Connect with us

The Center Square

Trump, Zelenskyy to meet Monday in steps toward peace with Russia | National

Published

on

www.thecentersquare.com – Sarah Roderick-Fitch – (The Center Square – ) 2025-08-16 07:30:00


Following a “successful” Alaska meeting with Vladimir Putin, President Trump announced plans for peace talks with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy at the White House, aiming for a direct peace agreement to end the nearly four-year war. Trump highlighted progress with Putin but stressed “no deal until there’s a deal,” leaving final decisions to the Eastern European leaders. Putin emphasized addressing the conflict’s root causes for lasting peace, while Zelenskyy demanded a real ceasefire, prisoner releases, and continued sanctions pressure on Russia. The White House meeting marks a potential breakthrough following prior tense exchanges between the leaders.

(The Center Square) – Following a “successful” meeting in Alaska with Russian President Vladimir Putin, President Donald Trump said he is going straight for a “peace agreement” in a Monday meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House.

“The meeting with President Vladimir Putin of Russa went very well, as did a late night phone call with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine, and various European leaders, including the highly respected Secretary General of NATO,” the president wrote on social media early Saturday morning after arriving back in Washington.

Trump indicated in-person peace talks between the two Eastern European leaders could be on the horizon, raising hopes for putting an end to a war in its fourth year. He has said similar things since the opening weeks of his second term, and dozens of times on the campaign trail said the war would end on Day 1 if he was elected.

“It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere ceasefire agreement, which often times do not hold up,” Trump wrote. “President Zelenskyy will be coming to D.C., the Oval Office, on Monday afternoon. If all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin. Potentially, millions of people’s lives will be saved.”

During a press conference following the Friday meeting between Trump and the Russian president, Putin said his country is interested in “putting an end” to the war with Ukraine.

Trump indicated progress was made in talks with Putin, but did not elaborate on any agreements.

There were no immediate changes on the battlefields.

“Many points were agreed to, and there are just a very few that are left,” said the president. “Some are not that significant. One is probably the most significant, but we have a very good chance of getting there. We didn’t get there but we have a very good chance of getting there.”

Despite the successful meeting, Trump underscored that there is “no deal until there’s a deal” and that it is “ultimately up to” the two Eastern European leaders to come to an agreement.

The Russian president told reporters that the two countries must address the “roots” of the conflict in order to reach an agreement.

“We’re convinced that in order to make the settlement lasting and long term, we need to eliminate all the primary roots, the primary causes of that conflict and … to consider all legitimate concerns of Russia and to reinstate a just balance of security in Europe and in the world on the whole,” Putin said. “We agree with President Trump … that naturally, the security of Ukraine should be insured as well.”

In a social media post Saturday morning, Zelenskyy was much more direct in his demands for peace.

“The positions are clear,” Zelenskyy wrote. “We need to achieve real peace that will be lasting, not just another pause between Russian invasions. We must stop the killings as soon as possible, cease fire both on the battlefield and in the skies, and against our port infrastructure. We must free all Ukrainian prisoners of war and civilians and bring back the children abducted by Russia. Thousands of our people are still held in captivity; they all must be brought home. We must maintain pressure on Russia as long as the aggression and occupation continue.

“In the conversation with President Trump, I emphasized that sanctions should be strengthened if there is no trilateral meeting or if Russia evades an honest end to the war. Sanctions are an effective tool. We need to reliably and long-term guarantee security with the participation of both Europe and the United States. All issues important to Ukraine must be discussed with Ukraine’s involvement, and no issue, including territorial ones, should be resolved without Ukraine.”

The last time Zelenskyy and Trump met at the White House in February, the meeting ended abruptly following a tense exchange. At the time, Trump said Zelenskyy wasn’t “ready for peace.”

Since then, the leaders appeared to have patched things up during two sidebar meetings in Europe.

The post Trump, Zelenskyy to meet Monday in steps toward peace with Russia | National appeared first on www.thecentersquare.com



Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Centrist

The article primarily reports on recent diplomatic interactions involving President Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and Volodymyr Zelenskyy, focusing on their statements and actions regarding peace talks. The tone is factual and descriptive, presenting quotes and developments without endorsing or criticizing any party. It distinguishes between the ideological positions of the leaders—such as Zelenskyy’s emphasis on sanctions and security guarantees and Putin’s focus on addressing the conflict’s roots—without adopting or promoting these views itself. Overall, the content adheres to neutral reporting by conveying information and perspectives from all sides without evident framing that suggests a political bias.

The Center Square

D.C. attorney general sues Trump administration, claiming ‘unlawful’ takeover | National

Published

on

www.thecentersquare.com – Sarah Roderick-Fitch – (The Center Square – ) 2025-08-15 09:57:00


Days after President Trump declared “Liberation Day” by federalizing the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and deploying National Guard troops to address crime, D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb filed a lawsuit against the federal takeover. Schwalb called it a “brazenly unlawful” and “hostile takeover,” arguing Trump exceeded his limited authority under Section 740 of the Home Rule Act, which only permits temporary federal control for emergencies and federal purposes. The lawsuit aims to defend D.C.’s autonomy and maintain MPD under local control. Meanwhile, the Trump administration replaced MPD’s chief and rescinded sanctuary policies, citing rampant violence. Republican lawmakers seek to alter or repeal the Home Rule Act to remove federal limits.

(The Center Square) – Days after President Donald Trump declared “Liberation Day” by federalizing the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department and deploying hundreds of National Guard members to curb crime, D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb is filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration claiming the federal takeover is unlawful.

Schwalb describes the Trump administration’s federal takeover of MPD as “brazenly unlawful” and a “hostile takeover,” adding that Trump has “limited authority” in invoking Section 740 of the Home Rule Act.

“The federal government’s power over DC is not absolute, and it should not be exercised as such. Section 740 of the Home Rule Act permits the President to request MPD’s services. But it can only be done temporarily, for special emergencies, and solely for federal purposes,” the attorney general posted on X Friday morning.

He claims the Home Rule Act “keeps operational control of MPD with the Mayor and Chief.”

“This is an affront to the dignity and autonomy of the 700,000 Americans who call DC home. Our office will go to court to defend Home Rule, block the unlawful orders, and maintain MPD under District control. We have no choice but to stand up for DC residents’ rights and safety,” Schwalb wrote.

The lawsuit comes on the heels of U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi issuing an order to replace MPD Chief Pamela Smith with Drug Enforcement Administration Administrator Terry Cole to serve as the agency’s “emergency police commissioner.” In addition, the Trump administration rescinded the district’s “sanctuary policies,” allowing law enforcement to cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials.

Trump tapped Bondi to take operational control of the Metropolitan Police as part of an executive order, citing “out of control” violence in the nation’s capital.

Trump claims the district has “crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor and worse” in defense of his reasoning to invoke the act.

Prior to declaring “Liberation Day” in the district, the president described the city’s crime as “out of control,” citing youth violence.

“Crime in Washington, D.C., is totally out of control. Local ‘youths’ and gang members, some only 14, 15, and 16-years-old, are randomly attacking, mugging, maiming, and shooting innocent Citizens, at the same time knowing that they will be almost immediately released,” Trump lamented. “They are not afraid of Law Enforcement because they know nothing ever happens to them, but it’s going to happen now! The Law in D.C. must be changed to prosecute these ‘minors’ as adults, and lock them up for a long time, starting at age 14.”

As the law currently stands, Section 740 of the Home Rule Act only allows the president to federalize MPD for up to 30 days.

 However, a group of Republicans in Congress is trying to alter or rescind the Home Rule Act. Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., is proposing a resolution to remove the 30-day limit.

In February, U.S. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Ogles introduced legislation to repeal the Home Rule Act, claiming the district is plagued by violence and crime.

The duo tied the title of the legislation to Democratic Mayor Muriel Bowser. The Bringing Oversight to Washington and Safety to Every Resident Act can be shortened to the BOWSER Act.

The District of Columbia Home Rule Act of 1973 was enacted by Congress and ratified by D.C. voters. The act gave the district residents limited autonomy over local affairs, allowing them to elect local leaders, including mayors and council members.

The post D.C. attorney general sues Trump administration, claiming ‘unlawful’ takeover | National appeared first on www.thecentersquare.com



Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Right

The article presents a detailed account of the federal takeover of the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department ordered by former President Donald Trump and the subsequent legal pushback by D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb. The tone mostly conveys the Republican perspective favoring stronger federal intervention to combat crime, as evidenced by the emphasis on Trump’s declarations of “Liberation Day,” crime descriptions, and Republican legislative efforts to limit D.C.’s autonomy. While the article includes strong quotes from Democratic officials opposing the federalization as unlawful and infringing on D.C. autonomy, the framing places notable focus on law-and-order themes and legislative responses from Republicans aimed at expanding federal control. The language and selection of details subtly lean toward presenting the federal action and critiques as legitimate responses to crime rather than critically examining them, suggesting a center-right ideological stance rather than neutral or left-leaning reporting.

Continue Reading

News from the South - Florida News Feed

Deportation Depot proposed for site in northern Florida | Florida

Published

on

www.thecentersquare.com – By Alan Wooten | The Center Square – (The Center Square – ) 2025-08-14 15:11:00


Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has proposed a second immigration detention center, named Deportation Depot, to complement Alligator Alcatraz, the first such facility located in the Everglades. The new facility would be at Baker Correctional Institution near Jacksonville, with 1,300 beds expandable to 2,000, potentially housing undocumented immigrants by Labor Day. DeSantis emphasized the state’s commitment to detaining and deporting illegal immigrants in coordination with federal authorities, prioritizing public safety and the rule of law. The Department of Homeland Security secretary praised the initiative. Construction at Alligator Alcatraz is paused by a judge due to environmental concerns, but it remains operational.

(The Center Square) – Deportation Depot, a second immigration detention facility in Florida, has been proposed by Gov. Ron DeSantis.

The second-term Republican while in Sanderson on Thursday said another location is needed as a complement to Alligator Alcatraz, the first such facility he opened on an isolated airport in the Everglades. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams has put a 14-day stoppage to additional construction there while considering environmental issues.

The 1,300-bed facility at Baker Correctional Institution, about 40 miles from Jacksonville in the northern part of the state, could be expanded to 2,000. It could begin housing people illegally in America on or before Labor Day, according to an estimate from state Emergency Management.

DeSantis said, “Florida’s new Deportation Depot will begin housing, detaining, and processing illegal aliens for deportation, in coordination with federal authorities. With Alligator Alcatraz operating in South Florida and Deportation Depot authorized in North Florida, we are ramping up our capacity to deport more foreign criminals every day. Florida will always stand for the rule of law and put the safety of our citizens first.”

Kristi Noem, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, has praised the Florida initiatives.

The governor said costs would be reimbursed by federal partners.

The judicial order on Alligator Alcatraz at the Dade-Collier Training and Transition Facility about 50 miles from Miami doesn’t stop use of the facility. Rather, it does halt construction. The state and the administration of President Donald Trump are allowed to use the facility and house detainees.

The post Deportation Depot proposed for site in northern Florida | Florida appeared first on www.thecentersquare.com



Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Right

The article primarily reports on the actions and statements of Republican Governor Ron DeSantis regarding the expansion of immigration detention facilities in Florida. It presents factual information about the proposed facility, quotes from DeSantis, and mentions judicial actions without editorializing or using emotionally charged language. However, the focus on a law-and-order approach to immigration, along with the inclusion of supportive comments from a Department of Homeland Security official, subtly aligns the content with a center-right perspective. The article does not explicitly promote this viewpoint but frames the information in a way that reflects the priorities of conservative policymakers, thus suggesting a mild center-right bias through its selection and presentation of facts rather than overt opinion.

Continue Reading

The Center Square

Illinois judge rejects Texas legislature lawsuit over absconding Dems | Illinois

Published

on

www.thecentersquare.com – Bethany Blankley – (The Center Square – ) 2025-08-14 07:40:00


An Illinois judge dismissed Texas’ lawsuit against 33 House Democrats who fled Texas to block legislative proceedings. Filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, the suit sought to enforce Texas-issued quorum warrants in Illinois to compel the Democrats’ return. Judge Scott Larson ruled Illinois courts lack jurisdiction over the case and cannot enforce out-of-state warrants on nonresidents temporarily in Illinois. Texas argued the Full Faith and Credit Clause requires honoring such warrants, but the court disagreed. Over 50 Democrats left Texas to prevent a vote on redistricting, delaying the special session. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott vowed repeated sessions until demands are met.

(The Center Square) – An Illinois judge has rejected a lawsuit filed by the state of Texas against 33 House Democrats who absconded from the state to stop legislative proceedings.

The lawsuit was filed in the Eighth Judicial Circuit Court in Adams County, Illinois. It asked the court to hold the Democrats in contempt and to domesticate Texas warrants, allowing for absconding Democrats to be arrested and brought back to Texas.

It was filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Illinois state Sen. Jil Walker Tracy, R-Quincy, The Center Square reported.

Judge Scott Larson said in a Wednesday ruling that Paxton had “failed to present a legal basis for the court to obtain subject matter jurisdiction over this cause of action, this court is without jurisdiction to grant petitioner’s emergency motion to rule on pleadings.

“This court does not find that it has subject matter jurisdiction, this court does not consider the issues of personal jurisdiction, venue or the merits of the underlying petition for rule to show cause or the request to issue a rule to show cause upon the respondents.”

Larson also said that Illinois courts can’t determine whether “foreign legislators” willfully abscond from their duties and cannot direct Illinois law enforcement to execute civil quorum warrants upon “nonresidents temporarily located in the State of Illinois.”

Paxton and House Speaker Dustin Burrows haven’t issued a statement in response and didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

Texas’ lawsuit disagrees, arguing the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution establishes the doctrine of comity between states. “This Court must give full faith and credit to warrants duly issued by the Texas House of Representatives that compel these civil servants to return to Texas and to their civic responsibilities,” the lawsuit states.

In this case, Texas asked the court to issue an order “to effectuate the Quorum Warrants, just as if they were acts of the State of Illinois,” treating Texas’ Quorum Warrants “as its own civil order.” It also asked the court to “issue a rule to show cause why Respondents should not be held in contempt,” to initiate contempt proceedings against Texas Democrats “for unlawfully seeking to evade Texas’s duly issued Quorum Warrants,” and set a hearing as soon as possible. If it didn’t, “Texas is threatened with immediate and irreparable harm,” the lawsuit argues.

It is unclear if Texas will appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court. If it did, and the court ruled against Texas, Texas could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, The Center Square reported.

More than 50 House Democrats fled the state to avoid being arrested in Texas after breaking quorum and stopping House proceedings during a special session. The House is scheduled to convene on Friday. If the House Democrats don’t show up, then both the House and Senate will adjourn sine die and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott will immediately call a second legislative session.

After blocking a Hill Country relief package that was scheduled for a vote in the House on Tuesday, House Democrats said they may return after the first special session was over, The Center Square reported.

Those “who left the state to prevent a vote on new congressional maps will return to Texas, feeling they have accomplished their mission of killing the first special session, raising awareness and sparking national backlash about the mid-decade redistricting,” the House Democratic Caucus said.

Abbott has said he will call special session after special session until the legislature passes bills on the call for the session.

He also said Texas Democrats “mailing their ‘demands’ … FROM CHICAGO” is “embarrassing.” He told them to “Come back and fight like Texans rather than running and hiding like cowards.”

The post Illinois judge rejects Texas legislature lawsuit over absconding Dems | Illinois appeared first on www.thecentersquare.com



Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Right

The article primarily reports on the legal dispute between Texas Republicans and Illinois Democrats regarding the quorum-busting tactic without overtly endorsing either side. However, the language and framing slightly lean toward a Center-Right perspective by emphasizing the actions and statements of Texas Republican officials, such as Attorney General Ken Paxton and Governor Greg Abbott, and by highlighting the legal rationale supporting Texas’s position. The inclusion of Abbott’s critical remarks about the Democrats and the detailed presentation of the lawsuit’s arguments give more prominence to the Republican viewpoint. While the article remains largely factual and refrains from explicit editorializing, the selection and emphasis of content suggest a modest Center-Right bias rather than a strictly neutral or balanced report.

Continue Reading

Trending