Connect with us

Politics

Hegseth Orders Pentagon to Stop Offensive Cyberoperations Against Russia

Published

on

Hegseth Orders Pentagon to Stop Offensive Cyberoperations Against Russia

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered U.S. Cyber Command to halt offensive operations against Russia, according to a current official and two former officials briefed on the secret instructions. The move is apparently part of a broader effort to draw President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia into talks on Ukraine and a new relationship with the United States.

Mr. Hegseth’s instructions, part of a larger re-evaluation of all operations against Russia, have not been publicly explained. But they were issued before President Trump’s public blowup in the Oval Office with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine on Friday.

The precise scope and duration of the Defense Department order is not clear, as the line between offensive and defensive cyberoperations is often a blurry one.

Still, retaining access to major Russian networks for espionage purposes is critical to understanding Mr. Putin’s intentions as he enters negotiations, and to tracking the arguments within Russia about what conditions to insist upon and what could be given up.

Former officials said it was common for civilian leaders to order pauses in military operations during sensitive diplomatic negotiations, to avoid derailing them. Still, for President Trump and Mr. Hegseth, the retreat from offensive cyberoperations against Russian targets represents a huge gamble.

Advertisement

It essentially counts on Mr. Putin to reciprocate by letting up on what many call the “shadow war” underway against the United States and its traditional allies in Europe. The leading European powers continue to say their support of Ukraine is undiminished even as Mr. Trump, who has sought to portray himself as a neutral arbiter in seeking to end the war in Ukraine, has at times sided openly with Mr. Putin.

U.S. officials have said Russia has continued to try to penetrate U.S. networks, including in the first weeks of the Trump administration. But that is only part of a broader Russian campaign.

Over the past year, ransomware attacks on American hospitals, infrastructure and cities have ramped up, many emanating from Russia in what intelligence officials have said are largely criminal acts that have been sanctioned, or ignored, by Russian intelligence agencies.

Sabotage efforts in Europe — including suspected Russian attempts to cut communications cables, mysterious explosions and Russian-directed assassination plots, including against the chief executive of Germany’s largest arms maker — have accelerated in the past year. The United States has, until now, been central in helping European nations fight back, often in covert cyberoperations, but that cooperation could now be in jeopardy.

Many of those operations are run out of Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters — the storied intelligence agency that broke the Enigma codes in World War II — and to some extent by Canada. It is possible they will continue that work, while the United States focuses on China, its most sophisticated adversary in cyberspace.

Advertisement

Russia also ran an aggressive influence campaign during the last presidential campaign, according to reports by U.S. intelligence agencies during the Biden administration. In recent election cycles, U.S. Cyber Command has conducted secret operations to hamper or curtail those influence efforts.

But the Trump administration has already begun to dismantle efforts by the F.B.I. and other agencies to warn about Russian propaganda, and the order by the Pentagon would halt, at least for now, any further Cyber Command efforts to interrupt future Russian influence campaigns.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday described the urgency of getting Russia to the negotiating table over Ukraine, even while acknowledging that it was unclear whether Mr. Putin was ready to make a deal.

“You’re not going to bring them to the table if you’re calling them names, if you’re being antagonistic,” Mr. Rubio said on ABC’s “This Week.” “That’s just the president’s instincts from years and years and years of putting together deals as someone who’s in business.”

Mr. Rubio was not asked about the decision to stop the offensive cyberoperations, but he grew defensive when pressed on why the United States was letting up on pressure on Moscow, to the point of removing language from a United Nations resolution that described Russia as the aggressor in the war in Ukraine. Almost all of the United States’ traditional allies voted against the resolution, leaving the Trump administration siding with Russia, North Korea, Iran and Belarus, and a handful of other authoritarian states.

Advertisement

“If this was a Democrat that was doing this, everyone would be saying, well, he’s on his way to the Nobel Peace Prize,” Mr. Rubio said. “This is absurd. We are trying to end a war. You cannot end a war unless both sides come to the table, starting with the Russians, and that is the point the president has made. And we have to do whatever we can to try to bring them to the table to see if it’s even possible.”

The order from Mr. Hegseth was first reported by The Record, a cybersecurity publication from Recorded Future, which tracks cyberoperations. The Pentagon and U.S. Cyber Command declined to comment on the record, but a senior defense official, declining to allow use of her name, said that Mr. Hegseth had “no greater priority” than the safety of military members, including in cyberoperations.

After the publication of this article, Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, said in a statement that Mr. Trump appeared to be giving Mr. Putin “a free pass as Russia continues to launch cyberoperations and ransomware attacks against critical American infrastructure.” He called the administration’s move “a critical strategic mistake.”

As the Trump administration prepared to take office, departing Biden administration officials urged Mr. Trump’s appointees to keep the pressure on Russia, including by continuing to arm Ukraine and push back on the GRU and the SVR, two Russian intelligence agencies that have been behind some of the most aggressive Russian cyberattacks and espionage operations.

They specifically briefed the Trump officials on suspected Russian efforts to cut communications cables undersea, and the U.S. effort last year to get a message to Mr. Putin about the consequences if an effort to put explosives on cargo planes resulted in an air disaster. American intelligence agencies concluded that Russia’s ultimate goal was to send those packages to the United States.

Advertisement

During Mr. Trump’s first term, American cyberoperations against Russia were, if anything, ramped up. The National Security Agency created a “Russia Small Group” after the Russian interference in the 2017 election

Mr. Trump gave Cyber Command new authorities in his first term to conduct offensive cyberoperations without direct presidential approval in a classified document known as National Security Presidential Memorandum 13.

One of those operations was a stepped-up effort to probe Russia’s electric power grid, an effort first disclosed by The New York Times and one likely meant as a warning to Russia not to interfere with American critical infrastructure. Mr. Trump denounced that reporting as “a virtual act of Treason,” but his former aides later said he was concerned the revelation would affect his relationship with Mr. Putin.

Politics

Trump threatens to halt all US aid, conduct ‘vicious’ military attack in Nigeria over Christian persecution

Published

on

Trump threatens to halt all US aid, conduct ‘vicious’ military attack in Nigeria over Christian persecution

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Donald Trump on Saturday announced the U.S. will immediately stop all aid and assistance to Nigeria if its government continues to allow the killing of Christians, and may even go into the country “guns-a-blazing” to “completely wipe out the Islamic terrorists” responsible.

“I am hereby instructing our Department of War to prepare for possible action,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. “If we attack, it will be fast, vicious, and sweet, just like the terrorist thugs attack our CHERISHED Christians! WARNING: THE NIGERIAN GOVERNMENT BETTER MOVE FAST!”

The post comes after the president on Friday designated Nigeria as a “country of particular concern,” citing the widespread killings of Christians.

I’M A CHRISTIAN FROM NIGER. DON’T IGNORE HORRIFYING ATTACKS ON AFRICAN CHRISTIANS

Advertisement

President of Nigeria, Bola Tinubu, said the country has taken action to safeguard religious freedom. (Ton Molina/Getty Images)

“Christianity is facing an existential threat in Nigeria,” Trump posted to Truth Social Friday. “Thousands of Christians are being killed. Radical Islamists are responsible for this mass slaughter. I am hereby making Nigeria a ‘COUNTRY OF PARTICULAR CONCERN’—But that is the least of it.”

He said Rep. Riley Moore, R-W. Va., Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., and members of the House Appropriations Committee were directed to look into the reports and present findings to him at a later date.

“The United States cannot stand by while such atrocities are happening in Nigeria, and numerous other Countries,” Trump wrote. “We stand ready, willing, and able to save our Great Christian population around the World!”

WHITE HOUSE RESPONDS TO SURGE IN CHRISTIAN PERSECUTION CRISIS ACROSS SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA

Advertisement
Nigerian Christians murdered

Pope Leo XIV condemned the killings of up to 200 people in Yelewata community in Nigeria. (Associated Press)

The persecution of Christians in Nigeria has reached crisis levels, as Islamist militants burn down villages, massacre worshipers and displace thousands across the north and central regions.

Attackers in June invaded a bishop’s village days after he testified before Congress, killing more than twenty people.

Other assaults in Plateau and Benue states have left hundreds dead, with survivors describing militants shouting “Allahu Akbar” as they burned churches and homes.

Christians in Nigeria

Members of St Leo Catholic Church hold a procession to mark Palm Sunday in Ikeja, Lagos, Nigeria, on April 13, 2025.  (Adekunle Ajayi/Getty Images)

International watchdog group Open Doors reported nearly 70% of Christians killed for their faith last year were in Nigeria.

Groups like Boko Haram, Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) and Fulani militants are blamed for most attacks, often targeting Christian farmers. Rights groups estimate 4,000–8,000 Christian deaths annually.

Advertisement

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital 50,000 Christians have been killed and 20,000 Christian schools and churches destroyed in the country since 2009, calling it “a crisis of religious genocide.”

Mark Walker, Trump’s ambassador-designate for International Religious Freedom, urged stronger U.S. pressure on Nigeria’s government, calling the violence a humanitarian crisis. He also pledged to work with Secretary of State Marco Rubio to strengthen U.S. advocacy.

I WAS KIDNAPPED BY BOKO HARAM, AND SURVIVED. NO THANKS TO THE WEST’S SILENCE

The White House and global leaders have condemned the violence, warning it could spread across Africa. However, Nigerian officials have denied systematic persecution, calling U.S. reports “misleading.”

Hours before Trump’s threat Saturday, Nigerian President Bola Ahmed Tinubu posted a statement on X, noting Nigeria “stands firmly” as a democracy governed by constitutional guarantees of religious liberty.

Advertisement

“Since 2023, our administration has maintained an open and active engagement with Christian and Muslim leaders alike and continues to address security challenges which affect citizens across faiths and regions,” Tinubu wrote in the statement. “The characterization of Nigeria as religiously intolerant does not reflect our national reality, nor does it take into consideration the consistent and sincere efforts of the government to safeguard freedom of religion and beliefs for all Nigerians. Religious freedom and tolerance have been a core tenet of our collective identity and shall always remain so.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Nigeria opposes religious persecution and does not encourage it,” he continued. “Nigeria is a country with constitutional guarantees to protect citizens of all faiths. Our administration is committed to working with the United States government and the international community to deepen understanding and cooperation on protection of communities of all faiths.”

Fox News Digital’s Efrat Lachter and Sophia Compton contributed to this report.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Judges order USDA to restart SNAP funding, but hungry families won’t get immediate relief

Published

on

Judges order USDA to restart SNAP funding, but hungry families won’t get immediate relief

Two federal judges told the U.S. Department of Agriculture in separate rulings Friday that it must begin using billions of dollars in contingency funding to provide federal food assistance to poor American families despite the federal shutdown, but gave the agency until Monday to decide how to do so.

Both Obama-appointed judges rejected Trump administration arguments that more than $5 billion in USDA contingency funds could not legally be tapped to continue Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits for nearly 42 million people — about 1 in 8 Americans — while the federal government remains closed. But both also left unclear how exactly the relief should be provided, or when it will arrive for millions of families set to lose benefits starting Saturday.

The two rulings came almost simultaneously Friday.

In Massachusetts, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani stopped short of granting California and a coalition of 24 other Democrat-led states a temporary restraining order they had requested. But she ruled that the states were likely to succeed in their arguments that the USDA’s total shutoff of SNAP benefits — despite having billions in emergency contingency funds on hand — was unlawful.

Advertisement

Talwani gave USDA until Monday to tell her whether they would authorize “only reduced SNAP benefits” using the contingency funding — which would not cover the total $8.5 billion to $9 billion needed for all November benefits, according to the USDA — or would authorize “full SNAP benefits using both the Contingency Funds and additional available funds.”

Separately, in Rhode Island, U.S. District Judge John McConnell granted a temporary restraining order requested by nonprofit organizations, ruling from the bench that SNAP must be funded with at least the contingency funds “as soon as possible,” and requesting an update on progress by Monday.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta — whose office helped bring the states’ lawsuit — praised the decisions of the two courts, saying SNAP benefits “provide an essential hunger safety net” to 5.5 million Californians. “Simply put, the stakes could not be higher.”

Skye Perryman, president and chief executive of Democracy Forward, which represented the nonprofit groups, said the ruling in that case “affirms what both the law and basic decency require” and “protects millions of families, seniors, and veterans from being used as leverage in a political fight.”

It was not clear if the administration would appeal the rulings. President Trump wrote in a post to his Truth Social platform that he does not want Americans to go hungry and that he had instructed the government’s lawyers “to ask the Court to clarify how we can legally fund SNAP as soon as possible,” as it would be his “HONOR” to provide the funding with “appropriate legal direction by the Court.”

Advertisement

“It is already delayed enough due to the Democrats keeping the Government closed through the monthly payment date and, even if we get immediate guidance, it will unfortunately be delayed while States get the money out,” Trump wrote, before urging SNAP recipients to call Democrats in Congress and demand they end the shutdown.

While the orders were a win for states and the nation’s SNAP recipients, they do not mean that all those recipients will be spared a lapse in their food aid, state officials stressed. State and local food banks continued scrambling to prepare for a deluge of need starting Saturday.

Asked Thursday if a ruling in the states’ favor would mean SNAP funds would be immediately loaded onto CalFresh and other benefits cards, Bonta said “the answer is no, unfortunately.”

“Our best estimates are that [SNAP benefit] cards could be loaded and used in about a week,” he said, calling that lag “problematic.”

“There could be about a week where people are hungry and need food,” he said. For new applicants to the program, he said, it could take even longer.

Advertisement

The rulings came as the now monthlong shutdown continued Friday with no immediate end in sight.

They also came after Trump called Thursday for the Senate to end the shutdown by first ending the filibuster, a longstanding rule that requires 60 votes to overcome objections to legislation. The rule has traditionally been favored by lawmakers as a means of blocking particularly partisan measures, and is currently being used by Democrats to resist the will of the current 53-seat Republican majority.

Los Angeles Regional Food Bank Chief Executive Michael Flood, standing alongside Bonta as members of the California National Guard worked behind them stuffing food boxes Thursday, said his organization was preparing for massive weekend lines, similar to those seen during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“This is a disaster type of situation,” Flood said.

“5.5 million Californians, 1.5 million children and adults in L.A. County alone, will be left high and dry — illegally so, unnecessarily so, in a way that is morally bankrupt,” Bonta said.

Advertisement

Bonta blamed the shutdown on Trump and his administration, and said the USDA broke the law by not tapping its contingency funds to continue payments.

Bonta said SNAP benefits have never been disrupted during previous federal government shutdowns, and should never have been disrupted during this shutdown, either.

“That was avoidable,” he said. “Trump created this problem.”

The Trump administration has blamed the shutdown and the looming disruption to SNAP benefits entirely on Democrats in Congress, who have blocked short-term spending measures to restart the government and fund SNAP. Democrats are holding out to pressure Republicans into rescinding massive cuts to subsidies that help millions of Americans afford health insurance.

Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, previously told The Times that Democrats should be the ones getting asked “when the shutdown will end,” because “they are the ones who have decided to shut down the government so they can use working Americans and SNAP benefits as ‘leverage’ to pursue their radical left wing agenda.”

Advertisement

“Americans are suffering because of Democrats,” Jackson said.

In their opposition to the states’ request for a temporary restraining order requiring the disbursement of funds, attorneys for the USDA argued that using emergency funds to cover November SNAP benefits would deplete funds meant to provide “critical support in the event of natural disasters and other uncontrollable catastrophes,” and could actually cause more disruption to benefits down the line.

They wrote that SNAP requires between $8.5 billion and $9 billion each month, and the USDA’s contingency fund has only about $5.25 billion, meaning it could not fully fund November benefits even if it did release contingency funding. Meanwhile, “a partial payment has never been made — and for good reason,” because it would force every state to recalculate benefits for recipients and then recalibrate their systems to provide the new amounts, they wrote.

That “would take weeks, if it can be done at all,” and would then have to be undone in order to issue December benefits at normal levels, assuming the shutdown would have lifted by then, they wrote.

Simply pausing the benefits to immediately be reissued whenever the shutdown ends is the smarter and less disruptive course of action, they argued.

Advertisement

In addition to suing the administration, California and its leaders have been rushing to ensure that hungry families have something to eat in coming days. Gov. Gavin Newsom directed $80 million to food banks to stock up on provisions, and activated the National Guard to help package food for those who need it.

Counties have also been working to offset the need, including by directing additional funding to food banks and other resource centers and asking partners in the private sector to assist.

Dozens of organizations in California have written to Newsom calling on him to use state funds to fully cover the missing federal benefits, in order to prevent “a crisis of unthinkable magnitude,” but Newsom has suggested that is not possible given the scale of funding withheld.

SNAP served about 41.7 million people in 2024, at an annual cost of nearly $100 billion, according to the USDA. Children and older people accounted for more than 63% of California recipients.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Millions at Risk of Hunger as Food Stamp Freeze Looms

Published

on

Video: Millions at Risk of Hunger as Food Stamp Freeze Looms

new video loaded: Millions at Risk of Hunger as Food Stamp Freeze Looms

transcript

transcript

Millions at Risk of Hunger as Food Stamp Freeze Looms

Forty-two million low-income Americans could lose access to food assistance on Nov. 1, making it the most significant and dire casualty of a governmentwide closure that has stretched into its fifth week. A judge is set to rule Friday on whether the Trump administration must reverse course and continue to fund the program known as SNAP.

I started using SNAP about a year ago. As soon as you turn an adult, expenses just hit you. And it’s hard to afford things. Your country is supposed to be supporting you, and the last thing you want to worry about is if you’re going to have food on your table at the end of the night. We have a lot of seniors here. There’s a lot of disabled people, so they rely on us because the SNAP is just not enough. And especially now, when there’s going to be completely cut off, they’re going to rely on us 100 percent even more to come and get as much food as possible.

Advertisement
Forty-two million low-income Americans could lose access to food assistance on Nov. 1, making it the most significant and dire casualty of a governmentwide closure that has stretched into its fifth week. A judge is set to rule Friday on whether the Trump administration must reverse course and continue to fund the program known as SNAP.

By Monika Cvorak

October 31, 2025

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending