President Donald Trump affirmed on Wednesday that the U.S. would ‘always be there for NATO,’ while accusing the alliance of not sharing the same commitment to aiding the U.S.

‘We will always be there for NATO, even if they won’t be there for us,’ the president wrote in a lengthy Truth Social post.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt underscored Trump’s statement of commitment to NATO during a briefing on Wednesday. When pressed further about the issue, she underscored the increase in NATO allies’ spending that occurred as a result of Trump’s push.

The president claimed responsibility for strengthening NATO, saying that his work has served as the main deterrence for China and Russia.

‘Without my involvement, Russia would have all of Ukraine right now. Remember, also, I single-handedly ended 8 wars, and Norway, a NATO member, foolishly chose not to give me the Noble Peace Prize. But that doesn’t matter! What does matter is that I saved millions of lives. Russia and China have zero fear of NATO without the United States, and I doubt NATO would be there for us if we really needed them. Everyone is lucky that I rebuilt our military in my first term, and continue to do so,’ Trump said.

The president’s remarks come as his administration works to bring an end to the Russia-Ukraine war. Additionally, Trump has faced some pushback from NATO allies in recent days over his renewed calls for the U.S. to take over Greenland, something he has said is a matter of national security. It is unclear which issue was on his mind when he made the post.

The negotiations aimed at ending the Russia-Ukraine war remain active but have yet to reach the end stage of the deal-making process. On Tuesday, the U.K. and France signed a declaration pledging troops for Ukraine under a future peace deal and with security guarantees supported by the U.S. and allied partners.

The declaration was adopted in Paris by the Coalition of the Willing and sets out what leaders said was a framework for lasting peace between Ukraine and Russia set in international law and the principles of the United Nations Charter.

A key U.S. role is outlined in plans for a continuous, U.S.-led ceasefire monitoring and verification mechanism, with contributions from partners. The U.S. would participate in a special commission to manage ceasefire breaches, attribute responsibility and determine solutions.

Meanwhile, NATO allies have expressed concern as Trump appeared to renew his push for the U.S. to take Greenland. The president told reporters on Air Force One that the U.S. needed the self-governing Danish territory for ‘national security’ reasons.

‘We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security, and Denmark is not going to be able to do it,’ Trump said.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen on Monday warned that Trump’s threats to annex Greenland could mean the end of NATO. Frederiksen told Danish broadcaster TV2 in an interview that Trump’s threats about Greenland should be taken seriously. Since then, several world leaders, including those hailing from NATO-allied countries, have expressed concern about Trump’s remarks on Greenland.

While there are no clear plans in the works for annexing Greenland, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller insisted in a recent interview that ‘nobody’ would fight the U.S. over control of the island, Axios reported.

Fox News Digital’s Emma Bussey and Ashley Carnahan contributed to this report.

A House GOP lawmaker is working to find more information after learning one of her constituents was possibly detained by Venezuela’s government.

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., told Fox News Digital she was ‘advocating for the State Department to assist’ with a U.S. citizen from her district who is possibly being held by the Latin American government.

‘My biggest issue at the moment is that I have a constituent that is suspected of being unlawfully detained by the Venezuelan government,’ Malliotakis told Fox News Digital.

She said she was appealing to the State Department to use its ‘leverage’ to get the man released.

The New York City-area Republican said he had likely been detained for ‘a couple of weeks,’ before Maduro’s ouster.

Malliotakis said his family suspected him of being unlawfully detained, but it’s not clear if he’s classified as such by the U.S. government.

Her office sent Fox News Digital a longer statement, ‘While we have not been contacted by the family of James Luckey-Lange, we learned about the situation from the media on Friday and immediately contacted the U.S. Department of State.’

‘For months, the State Department has advised American citizens not to travel to Venezuela, determining a very high risk of wrongful detention of U.S. nationals in the country. While we have not yet been able to confirm he has been detained, we are engaged, actively monitoring the situation, and have elevated our concern directly to the White House and the Secretary of State, and the State Department has been in contact with the family,’ Malliotakis’ office said.

‘It is our hope that our constituent will soon safely return to the United States.’

Fox News Digital reached out to the State Department for further information. A State Department spokesperson responded to the inquiry, ‘The United States has no higher priority than the safety and security of U.S. citizens. We are aware of reports of U.S. citizens detained in Venezuela. Due to privacy and safety concerns, we have nothing further at this time.’

Her comments came after a House-wide classified briefing on the government’s Venezuela operation on Wednesday, which was led by top Trump administration officials.

Maduro and his wife, Celia Flores, were extracted after precision strikes in the capital city of Caracas and are currently facing trial on terrorism-related charges at the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York.

A story published in the Staten Island Advance, a local outlet in Malliotakis’ district, cited the New York Post in naming Luckey-Lange as being potentially detained by Venezuela since arriving there in December.

The outlets reported that it’s not clear if he had a visa to enter Venezuela.

President Donald Trump said last weekend that the U.S. would ‘run’ the country until an adequate transition were to occur. 

Meanwhile, Maduro’s vice president, Delcy Rodríguez, was sworn in as acting president on Tuesday.

President Donald Trump is again amplifying his push for the U.S. to acquire Greenland, reinvigorating his repeated comments earlier in his political career that the territory nestled between North America and Europe in the Arctic Circle is a strategic asset for the U.S. 

Trump confirmed Saturday that the U.S. military had successfully executed an operation in Venezuela that led to the arrests of the nation’s dictatorial leader, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife. 

The operation was swiftly followed by Trump putting ‘anyone who would threaten American sovereignty or endanger American lives’ on notice. Cuba, for instance, is likely ‘in a lot of trouble’ for ‘propping up Maduro,’ according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio. 

Amid the warnings, Trump was pressed about plans to potentially acquire Greenland, which he has previously floated while touting its strategic location for national security purposes. 

‘We need Greenland from a national security situation. It’s so strategic. Right now. Greenland is covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place,’ Trump said from Air Force One Sunday as he traveled back to Washington from his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida. 

Trump initially said he did not want to discuss Greenland and wanted to instead focus questions on Venezuela, Russia or Ukraine before teasing that more would follow on Greenland in the coming months. 

‘We’ll worry about Greenland in about two months. Let’s talk about Greenland in 20 days,’ he told the media. 

Trump added that the U.S. needs to acquire ‘Greenland from the standpoint of national security, and Denmark is not going to be able to do it.’ 

He continued that acquiring the territory would benefit both the U.S. and European Union from a security standpoint.

‘The European Union needs us to have it, and they know that,’ the president said before moving on to other questions. 

Greenland was a strategic outpost during the Cold War, sitting astride the shortest routes between North America and the Soviet Union across the Arctic. The U.S. expanded its presence at the airbase, now known as Pituffik Space Base, using it as a key location for early-warning radar and surveillance meant to detect incoming bombers and missiles. 

U.S. interest in Greenland also would likely counter China’s growing Arctic ambitions and deny Beijing a foothold in the region. China published its first Arctic policy white paper in 2018, when it labeled itself a ‘near-Arctic state,’ while promoting a ‘Polar Silk Road’ as part of its broader Belt and Road vision. Trump first publicly mentioned interest in Greenland in 2019. 

The Arctic is the shortest corridor for long-range threats from adversaries such as China or Russia, making Greenland a prime place for early-warning and tracking sensors that protect North America. 

Trump views acquiring Greenland as a national security priority, the White House reiterated Tuesday, and the use of the U.S. military remains an option as his administration weighs how to acquire the territory. 

‘President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States,’ White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to Fox News. 

‘The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and, of course, utilizing the U.S. military is always an option at the commander in chief’s disposal.’

The U.S. potentially purchasing or acquiring Greenland has roots in the first Trump administration. The president first floated the purchase of the territory from Denmark in 2019. Greenland, which is the world’s largest island, is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. 

‘It’s just something we’ve talked about,’ Trump said in 2019. ‘Denmark essentially owns it. We’re very good allies with Denmark. We’ve protected Denmark like we protect large portions of the world, so the concept came up.

‘Strategically, it’s interesting. And we’d be interested. We’ll talk to them a little bit,’ the president said. ‘It’s not No. 1 on the burner, I can tell you that.’

Greenland spans roughly 836,000 square miles, though most of the world’s largest island is covered by an ice sheet. It’s home to about 56,000 people, predominantly Inuit and Danes, with the capital and largest town, Nuuk, serving as the country’s political and economic hub. The island is also home to oil, natural gas and mineral resources, which could be used to manufacture batteries and other technologies. 

The amplified focus on the U.S. potentially acquiring Greenland has had a ripple effect in the administration and in Congress, with White House deputy chief of staff for policy Stephen Miller arguing it was not breaking news that Trump has genuine interest in acquiring the territory. 

‘For the United States to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend NATO and NATO interests, obviously, Greenland should be part of the United States,’ Miller said on CNN. ‘And, so, that‘s a conversation that we‘re going to have as a country. That‘s a process we‘re going to have as a community of nations.’

CNN host Jake Tapper pressed Miller whether he could confirm military force would not be used to seize Greenland, similar to Venezuela. 

‘It wouldn’t be military action against Greenland,’ he said. ‘Greenland has a population of 30,000 people, Jake. The real question is by what right does Denmark assert control over Greenland? What is the basis of their territorial claim? What is their basis of having Greenland as a colony of Denmark?’

The rhetoric has spooked the Danes, who have long balked at Trump’s interest in buying Greenland, reiterating that the island is not for sale. 

‘It makes absolutely no sense to talk about the U.S. needing to take over Greenland. The U.S. has no right to annex any of the three countries in the Danish Kingdom,’ Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said Sunday.

‘I would therefore strongly urge the U.S. stop the threats against a historically close ally and against another country and another people, who have very clearly said that they are not for sale.’

Top European leaders have also resisted Trump’s calls for the U.S. to acquire the territory, instead reflecting that NATO allies work together to ensure the Artic is secure.  

Artic security must be ‘achieved collectively, in conjunction with NATO allies, including the United States, by upholding the principles of the U.N. Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders. These are universal principles, and we will not stop defending them,’ the top leaders from the U.K., France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain and Denmark said in a joint statement. 

‘Greenland belongs to its people. It is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland.’

South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham told Fox News Tuesday, ‘I’m not saying we’re gonna go take over Greenland. I’m saying we gonna build up our military presence, and we need to create a new relationship between the United States and Greenland to make sure our investment is secure.

‘If you want a bigger presence in Greenland militarily, which everybody seems to do, and you want it to be American, which I do, then you need to look at the relationship between us and Greenland before we spend a bunch of money and put our troops on the ground.’

Congressional Republicans aren’t warming up to using military action to take a long-sought prize of President Donald Trump: Greenland.

The colossal, resource-rich arctic island reentered the Trump administration’s orbit following the successful capture of former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. 

Top officials, like White House deputy chief of staff of policy Stephen Miller, reiterated earlier this week it was the position of the U.S. government that ‘Greenland should be part of the United States.’ 

While the GOP has largely championed the Trump administration’s recent military action in Venezuela, lawmakers aren’t keen on replicating the same tactics to capture the Danish territory. 

President Donald Trump has not made a push for military action there, but White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt did not rule it out during a news briefing Tuesday.

‘All options are always on the table for President Trump as he examines what’s in the best interests of the United States,’ Leavitt said. ‘But I will just say that the president’s first option always has been diplomacy.’ 

Wednesday saw several Trump administration officials provide closed-door, classified briefings on both sides of the Capitol on the strikes, next steps and a possible exit strategy in Venezuela. 

Several Republicans would not say afterward whether the topic of Greenland came up in the meeting, and many reiterated that any military action would be taboo, given that the island is a territory of Denmark, a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ally.

‘To invade Greenland and attack its sovereignty, a fellow NATO country, would be weapons-grade stupid,’ Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., told Fox News Digital. ‘President Trump is not weapons-grade stupid, nor is Marco Rubio.’

Miller’s comments triggered rebuttals from several of America’s European allies, who in a joint statement on Tuesday contended that Greenland ‘belongs to its people.’ 

Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., wouldn’t say whether Greenland, broadly or as a next likely target, was discussed in the classified briefing.

But he told Fox News Digital that the massive island, which could fit California, Montana and Texas combined, had been on his mind. 

‘I think that Greenland would be a huge asset to America,’ Marshall said. 

‘I don’t want any military operation in Greenland,’ he continued. ‘There’s no criminals there that I know of. I think it’s apples and oranges. It could be very critical to our national security. Going forward, I hope that we can work out a deal with Denmark.’

Despite the overseas saber-rattling, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said after the briefing he would be meeting with officials from Denmark next week, and he noted that it has ‘always been the president’s intent from the very beginning’ to buy the ice-encased island. 

‘He said it very early on,’ Rubio said. ‘I mean, this is not new. He talked about it in his first term, and he’s not the first U.S. president that has examined or looked at how could we acquire Greenland. There’s an interest there.’

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is one of the few Republicans who has pushed back against the administration’s most recent strikes in Venezuela and previous strikes in the Caribbean against alleged drug boats. But he didn’t appear opposed to the notion of purchasing Greenland.

‘To acquire Greenland, the best way would be not to insult them,’ Paul said. ‘If I want to buy your country, I would think I would start out with flattery and not denigration.

‘I think Greenland would have to be encouraged to further their independence movement,’ he continued. ‘Then they would have to be encouraged that being part of the U.S. would have advantages. I think they would have to vote, basically, to become part of the United States.’

In the House of Representatives, a number of Republicans who spoke with Fox News Digital similarly said they recognized the security significance of Greenland but were hesitant when asked about the possibility of military force.

‘I understand the strategic importance,’ Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Calif., told Fox News Digital. ‘I think (military force) is not an option in this case scenario.

‘The secretary of state has made it clear that the goal is to work with our ally toward a mutually agreeable solution.’

Rep. Derek Schmidt, R-Kan., said, ‘I don’t think we should use military force,’ adding ‘discussion’ about acquiring the territory ‘never hurts.’

‘Greenland is very important strategically,’ Schmidt said. ‘That’s not a uniquely American position, that’s a NATO position. Everybody recognizes that … but I think we need to work with our allies.’

Meanwhile, Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., was more critical of the prospect of U.S. ownership.

‘This is really dumb. Greenland and Denmark are our allies. There is no upside to demeaning our friends. But, it is causing wounds that will take time to heal,’ he wrote on X this week.

Venezuelan crude oil is being shipped to the U.S. at speed and in bulk following the arrest of former President Nicolás Maduro, according to a maritime intelligence analyst.

As many as ’15 very large crude carrier shipments’ carrying 50 million barrels will end up en route, said Michelle Wiese Bockmann, senior maritime intelligence analyst at Windward, which has tracked oil tanker movements around the troubled region for months.

‘The moves overnight that were announced to sell about 30 to 50 million barrels of oil,’ Wiese Bockmann said at a press conference.

‘That’s equivalent to about 15 very large crude carrier shipments,’ the analyst added.

The rapid surge in shipments comes days after President Donald Trump announced that Venezuela would move between 30 million and 50 million barrels of sanctioned oil to the U.S., worth roughly $2.8 billion at current prices.

Trump said Tuesday the oil would be sold at market value and that he would control the proceeds to ensure they are ‘used to benefit the people of Venezuela and the United States!’

Windward maritime intelligence data indicates massive oil flows are already materializing, according to Wiese Bockmann.

‘And just for comparison, over December, using our commodities tracking partners, Vortex, about 47 million barrels of crude and containers were shipped from Venezuela,’ she noted.

‘They’re going to be taken by storage ships to the U.S.,’ Wiese Bockmann added.

According to the analyst, U.S. infrastructure is well-prepared to handle the influx.

‘U.S. refineries have been configured for Venezuela’s heavy crude,’ she said, adding that ‘we’re already very quickly seeing some action there.’

Windward tracking data shows increasing tanker activity tied to Western operators, with four Western-linked tankers being tracked sailing for Venezuela, she said, as well as reports of tankers already chartered.

The developments follow dramatic geopolitical events earlier this month, when U.S. forces captured Maduro and his wife and transported them to New York City to face criminal drug charges.

Trump later said the U.S. would temporarily run Caracas until a safe transition could occur, warning he was ‘ready to stage a second and much larger attack’ if necessary.

‘There are reports of more tankers chartered,’ the analyst said.

‘Two arrived at Jose Terminal on the fifth and sixth of January, and two have sailed so far for the U.S. on Jan. 2 and Jan. 6.’ she claimed. 

According to reports, Venezuela is said to hold more than 300 billion barrels of proven reserves, which is more than Saudi Arabia, Iran or Kuwait, but sanctions and isolation have impacted production and exports.

As previously reported by Fox News Digital, Energy Secretary Chris Wright has been tasked with executing Trump’s plan ‘immediately,’ as major U.S. energy companies such as Chevron, ConocoPhillips and ExxonMobil prepare for White House meeting Friday to revive Venezuela’s oil industry.

But Wiese Bockmann said the arrest of Maduro had disrupted the so-called dark fleet trade that had been taking Venezuelan crude to Asia.

‘We’ve had this phenomenon of the dark fleet exploding since Russia invaded Ukraine,’ she added.

‘And we’ve had this axis of Venezuela, Iran, Russia, China basically trading oil between them.

‘If it’s condensate from Iran to Venezuela or if it’s crude back from Venezuela to China, which is about 600,000 barrels a day on average,’ she added.

‘These days, Asia-bound exports remain poor and are paralyzed, but we have seen a very quick resumption of crude flows to the U.S. after the seizure of Maduro.’

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.

Nine House Republicans bucked their party leaders on Wednesday evening to advance a vote on a Democrat-led healthcare bill.

The nine GOP lawmakers’ support was key to pushing ahead on a vote to extend enhanced Obamacare subsidies that expired at the end of last year. A vote on the bill itself is now expected Thursday afternoon.

It’s a blow to Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who argued for weeks that the majority of House Republicans were opposed to extending the COVID-19 pandemic-era tax subsidies.

But a significant number of GOP moderates were frustrated that their party leaders in the House and Senate had done little to avert a price hike for millions of Americans’ insurance premiums. 

Four of them signed onto a discharge petition filed by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., last month aimed at forcing a vote on extending the subsidies for three years over House GOP leaders’ objections.

A discharge petition is a mechanism for getting legislation considered on the House floor even if the majority’s leadership is opposed to it.

Those four lawmakers — Reps. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., Rob Bresnahan, R-Pa., and Ryan Mackenzie, R-Pa. — were among the nine to vote for advancing Jeffries’ petition on Wednesday.

At the time, they criticized leadership in both parties for not working toward a bipartisan solution earlier and said they were left with little choice in the matter.

The other five lawmakers who voted to advance the petition were Reps. Nick LaLota, R-N.Y., Maria Salazar, R-Fla., David Valadao, R-Calif., Max Miller, R-Ohio, and Tom Kean Jr., R-N.J.

The bill is expected to pass the House on Thursday, but it is all but certain to die in the GOP-controlled Senate.

Similar legislation led by Senate Democrats failed to reach the necessary 60-vote threshold to advance in December.

The vast majority of Republicans believe that the subsidies are a COVID-era relic of a long-broken federal healthcare system. Conservatives argued that the relatively small percentage of Americans who rely on Obamacare meant that an extension would do little to ease rising health costs that people across the country are experiencing.

But a core group of moderates has been arguing that a failure to extend a reformed version of them would force millions of Americans to grapple with skyrocketing healthcare costs this year.

House Republicans passed a healthcare bill in mid-December aimed at lowering those costs for a broader swath of Americans, but that legislation has not been taken up in the Senate.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, on Wednesday called on Congress during a Senate hearing to impeach two federal judges, making his most elaborate case yet for imposing the extraordinary sanction on a pair of closely scrutinized jurists.

Cruz acknowledged that impeaching federal judges is exceedingly rare — 15 have been impeached in history, typically for straightforward crimes like bribery — but the Texas Republican argued it was warranted for judges James Boasberg and Deborah Boardman.

‘Rarer still, until now, were the deeper offenses the framers feared most — judges who, without necessarily breaking a criminal statute, violate the public trust, subvert the constitutional order or wield their office in ways that injure society itself,’ Cruz said. ‘That is why, throughout history, Congress recognized that impeachable misconduct need not be criminal.’

Cruz, a Senate Judiciary Committee member with an extensive legal background, said the House needed to initiate impeachment proceedings over controversial gag orders Boasberg signed in 2023 and a sentence Boardman handed down last year in the case of Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s attempted assassin.

Impeachment proceedings must be initiated in the House and typically run through the House Judiciary Committee.

Russell Dye, a spokesman for the GOP-led committee, said ‘everything is on the table’ when asked if Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, was open to the idea. If the House were to vote in favor of impeachment, it would then advance to the Senate. Two-thirds of senators would need to vote to convict the judges and remove them, a highly improbable scenario because the vote would require some support from Democrats.

Cruz’s counterpart at the hearing, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., defended the judges and accused Republicans of threatening impeachment as an effort to intimidate the judiciary because it routinely issues adverse rulings against the Trump administration.

‘There was a time when I’d have hoped a Senate Judiciary subcommittee would not be roped into a scheme to amplify pressure and threats against a sitting federal judge,’ Whitehouse said. ‘But here we are.’

In the case of Boardman, a Biden appointee, the judge sentenced Sophie Roske, who previously went by Nicholas Roske, to eight years in prison after the Department of Justice sought a 30-year sentence. Roske pleaded guilty to attempting to murder Kavanaugh. Boardman said she factored into her sentence that Roske identified as transgender and therefore faced unique adversity.

Cruz argued Democrats’ concerns about threats that judges have faced for ruling against President Donald Trump fell on deaf ears, in his view, because they did not speak out about Boardman’s leniency toward Roske.

‘My Democrat colleagues on this committee do not get to give great speeches about how opposed they are to violence against the judiciary, and, at the same time, cheer on a judge saying, ‘Well, if you attempt to murder a Supreme Court justice, and you happen to be transgender, not a problem. We’re going to deviate downward by more than two decades,” Cruz said.

In the case of Boasberg, former special counsel Jack Smith subpoenaed several Republican Congress members’ phone records while conducting an investigation into the 2020 election and Trump’s role in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. Smith sought gag orders so that the senators would not immediately be notified about the subpoenas, and Boasberg authorized those orders.

Prosecutors seeking gag orders is not unusual, but senators have layers of protection from prosecution under the Constitution. The targeted Republicans have decried the subpoenas, saying their rights were violated.

Smith and an official representing the federal courts have both said that Boasberg was not notified that the subpoenas and gag orders were related to members of Congress.

Rob Luther, a law professor at George Mason University, was a witness for Republicans at the hearing and said Boasberg still should not have signed the gag orders without knowing who they applied to. Luther cited stipulations included in the orders.

‘One must ask on what basis Judge Boasberg found that the disclosure of subpoenas would result in destruction of or tampering with evidence, intimidation of potential witnesses, and cause serious jeopardy to the investigation, end quote,’ Luther said. ‘Did Judge Boasberg merely rubber stamp the requested gag order, or was he willfully blind?’

Smith’s actions also aligned with a DOJ policy at the time that did not require the special counsel to alert the court that the subpoenas targeted senators, a point raised by Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., during the hearing. Luther said the policy did not matter.

‘DOJ policy does not supplant federal law,’ he said.

Sen. Lindsey Graham announced Wednesday that President Donald Trump has approved a Russian sanctions bill designed to pressure Moscow to end its war with Ukraine.

Graham revealed the development in a post on X, describing it as a pivotal shift in the U.S. approach to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. 

‘After a very productive meeting today with President Trump on a variety of issues, he greenlit the bipartisan Russia sanctions bill that I have been working on for months with Senator Blumenthal and many others,’ Graham said. 

‘This will be well-timed, as Ukraine is making concessions for peace and Putin is all talk, continuing to kill the innocent.’

According to the Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025, the bipartisan legislation is designed to grant Trump sweeping, almost unprecedented, authority to economically isolate Russia and penalize major global economies that continue to trade with Moscow and finance its war against Ukraine.

Most notably, the bill would require the United States to impose a 500% tariff on all goods imported from any country that continues to purchase Russian oil, petroleum products or uranium. The measure would effectively squeeze Russia financially while deterring foreign governments from undermining U.S. sanctions.

‘This bill will allow President Trump to punish those countries who buy cheap Russian oil fueling Putin’s war machine,’ Graham said.

‘This bill would give President Trump tremendous leverage against countries like China, India and Brazil to incentivize them to stop buying the cheap Russian oil that provides the financing for Putin’s bloodbath against Ukraine.’

Graham said voting could take place as early as next week and that he is looking forward to a strong bipartisan vote.

The move on the Russian sanctions bill follows another sharp escalation in America’s clampdown on Moscow. Earlier Wednesday, U.S. forces reportedly seized an oil tanker attempting to transport sanctioned Venezuelan oil to Russia.

Graham publicly celebrated the seizure in another post on X, describing it as part of a broader winning streak of U.S. intervention aimed at Venezuela and Cuba. 

In the post, he also took aim at critics such as Sen. Rand Paul, who has opposed the bill, arguing that it would damage America’s trade relations with much of the world.

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment.

The seizure of a Russian-linked oil tanker in the North Atlantic has highlighted ‘worry’ among NATO and Nordic-Baltic governments over dark fleet vessels and the type of crews onboard, according to a maritime intelligence analyst.

U.S. military and Coast Guard personnel boarded the Marinera between Iceland and the U.K. Wednesday as it operated under deceptive shipping practices, including flying a false flag and violating sanctions.

According to Reuters, Russian authorities demanded the humane treatment and repatriation of the crew members.

Windward maritime intelligence analyst Michelle Wiese Bockmann claimed the Marinera’s ownership had just been transferred to Burevestmarin LLC, a Russian company.

‘We do not know the status of these sailors and seafarers, who are Russian nationals,’ Wiese Bockmann told Fox News Digital. ‘That lack of clarity is common with dark fleet tankers.

‘The Marinera did have its ownership transferred to a newly formed Russian company, with the registered owner, ship manager and commercial manager being Burevestmarin LLC.’

She also suggested NATO and the Nordic-Baltic 8+ group of governments have been ‘worried’ about sanctioned oil tankers with unauthorized personnel onboard, including ‘armed guards.’

‘Increasingly, and I know the Nordic Baltic 8+ governments are worried about the fact that you are having unauthorized people also on board, also known as armed guards,’ Wiese Bockmann said. ‘But it is highly irregular.

‘Armed guards are rarely seen and typically used on ships that are transiting the Gulf of Aden or the Red Sea and are therefore assessed as at risk from attack by Houthis or pirates,’ she added.

After the seizure, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt rejected Russian demands for special treatment of the Marinera’s crew during her regular briefing Wednesday.

‘This was a Venezuelan shadow fleet vessel that had transported sanctioned oil,’ Leavitt said.

‘The vessel was deemed stateless after flying a false flag, and it had a judicial seizure order. And that’s why the crew will be subject to prosecution.’

Russia’s Foreign Ministry said it was ‘closely following’ the situation, according to the state-run TASS news agency.

Wiese Bockmann noted that dark fleet crews are often multinational, typically involving a Russian master with Chinese, Indian or Filipino crew members.

‘There is a blurring of commercial and military shipping around the dark fleet,’ she said. ‘What we’re seeing now is something that has really only emerged in the last six or seven months.’

European authorities have also begun holding crews accountable, particularly when captains are ‘facilitating dangerous deceptive shipping practices, such as spoofing and going dark,’ she explained.

‘The EU recently sanctioned the captain of a tanker who refused orders from the Estonian navy (Jaguar) to be stopped for inspection last May. And the French charged a captain over his refusal to comply with orders and failure to justify a flag’s nationality after authorities intercepted a dark fleet tanker in the Atlantic last October,’ Wiese Bockmann added.

As previously reported by Fox News Digital, a second vessel, the M. Sophia, was also boarded in international waters near the Caribbean while en route to Venezuela.

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.