Federal workers reportedly got another email Friday night asking them to document their weekly activities — though so far this time, there's been no explicit threat from Elon Musk they'll lose their jobs if they don't reply.
Why it matters: The Musk-led campaign to slash the federal workforce is accelerating, and the emails may end up being another way to justify cutting thousands of jobs.
Catch up quick: NPR and Government Executive reported the new emails went out late Friday night, asking workers to send five bullet points documenting their activities by 11:59 p.m. ET Monday night.
The emails do not mention any consequences for failing to respond.
"The President has made it clear that this is mandatory for the executive branch," Musk posted on X Saturday morning.
Flashback: A week ago, federal workers got a similar email, with a warning from Musk posted to X that failing to respond would be considered a resignation.
The White House later clarified that responses were actually entirely voluntary, and many federal agencies told their employees not to answer.
About half the federal workforce ultimately responded. Unions representing large chunks of that workforce sued, alleging the emails were illegal and that the Office of Personnel Management didn't have the authority to fire anyone who didn't answer.
President Trump later said those who didn't answer were "on the bubble."
Musk, for his part, described the email as a test to see if people were actually alive and working.
What we're watching: How agencies actually respond this time, and whether they order their employees to comply or not.
The emails may have a different urgency now, given White House directives to agencies this week to prepare large-scale layoffs by March 13.
The Oval Office shouting match Friday was shocking. But it wasn't too surprising to anyone close to President Trump or Vice President Vance.
Why it matters: Privately, Trump sees Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as a pro-Biden, ungrateful lightweight destined to lose to Russia.
And Trump advisers believe Zelensky sees Trump as a pro-Putin, delusional fool destined to make him lose to Russia.
To Trump's team, it was three strikes — and now officially out of favor — for Zelensky. In their eyes, Zelensky already had two strikes against him when he sat down with Trump and Vance.
That was the backdrop for a conversation that would become perhaps the most epic televised foreign policy row in history — an argument that rattled Europe and vividly illustrated a sharp turn in U.S. foreign policy toward Russia.
It began with what Trump's team saw as Strike 3 against Zelensky: He disagreed publicly with Vance, who accused Zelensky of trying to "litigate" his case before the media.
Vance said Zelensky didn't show enough thanks to the U.S. for funding Ukraine's defense — or to Trump for trying to bring peace.
After a tense nine-minute exchange, it ended with Trump stopping the 50-minute meeting and essentially showing Zelensky the door.
Strike 2 came just before Friday's meeting, when Zelensky arrived at the White House without a suit or jacket, as requested. It was perceived by White House staffers as disrespectful.
Strike 1, as first reported by Axios, came Feb. 15, when Zelensky publicly trashed a proposed mineral rights deal with Ukraine that he privately had discussed the day before in Munich with Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
The plan Friday was for Zelensky to sign a new version of the deal as part of a plan to end the war. That didn't happen.
The big picture: At the heart of the discord is Trump's view of the conflict, which continues to challenge the United States' long-held alliances in Europe.
Trump sees geopolitics in terms of negotiations between powerful countries and big personalities. Russian President Vladimir Putin is a coequal in this paradigm. Zelensky — the leader of a smaller country surviving thanks to American largesse — isn't.
Trump also approaches politics like a business deal or, as a former casino owner, as a type of poker. In one telling moment, he told Zelensky he had a bad hand without the U.S.
"I'm not playing cards. I'm very serious," Zelensky said. Trump shot back: "You're playing cards. You're gambling with the lives of millions of people."
Quick to temper and desiring of flattery, Trump demands a high degree of obeisance from supplicants. Zelensky didn't show that — and Vance was quick to try to put him in his place.
Trump's expectation of deference from Zelensky is particularly high because of the massive aid the U.S. has sent to Ukraine (an amount Trump inflates). The two have had a fraught relationship since 2019, when Trump was impeached for trying to leverage Zelensky for political gain against Joe Biden.
Vance has long had antipathy for Zelensky and funding Ukraine's fight against Russia's invasion. In his 2022 Senate race in Ohio, Vance ran on a platform of ending Ukraine aid.
During the presidential election, Zelensky visited a Pennsylvania arms factory and signed missiles with President Biden. Vance cited that episode Friday, accusing Zelensky of "campaigning with the opposition."
Between the lines: Democrats and European allies, who were far more aligned with Biden than Trump, were aghast at the Oval Office spectacle and at how Trump seemed to be shrugging off Putin's aggression against Ukraine.
But Trump's close Republican allies loved the tag-teaming against Zelensky. White House officials said a message was sent.
Zelensky "has refused to accept that people are tired of funding this war, and that there is a new sheriff in town," a senior White House adviser said. "He did not come in with that understanding of reality."
What they're saying: Critics say Trump acted more like a crime figure than a president or law enforcement officer.
"Trump runs the White House like a mob boss. He looks at Russia and China like they're other mob families; he sees Zelensky as a nobody," said Trump critic Lev Parnas, who was Trump's Ukraine fixer during the president's first term, spent time in prison afterward, then penned a tell-all book and a documentary.
"He thinks [Zelensky] should just beg and then shut up," Parnas said.
On Friday, "the wildcard was Vance," Parnas added. "I think [Zelensky] would've swallowed whatever Trump was gonna offer, but JD Vance set it off. ... He never liked Zelensky."
Vance advisers say he hadn't plotted to blow up the negotiations, though one privately acknowledged he's "prone to think Zelensky is a liar."
The meeting was largely uneventful until Zelensky addressed Vance directly and asked how diplomacy would work with a lying killer like Putin.
"No one expected Zelensky to walk in there and act like such a petulant child, constantly frowning and shaking his head and DJT and JD had had enough," one Republican close to the administration told Axios via text.
"I'm not sure this is salvageable," the senior White House adviser summed up. "Three strikes and you're out."
Zoom in: Inside the White House, there was a feeling of unease among Trump advisers Friday when they saw Zelensky arrive without a business suit or a blazer. He was dressed instead in a three-button, skintight, long-sleeved black athletic shirt.
"Wow look, you're all dressed up today," Trump said in a seemingly friendly way that advisers say masked annoyance.
Brian Glenn, a conservative reporter and boyfriend of Trump ally Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), seemed to voice the attitude of Trump's team in the Oval Office when he asked Zelensky, "Why don't you wear a suit? … Do you own a suit?" Vance laughed out loud.
"I will wear a [suit] after this war will finish," Zelensky said. "Maybe something like yours. Maybe something better ... maybe something cheaper."
After Trump canceled a lunch and press conference that was planned after the Oval Office meeting, Zelensky left the White House.
Later he posted on X, thanking "POTUS, Congress and the American people" for the visit.
That was interpreted differently by members of the administration. Some thought he was tweaking Vance for having scolded Zelensky. Others thought Zelensky was bending a knee.
What we're watching: Whether Trump and Zelensky can get back to the negotiating table and arrive at a peace deal for Ukraine. If not, Friday's clash could go down in U.S. foreign policy history as even more significant than it already appears.
Nearly 30% of parents of kids ages 0-8 say their children have used AI for learning, according to new research from Common Sense Media.
Why it matters: Even the youngest of children are experimenting with a rapidly changing technology that could reshape their learning and critical thinking skills in unknown ways.
By the numbers: One in four parents of kids ages 0-8 told Common Sense their children are learning critical thinking skills from using AI.
39% of parents said their kids use AI to "learn about school-related material," while only 8% said they use AI to "learn about AI."
For older children (ages 5-8) nearly 40% of parents said their child has used an app or a device with AI to learn.
24% of children use AI for "creative content," like writing short stories or making art, according to their parents.
Common Sense surveyed 1578 parents of children 8 years old or younger last August.
Yes, but: Many parents said they didn't see a problem with their kids' AI use.
More than half (61%) of parents of kids ages 0-8 said their kids' use of AI had no impact on their critical thinking skills.
60% said there was no impact on their child's well-being.
20% said the impact on their child's creativity was "mostly positive."
"The big findings around AI were really the most notable for older kids (ages 5-8)," Supreet Mann, director of research at Common Sense Media, told Axios.
There were some parents of kids younger than five who reported that their children had used AI for learning and in other contexts, but "it's a pretty small percentage of the overall population," Mann said.
Reality check: You're supposed to be 13 years old or older to use OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and Meta AI. To use Anthropic's Claude, you're supposed to be 18 or older.
What they're saying: "Our youngest children are on the front lines of an unprecedented digital transformation," said James P. Steyer, founder and CEO of Common Sense.
"Addressing the impact of AI on the next generation is one of the most pressing issues of our time," Miriam Vogel, president and CEO of EqualAI, told Axios in an email. "Yet we are insufficiently developing effective approaches to equip young people for a world where they are both using and profoundly affected by AI."
EqualAI just launched a new AI Literacy Initiative to help people navigate AI technologies in their professional and personal lives.
Between the lines: This is the fifth year that Common Sense Media has released its report on media use for kids ages 0-8, but the first time the report has covered AI.
Hours of screen time per day for kids 0-8 per day has remained stable, but children are watching less live television and cable and more time short videos on TikTok, Instagram and YouTube.
On average, kids 0-8 spent 14 minutes a day watching short-form videos, according to their parents.
President Trump will speak at the first-ever White House Crypto Summit next Friday.
Why it matters: Trump has promised to be America's "first crypto president," and said Feb. 19 that he's "committed to making America the crypto capital."
Zoom in: The White House says summit attendees will include prominent crypto founders, CEOs and investors.
The summit will be chaired by White House A.I. & Crypto Czar David Sacks, and run by Bo Hines, executive director of the President's Working Group on Digital Assets.
The intrigue: The announcement comes amid a global sell-off in cryptocurrencies, which has some investors fearing the market's "Trump bump" may be over.
Bitcoin is off 22% from the all-time high it set the day Trump was inaugurated.
The global market capitalization of all cryptocurrencies combined is down 13% in just the last week, per CoinGecko data.
Left: Pro-Trump commentator Rogan O'Handley, aka DC Draino, holds up a binder of Epstein-related documents at the White House. Right: Andrew Tate lands at Fort Lauderdale airport. Photos: Saul Loeb/AFP; Alon Skuy via Getty Images
President Trump's online base is splintering over the administration's handling of two major news stories related to sex trafficking, which converged this week in dramatic fashion.
Why it matters: The online MAGA universe is diverse, powerful, and extremely volatile. With a mix of ultra Trump loyalists and conservative ideologues, infighting is inevitable — and often explosive.
That's become especially true on issues related to sex trafficking, which was at the heart of the #Pizzagate and QAnon conspiracy theories that helped grow Trump's online base.
What's happening: On Fox News Wednesday night, Attorney General Pam Bondi promised to declassify and release secret documents related to Jeffrey Epstein, the deceased sex trafficker whose client list implicated global elites.
On Thursday, Bondi and FBI director Kash Patel hosted pro-Trump influencers at the White House and gave them a sneak peek of the documents in binders titled, "The Epstein Files: Phase 1."
The influencers were then photographed by White House press holding up the binders, the contents of which had not yet been publicly released. Some of them were pictured smiling and laughing.
Later that evening, the Justice Department released 200 pages of documents mostly consisting of recycled Epstein flight logs and contact information that had long been in the public domain.
The online reaction was furious: Prominent Trump supporters accused Bondi and the influencers of staging a PR stunt and failing to release any new information.
To make matters worse, the GOP-controlled House Judiciary Committee posted a link on X purporting to hold the "Epstein files." It instead redirected users to a video of Rick Astley singing "Never Gonna Give You Up" — a "Rickroll" prank from the 2000s.
Bondi then released a letter alleging that the FBI's New York field office was withholding thousands of pages of Epstein documents, and called for them to be turned over by Friday at 8 am ET.
Screenshot via X. Far-right influencer Laura Loomer calls for Bondi's resignation.
Zoom in: As the chaos over the Epstein files was unfurling, Romania suddenly lifted travel restrictions on Andrew and Tristan Tate, a pair of far-right influencers who were awaiting trial on human trafficking charges.
The British-American Tate brothers — self-proclaimed misogynists who support Trump and have a massive global audience of young men — have also been accused of rape and tax evasion in the U.K.
The Financial Times reported that Trump officials had pressured Romanian authorities to lift the travel ban, though Trump himself denied any knowledge of the case Thursday.
The Tate brothers' arrival at Fort Lauderdale airport in Florida, where they proclaimed their innocence, set the stage for another intra-MAGA feud between mainstream conservatives and hardline provocateurs.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said the Tate brothers were not welcome in his state, and that his attorney general would investigate whether any of their alleged crimes trigger Florida jurisdiction.
"That these moral monsters have been welcomed to our shores with open arms is appalling and shameful," conservative columnist Josh Hammer wrote in a Newsweek piece shared by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.).
Between the lines: Backlash against Trump is brewing among segments of his base that are not traditionally political — but have an intense interest in the Tate and Epstein sagas.
"If I'm gonna be fair these questions needs to be asked today. Why is the release of the Epstein list always a shit show?" tweeted Barstool Sports founder Dave Portnoy.
"What's the point of booting out illegals and criminals while somehow becoming a safe haven for the Tate brothers?"
President Trump's clash with legacy media, his spat with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and influence over the House GOP's budget deal were among the biggest news events out of his administration this week.
Here's our recap of key developments the past week:
White House takes over press pool coverage
The White House upended decades-old protocols Tuesday by announcing it would decide which news outlets can access the president at meetings and events when space is limited, also known as the press pool.
Historically, the independent White House Correspondents' Association has determined which outlets make up the pool, ensuring that outlets with diverse perspectives have access to the president.
The move "suggests the government will choose the journalists who cover the president," Eugene Daniels, president of the WHCA and Politico reporter, said in a statement. (The WHCA said Wednesday it will no longer coordinate pool coverage.)
Zoom out: The Associated Press is suing White House officials for banning its reporters from the Oval Office and Air Force One over its use of Gulf of Mexico instead of Trump's preferred Gulf of America.
Since AP mentioned its role in the press pool 52 times in its initial 18-page lawsuit, the White House decided to take over the function of picking the outlets in it, one White House adviser told Axios' Marc Caputo.
Canada and Mexico tariffs still on
The White House remains committed to imposing 25% tariffs on Canadian and Mexican imports next week, despite earlier comments from Trump that hinted at a possible delay.
A 10% tariff took effect on Feb. 4 for China, with another 10% on the way March 4, Axios reported.
Tariffs for Canada and Mexico, at 25%, are delayed until March 4, and reciprocal tariffs are set to take effect April 2.
"The tariffs could jolt the global trading system and stoke tensions with allies and adversaries," Axios' Courtenay Brown writes.
Speaker Mike Johnson's Trump-backed budget bill narrowly cleared the House 217-215 on Tuesday, overcoming a brief Republican rebellion earlier in the day.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), a fiscal hawk, cast the lone GOP dissenting vote, while Democrats united in opposition.
The passage sets the stage for advancing Trump's domestic policy agenda, including tax cuts, border security measures and potential energy cuts.
Federal workers who failed to respond to an emailed request last weekend to report their progress "are on the bubble," Trump said during his first Cabinet meeting this term on Wednesday. He added, "Maybe they're gonna be gone." Federal workers had been warned their failure to respond to his email would be treated as a resignation.
The email rattled D.C. throughout the week and showed a misalignment between the administration, government agency heads and Cabinet officials.
Musk on Wednesday described the email, which many agency heads told their staff to ignore, as a "pulse check review."
Workers later claimed in a lawsuit filed and amended on their behalf that Musk's DOGE doesn't have the power to make good on the threat.
What to watch: The White House has already directed federal agencies to plan for large-scale layoffs in its promise to reduce federal bureaucracy and return power to the states, Axios' Emily Peck writes.
Trump and Zelensky meet at the White House
Zelensky made his first visit to the White House Friday since President Trump took office. The meeting's purpose was to improve relations and get a minerals deal signed, after a public squabble last week between the two leaders.
But it devolved into a public shouting match including a tense exchange where Vice President Vance accused Zelensky of disrespecting Trump by "trying to litigate" U.S. policy on Ukraine in front of the media.
Throughout the exchange, Zelensky became visibly uncomfortable and upset. He pointed out that Vance hadn't been to war-torn Ukraine, conceding that every country in their situation has problems.
Zoom out: The minerals deal would allow the U.S. to tap into Ukraine's minerals and other natural resources. It would also establish a joint fund for rebuilding Ukraine.
As of Friday afternoon, it wasn't signed.
"He can come back when he is ready for Peace," Trump wrote on Truth Social.
"I am not sure we did something bad," he said in an interview with Bret Baier Friday evening.
Why it matters: The earlier shouting match in front of the cameras led to the explosion of a meeting between the two leaders, with Trump asking Zelensky to leave the White House.
It also took off the table, for now, the U.S.-Ukraine minerals agreement that was supposed to be signed on Friday.
The divide between the U.S. and Ukrainian leaders will likely lead to more changes in the Trump administration's policy towards Ukraine.
A U.S. official said Trump is considering several retaliatory steps, including stopping military assistance to Ukraine.
What they're saying: "I respect president Trump and the American people, but we have to be very honest and direct to understand each other," Zelensky said when asked whether he regrets the exchange with Trump and Vance.
The Ukrainian did say he thinks this discussion would have been better if it hadn't take place in front of the cameras, per FOX News Channel's Special Report.
"It was not good," he said. "I think this kind of spat is not good for both sides."
Zelensky stressed that he thinks his relationship with Trump can be salvaged.
The other side: Shortly before Zelensky's interview, Trump told reporters his meeting with Zelensky "didn't work out exactly great from his standpoint."
"He very much overplayed his hand," Trump added.
He claimed while he wants to get peace, Zelensky "is looking to go on and fight, fight, fight...he's gotta say I want to make peace."
A White House official told Axios Zelensky's interview on Fox was insufficient. "He keeps insisting on security guarantees on this economic deal and we've made clear that won't be part of this," the official said
In his interview, Zelensky said Ukraine wants peace and agreed to hold negotiations on ending the war. He also stressed this was the reason he visited the White House.
"But I can't change Ukrainian attitude towards Russia. They are killers for us. It doesn't mean we don't want peace. But we want [the U.S.] to recognize reality," he said.
While Trump said he wants a ceasefire as soon as possible, Zelensky said a ceasefire alone without security guarantees for Ukraine won't work.
"My people want to hear the U.S. is on our side," he said.
Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional details.
President Trump's explosive Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky shocked hawkish Republican lawmakers and led one prominent GOP backer of Ukraine to suggest that Zelensky should resign.
Why it matters: The meeting angered Democrats, who were horrified by Trump and Vice President Vance's conduct. It offended some Republicans, with most of them reserving their ire for Zelensky.
Zelesnky "has made it almost impossible to sell to the American people that he's a good investment."
Other Republicans shared their concern about the long-term fallout of the short-tempered meeting.
Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), in a text to Axios, said Friday was "a bad day for America's foreign policy."
"Ukraine wants independence, free markets and rule of law. It wants to be part of the West. Russia hates us and our Western values. We should be clear that we stand for freedom," he said.
Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), in a post on X, called the meeting "a disaster — especially for Ukraine," adding, "Sadly, the only winner of today is Vladimir Putin.
What they are saying: The most heated GOP criticism targeted Zelensky, while some argued the meeting was a loss for both countries.
"I don't know if Zelensky can ever get where you want to go with the United States. Either he dramatically changes, or you need to get someone new," Graham said on Fox News.
He described Zelensky as having "a chip on his shoulder." "I don't know if you can repair the damage. I don't know if you can ever do a deal with Zelensky anymore," he added, encouraging Zelensky to apologize.
The other side: Democrats were nearly unanimous in their condemnation of Trump's and Vance's behavior.
"Trump and Vance are doing Putin's dirty work," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y) said on X. "Senate Democrats will never stop fighting for freedom and democracy."
"Trump and Vance tag teamed Zelensky," said Rep. Chuy Garcia (D-Ill.). "Truly shameful conduct that the world is seeing. Embarrassing."
What happened: The press conference with Trump, Zelensky, Vance and other leaders began with statements and questions from reporters — but devolved into a shouting match.
Vance accused Zelensky of being disrespectful and ungrateful for U.S. support.
Trump released a statement afterward, saying that he had determined Zelensky is "not ready for Peace if America is involved." Lunch and a joint press conference between the two leaders were canceled.
Zelensky departed the White House about two and a half hours after he arrived, and a highly anticipated minerals deal was not signed.
Democratic lawmakers, united in their fury over DOGE, are diverging on how to use President Trump's address to Congress next week as the effective launchpad for Resistance 2.0.
Why it matters: It's a question that has repeatedly splintered party members when faced with inflammatory speecheson Capitol Hill: Should they show up and protest from within, or boycott and counterprogram on the outside?
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) want members to attend and bring special guests who have been negatively affected by the administration.
"We ask that House Democrats attending the Joint Address bring a guest who has been harmed by the Trump administration's early actions," the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee (DPCC) told congressional offices in a memo obtained by Axios.
Zoom in: However, there are lawmakers in the House and Senate who believe a different form of resistance — nonparticipation — may be a better way to meet the moment.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) told Axios he is leaning against attending the speech because "when Trump does it, it's not a serious event."
"We want to make [clear] that things are not business as usual. Things are falling apart," said Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.), a DPCC co-chair who is undecided on attending.
What we're hearing: Other lawmakers told Axios their plans fell through or they will take their spouses, as is common.
Rep. Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.), Jeffries' top Democrat on the House Administration Committee, said he committed weeks ago to give his plus-one to a Republican colleague.
"I hadn't really given much thought to bringing someone, partly out of my frustration with the president," Morelle told Axios.
Zoom out: Democrats have been debating the best method to fight their way out of the political wilderness. Initially, party leadership declined to respond in kind to Trump's flood-the-zone strategy.
Leaders are trying to balance those two approaches by urging Democrats to stay laser-focused on hitting Musk and GOP spending cuts — including with Trump's speech.
"It is more important than ever that House Democrats tune out the stream of chaos and ... communicate with precision on the issues that matter," said the DPCC memo.
By the numbers: Nearly a dozen House and Senate Democrats told Axios they are either leaning against attending the speech or undecided.
Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) all declined to commit to attending.
So did Reps. Don Beyer (D-Va.), Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) and Mark DeSaulnier (D-Calif.).
"As of now, I don't have any reason to go," said Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas). "I know what he's going to say — he's going to get up there, he's going to lie, he's going to praise [Russian President Vladimir] Putin and all kinds of other nonsense."
The other side: "I know that many of my colleagues are eager to sit in and express our profound opposition to everything going on," said Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.).
"It is far better to push back inside the room, I think, than outside."
A parade of European leaders issued statements of solidarity with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky after his stunning confrontation with President Trump in the Oval Office on Friday.
Why it matters: Trump has plunged the U.S. into a state of unprecedented isolation on the world stage. Ukraine's fate is deeply uncertain, as the country is now at risk of losing its most important partner in the three-year fight against Russia's invasion.
What's happening: Trump's team asked Zelensky to leave the White House after a meeting to sign a rare minerals deal devolved into an extraordinary screaming match in front of TV cameras.
"He disrespected the United States of America in its cherished Oval Office. He can come back when he is ready for Peace," Trump wrote on Truth Social.
The verbal clash was triggered when Zelensky asked Vice President Vance "what kind of diplomacy" he envisioned with Vladimir Putin, who has repeatedly violated ceasefires since first occupying Ukraine in 2014.
Vance, who has long been critical of U.S. support for Ukraine, accused Zelensky of being disrespectful and ungrateful.
Zelensky shot back that the U.S. could one day feel threatened by Russia — seemingly enraging Trump, who said the Ukrainian leader was "gambling with World War III."
"What you're doing is very disrespectful to the country, this country, that's backed you," Trump said, raising his voice as the Ukrainian ambassador appeared to bury her head in her hands.
How it's playing: The confrontation with Zelensky exhilarated not only Trump's "America First" base, but Kremlin officials watching closely from Moscow.
"The insolent pig finally got a proper slap down in the Oval Office. And Trump is right: The Kiev regime is 'gambling with WWIII,'" tweeted Dmitry Medvedev, former Russian president and prime minister.
"How Trump and Vance restrained themselves and didn't punch this scumbag is a miracle of endurance," Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova wrote on Telegram.
What they're saying: European leaders, who are increasingly coming to terms with Trump's hostile approach toward the transatlantic alliance, moved swiftly to defend Zelensky with a coordinated message of support.
"Your dignity honors the bravery of the Ukrainian people. Be strong, be brave, be fearless. You are never alone, dear President Zelensky," tweeted European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
Zelensky — whom Vance accused of not saying "thank you" during his White House visit — individually thanked each European leader who expressed solidarity with Ukraine.
Between the lines: The Zelensky debacle is likely to be remembered as an inflection point for Europe, with little doubt that Trump will continue undermining U.S. alliances in the years ahead.
"We will step up our support to Ukraine so that they can continue to fight back the aggressor," tweeted the EU's top diplomat Kaja Kallas, who has clashed repeatedly with Trump officials in recent weeks.
"Today, it became clear that the free world needs a new leader. It's up to us, Europeans, to take this challenge."
President Trump and his top advisers huddled in the Oval Office after the on-camera shouting match with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Friday before Trump came to a decision: Zelensky had to go.
Behind the scenes: The delegation from Kyiv waited in another room for about an hour, still hoping to sign the minerals deal that prompted Zelensky's trip and to salvage the visit. Trump and Zelensky were still scheduled to have lunch and hold a joint press conference.
Then Secretary of State Marco Rubio and national security adviser Mike Waltz "went out of the Oval Office, walked to where Zelensky was sitting, and told him to leave," a senior White House official tells Axios.
The visit was over without a minerals deal, and without any assurances of ongoing U.S. support.
Trump followed up with a Truth Social post saying Zelensky "disrespected the United States of America in its cherished Oval Office. He can come back when he is ready for Peace."
Between the lines: The White House official insisted the explosion in the meeting was not a pre-meditated ambush. "Our plan was to sign the minerals deal and get into this economic partnership and move towards peace."
The shouting match began after Vice President Vance answered a reporter's question by insisting that diplomacy with Russia was the only path to peace.
An exasperated Zelensky replied with a monologue about how Putin violated previous agreements. "What diplomacy are you talking about JD?" he asked.
Vance and Trump both accused Zelensky of disrespect, and Zelensky repeatedly tried to cut in as the rhetoric from the president and VP grew more hostile, with Trump at one point accusing Zelensky of "gambling with World War III."
U.S. allies swiftly rallied around Zelensky after the meeting, and Democrats on the Hill denounced Trump for bullying Ukraine's wartime leader.
But Trump's aides put the blame squarely on Zelensky. "He could have just acknowledged the vice president's remarks and moved on, but he couldn't bring himself to do it," the White House official said.
Whether the fracas was Zelensky's fault or not, the fallout for Ukraine could be severe. Zelensky has acknowledged just how dependent his military is on further U.S. aid, which remains highly uncertain.
And Trump was not entirely wrong when he repeatedly told Zelensky he didn't "have the cards" to shape the outcome of the war without U.S. support.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who met Zelensky before his meeting with Trump, told reporters he advised the Ukrainian president "don't take the bait" and "talk about the positive." Now, "I don't know if we could ever do business with Zelensky again," Graham said.
One small but not insignificant factor that irritated Trump was the fact Zelensky didn't wear a suit, two sources with direct knowledge told Axios.
Trump's advisers told Zelensky's team on multiple occasions that it would be more respectful for Zelensky to ditch his military-style attire when visiting the White House.
Zelensky arrived at the White House wearing a more formal black outfit with Ukraine's national symbol, but without a suit.
"He is all dressed up today," Trump remarked when he shook Zelensky's hand at the entrance to the West Wing.
Friction point: U.S. officials had suspected another Trump-Zelensky flare-up was likely at some point, based on his handling of the minerals deal negotiations.
"For several days the Ukrainians jerked us around with this minerals deal and today was the inflection point," a senior U.S. official said. "The blank check era for Zelensky in Washington is over and he didn't realize that."
For their part, the Ukrainians were furious that Trump tried to force what was initially a deeply lopsided deal on them at a time when the U.S. was already leaving them out of talks with Russia about the future of Ukraine.
And as Friday's meeting got underway, Zelensky was clearly frustrated at being lectured about the trouble his own country was in.
After leaving the White House, Zelensky canceled his next two public events and published a short statement on X thanking the American people, Congress and Trump for their support.
"Ukraine needs just and lasting peace, and we are working exactly for that," he wrote.
The number of immigrants held in detention under U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has hit the highest level in more than five years, new data show.
Why it matters: The detention surge comes as the Trump administration steps up immigration enforcement and seeks to expand the capacity to detain more immigrants amid a months-long backlog with immigration judges.
By the numbers: ICE is reporting that it has increased the number of immigrants in detention to 43,759 as of Feb. 23, according to new data collected by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) and reviewed by Axios.
That's the highest detention level since November 2019 during the first Trump administration.
The number of immigrants in detention reached as high as 55,654 in August 2019, with the help of temporary centers erected to house an increase of migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border.
Zoom in: 22,797 out of 43,759 — or 52.1% — held in ICE detention at the various locations across the country have no criminal record, TRAC found.
Many more have only minor offenses, including traffic violations.
ICE relied on detention facilities in Texas to house the most people during FY 2025, according to data current as of Feb. 18, 2025.
Adams County Detention Center in Natchez, Miss., held the largest number of ICE detainees so far in fiscal year 2025, averaging 2,148 per day, the analysis found.
State of play: For the first time in four years, it appears that ICE is now responsible for more than half of all immigrants arrested, leading to detention.
New numbers show 52% of detainees were originally arrested by ICE compared to 48% first apprehended by Customs and Border Protection (CBP), signaling how aggressive the Trump administration is turning toward the interior of the nation for immigration enforcement.
ICE arrested 11,755 and CBP arrested 10,198 of the 21,953 people booked into detention by ICE during January 2025.
The intrigue: The switch to ICE making more arrests now than CBP isn't surprising sincethere is nolower border traffic, but also fewer people even trying to travel through theDarién Gap, Boston College Law School professor Daniel Kanstroom tells Axios.
Jennie Murray, president and CEO of the moderate to conservative-leaning National Immigration Forum, tells Axios that the Trump administration appears to be focusing more on enforcement in workplaces and cities.
Still, in these early days of the Trump presidency, Murray says it's hard to determine long-term patterns. "The reporting has not been that consistent from ICE," she said.
Between the lines: Holding immigrants in detention is by far the largest cost of the deportation process.
A backlog of 3.7 million cases in immigration courts, where immigrants are entitled to make their case to stay in the U.S., means detained immigrants can wait months, even years, for a hearing.
Undocumented immigrants facing criminal charges can't be deported immediately, as President Trump has suggested. Instead, they typically have to go through the criminal justice system, serve sentences if found guilty, then face deportation.
President Trump and Vice President Vance's Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky Friday quickly turned into a heated argument.
Why it matters: The meeting devolved into a shouting match, with Vance accusing Zelensky of disrespect and of misleading visitors by taking them on "propaganda tours," and Zelensky retorting that Vance had never visited Ukraine.
See the video below.
Zelensky-Trump meeting
Editor's note: This story will be updated. Check back.
The main event of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's visit to the White House was supposed to be the signing of a minerals deal, but it quickly devolved into a heated argument with President Trump and Vice President Vance.
The latest: After an explosive Oval Office meeting in front of the press, Trump released a statement saying that he had determined Zelensky is "not ready for Peace if America is involved." Lunch and a joint press conference between the two leaders were canceled.
"He disrespected the United States of America in its cherished Oval Office. He can come back when he is ready for Peace," Trump wrote on Truth Social.
Zelensky departed the White House about two and a half hours after he arrived, and the minerals deal was not signed.
Driving the news: The Trump-Zelensky meeting in the Oval Office started with statements from both leaders and then questions from the press.
After around 40 minutes, a reporter asked Trump why he engaged with Russian President Vladimir Putin and distanced himself from Ukraine.
Trump replied that if he didn't show a balanced approach, he wouldn't be able to get a deal. "You want me to say really terrible things about Putin and then say, 'hi, Vladimir. How are we doing on the deal?' It doesn't work that way," Trump said.
Trump then said Zelensky has "tremendous hatred" towards Putin and "it is very tough for me to make a deal with that kind of hate." He added: "I understand that, but I can tell you the other side isn't exactly in love with him, either." As Trump was speaking, Zelensky moved in his chair and looked more and more upset.
Vance weighed in and said the way to end the war is through diplomacy. Zelensky then spoke directly to Vance, recounting the events since Russia's initial invasion in 2014 and all the failed diplomacy and Russian violations since then. "What kind of diplomacy, JD, are you talking about?" Zelensky asked.
At that point, the meeting devolved into a shouting match, with Vance accusing Zelensky of disrespect and of misleading visitors by taking them on "propaganda tours," and Zelensky noting Vance had never visited Ukraine.
Zelensky then said that every country at war had problems and the U.S. would likely feel that some day too.
Trump cut in and said Zelensky was "in no position to dictate what we're going to feel."
"You're not in a good position ... you're gambling with the lives of millions of people, you're gambling with World War III ... and what you're doing is very disrespectful to the country, this country, that's backed you," Trump said, as Zelensky crossed his arms and tried to interject.
At one point, Trump told Zelensky "you don't have the cards" and Zelensky replied tersely, "I'm not playing cards."
Latest, Trump told Zelensky "your country is in big trouble," and Zelensky said "I know" before being cut off again by Trump.
Trump insisted that Ukraine would have been overrun without U.S. help and that his help was the country's only chance.
"It's going to be a very hard thing to do business like this," Trump said as Zelensky repeatedly tried to interject.
State of play: The visit comes as the Trump administration pushes for a ceasefire in the war between Ukraine and Russia, to be followed by peace negotiations.
Zelensky said at the top of the meeting that the U.S. was "on our side" from the beginning of the war "and I think that Trump is on our side."
He said he is sure U.S. assistance to Ukraine will continue, adding: "This is crucial for us."
But he drew Trump's ire by objecting to the ceasefire plan, saying Putin had repeatedly broken ceasefires in the past.
What to watch: The signing of the minerals deal did not take place, and its status is unclear. Trump said at the top of the meeting with Zelensky that the deal was "fair" and it "a big commitment by the U.S."
"The problem is, I've empowered you to be a tough guy, and I don't think he'd be a tough guy without the United States," Trump warned Zelensky. "Your people are very brave, but you're either going to make a deal or we're out, and if we're out, you'll fight it out."
The U.S. wants to use the minerals "for all of the things we do, including AI and including weapons and the military," Trump said.
Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional details.
The cuts of about 800 probationary employees at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration sliced deep into the agency tasked with a range of safety missions.
Why it matters: The cuts spared "only some" specialists at its National Weather Service, according to a congressional aide speaking on condition of anonymity.
The big picture: By Thursday night, some Weather Service and NOAA offices were already cutting back on their services.
A bulletin from NWS headquarters announced that staffing shortages would prevent the twice-daily weather balloon launches from Kotzebue, Alaska. These provide information on upper air conditions to fine-tune computer models that help predict the weather across the U.S.
The NOAA Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory announced its public communications would be on "indefinite hiatus" due to staffing shortages.
Among the deepest of NOAA's cuts was to the Office of Space Commerce. It licenses commercial satellites and issues warnings to satellites to prevent them from getting too close to one another in orbit, among other national security-related tasks.
Multiple layoffs hit the NWS' Environmental Modeling Center, which is responsible for keeping the agency's computer models operating.
Zoom in: The cuts hit workers at NOAA headquarters; NOAA's satellites division; the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) in Princeton, N.J.; and divisions on the oceans side of the agency.
GFDL and the research office at NOAA both do cutting-edge climate science work, including developing computer models to project global warming.
Sources at NOAA who spoke on the condition of anonymity told Axios about the layoffs. A spokesperson for the NWS declined to comment on personnel matters but told Axios: "We continue to provide weather information, forecasts and warnings pursuant to our public safety mission."
"NOAA remains dedicated to its mission, providing timely information, research, and resources that serve the American public and ensure our nation's environmental and economic resilience," the spokesperson said.
As of Friday, NOAA's travel cards had been cut, halting agency travel, and purchase cards were reduced to $1 except for about a dozen. There were also reports of leases for office space being canceled.
Friction point: The cuts infuriated the tight-knit weather and climate community, which depends on NOAA for raw data, forecast guidance, computer modeling, hurricane research flights and watch and warning information.
"The mass firing of both new hires and recently promoted senior staff within NOAA, including mission-critical and life-saving roles at the National Weather Service, is profoundly alarming," said Daniel Swain, a climate scientist at UCLA, in a statement posted to X.
"The NWS is a critical public utility, and it would be extremely difficult to rebuild if torn down. This is not, in short, an acceptable setting in which to 'move fast and break things,'" he said.
Threat level: Tom Di Liberto, a meteorologist who was laid off from his role in NOAA Communications, told Axios that the cuts to NWS in particular will be harmful.
"We will be less prepared for the next disaster and the disaster after that," Di Liberto said. "We're asking an already short-staffed agency to deal with increasing extremes with less people. Burnout will be real."
About 300 members of the NWS may have been affected, one source said, about 7% of the service. Even before the cuts, the NWS in particular was short-staffed.
As of February, NOAA had about 12,000 full-time employees, according to its website.
What they're saying: Lawmakers denounced moves to lay off workers at NOAA and other Commerce agencies.
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) said the move threatens safety and the economy.
"This action is a direct hit to our economy, because NOAA's specialized workforce provides products and services that support more than a third of the nation's GDP," she said in a statement.
Cantwell is ranking member of the Senate Commerce Committee that oversees NOAA.
Zoom out: The layoffs of probationary employees that began Thursday hit soon after cuts at the behest of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency occurred at other climate and environment agencies.
The layoffs have mainly hit employees with less than two years of service.
Others who were promoted recently or transferred agencies can also be considered to be on probationary status.
The agency had used funding from the infrastructure law and Biden climate law to bolster its headcount and add more computing power.
What we're watching: How the cuts — and potentially deeper staff reductions to come — affect the accuracy and timeliness of NOAA's extreme weather warnings as well as its climate products.
It'll be a long, uncertain road from Friday's signing of the U.S.-Ukraineminerals deal to development of resources and revenue that President Trump covets.
The big picture: The pact would create a joint reconstruction fund, partly used to reinvest in Ukrainian minerals, energy and infrastructure projects.
Specifics of the U.S. stake and logistics remain to be ironed out.
Driving the news: Ukraine has deposits of graphite, lithium, rare earths, uranium, and more.
The country's geological survey and resource ministry estimates, for instance, that it includes 6% of global graphite reserves.
Reality check: New projects have long, sometimes multidecade development timelines, even in countries that have not lost crucial infrastructure. Other hurdles in Ukraine include:
Knowledge gaps. Resources estimates are incomplete and often quite old for some commodities, analysts say.
"[T]here is very limited data on whether Ukraine's rare earth elements and other strategic materials are commercially viable to mine," Center for Strategic and International Studies scholars write in a primer.
Security risks could impede development. Private firms will likely be wary unless they're confident that risks are tolerable.
Up to 40% of Ukraine's overall critical mineral deposits are in areas currently under Russian occupation, Benchmark Minerals Intelligence analyst George Ingall tells the WSJ.
Extraction is just one piece of the puzzle. Access to raw materials doesn't fully achieve resource security goals when China still dominates processing and refining.
"For a deal to really de-risk the US minerals supply chain, more infrastructure is likely needed to ensure that the newly acquired mineral ores don't flow toward Beijing," Reed Blakemore of the Atlantic Council's Global Energy Center said in a post.
The bottom line: The deal could improve the icy Trump-Zelensky relationship and bolster the U.S. interest in a peaceful Ukraine. But future development remains highly speculative.
President Trump has proposed abolishing the EB-5 visa for immigrants willing to invest in the U.S., and replacing it with a "gold card" that, he said, could see enough demand to eliminate the national debt.
Why it matters: For all of Trump's debt-busting dreams, realistic demand for any such program is likely to be in the thousands of people, not the millions.
Indeed, according to experts, when it comes to "golden visas" there could be more demand from Americans looking to emigrate than there is from non-Americans looking to immigrate.
Where it stands: The gold card is designed to replace the EB-5 investor visa, which gives out green cards in return for investment in the U.S. economy.
The minimum cost of an EB-5 ranges from $800,000 to $1.05 million, substantially all of which takes the form of an investment and thus doesn't reduce the applicant's net worth.
Between 2017 and 2024, an average of 8,823 EB-5s were issued per year, per the EB-5 visa data dashboard.
Between the lines: Trump's proposed gold card costs five times as much as an EB-5 — $5 million — and the money would go straight to the government, where it could help reduce the national debt.
Flashback: Both the U.K. and Australia have tried similar "golden visa" programs. Both were wound down after interest peaked at a few hundred applications per year, said London School of Economics professor Kristin Surak, author of "The Golden Passport: Global Mobility for Millionaires."
"If it's a donation, the interest will be in the very low thousands per year," Surak told Axios.
Zoom in: Anybody with a "gold card" would be obligated to pay U.S. tax on their global income, said Atossa Araxia Abrahamian, author of "The Hidden Globe: How Wealth Hacks the World."
That makes U.S. tax residence significantly less attractive to the global ultra-rich than most other jurisdictions.
Besides, Abrahamian noted, the trade in golden visas from places like Portugal and Malta, both E.U. member states, has been going on for long enough that most ultra-rich people who want one already have one.
Zoom out: When it comes to the global market in golden visas, "one of the most remarkable changes in the past few years is the huge increase in interest from U.S. citizens" looking to gain residence in countries like Portugal, according to Surak.
"People are looking to secure access to the U.S.," she said, "but U.S. citizens are also looking to hedge their bets and secure a Plan B elsewhere."
The bottom line: It's very unlikely that there would be more demand for the gold card than there is right now for the EB-5, to say nothing of enough for Trump's $50 trillion goal.
European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas told Axios in an interview on Thursday that she felt "uncomfortable" hearing President Trump and other senior U.S. official in recent weeks "repeating Russian narratives and talking points" about the war in Ukraine.
Why it matters: The former Estonian prime minister has the seemingly impossible job of managing the EU's relationship with Trump's Washington. She received an ominous signal on shortly after arriving in D.C. on Tuesday, when Secretary of State Marco Rubio canceled their meeting planned for the next morning.
Driving the news: The State Department claimed that was due to "scheduling reasons," but European diplomats think the cancellation was a political decision by the Trump administration.
"You have to ask him why he cancelled," Kallas told Axios. She said she'd had a good meeting with Rubio at the Munich Security Conference two weeks ago and expected to meet him at the G7 next month.
On Wednesday, Trump claimed at the top of his Cabinet meeting — with Rubio at his side — that the EU was formed "to screw" the U.S. over trade, and reiterated a threat of 25% tariffs.
The big picture: Senior Trump officials have been going after the EU on trade, circumventing it on Ukraine, and intervening in the bloc's internal politics.
Kallas admits she's concerned the new administration is distancing itself from Europe and aligning itself with what she called "new friends."
"The statements made towards us are quite strong. The statements regarding Russia are very friendly. It is a change," said Kallas, who has a history of hawkish rhetoric toward Russia.
Kallas noted that the U.S. voted against its European allies at the UN this week and with countries like "North Korea, Russia, Belarus, Mali, Nicaragua and Haiti" in opposing a resolution to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
What she's saying: Kallas argued the Trump administration's engagement with Russia is giving President Vladimir Putin what he wants: international legitimacy.
"Russia wants to be back around the international table like nothing has happened. If we allow that to happen, then we will see more wars, not only in Europe," she warned.
Asked whether she thinks Trump is trying to divide the EU, she said it's unclear what is motivating him: "His statements regarding Europe are very strong, and the question is, why are they so strong? I mean, where is it all coming from?"
State of play: On Thursday, at the top of his meeting with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Trump attacked the EU again.
"We do have problems with the EU because they've tariffed us. They sue our companies. We don't like the way they're treating our people. We don't like the way they're treating our companies," he said.
Trump also falsely claimed the U.S.-EU trade deficit was $350 billion. The deficit was $236 billion for goods in 2024, and considerably less if services are factored in. Kallas said the deficit was just 3% of all trade and thus "not a lot."
Between the lines: Kallas was representing the EU at the Munich conference this month where Vice President Vance accused European countries of blocking free speech and not respecting election results because they are afraid of their own people.
Kallas tried to downplay the significance of Vance's comments. "I think it's more important what the Europeans do, rather than what the Americans say," she stressed.
At the same time, she argued Vance was out of bounds to weigh in on domestic political issues, and also had his facts wrong.
"It was very surprising. Why did he attack and say that we have a problem with freedom of expression when this is one of the fundamental values of European Union? I refuse to accept that criticism, because it's just simply not true. In the U.S. you have two parties, in the European Parliament we have eight different parliamentary groups. From the left, from the right, from the center. At the same time, in Russia, you don't have free elections and you don't have free expression," she said.
What to watch: The EU and its members states are closely following the Trump administration's dialogue with Russia and are concerned Trump and Putin will cut a deal on Ukraine behind their backs.
"They can talk with Putin all they want, but in order for any kind of deal to be implemented, they need the Europeans, and if the Europeans or Ukrainians do not agreed to this, then any deal would not work," Kallas said.
After two weeks of verbal attacks, President Trump softened his tone on Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky ahead of a key meeting between the leaders Friday.
Why it matters: Zelensky will visit the White House to sign an economic cooperation deal that gives the U.S. access to Ukrainian minerals and other natural resources, such as oil and gas.
The visit comes amid a push by the Trump administration for a ceasefire in the war between Ukraine and Russia to be followed by peace negotiations.
Catch up quick: Last week, U.S. and Russian officials met in Saudi Arabia to discuss the war without inviting Ukraine to participate.
After Zelensky complained that the U.S. has been working with Russia behind its back, Trump replied with public accusations against the Ukrainian president, falsely suggesting Ukraine started the war and that Zelensky is deeply unpopular with his own people.
Zelensky responded by accusing Trump of living in a "disinformation space" created by the Kremlin.
Trump fired back by calling Zelensky "a dictator without elections" — a term he never used for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Zoom in: At the top of his meeting with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer Thursday, Trump admitted his relations with Zelensky became "testy" over the last few weeks while they negotiated the minerals deal, but walked back calling him a "dictator."
"Did I say that? I can't believe I said that. Next question," Trump said.
Trump was later asked the same question during a press conference with Starmer and dodged it.
"We will have a very good meeting tomorrow morning — I have a lot of respect for him," he said of Zelensky.
State of play: The efforts to launch peace talks to end the war in Ukraine were at the center of Trump's meeting with Starmer. Trump held similar discussions with French President Emmanuel Macron on Monday.
After the meeting with Starmer, Trump said the next step is reaching a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine: "We are working on ending the war in Ukraine. It is moving along rapidly. It's either going to happen fairly soon or not at all."
Starmer praised Trump for his diplomatic push but also stressed that any such deal should be "tough and fair" and must not serve Putin's interests.
"We have to get it right. We have to win the peace ... it can't be peace that rewards the aggressor," he said, adding that Ukraine must help shape any such agreement.
Starmer said the U.K. is ready to "put boots on the ground and planes in the air" as part of future security guarantees for Ukraine. Trump has endorsed the idea of a European peacekeeping force but said U.S. troops won't take part.
The international order forged after World War II is imploding, squeezed on all sides by the return of strongmen, nationalism and spheres of influence — with President Trump leading the charge.
Why it matters: Trump is openly scornful of international institutions and traditional alliances. Instead, he sees great opportunity in a world dominated by superpowers and dictated through dealmaking.
Between the lines: Trump's approach is based, according to U.S. officials, in "realism" — and the belief that "shared values," international norms and other squishy concepts can never replace "hard power."
"The postwar global order is not just obsolete," Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared at his confirmation hearing last month. "It is now a weapon being used against us."
Where the U.S. oncehelped enforce global norms, such as on trade, Trump is undercutting them.
Trump's first term posed newfound threats to 20th-century alliances and structures — NATO, the World Trade Organization, even the UN.
A second Trump term could render them virtually obsolete.
Zoom in: The frailty of the rules-based order was exposed this week on the preeminent global stage built to support it.
At the UN General Assembly on Monday, the U.S. voted against a resolution condemning Russia for invading Ukraine on the third anniversary of the war.
It was the first time since 1945 that the U.S. sided with Russia — and against Europe — on a resolution related to European security, according to the BBC's James Lansdale.
Nearly all other Western leaders see Russia as a rogue state and an aggressor. Trump sees a potential partner.
Zoom out: For Europe, which has relied on the U.S. to guarantee its security for the last eight decades, this isn't just a wakeup call: It's an existential challenge that throws the entire transatlantic alliance into question.
Germany's conservative leader Friedrich Merz said after his election victory Sunday that his "absolute priority" is to rapidly strengthen Europe so that it can "achieve independence from the USA."
"I would never have believed that I would have to say something like that on television," Merz admitted. "But after Donald Trump's statements last week, it is clear that the Americans ... are largely indifferent to the fate of Europe."
Trump officials have expressed open contempt toward Europe on a range of issues beyond collective defense, including trade, migration, free speech and culture.
"The European Union was formed in order to screw the United States. That's the purpose of it, and they've done a good job of it," Trump said in the Oval Office this week as he floated 25% tariffs on EU goods.
"There's a new sheriff in town," Vice President Vance announced in a fiery speech in Munich this month that painted globalism as the downfall of European society.
The big picture: In today's multipolar world, the U.S., Russia and China are all racing to secure their strategic interests and solidify — or expand — their spheres of influence.
Russian President Vladimir Putin dreams of reconstituting the Soviet bloc and has tried to do so by force — invading Ukraine and meddling in elections across the Western world.
China, an economic and military superpower under Xi Jinping, is watching Ukraine carefully as it ponders whether to invade Taiwan and cement Xi's legacy through "reunification."
Trump, meanwhile, has broken sharply with his predecessors by calling for the expansion of U.S. territory — potentially to include Canada, Greenland, the Panama Canal and even the Gaza Strip.
He's also floated grand bargains with both Beijing and Moscow on everything from trade to nukes.
This is great power competition in its purest form, and it's the direction that Trump — to the deep consternation of small and mid-sized countries — seems intent on taking the world.
The bottom line: What's old is new again.
80 years ago, three great powers — the U.S., U.K. and the Soviet Union — gathered in what is now Russian-occupied Crimea to decide the fate of a European continent ravaged by war.
There at Yalta, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Winston Churchill and Josef Stalin set the terms for what ultimately led to the Iron Curtain, fueling the decades-long Cold War.
"I think that's Donald Trump's mindset. It's certainly Putin's mindset. It's Xi Jinping's mindset. It's not Europe's mindset," former MI6 chief Alex Younger warned last week. "That's the world we're going into."
