The Morning Sixpack - August 19, 2025
Trump chases Nobel with Putin-Zelensky talks, vows mail vote ban, guts EPA rules, ignores TB in ICE camps, as Newsmax and Gaza burn.
Trump Tries to Broker Putin-Zelenskyy Meeting After “Very Good” White House Talks
Donald Trump says he’s organizing a face-to-face meeting between Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy after hosting the Ukrainian president and European leaders at the White House—but so far, there’s no roadmap for how peace would actually happen.
Fresh off his own sit-down with Putin in Alaska, Trump cast the White House meeting as progress, saying it included discussions on “Security Guarantees for Ukraine” coordinated with Europe and the U.S. Zelenskyy added that part of the talks touched on U.S. weapons sales and drone deals, but the central sticking point—territory—would be left to a direct negotiation with Putin.
This Oval Office encounter was a big shift from Zelenskyy’s disastrous February visit, when the meeting imploded. This time, Zelenskyy struck a warmer tone, even presenting a letter from his wife to Melania Trump. The optics were friendly, but beneath them lurked the reality: nothing concrete was achieved.
“All of us would obviously prefer an immediate ceasefire while we work on a lasting peace,” Trump told reporters. “And maybe something like that could happen. At this moment, it’s not happening.” That’s about as clear as mud when you’re talking about a war still grinding on daily.
Trump may be eyeing a Nobel Prize more than a peace deal, but for Ukraine, every delay costs lives. Zelenskyy is left balancing hope for U.S. backing with skepticism about Trump’s alignment with Putin. Until there’s a real plan, the only thing “very good” is the spin.
If Trump thinks hosting photo-ops counts as diplomacy, maybe he should skip the Nobel Prize nomination and apply for a gig in wedding planning instead.
Source: Semafor
Tuberculosis Is Thriving in Trump’s ICE Camps—and Spilling Into Communities
Tuberculosis, the world’s deadliest infectious disease, is spreading inside ICE detention centers packed with sick, neglected, and disposable human beings.
Reports of detainees testing positive are stacking up coast to coast—from Alaska to California, Arizona to Washington. One immigrant in Arizona died just days after being diagnosed. In Tacoma, detainees were hospitalized while ICE shrugged and dismissed the mounting evidence as “false claims.” Spoiler: the germs don’t care about ICE’s press releases.
Doctors are clear: these outbreaks aren’t inevitable—they’re the product of deliberate neglect. Overcrowding, filth, and health protocols tossed aside create the perfect 19th-century petri dish. “By protecting people in carceral settings,” said Dr. Leonardo Martinez of Boston University, “we’re protecting people outside of carceral settings.” Translation: if ICE won’t contain TB, it doesn’t stay locked up.
The money is there, but the priorities are not. ICE just got $45 billion, yet medical experts doubt a penny of it will land in health care. Instead, private prison giants CoreCivic and Geo Group are cashing in on “unprecedented growth opportunities.” The line item for cleaning up soaked toilet paper in isolation cells? Probably not in the budget.
The consequences are bigger than detainee health. TB becomes resistant to treatment when outbreaks go unchecked, creating strains that ignore medicine entirely. Add Trump’s mass deportation push, flu season, and Medicaid cuts gutting hospitals, and you’ve got the makings of a public health disaster that won’t stop at the detention center gates.
ICE can’t even keep track of its own death toll, but hey, at least the private prison lobby’s shareholders are sleeping well. The rest of us? Not so much.
Source: The American Prospect
Newsmax to Pay $67 Million for 2020 Election Lies
Newsmax’s lies about the 2020 election just bought them a $67 million bill from Dominion Voting Systems.
To dodge a trial that could have dragged its dirty laundry into the spotlight, the right-wing network agreed to pay $27 million upfront and another $40 million over the next two years. Dominion confirmed the settlement but had no interest in rubbing salt in the wound—just a curt, “We are pleased to have settled this matter.” Translation: we’ll take the cash, thanks.
This isn’t Newsmax’s first dance with defamation payouts. It follows Fox News’ $787.5 million settlement with Dominion in 2023, proving that while conspiracy theories may goose ratings, they also bleed balance sheets. Newsmax’s ratings are only about a tenth of Fox’s, which makes this settlement an even bigger hit proportionally.
Still, Newsmax is playing the victim card. The company whined that Delaware Judge Eric Davis, who oversaw the case, was biased and punished them because “our reporting was not always sympathetic to Joe Biden.” Never mind that Davis simply ruled that it was flat-out false to claim the 2020 election was rigged—a pesky little detail called “reality.” Legal experts have praised Davis for being evenhanded, but Newsmax prefers to blame the referee instead of admitting it lost the game.
The network insists it never defamed Dominion and points to a December 2020 “clarification” as proof it practiced “accepted journalistic standards.” Sure—if by standards you mean giving airtime to baseless election fraud claims, then quietly walking it back months later when lawyers started circling. Meanwhile, more lawsuits against pro-Trump media outlets are still in the pipeline, and Smartmatic’s case is waiting in the wings.
Nothing screams “responsible journalism” like paying $67 million in a defamation settlement while pretending you did nothing wrong. At this rate, Newsmax might want to launch a new channel: Bankruptcy TV.
Source: CNN
Trump’s EPA Move Could Blow Up Corporate America’s Legal Shield on Climate
The Trump administration wants to erase the EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases, a move that could unleash chaos for both the environment and corporate America.
Since 2009, the EPA’s “endangerment finding” has been the legal foundation for regulating climate pollution under the Clean Air Act. Tossing it out would kill every federal greenhouse gas standard—what the agency itself calls “one of the largest deregulatory actions in American history.” Businesses may gripe about rules, but many actually want the EPA in charge, because clear national standards give them protection from lawsuits and the predictability they need to invest long-term.
Industry groups are hardly cheering this on. Even the American Petroleum Institute says it supports a federal role in greenhouse gas regulation. Former Bush-era EPA official Jeff Holmstead put it bluntly: “Several of them have opposed it. And I know that a number of companies were trying to persuade the administration not to do it.” Translation: when oil and gas lobbyists are more rational than the White House, you know things are sideways.
Experts warn this could backfire badly on fossil fuel companies. Right now, they often defend themselves in state lawsuits by pointing to federal preemption under the Clean Air Act. If the EPA drops climate regulation, that defense goes up in smoke—opening the door to a flood of new litigation. Even utility trade groups like the Edison Electric Institute are warning that without federal rules, “This would be chaos.”
The kicker? This isn’t about science or economics—it’s ideology. EPA chief Lee Zeldin framed the rollback as “driving a dagger straight into the heart of the climate change religion.” Meanwhile, scientists like Zeke Hausfather say the administration is cherry-picking studies to minimize climate risks. Businesses want stability. Conservatives want a culture war. And the planet? Well, it gets the short end of the exhaust pipe.
Nothing says “America First” like making U.S. companies legally vulnerable while pretending carbon dioxide is just a harmless puff of freedom smoke.
Source: NPR
Trump Vows to Kill Mail-In Voting With an Executive Order He Can’t Legally Enforce
Donald Trump says he’ll “lead a movement” to eliminate mail-in voting—even though the Constitution gives that power to the states, not the president.
In a fresh round of lies, Trump declared he would sign an executive order to scrap mail-in ballots ahead of the 2026 midterms, calling the method “corrupt” and claiming it makes “real democracy” impossible.
“We’re going to start with an executive order that’s being written right now by the best lawyers in the country,” he boasted in the Oval Office, while sitting alongside Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and European leaders.
The problem? No executive order can override state election laws.
Trump has made attacking mail-in ballots central to his post-2020 political playbook, even though he has used the very system he calls fraudulent. Legal experts note he’s ignoring the fact that states—not the White House—control election procedures.
“The framers of the U.S. Constitution took care to keep the main responsibility for administering elections with the states and localities, which are in no way mere ‘agents’ of federal authorities,” said Walter Olson of the Cato Institute.
The bigger picture is Trump’s effort to reshape the voting system in ways that favor Republicans, from pushing redistricting in Texas and Florida to testing the limits of executive authority. His earlier executive orders attempting to rewrite voting rules have already been blocked in court, but he continues to float new ones anyway. Even some Republicans admit these moves are legally flimsy, but Trump’s base eats up the narrative.
And of course, he’s not alone in selling the myth. Trump claimed that Russian President Vladimir Putin told him U.S. elections are rigged because of mail-in ballots and insisted America is the “only country” that uses them—a statement as false as it is absurd. Dozens of democracies around the world rely on mail-in voting. But when the truth doesn’t fit the storyline, Trump just makes up a new one.
Trump railing against mail-in ballots while happily casting his own by mail is the kind of hypocrisy that almost makes you admire the consistency—if the consistency weren’t pure, uncut self-interest.
Source: The Washington Post (gift article)
Hamas Reportedly Backs Ceasefire Plan as Gaza Starvation Mounts
Hamas has reportedly agreed to a Qatari-Egyptian ceasefire proposal that includes releasing Israeli hostages and Palestinian prisoners while allowing aid into Gaza, where hundreds of people have already died of starvation.
The plan mirrors one Israel previously accepted and lays out both an initial truce and a possible path toward ending the war. Mediators rushed to lock it in before a potential Israeli incursion into Gaza City, but the key question remains whether Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will play ball. His far-right finance minister, whose support Netanyahu needs to keep his coalition intact, openly blasted the idea of a partial deal.
Diplomats see the moment as critical. The ceasefire framework is designed not just to stop the immediate bloodshed but to pave the way toward a broader settlement. Yet Netanyahu’s political survival is tied to hardliners who oppose compromise, making it unclear whether this fragile opportunity will hold.
For Gaza’s civilians, the urgency couldn’t be starker. Humanitarian groups report widespread hunger, and Al Jazeera confirmed hundreds of starvation deaths. The ceasefire’s aid provisions are not abstract details—they are literally about keeping people alive long enough to see peace talks succeed.
As ever, the geopolitics are layered with cynicism. On one side, Hamas appears ready to deal. On the other, Netanyahu risks scuttling talks to appease extremists in his coalition. Meanwhile, civilians trapped between these power plays are paying with their lives.
If your “national security strategy” means letting children starve so you don’t lose a coalition partner, maybe it’s time to rethink who’s actually being protected.
Source: Semafor