help protect supplies and ease some of that pressure, particularly as winter approaches.”

However, she warned it was too early to call it a “diplomatic breakthrough”, citing Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s statement that the energy truce came as a surprise to him.

Trump’s decisions have drawn criticism from US politicians and European allies, who warn that allowing Russian fuel back into global markets could provide Moscow with new revenue to finance its war in Ukraine. In March, the Trump administration gave a sanctions waiver to Russian seaborne oil.

So, why has Trump repeatedly changed his position on Russian energy, and what is behind his latest decisions?

What is the ‘energy ceasefire’ Trump announced?

On Sunday, Trump said Russia and Ukraine had agreed to immediately stop attacking each other’s energy infrastructure.

“Both parties have agreed. Do not break it!” he wrote on Truth Social, without providing further details.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he was not aware of the energy truce, saying the deal was “news to me” but welcomed the announcement nonetheless.

However, he said Russian drones continued targeting Ukrainian energy facilities, including a power plant in Kharkiv, after Trump’s statement.

“We are waiting for the details of the conditions between the Americans and Russians, ⁠⁠⁠⁠and we are waiting ⁠⁠⁠⁠to see one specific step the Americans are ready to take,” Zelenskyy said on Monday during a video address to a security conference in Warsaw.

“This ⁠⁠⁠⁠energy ceasefire, it can work, and it can become a major step towards ending ‌‌‌‌the war if the Americans truly step in now and make ‌‌‌‌sure ‌‌‌‌Russians respect it.”

Ukraine has repeatedly targeted Russian oil refineries, arguing that energy revenues help fund Moscow’s war. Russia, meanwhile, has attacked Ukraine’s electricity and heating infrastructure throughout the four-year conflict.

Academic Alexey Muriaev has urged caution over Trump’s announcement, questioning whether an agreement has actually been reached, and if so, what it entails.

“Is it about suspending attacks on oil refineries? And if that’s the case, then the situation would be inadequate, because Ukraine’s oil refineries have already been taken out by Russia’s strikes beforehand,” Muraviev, senior research fellow in Defence and Strategic Studies at Edith Cowan University, told Al Jazeera.

“So, in this sense, it would mean effectively Ukraine suspending unilateral action against Russia’s oil refinery facilities.”

Muriaev also linked the announcement to Trump’s diesel agreement with Russian President Vladimir Putin, suggesting it may be a signal to Zelenskyy.

“Attacking Russian oil refinery capability would probably be interpreted by Washington as an attack on US economic interests,” he said, referring to the agreement on diesel exports through April 2027.

What’s the state of global oil prices?

The ongoing conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine have continued to keep global oil markets under pressure.

On Monday, Brent crude, the international benchmark, fell to about $103.04 a barrel following Trump’s ceasefire announcement and Russian diesel deal, while US West Texas Intermediate crude traded at about $90.96.

However, prices remain elevated because of the US-Israel war on Iran, which began on February 28, and disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz, a key waterway through which one-fifth of the world’s oil supplies flow.

Recent attacks on Saudi oil installations and airports by Yemen’s Houthis and the fighting around the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandeb Strait have put further pressure on oil prices.

Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries have compounded diesel shortages, affecting a fuel essential for the agriculture and trucking industries.

The crisis prompted the Group of Seven nations last week to agree to release 100 million barrels of emergency oil and diesel reserves. The G7 decision came after pressure from Trump.

How has the Trump administration zig-zagged between punishing and embracing Russian energy?

Washington’s approach to Russian energy has shifted repeatedly since Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Under President Joe Biden, the US banned Russian oil and energy imports in March 2022, seeking to cut off revenue used to finance Moscow’s war.

But Washington simultaneously supported a G7 price cap on Russian oil, designed to restrict Moscow’s earnings without removing too much supply from global markets.

Moreover, the Biden administration also accepted India’s continued purchases of Russian crude to prevent global prices from rising.

After returning to power last year, Trump initially intensified pressure on Moscow. In August 2025, his administration imposed additional tariffs on Indian goods over New Delhi’s purchases of Russian oil.

Two months later, Washington sanctioned Russian energy giants Rosneft and Lukoil, accusing Moscow of failing to seriously pursue peace negotiations to end the war in Ukraine.

However, Washington’s approach took a dramatic turn this year. On March 5, Washington issued a 30-day waiver allowing India to buy Russian oil stranded at sea, as disruptions to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz amid US attacks on Iran threatened global supplies.

A week later, the Trump administration expanded the exemption, allowing countries worldwide to buy sanctioned Russian oil and petroleum products already loaded onto tankers, with the waiver lasting until April 11.

In September, Trump urged Ukraine to stop attacking Russian refineries, blaming the strikes for global diesel shortages.

On October 9, he announced an agreement with Russian President Putin for Moscow to release more than 300,000 tonnes of diesel immediately, with another 1.5 million tonnes to follow.

Why has Trump changed his position on Russian oil frequently?

Trump’s shifting public position on Russian energy reflects ongoing, and often competing, political and economic pressures.

“Trump is caught between his geopolitical ambitions and the domestic political consequences of expensive energy,” Susannah Streeter of Wealth Club, told Al Jazeera.

She said Washington was trying to pressure Moscow over its war in Ukraine while simultaneously allowing Russian fuel sales that could generate additional revenue for the Kremlin.

“The shift may deliver a short-term political gain if supplies increase and prices ease, but it could come at a longer-term diplomatic cost,” she said, adding that the benefits appeared limited while the Middle East war continued.

US diesel prices reached a record $6.52 per gallon in September, placing Trump under pressure ahead of the November 3 midterm elections.

However, according to academic Muriev, the US president’s public rhetoric should be distinguished from his administration’s actions.

“I don’t really see inconsistency in Trump’s approach because, apart from his public rhetoric, apart from his frequent media posting, there’s been a more steady approach on behalf of his administration,” he told Al Jazeera.

He pointed to discussions between Russian and American officials in August and September, suggesting that negotiations over the latest diesel agreement may have begun well before Trump’s announcement last Friday.

Muriev suggested the timing of the announcement could be politically motivated, allowing Trump to claim a victory on energy prices before the midterms.

Moreover, Moscow also has an interest in helping Trump retain political influence because his administration appears more willing to negotiate with Russia than former President Biden was. Trump has  been relatively more accepting of the Russian position on the Ukraine war and has even blamed Zelenskyy for failing to end the war.

“For Putin, it’s not just about scoring immediate economic benefit, but also achieving longer-term political and strategic goals,” Muriev said, referring to other issues such as Iran, cybersecurity, space cooperation and nuclear arms control.

The energy crisis has also created contrasting consequences for American businesses.

While higher oil prices can boost revenues for US energy producers, they increase operating costs for businesses dependent on fuel.

Susannah Streeter said cheaper diesel could provide relief to trucking companies, farmers and manufacturers, although the additional Russian supplies were unlikely to make a significant difference while disruptions in the Middle East continued.

She also warned that frequent changes to sanctions could create uncertainty for companies making long-term investment and supply-chain decisions.

“If sanctions are relaxed, reimposed or changed at short notice, companies face greater uncertainty over sourcing, compliance and the risk of being caught on the wrong side of a policy reversal,” she said.

The EU also announced that it officially added almost 1,600 new sanctions on Russia’s military industrial complex.

Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy has accused Russia of violating the “energy ceasefire” that United States President Donald Trump unilaterally announced at the weekend and promised to respond if the attacks continue.

Speaking at the Warsaw Security Forum via videolink on Monday, the Ukrainian president urged the US to step in to ensure ⁠that Moscow abided by the truce, noting that there have already been “Russian violations of the energy ceasefire announced by ‌President Trump.”

“We are waiting for the details of the conditions between the Americans and Russians, ⁠and we are waiting ⁠to see what specific steps the Americans are ready to take,” said Zelenskyy, who expressed surprise at the ceasefire deal.

“This ⁠energy ceasefire, it can work, and it can become a major step toward ending ‌the war if the Americans truly step in now and make ‌sure ‌Russians respect it … If Russia does not agree to an energy ceasefire, we will respond,” Zelenskyy told the Warsaw Security Forum.

Trump’s announcement on Sunday that the two countries had agreed to an “energy ceasefire” caused confusion. It came two days after Trump declared a temporary easing of US sanctions on Russian diesel, prompting outrage from European allies and Kyiv, who said it would only embolden Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Both Ukraine and Russia have been launching mutual attacks on each other’s energy infrastructure for months, adding to upward pressure on global energy prices that have risen amid the US-Israeli war on Iran.

Zelenskyy initially denied any knowledge of the agreement and said it was “news to him,” according to Axios.

Trump has previously taken to his Truth Social account to announce truces or other arrangements before either Kyiv or Moscow confirmed them.

“An energy ceasefire and other steps to reduce escalation and guarantee security are truly needed here in reality, not just on Truth Social,”  Zelenskyy added.

European leaders expressed encouragement at the proposed ceasefire, but agreed with Zelenskyy that it had not taken effect.

“I have not noted, over‌ the last 48 hours, any energy ceasefire coming from the ‌Russian ‌side,” French President Emmanuel Macron told reporters at a Paris autoshow.

At the Warsaw Security Forum, ⁠Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said that “Russia is not interested in ‌a ceasefire, de-escalation, or peace … that is why I will go to Brussels to urge all European partners ⁠to consider increasing ⁠sanctions.”

In Brussels, the European Union announced that it has officially added almost 1,600 new sanctions on Russia’s military industrial complex, including individuals and entities involved in its four-and-a-half-year war, in a bid to maintain pressure on Moscow.

“This is the single largest expansion of our sanctions list since Russia started its war,” EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas wrote online. “Europe is again showing a united front … We are making it significantly harder, slower and more expensive for Russia to produce the weapons it uses to kill Ukrainians,” she added.

Meanwhile, Russia ⁠attacked Ukrainian gas production facilities belonging to its state ⁠oil and gas ⁠company Naftogaz in the Kharkiv region overnight, which caused a fire, the ‌company said on Monday.

“The attack damaged critical equipment. Our employees are doing everything possible ⁠to repair the ⁠damage as quickly as possible and ⁠prevent risks to ⁠the stable ⁠operation of the energy system,” Naftogaz acting CEO ‌Sergii Fedorenko wrote on Telegram.

A day earlier, Zelenskyy had said that Ukraine was ready to halt attacks on Russian oil refineries if Moscow ceased its own attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure.

Duffy scored both goals in Derry’s win at Eamonn Deacy Park to send his side into the final and was understandably emotional at the final whistle, aware that ” it was so importnat we got to the final this year”.

“It’s been a tough year all round,” he continued.

“Now we can get a real buzz around the town this month, build it up and get that good feeling back between us all. We’ve a brilliant day to look for ward to.”

Derry City’s form has imporved since Connolly’s appointment in August as they have removed any fears of relegation while reaching the cup final.

Duffy praised the impact of the former defender who he feels has liberated the team to express themselves on the pitch.

“He’s letting us play free-flowing football, encouraging all the defenders to try and play football as we’re all good players,” Duffy said.

“He wants us to take risks and we’re constantly doing that every day in training. Before matches he’s saying that if we lose the ball, that’s on him.

“He’s enclouraging us so much and it’s so enjoyable to play in. I think you can see that in these last few weeks were we are dominant and playing some nice football, but the main thing is players are digging in massively.

“You can see on the pitch it means everything to every player.”