After Monday’s White House meetings between President Donald Trump, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders, the question remains: is Russian President Vladimir Putin prepared to sit down face-to-face with the Ukrainian leader — and on what terms?

Trump said he had personally called Putin to begin arranging a meeting. The Kremlin, by contrast, offered a more ambiguous response, acknowledging the idea had surfaced but refusing to confirm whether Moscow would accept.

For Putin, any such encounter would carry more weight as theater than diplomacy. ‘Putin would not like to meet Zelensky because he does not even recognize Ukrainian sovereignty,’ Ivana Stradner, Russia expert at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Fox News Digital. ‘The only way that he can be in the room with Zelensky is if Trump facilitates, because Putin wants to show that Russia is equal to the United States… We are giving him that pleasure to feed his population about so-called Russian greatness.’

Ambassador Kurt Volker, who served as U.S. envoy to Ukraine in the first Trump administration, agreed that the Kremlin is unlikely to budge without concessions. ‘Putin is unlikely to accept such a meeting if his pre-conditions are not met,’ he said.

Those conditions are formidable. The Kremlin has already rejected NATO-style security guarantees for Ukraine, while Zelenskyy and European leaders have ruled out surrendering territory. Stradner warned that Putin’s strategy is to test the West’s resolve. ‘Eventually, Putin would challenge Western soldiers on the ground,’ Stradner said. ‘I doubt, as things are today, that any of the Western nations, except maybe the Baltic States or Poland, would be willing to send their kids to die for Ukraine. And Putin knows this.’

The Russian leader, she added, has been emboldened by weak Western responses in the past. She pointed to the 2023 clashes in Kosovo, when ethnic Serbians attacked NATO peacekeepers, injuring 90. ‘What did NATO do? Nothing,’ Stradner said. ‘That was round one. And round two is on the horizon.’

Volker, however, struck a more pragmatic tone. He noted that while Putin may posture at the negotiating table, Russia is grappling with battlefield supply line disruptions and a faltering economy. ‘The real issue will be what happens to Russian supply lines, increasingly targeted by Ukraine, and the Russian economy, which is faltering,’ Volker said. ‘I still expect Putin to go along with a ceasefire in place by the end of the year.’

The White House has tried to box Putin in, with press secretary Karoline Leavitt insisting Tuesday that ‘he has’ agreed to the meeting. ‘Both leaders have expressed a willingness to sit down with each other,’ she said. Still, analysts caution that Moscow’s word is far from binding.

Russia’s foreign minister signaled that a summit was not impossible, but hedged that ‘any contacts involving top officials should be prepared very carefully.’ He also reiterated longstanding Kremlin demands that Kyiv roll back laws Moscow claims limit the rights of Russian speakers.

Maria Snegovaya, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said a meeting would mark a shift but not a breakthrough. ‘So far there’s no clarity, at least in the public space, that the Kremlin is serious about meeting,’ she told Fox News Digital. ‘Even if it still would not necessarily get us closer to an actual agreement, it would signal some willingness toward not trying to avoid provoking or annoying President Trump.’

Snegovaya added that Putin’s calculus is rooted in caution. ‘For over 25 years of his rule, Putin generally avoids attacking a stronger side. He usually goes after the weaker party… Georgia, Syria, Chechnya. I think he would be cautious about going after the will of the European allies, especially if a strong retaliation is promised.’

Putin’s ‘fear’ of Trump may be the last lifeline to end the war, according to Stradner. 

‘He does not trust Europe, he does not respect Europe. When it comes to the US, he despises the United States, but he fears Trump, because Trump is an unpredictable leader, and that’s that’s a nightmare for Putin.’

Israel took out a terrorist during an airstrike earlier this month who was involved in the abduction of an Israeli man on Oct. 7, 2023, authorities said Tuesday. 

The strike, which occurred in Gaza on Aug. 10, killed Jihad Kamal Salem Najjar, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, announced. 

‘A small part of my closure happened today. Thank you to the IDF, the Shin Bet, and everyone who took part in the elimination of one of the terrorists who kidnapped me on October 7,’ Yarden Bibas said in a statement provided by the Hostages and Missing Families Forum. ‘Thanks to you, he will not be able to harm anyone else.

‘Please take care of yourselves, heroes. I am waiting for full closure with the return of my friends David and Ariel, and the remaining 48 hostages,’ he added. 

Najjar was involved in the invasion of the Kibbutz Nir Oz, one of the hardest hit during the deadly Oct. 7 attacks, where Bibas was kidnapped. Bibas’ family was kidnapped separately and was eventually murdered while in captivity. 

He spent 480 days as a hostage before he was released in January. His wife, Shiri, and their two young children, Ariel and Kfir, were killed before their bodies were returned to Israel. 

While in captivity, Bibas was forced to make a hostage film in which he was seen breaking down as Hamas claimed his wife and children had been killed. 

Hamas often uses hostage videos as part of what the IDF calls ‘psychological terror.’

Upon his release, Bibas’ family said that ‘a quarter of our heart has returned to us after 15 long months. … Yarden has returned home, but the home remains incomplete.’

In the aftermath of Hamas’ attack, the Bibas family became a symbol of the terror group’s cruelty. Video footage of Shiri Bibas holding her two red-headed children in her arms went viral across the globe. 

In April, Israel said it had killed Mohammed Hassan Mohammed Awad, a senior commander in the Palestinian Mujahideen terrorist organization and who helped lead ‘several’ attacks on the Nir Oz kibbutz.

The U.S. isn’t interested in open-ended funding for Ukraine amid ongoing peace talks to end the war between Russia and Ukraine, according to the White House. 

President Donald Trump, who ruled out sending U.S. troops on the ground to support Ukraine, is very ‘sensitive to the needs of the American taxpayer,’ according to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. 

‘He made it very clear that we’re not going to continue writing blank checks to fund a war very far away, which is why he came up with a very creative solution to have NATO purchase American weaponry, because it is the best in the world, and then to backfill the needs of the Ukrainian army and the Ukrainian people in their military,’ Leavitt told reporters Tuesday. 

‘So that’s the solution the president has come up with. We’ll continue to see that forward,’ Leavitt said. ‘As for any additional sales, I’ll have to refer you to the Department of Defense.’ 

Congress has passed several pieces of legislation to support Ukraine, totaling at least $175 billion in spending to aid it since February 2022, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

Meanwhile, Trump approved a deal in July allowing European allies to purchase U.S. weapons, like Patriot missile defense systems, for Ukraine. 

The Trump administration’s defense budget proposal did not allocate any funding to purchase weapons for Ukraine, nor did the House defense appropriations bill passed in July. Even so, the Senate’s version of the measure that the upper chamber is slated to consider later in 2025 includes $800 million toward the program.

Leavitt’s comments echo ones made by Vice President JD Vance, who said Aug. 10 following meetings with European officials in the U.K. that he communicated to European leaders that the U.S. is ‘done with the funding of the Ukraine war business,’ and that European allies must take one greater responsibility in ending the conflict.

‘What we said to Europeans is simply, first of all, this is in your neck of the woods, this is in your back door,’ Vance said in an interview with Fox News. ‘You guys have got to step up and take a bigger role in this thing, and if you care so much about this conflict you should be willing to play a more direct and a more substantial way in funding this war yourself.’ 

On Monday, Trump met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and other European leaders at the White House, where they discussed various security measures to prevent Russian aggression against Ukraine again. However, Trump said Tuesday that sending U.S. troops to Ukraine to beef up security in the region was off the table. 

‘The president has definitively stated, U.S. boots will not be on the ground in Ukraine, but we can certainly help in the coordination and perhaps provide other means of security guarantees to our European allies,’ Leavitt said. ‘The president understands security guarantees are crucially important to ensure a lasting peace, and he has directed his national security team to coordinate with our friends in Europe, and also to continue to cooperate and discuss these matters with Ukraine and Russia as well.’ 

House GOP allies of President Donald Trump are nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize amid his ongoing efforts to stop the war between Russia and Ukraine.

Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., is spearheading a letter to the Nobel Committee on Tuesday alongside Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind. 

Their nomination hails Trump as a peacemaker on several fronts, the most recent being his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin and subsequent meeting with European leaders, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

‘We respectfully submit this nomination of President Donald J. Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, in recognition of his concrete contributions to international fraternity, his leadership in reducing conflict and the risk of war, and his commitment to fostering dialogue as a path toward reconciliation,’ Ogles and Stutzman wrote. 

‘His decisive leadership in securing landmark diplomatic agreements, de-escalating global conflicts, and actively pursuing peaceful resolutions to some of the world’s most entrenched disputes has led and continues to lead to a more peaceful world.’

Trump met with Putin in Alaska on Friday, the first time the Russian Federation leader spoke face-to-face with a U.S. president since the pair previously sat down together during Trump’s first term. Both sides described the meeting in positive terms.

It was followed by an extraordinary gathering at the White House on Monday with Zelenskyy and other leaders, where Trump pledged Ukraine would have ‘a lot of help’ for security, while specifying that Europe would be Kyiv’s ‘first line of defense.’

Trump said on Truth Social later that he spoke with Putin at the conclusion of that meeting and ‘began arrangements for a meeting, at a location to be determined, between President Putin and President Zelenskyy.’

House Republicans’ nominating letter noted Trump’s move in ‘hosting a high-stakes summit with President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on August 15, 2025, focused on establishing a path towards a Ukraine ceasefire, prisoner exchanges, humanitarian corridors, and future security arrangements—a significant step in reopening direct, constructive dialogue.’

It also lauded him for ‘hosting a meeting with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and numerous other European leaders on August 18, 2025, to discuss security guarantees for Ukraine and facilitating a discussion between Presidents Zelenskyy and Putin to bring about a just and lasting peace in the region.’

Russia invaded Ukraine in a bid to take over the ex-Soviet territory-turned-sovereign state in February 2022. 

Both countries have been locked in a bloody war that has taken thousands of lives, including heavy civilian casualties in Ukraine from Russia’s attacks on non-military targets.

Trump has argued multiple times that Moscow would not have invaded if he were president at the time.

Putin, along similar but not identical lines, said Friday that he believed there would have been no war if Trump was president at the time.

In addition to dealing with his efforts to resolve the Eastern European conflict, Ogles and Stutzman’s letter also lauded Trump for brokering a historic peace agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan, ‘engaging directly with regional leaders on the Gaza conflict,’ along with peace agreements struck during his first term, such as the Abraham Accords.

‘Because of President Trump’s leadership, more people are alive today, and there are fewer wars in the world than before,’ Ogles told Fox News Digital.

‘He is a champion of America First statesmanship, proving that strength and prudence—not globalism—are the keys to lasting U.S. foreign policy. No other world leader can claim to have halted wars and begun resolving centuries-old disputes.’

Stutzman, calling Trump ‘the president of peace,’ added, ‘There is no one on the planet more deserving of this year’s Nobel Prize and multiple world leaders have recognized that.’

One Senate Republican has crafted a blueprint for how conservatives can take on Democrats in the courts and win.

Before he was in Washington, D.C., Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo. served as Missouri’s attorney general during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. And during that time, he filed lawsuit after lawsuit challenging the Biden administration, Dr. Anthony Fauci and even going so far as to sue China.

And more often than not, be it through uncovering discrepancies during the discovery process or winning multibillion-dollar settlements, Schmitt was mostly successful in challenging Democratic ‘lawfare.’

‘The fact of the matter is, what our fights were, were about restoring individual liberty and pulling back the expanse of government,’ Schmitt told Fox News Digital in an interview. ‘What the Left is trying to do now with their lawfare machine was, number one, they’re trying to put their opponents in jail, but then also to defend the expanse of government, to defend the administrative state. And I think if we have the right arguments, we can win.’

Schmitt detailed how to secure those winning arguments through his own experiences in his latest book ‘The Last Line of Defense: How to Beat the Left in Court.’

He described the book as ‘a field manual from the front lines of the battles that were fought against the left-wing law machine.’ Indeed, Schmitt outlined a guide for attorneys general across the country to take on challenges at all levels, from local to federal.

‘Our playbook really is… really in response to what their playbook was, to create a manufactured emergency, a real or manufactured emergency, to aggregate power, to exercise it in ways that never were imagined to other folks who disagree and silence dissent,’ Schmitt said. ‘That’s what they were really trying to do.’

In some cases, he went beyond the country’s borders and sued a foreign country, as Schmitt did to China. He argued in the book that the Chinese Communist Party had withheld information on the COVID-19 virus, and was actively hoarding high-quality personal protective equipment (PPE) while producing and selling lower-quality PPE for the rest of the world. That case resulted in an eventual $24 billion judgment earlier this year.

From there, Schmitt challenged former President Joe Biden’s student loan debt cancellation plan by focusing his case on a local student loan servicing company, a plan that was ultimately blocked by the Supreme Court just months into Schmitt’s first year as a lawmaker in 2023.

Through it all, the pandemic was the ‘inflection point,’ Schmitt said, and his biggest target became Fauci.

He got an opportunity to depose Fauci, who served as the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and medical advisor to Biden, as part of his lawsuit taking on censorship and suppression by social media platforms like Facebook.

‘He wanted to silence anybody who talked about it being a lab leak,’ Schmitt said. ‘Which, of course, we know is that’s exactly what it was now. It wasn’t some bat mating with a penguin, you know, this was actually in the Wuhan Institute of Virology is where this thing came from.’

Schmitt, who is a fan of both Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and the late Justice Antonin Scalia — particularly Scalia’s usage of originalism, or interpreting the Constitution as it was written rather than as a living document — noted in the book that there has been a ‘complete shift’ in the courts.

In particular, conservative-leaning justices have the majority on the Supreme Court, and courts across the country are being filled, albeit slowly, with President Donald Trump’s picks.

When asked if he was at all concerned about partisan politicking coming to the bench, Schmitt countered that courts are returning to a legal system that had been ‘disrupted by the progressive era, beginning with Woodrow Wilson and the rise of the administrative state, FDR, who threatened to pack the court.’

‘The Constitution means exactly what it says, nothing more, nothing less, just like our laws,’ he said. ‘They mean what they say, nothing more, nothing less.’ 

‘I don’t want a judge to necessarily agree with my politics,’ he continued. ‘I just want a judge to adhere to the Constitution.’

A conservative think tank that played a key role in shaping President Donald Trump’s ‘one big, beautiful bill’ is circulating a new roadmap of recommendations for Republicans’ second act.

The Economic Policy Innovation Center, which styles itself as ‘EPIC For America,’ has been circulating a new memo with key congressional GOP figures in recent days, a source familiar with the group’s plans told Fox News Digital.

The memo, which was obtained by Fox News Digital, advises lawmakers to broadly push for further Medicaid and regulatory reforms, crack down on federal dollars for government pensions and student loans, and use fiscal policy to extend conservative goals on abortion and transgender treatment.

Passing Trump’s massive agenda bill despite razor-thin majorities in the House and Senate was a major victory for Republican leaders. EPIC, which hails the bill as a success, argues that continued reforms are needed for meaningful fiscal reform.

‘Unfortunately, even with the victories for the American people in the OBBB, our work is far from done. We must rebuild an economy that truly works for every American, while protecting the nation’s financial foundation to ensure lasting resilience,’ the memo said.

‘The federal government is rapidly running out of fiscal space. Maintaining sufficient fiscal space is critical in order to respond appropriately to a crisis. Without space between the fiscal limit and the current level of debt, elected officials will not have room to maneuver in the event of war, a natural disaster, or a recession.’

On Medicaid, the memo advises further cuts to the cost-sharing burden on the federal government – known as the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) – for ‘large, wealthy states’ as well as Washington, D.C.

FMAP refers to the rate at which the federal government matches state Medicaid payments, which is currently 50%.

The memo calls to ‘end the special Medicaid subsidy FMAP treatment’ for D.C., whose minimum is 70%.

Republicans’ first budget reconciliation bill reduced certain FMAP expansions permitted under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), including for emergency care for states that provide Medicaid coverage to illegal immigrants.

In turn, EPIC advises lawmakers to enhance personal and employer-based healthcare, like Individual Coverage Health Reimbursement Arrangements (ICHRAs) and Health Savings Accounts (HSAs).

Medicaid cuts were one of the largest sticking points during talks for the initial bill and will likely be just as politically fraught for Republicans in the second round. Meanwhile, Democrats have been using those reforms as a political cudgel, accusing the GOP of trying to take healthcare from millions of Americans. 

But conservatives have viewed Medicaid as fraught with waste, fraud, and abuse – insisting their reforms better protect the program for vulnerable people who truly need it.

The memo also advises congressional Republicans to use the budget reconciliation process to ‘reform federal bureaucrat compensation and retirement’ and ‘eliminate public sector student loan forgiveness,’ among other goals.

On the social conservative policy front, EPIC appears to view an extension of the ban on taxpayer funds to abortion providers as critical to a second reconciliation bill.

The first bill was viewed as a victory for pro-life advocates in its ban on Medicaid funds for large healthcare providers that perform abortions, which would affect Planned Parenthood and other similar organizations. But that ban is only effective for a year.

In a section titled ‘Protect Life and American Values,’ EPIC urges lawmakers to ‘extend the prohibition of taxpayer funding for big abortion providers’ as well as block Medicaid funds for gender transition care.

It also calls on lawmakers to ‘invest in election security’ and ‘impose an excise tax on higher education institutions that allow males to participate in women’s sports.’

EPIC was founded by Paul Winfree, who served as director of budget policy during the first Trump administration.

The group also has close ties to Capitol Hill, which it flexed during talks for Trump’s first agenda bill by both recommending policy initiatives and tailoring its advice through the various steps of the budget reconciliation process.

Budget reconciliation, which can be used three times during a given congressional term, allows the party in power to enact broad fiscal policy changes while sidelining the opposition – in this case, Democrats – by lowering the Senate’s threshold for passage from 60 votes to 51.

Brittany Madni, EPIC executive vice president and a former congressional aide, confirmed the memo’s veracity to Fox News Digital. She said the group would use the same ‘playbook’ it did during the first reconciliation process.

She said EPIC is looking to offer ‘an initial suggestion to lawmakers on what to target, and is readying to work with Republicans through the various steps of the process as details change and evolve.’

‘Mandatory spending reform is an essential target for actual fiscal change in order to stave off a debt spiral. This is why a second reconciliation bill building on the wins in the OBBB is important,’ Madni said.

Two sources told Fox News Digital that the group’s efforts so far have included a staff-level briefing with the Republican Study Committee (RSC), a 189-member-strong House GOP group that serves as its own de facto think tank for the Republican conference.

Many of the aforementioned proposals were discussed at that meeting, Fox News Digital was told, with EPIC being invited to speak as part of the RSC’s new initiative to workshop a second reconciliation bill.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has already publicly stated his goal of passing further reconciliation bills. But what a second bill would look like is still unclear.