It took a Trump to cool the guns in one of Europe’s most war-torn cities.

The ruined city of Oleshky in Ukraine’s southern Kherson region has been occupied by Russian forces for over four years. In addition to the persistent threat of violence, the estimated 2,000 residents trapped in the city — a city flooded after the destruction of the Kakhovka Dam — have long faced severe food, water, and medicine shortages.

‘Her personal involvement is crucial to the entire process.’

Some civilians reportedly began consuming soup made from garden weeds in recent months to survive.

After Pope Leo XIV urged Moscow and Kiev to agree to a ceasefire in the region, Melania Trump intervened and successfully brokered the deal. Mrs. Trump announced the ceasefire on Friday and gave an update on Tuesday.

The first lady said on Tuesday that “the ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia took effect at 4:00am Moscow time on October 27, 2026.”

“Timing was accelerated two days ahead of schedule to protect the safety of civilians and to facilitate the delivery of critical humanitarian aid,” continued Mrs. Trump. “The ceasefire’s geographic area has expanded beyond Oleshky, within the Kherson Region, to provide safe passage for the humanitarian convoys. General Valery Gerasimov, Joint Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces has confirmed.”

Dmytro Lubinets, Ukraine’s human rights commissioner, confirmed on Tuesday evening that both Russia and Ukraine were adhering to the agreement “in designated areas related to the humanitarian mission” and that there had been no violations recorded by either side.

This ceasefire comes after multiple previous attempts failed.

RELATED: First lady Melania Trump successfully negotiates ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine for occupied city

Ron Sachs/CNP/Bloomberg/Getty Images

According to Lubinets, the ceasefire — which he said was mediated and coordinated by Melania Trump and was holding firm without incident on Wednesday morning — will remain in effect until 10:59 p.m. on Sunday.

Yana Lantratova, Russia’s human rights commissioner, expressed gratitude to Mrs. Trump, stating, “I would like to thank U.S. first lady Melania Trump once again for supporting the humanitarian mission and helping the residents of Alyoshki. Her personal involvement is crucial to the entire process. A huge thank-you also goes to Melania Trump’s team for their significant efforts in coordinating.”

Per the terms of the ceasefire, an American media company will document the efforts by Russian and Ukrainian civilian teams to aid the people of Oleshky. Those who wish to leave the city will be provided with support and transportation. Melania Trump suggested that some civilians “will want to go to Russia, and some to Ukraine.”

On Oct. 16, Pope Leo spoke to Russian President Vladimir Putin and urged for “a ceasefire to allow the delivery of food and medical assistance, and the voluntary and safe evacuation of the civilian population,” according the Holy See Press Office.

Days later, the pope spoke to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy about the request to Putin, emphasizing his hope that cooperation between the warring parties will ameliorate the humanitarian crisis.

Melania Trump told reporters on Saturday that “it is great to have [the] pope’s support” and that she had spoken to the Ukrainian and Russian presidents about the ceasefire.

Mrs. Trump emphasized last week that the situation in Oleshky “is dire.”

“The people of Oleshky have limited electricity, live amid mined roads, and endure regular military attacks,” said the first lady. “It was abundantly clear that without my intervention, the possibility to bring humanitarian aid into the city and to evacuate the elderly would be impossible.”

According to the White House, the bleak circumstances in Oleshky were brought to the first lady’s attention during a private discussion at her Fostering the Future Together event during the 81st United Nations General Assembly.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Russia, Ukraine, Vladimir putin, Volodymyr zelenskyy, Melania trump, Ceasefire, War, Politics, Pope leo 

America can produce more crude oil and still fail to put much more gasoline in a driver’s tank. Between the well and the pump stand pipelines, refineries, and investments that take years to build. Politicians who promise affordability while making that work harder have a problem no campaign slogan can fix.

Americans don’t need another lecture about why they should accept higher electric bills. They need leaders willing to confront the policies that make energy harder to produce and deliver. Every family heating a home, filling a gas tank, or buying groceries pays the price. When energy gets more expensive, the cost works its way through nearly everything else.

You cannot campaign against an industry’s future and act surprised when companies hesitate to finance it.

The left wants credit for caring about working families. Its energy agenda should be judged by what those families can afford. Promises of a greener future offer little comfort to someone deciding which bill to pay late.

Affordability requires abundant energy, dependable infrastructure, and the freedom to build.

Start with gasoline. Expanding American oil production helps, but crude must travel through pipelines, reach refineries, and become usable fuel before it can get a parent to work. An energy agenda must follow the barrel all the way to the pump.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, American refineries operated at 96.5% of their operable capacity in June and July. That leaves little slack during peak summer demand. More crude cannot automatically produce a matching increase in gasoline output when refineries are already running close to capacity.

EIA identifies Marathon’s Garyville, Louisiana, facility, which opened in 1977, as the newest U.S. refinery with significant downstream processing capacity. Smaller refineries have opened since, and existing facilities have expanded considerably. Processing capacity deserves as much attention as drilling.

Democrats advocating a rapid retreat from petroleum should explain why investors would commit billions to infrastructure those same politicians want the country to stop using. You cannot campaign against an industry’s future and act surprised when companies hesitate to finance it.

China understands that industrial power requires physical infrastructure. The International Energy Agency’s 2025 investment report projected approximately $88 billion in Chinese transmission and distribution investment that year, alongside enormous investments in generation and storage. Beijing is building an energy system to support its industrial ambitions.

RELATED: The GOP can’t blame Biden forever for pain at the pump

Kyle Grillot/Bloomberg via Getty Images

America should compete through private enterprise, innovation, and the freedom to build. Those advantages cannot carry us far if our political system rewards short-term promises while long-term projects languish.

Members of the House face voters every two years. That accountability is essential, but the calendar also encourages projects that pay political dividends before the next election. A transmission upgrade won’t make a thrilling television ad. Refinery modernization won’t produce a viral moment. The infrastructure Americans depend on rarely makes a consultant’s highlight reel.

The temptation is to campaign on lower prices while ignoring the construction needed to deliver them. Republicans should resist it. A two-year election cycle cannot excuse the failure to plan 20 years ahead.

Our competitors benefit when American projects stall. Every unnecessary delay lets another chance to manufacture, innovate, or expand slip away.

And demand is growing. America wants to lead in artificial intelligence and advanced manufacturing. Both require dependable electricity. The IEA projects that data centers will account for roughly half of U.S. electricity demand growth through 2030.

Conservatives should welcome that investment and insist on the capacity to support it: natural gas, nuclear power, more transmission, and renewables competing on cost and performance. Families need electricity during extreme weather. Hospitals need it around the clock. Reliability must guide these decisions.

RELATED: Affordable energy is on the ballot in November

Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images

Large data-center developers should also pay the infrastructure costs their projects create. A retired couple should not finance a technology giant through a higher utility bill. Supporting business does not require handing its expenses to everyone else.

Permitting reform belongs at the center of the conservative agenda. Establish clear environmental standards, impose firm deadlines for decisions, and let responsible developers build when they meet the requirements. Communities deserve a voice. Investors deserve an answer. Endless uncertainty serves neither.

Americans also deserve to choose vehicles and household equipment that fit their finances and daily lives. New technology should win customers on performance and value. Politicians imposing mandates should answer for their costs.

Republicans must deliver completed projects, greater supply, and dependable service. Affordable energy allows a farmer to operate, a manufacturer to compete, a small business to hire, and a family to keep more of its paycheck.

America has the resources, expertise, and workers to build a stronger energy system. Conservatives should judge their leaders by completed projects, expanding supply, and reliable service — not promises recycled every two years. Campaign slogans cannot power a factory or heat a home.

​Opinion & analysis, Oil, Prices, Gasoline, Energy, Nuclear energy, Solar, Natural gas, 2026 midterms 

That bargain price on a car may be nothing more than bait.

You see the ad, compare the numbers, and make the trip to the dealership. Then come the mandatory packages, dealer fees, and discounts you may never qualify for. Suddenly, the price that got you through the door is nowhere near the price you’re expected to pay.

If you have financing arranged, say so before visiting. Confirm whether the quoted price changes if you use your own lender.

In one recent case, the Federal Trade Commission alleges the difference averaged more than $3,350, with buyers paying above the advertised price in more than 92% of the transactions examined.

For someone who has spent weeks comparing vehicles and working out a budget, that can wreck the deal. By the time the additional charges appear, the dealership already has your attention — and several hours of your day.

Thousands more than advertised

On October 8, the FTC announced a proposed settlement with Greenway Auto Group over allegedly deceptive advertising. The agency’s complaint describes mandatory administrative, dealer, delivery, and processing fees, along with packages and advertised discounts unavailable to some buyers.

The FTC warned Greenway about its pricing practices in March. According to the complaint, the company responded by adding false assurances of price transparency to its websites while continuing to advertise vehicles for thousands less than their actual prices.

Under the proposed settlement, Greenway agreed to prominently advertise the actual price consumers must pay, excluding required government charges. The proposed order also prohibits misrepresentations about whether fees, products, or particular financing arrangements are required. The allegations are not findings from a contested trial.

Greenway isn’t the only dealership group facing enforcement. In April, the FTC and Maryland attorney general announced a settlement with Lindsay Automotive Group that included a $3.1 million civil penalty and refunds for eligible consumers. The agencies said more than $75 million in charges could qualify for redress; that does not mean that amount has already been returned.

Their complaint alleged that buyers encountered unavailable rebates, were told they needed dealership financing to obtain advertised prices, and were charged for unwanted products such as service plans and tire-and-rim protection. Some customers allegedly pressured to finance through the dealership already had financing arranged through military credit unions.

These practices also hurt honest dealers. A business advertising a complete price can look more expensive than a competitor leaving mandatory charges out. The customer may never visit the dealership offering the real deal.

The rule is gone. The obligation remains.

The federal Combating Auto Retail Scams Rule was vacated by a federal appeals court in January 2025 on procedural grounds and formally withdrawn in February 2026. That did not make deceptive advertising legal.

In March, the FTC warned 97 dealership groups about potentially deceptive practices, including leaving mandatory fees out of advertised prices, advertising discounts unavailable to everyone, and requiring additional purchases.

The agency followed in September with price-transparency guidance for auto dealers. Its position is straightforward: advertised prices should include dealer-required charges, with an exception for government-required charges owed by the consumer.

That includes mandatory document fees. A fee does not become exempt from the advertised price simply because a state permits a dealer to charge it.

Conditional discounts can still be advertised, but the price available to any consumer should be the most prominent. A first-responder discount, for example, should not make the headline price look available to a buyer who cannot qualify.

California adds protections

While federal regulators pursue deceptive pricing under existing law, California has gone farther, giving car buyers additional protections.

California’s Combating Auto Retail Scams Act, Senate Bill 766, became operative October 1. Its requirements address advertised prices, disclosures, add-on products, and record-keeping.

The law also establishes an automatic three-day cancellation right for qualifying used vehicles priced at $50,000 or less, subject to mileage, condition, and other return requirements. Buyers should review the written cancellation disclosure rather than assume every purchase qualifies or every return is free.

These are California protections; buyers elsewhere need to check their own states’ rules.

Get the number before you go

Whatever regulators do next, buyers can insist on clearer information before committing an afternoon to a dealership.

Ask for an itemized, written out-the-door price for the specific vehicle. It should identify the vehicle and include dealer charges, taxes, title and registration costs, and any products included in the quote. Ask which discounts depend on your occupation, trade-in, financing choice, or other qualifications.

If you have financing arranged, say so before visiting. Confirm whether the quoted price changes if you use your own lender.

At the dealership, compare that quote with the purchase agreement. Ask about every added charge. If a product is optional and you do not want it, have it removed before signing. If the salesperson says it is mandatory, ask who requires it and where that requirement appears in writing.

Never negotiate a monthly payment until you have agreed on the total out-the-door price.

An extra $30 a month over a 72-month loan adds up to $2,160. A payment that fits your budget does not establish that every product bundled into it is worth buying.

Save the advertisement, quote, messages, and final paperwork. The FTC accepts reports of potentially deceptive dealership practices, and its guidance specifically encourages consumers to identify supporting advertisements and contracts.

Dealerships have every right to make a profit. Consumers have every right to know what they are agreeing to pay.

If a dealer cannot explain the difference between its advertisement and its contract, don’t let the time you have already spent there pressure you into signing.

​Advertised discounts, Car dealership, Dealer fees, Federal trade commission, Ftc, Auto industry, Auto dealers, Lifestyle, Consumer rights, Used cars, Automotive 

Atlanta police investigating the tragic death of a 4-year-old boy have arrested a friend of the boy’s mother.

Police said they were called to a townhome in a gated community in southwest Atlanta on Monday evening at about 7:15 p.m. for a welfare check.

‘He was 4. He was just the sweetest little boy ever, always smiling, and he loved his mommy.’

After forcing their way into the home, police found the child deceased inside. They tried to resuscitate the child, but he was declared dead at the scene.

Police determined that 32-year-old Jasmaine Smoak had allegedly fled from the scene with three children.

Smoak’s vehicle was tracked by license plate reader technology to Washington, Georgia, in Wilkes County. She was arrested without incident, and the three children were recovered.

One of the children had visible injuries and was hospitalized for treatment at a local hospital in Wilkes County.

Smoak was charged with one count of second-degree cruelty to children and one count of concealing the death of another.

Atlanta police said that Smoak was a friend of the mother of the deceased boy.

“He was 4. He was just the sweetest little boy ever, always smiling, and he loved his mommy,” said the boy’s aunt to WXIA-TV.

She said the injured boy was his brother and that he was in critical condition.

RELATED: ‘Horrific, monstrous, unfathomable’: Prosecutor unveils shocking details in ‘co-parent’ torture and death of 7-year-old boy

Police said the investigation was active and ongoing.

“My hat is off to our deputies and the Atlanta Homicide Detectives for their dedication, professionalism, and determination in bringing this matter to a swift resolution,” said Wilkes County Sheriff Darrell Powers.

“While most people were sleeping, these men and women were hard at work making sure this individual was located and taken into custody,” he added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​License plate reader, Atlanta, Child death, Georgia, Crime 

Democratic lawmakers want the Department of Veterans Affairs to reintroduce special taxpayer-funded support staff services dedicated to assisting veterans who want to “change” their gender. If they take Congress in November, they might be able to pressure the Trump administration to do just that.

If this happens, conservatives may have the Veterans of Foreign Wars to thank for it — even though veterans tend to be conservative and there is never a need for taxpayers to pay for gender transition treatments and recovery. In fact, it’s horrible for national security. But the VFW doesn’t seem to care.

Veterans need advocates, not another organization trying to earn a medal in the culture wars instead of taking care of our actual warfighters.

Most Americans think of their grandfathers, fathers, or uncles swapping stories with their fellow vets over a beer at the local VFW hall. They think of the organization as apolitical. The reality, however, is that the organization has increasingly become political — especially in support of left-wing causes.

The most prominent one is its advocacy for LGBT issues. This past summer, the VFW backed Pride Month and bragged about supporting Pride Month ever since President Bill Clinton issued the first presidential proclamation about it in 1999.

In 2019, VFW National Commander B.J. Lawrence delivered a congressional statement calling for additional resources specifically for LGBT veterans.

Lawrence sounded more like a woke corporate human resources department than the uniting voice of a veterans’ champion when he discussed “health inequities” affecting different identity groups.

These woke health care policies became entrenched within the organization. Instead of expanding access to care for all veterans, VFW supported giving favored groups access to specialized care at taxpayer expense. Thankfully, President Trump has reversed that, axing dedicated LGBT Veteran Care Coordinator roles and reorganizing specialized support networks so they support every veteran, critics be damned.

Now, the Democrats have explicitly called for those dedicated positions to be restored, and the VFW is right on board. In congressional testimony last year, Nancy Springer, acting director of the VFW’s National Legislative Service, explicitly supported bringing woke medicine back to the VA through legislation that would establish an equity and reconciliation commission designed to remedy “institutionalized discrimination,” whatever that means.

If the VFW is lobbying for identity-specific federal programs, it opens itself to legitimate questions about its priorities.

RELATED: You don’t have to convict a Trump aide to bankrupt one

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Veterans are not all red or all blue. Some are conservative, some are liberal, and some are independent. They come from all backgrounds and walks of life, and they aren’t a monolithic political bloc. Regardless of their political views, they all deserve equal access to health care.

It doesn’t matter where you, as an individual, stand on the question of gender “medicine.” We are all free to think what we want here in America. It does matter when a veteran organization wants taxpayers to fund surgeries and other procedures that don’t improve national security or enhance veteran care.

Veterans need advocates, not another organization trying to earn a medal in the culture wars instead of taking care of our actual warfighters.

The VFW already has a big job to do. It exists to “ensure that veterans are respected for their service, always receive their earned entitlements, and are recognized for the sacrifices they and their loved ones have made on behalf of this great country.”

That doesn’t encompass partisan LGBT policy or advocating for dubious “gender-affirming” care.

Veterans are struggling to obtain mental health support, access medical treatment, navigate disability claims, and secure the benefits they earned through their service. The VFW should spend less time fighting over gender ideology and more time fighting for the veterans it was founded to serve.

​Culture wars, Democratic lawmakers, Gender ideology, Gender transition, Lgbt issues, National security, Veterans affairs, Pride month, Lgbtq, Opinion & analysis, Donald trump 

A pro-abortion U.S. Senate candidate in Texas is trying to pass himself off as a sincere Christian preacher. If he succeeds, he could be the deciding vote to allow abortion up to birth.

James Talarico has mangled Scripture to conceal the gaping chasm between Christianity and the Democratic Party’s extreme abortion agenda. Currently, 210 House Democrats and the entire Democratic Senate caucus support abortion-up-to-birth legislation: the so-called Women’s Health Protection Act. And Democrats only need to win a few Senate races to build a pro-abortion majority.

Texas voters should look at this moral grandstanding and utterly reject it.

It is critically important for pro-life voters to get informed and frustrate his attempt to sneak these radical views past Texans.

Talarico’s voting record includes opposing protecting children born alive after a botched abortion and fighting to block or repeal crucial protections for the unborn in Texas. Following the Jackson v. Dobbs decision, Talarico begged President Joe Biden to undermine Texas laws by making abortionists federal employees and putting abortion clinics on federal land.

Talarico repeated these requests during a speech as part of an appeal to restore the “soul” of the country and to imitate Jesus. However, Talarico did not explain what was so Christ-like about ensuring that abortionists can dismember babies immediately before birth.

Faithful Christians deserve better than being represented by such a pro-abortion extremist. But Talarico is trying to appeal to Texas Christians, aided by glowing profiles from outlets such as Politico and the New York Times, which have portrayed him as a model Christian statesman.

This is why it is essential that voters look at his discrediting approach to Scripture. If they do, they will notice a clear pattern of a shameless politician abusing key passages to push an extreme abortion agenda.

On “The Joe Rogan Experience” in July of last year, Talarico was asked to provide biblical evidence for his abortion views. He outrageously chose to use Mary’s agreement to conceive the Savior as part of his pro-abortion argument. Talarico even told Joe Rogan that the Torah might contain instructions for how to commit an abortion. This is, of course, totally false. Instead, the Torah contains God’s words carved in stone: “You shall not murder.”

Talarico also used Scripture to argue that life begins “at first breath” in a clear attempt to undermine the humanity of the unborn.

During a discussion on “The Ezra Klein Show” earlier this year, Talarico warned that Christians would be judged by whether they feed the hungry and care for the sick, before moving on to defend abortion. However, he voted against a bill to ensure care for babies born alive after abortions.

By contrast, his pro-life colleagues voted to feed the hungry, to give drink to the thirsty, and to offer care to the most vulnerable of the sick.

Talarico maintains this absurd approach to Scripture not just on the campaign trail but in his sermons as well. In 2022, he suggested that defending the unborn was “Christo-fascism” and that “nothing is more un-Christian than” Texas’ laws protecting the unborn.

RELATED: The champagne communists who sold Millennials a bill of goods

BRO Vector/Getty Images

Talarico, who has described God as “nonbinary,” claimed during his abortion sermon that “the Bible sometimes describes God as a female, calling her Sophia.” He also claimed that “our trans community needs abortion care too.”

In light of such statements and Talarico’s record, Texas voters should look at this moral grandstanding and utterly reject it.

Talarico tends to contrast himself morally with his opponent, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, as if he were the Pharisee who thanked God that he was not like other men. But here is the most fundamental moral contrast that swamps all others: Talarico has tried to undermine Texas’ laws protecting the unborn. Paxton has defended them.

Talarico stayed silent when a surrogate mother, pressured to abort her baby, fled to Texas. She did so reportedly due to concerns that the biological parents would deny the baby life-saving care. Paxton welcomed and defended her and her child.

But Talarico’s arguments will not go unchallenged. Because informed pro-life Texans are the key to Talarico’s defeat, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America is investing $2 million in Texas races. This effort includes the Senate race between Talarico and Paxton. SBA is putting $500,000 behind a compelling new ad from the Women Speak Out PAC, which fiercely calls out Talarico’s radical abortion proposals.

Pro-life Christians fighting for the least among us, the vulnerable unborn, have the power to block Talarico and prevent a pro-abortion majority from taking power in Congress.

​Democratic party, James talarico, Joe biden, Ken paxton, New york times, Radical left, Christians, Senate, Texas, Trans agenda, Opinion & analysis, Abortion 

The mainstream media initially claimed that the unrest sweeping France was simply about schools — but staying true to the mainstream media’s tendency to lie, that couldn’t be farther from the truth.

And Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck knew it all along.

“The French are coming out and they’re saying, ‘Oh, I guess this really wasn’t all about schools.’ This is about a Marxist takeover, and only the mainstream media is being dishonest about this,’” Glenn explains.

“Thank God most people do not pay attention to the mainstream media at this point,” he adds.

The masked rioters began their tirade a couple of weeks ago in the middle of France, breaking into a city hall and setting it on fire.

“That building opened in 1883 and it survived two world wars, but it didn’t survive the Marxists in the street,” Glenn says.

“Roof caves in, the bell tower comes down, the paintings on the wall go with it. And across France that weekend, about 2,400 people were arrested. That has continued, and it is getting worse and worse, and they are becoming more and more die-hard about it,” he continues.

“The French press spent a week explaining it. ‘Oh, this is just about school,’” he says. “The French didn’t need that explanation. They didn’t. They saw it with their own eyes.”

But the Marxists appear to have overplayed their hand.

“And the latest in polling, if the hard-left candidate makes a runoff for president next spring, he loses by more than two to one,” Glenn says.

“What is happening?” he asks. “Well, you can argue with a newspaper column. You can, but you cannot argue with your city burning down. And it’s happening everywhere. It’s not just in France. It’s the Italians, the Danes, the Dutch, the British, the Americans, the Spanish.”

“Different languages, different histories, all looking at the same thing happening on their own streets and arriving at exactly the same answer at the same time,” he continues.

“And the answer is no … I don’t want any of this,” he adds.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Glenn beck, Marxism, France, Riots, Mainstream media, Lies, Blazetv show