Vance blames deceased woman for ICE shooting in heated press conference

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz is preparing the state’s National Guard after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent fatally shot 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis.

Walz announced Thursday he is authorizing the Minnesota National Guard to be “staged and ready” as protesters gather in Minneapolis. This comes as reports indicate the ICE officer who shot Good has been identified as Jonathan Ross. Federal officials described Ross as “an experienced” officer, according to The Minnesota Star Tribune.

At a White House press briefing Thursday, Vice President JD Vance said Good “violated the law” and committed an act of “terrorism.”

“She was trying to ram this guy with her car,” Vance said. He added that her death was “a tragedy of her own making.”

Videos, taken by bystanders at the scene, do not support the allegation that Good was attempting to hit the agent, according to an analysis by The New York Times.

Good’s ex-husband, who asked not be be named, told the Associated Press that she had driven her young son to school shortly before she was shot in the head by the ICE agent.

Earlier Thursday, Walz slammed the Trump administration’s decision to bar state officials from participating in the shooting investigation.

“I just want to make this clear for everyone: Minnesota must be part of this investigation,” Walz said after the U.S. Attorney’s Office, which operates under the Justice Department, decided that the Federal Bureau of Investigation would solely handle the probe.

ICE killing takes America a step closer to George Orwell’s nightmare

Orwellian” is a word that gets chucked around far too much, but there is surely something quite sinister in the official response to the shooting of a civilian, Renee Nicole Good, in Minneapolis by a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer.

Obviously, in such circumstances, there’s always some room for argument about what happened and why, but not about the more obvious facts, backed up by videos and eyewitness accounts.

The ultimate boss of ICE, the homeland security secretary, Kristi Noem, declared that Good was involved in an act of “domestic terrorism”, as if she were an Isis operative – and with zero evidence to back up that extreme claim, and little sign that Good was deliberately using her vehicle as a weapon.

Donald Trump, who is responsible for militarising Democrat‑run cities for his own reasons, even claimed – having viewed a video – that she had “viciously run over” the ICE agent, even though the agent in question can apparently be seen walking away from the incident towards an ICE vehicle and has since been released from hospital.

The president likes to put his spin on a story as quickly as possible; soon enough, the ICE-Noem-Trump version of events formed the basis for Maga “talking points” on social and mainstream media. Meanwhile, none of the local authorities in Minnesota, so far as can be seen, agree with the “federal” view. Points of law – such as the degree of force permitted in these circumstances – are disputed.

Fortunately, ubiquitous video coverage now allows us to see and judge for ourselves, and as we pore over the facts, it’s fair to say that they do not unequivocally support the account given by Trump and Noem.

Good’s car, for example, does not appear to be driving at great speed directly towards the ICE agent; rather, it seems to be pulling away and steering clear of the officers. Three shots were fired, seemingly deliberately, and with fatal consequences.

There will be official investigations and extensive media analysis – and, of course, the usual crop of conspiracy theories. But, given the video and the wider political climate in Trump’s America, one is inevitably reminded of one of Orwell’s more famous lines from Nineteen Eighty-Four: “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

There has also been a “Ministry of Truth” element to President Trump’s rewriting of history over the past few weeks. Not content with throwing random, misleading remarks into the ether during his increasingly aimless “weaves”, he has ordered official versions of past presidencies and of the insurrection on 6 January 2021.

They are such ludicrous, self‑glorifying inversions of the truth that it is hard to believe anyone would take them seriously – but, as someone (not Orwell, though he’d agree) once said, “A lie told once remains a lie, but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth.”

The White House timeline of 6 January portrays the president promoting peace; Mike Pence – who was almost murdered – as a villain; the rioters as patriots; and the brave police as killers.

Trump’s potted biographies of his predecessors in the “walk of fame” are entirely unreliable and designed solely to flatter his ego. He is such an insecure man, behind the bluster, that he must be sustained by fantasies such as the “stolen” election of 2020; it is possible that, schizophrenically, he sometimes believes truth and falsehood simultaneously, depending on which is most useful to him – consistency, except in his fixation on Joe Biden, is unnecessary.

To use another fashionable term, this is “gaslighting” on a grand scale – everything from falling egg prices to who started the war in Ukraine to who pays for tariffs is up for revision.

The world is used to it, and many of us are clear‑sighted enough to find it almost comical. Yet there are sufficient allies of the president across media and the tech giants, and bogus “journalists” now given spurious respectability in Washington, for lies to be propagated and facts suppressed, making rational political debate and genuine choice harder than ever.

We already know that the FBI investigation led by director Kash Patel (an ultra even in Trumpworld) into the Minneapolis shooting will not be believed by many; nor, likely, will the version prepared by the State of Minnesota.

The memory of poor Renee Nicole Good will be desecrated as she is cast as a terrorist, and America will take another step into the darkness Orwell warned us about. When you start rewriting history, it never ends well.

PM accused of delaying ethnic pay gap law over Farage backlash fears

Keir Starmer’s government has been accused of delaying moves to tackle the ethnic minority pay gap because of fears of a backlash from Nigel Farage’s Reform.

A scathing letter from the Ethnicity Pay Gap Steering Committee has questioned why it has taken the government six months to introduce legislation to make reporting on the issue mandatory for large employers, as promised following the end of a review.

In the letter to equalities minister, Seema Malhotra, the committee has lashed out at the delay and suggested that fear of right-wing political pushback was at the heart of the issue.

Noreen Biddle Shah, founder of the think tank Reboot, who wrote the letter on behalf of the committee, said: “My view is that it is reasonable to ask whether the lack of movement on long-awaited legislation is being shaped by concern about political pushback, particularly at a time when the rhetoric around race has become more charged and the popularity of Reform has grown.

“But our research shows something very clear: despite heightened social tension, the public still overwhelmingly supports transparency and fairness at work.”

Her comments come as a More in Common poll saw support for Reform surge by three points to 31 per cent, ahead of the Tories on 23 per cent, with Labour down two on just 19 per cent.

There are concerns that Labour is losing out in traditional so-called red Wall seats in the north of England, the Midlands, and Wales to Reform by pushing an anti-migrant message, with leading politicians using racially charged language.

Calling for an explanation on the delay in legislation, Ms Biddle Shah wrote: “The King’s speech was in July 2024 and the consultation ended in June 2025. We expected clarity by late 2025. The longer the government says nothing, the harder it becomes to explain why.”

The issue has been pegged to economic growth, with Sandra Kerr, race equality director at Business in the Community, previously highlighting that closing ethnicity pay gaps could add £37 billion a year to UK Gross Domestic Product (GDP), while mandatory reporting on wages would help ensure employees feel “valued, respected, and treated fairly at work.”

The letter was sent to coincide with Ethnicity Pay Gap Day, aimed at drawing attention to the persistent pay inequalities faced by ethnic minority workers. It represents an embarrassment for Ms Malhotra, who is set to be the keynote speaker at the Ethnicity Pay Gap Summit in February.

The Ethnicity Pay Gap Campaign, founded by Dianne Greyson, has been calling on employers and policymakers to address the lack of transparency around ethnicity pay disparities, which continue to leave many workers earning significantly less than their white counterparts.

Unlike gender pay gap reporting, ethnicity pay gap reporting remains voluntary in the UK, despite mounting evidence of structural inequality in pay, progression and opportunity, with campaigners calling for it to be made mandatory.

According to multiple studies, employees from Black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds are, on average, paid less than white employees across many sectors, even when accounting for their role and seniority. Campaigners argue that without mandatory reporting, organisations lack both the incentive and accountability to address the problem.

A study by the University of Surrey in 2024 found that in the NHS, 29.5 per cent of staff were from ethnic minorities, but only 7.9 per cent of senior management came from ethnic minorities.

A government spokesperson said: “The government is committed to introducing mandatory ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting.

“Ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting will provide transparency and vital data to help businesses identify and close ethnicity and disability pay gaps within their workforces.

“Good progress has been made in analysing the responses to the public consultation and developing our policy and legislative approach. We will announce further details in due course”

Former Labour minister tells Starmer’s government to quit X

A former Labour cabinet minister has called on the government to quit social media platform X (Twitter) amid concerns about the creation of sexualised images of adults and children.

In an intervention which will pile pressure on Sir Keir Starmer to take a stand against the platform, owned by tech billionaire Elon Musk, Louise Haigh said it was “unconscionable to use the site for another minute”.

She called on the Labour Party and government to “remove themselves entirely from X and communicate with the public where they actually participate online and can be protected from such illegality”.

It came as the prime minister demanded that X urgently “get their act together” and threatened to take action against the platform following reports that its AI tool Grok is being used to make sexualised images of children.

But ministers have so far rejected calls for a boycott, with a government source telling The Independent: “We will not be bullied out of a public space. It is up to Elon Musk to make sure this is a platform where everyone can feel welcome.”

An internet safety organisation said its analysts have confirmed the existence of “criminal imagery of children aged between 11 and 13 which appears to have been created using the (Grok) tool”.

The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) said the material was being shared in a dark web forum by users “boasting how they had used Grok, and how easy it had been”.

In a post to X, Ms Haigh, who resigned as transport secretary last year after it emerged she had previously been convicted of a fraud offence, said: “I have not personally used X/Twitter for some time now. It was already an unpleasant place prior to its takeover by Elon Musk, but since his acceptance of hate speech and anonymous online abusers, it has become utterly unusable.

“I continued to maintain an account and occasionally post because a critical mass of people, including the government and journalists who we need to communicate with as MPs, remained on the site.

“However, the revelations around the enablement, if not encouragement, of child sexual abuse mean it is unconscionable to use the site for another minute.”

She added: “I call on my party and my government to remove themselves entirely from X and communicate with the public where they actually participate online and can be protected from such illegality.”

Her intervention came just one day after the Women and Equalities Committee confirmed it had stopped using the social media platform, piling pressure on Downing Street to stage a boycott.

Committee chair Sarah Owen, who stopped using X in 2024, said she and her colleagues no longer see it as appropriate to use the platform to share their work.

In a letter to Cabinet Office minister Nick Thomas-Symonds, Ms Owen said: “It is surely no longer tenable for the government to have a continued presence on such a platform, not least given the government’s mission in tackling violence against women and girls.”

Speaking to Greatest Hits Radio on Thursday, Sir Keir said: “This is disgraceful. It’s disgusting. And it’s not to be tolerated.

“X has got to get a grip of this. And Ofcom has our full support to take action in relation to this. This is wrong. It’s unlawful.

“We’re not going to tolerate it. I’ve asked for all options to be on the table.

“It’s disgusting. And X need to get their act together and get this material down. And we will take action on this because it’s simply not tolerable.”

The prime minister’s official spokesperson described what had happened with the creation of sexualised images on Grok as “a disgrace” and “completely unacceptable”.

The No 10 spokesperson added: “No one should have to go through the ordeal of seeing intimate deepfakes of themselves online and we won’t allow the proliferation of these demeaning images.

“X needs to deal with this urgently, and Ofcom has our full backing to take enforcement action wherever firms are failing to protect UK users.

“It already has the power to issue fines of up to billions of pounds and even stop access to a site that is violating the law.

“And when it comes to keeping people safe online, all options remain on the table.”

Asked if the government would stop using the app, the spokesperson said: “All options are on the table.”

A post this month on the Grok X account said that there have been “isolated cases where users prompted for and received AI images depicting minors in minimal clothing”, and added: “AI has safeguards, but improvements are ongoing to block such requests entirely.”

Meet Stephen Miller — Trump’s man with the plan for Greenland

Stephen Miller rocked the world this week when he took to the airwaves and declared that Greenland “should be part of the United States,” insisting that no country would dare fight the US over the territory’s future. The bracing “America first” message came as an unpleasant shock for many, but it was all in a day’s work for those who had experience of the man credited with turning Donald Trump’s words into policy deeds.

Described by Steve Bannon, the ultra-conservative pundit, as “Trump’s Prime Minister,” Miller, 40, has long been one of the “true believers” who can make the unthinkable happen. Not for nothing is Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff lavishly trolled by California Governor Gavin Newsom, who casts him as Voldemort — the source of evil in the world of Harry Potter.

It was hardly surprising, then, that a photograph issued by the White House seemed to show that Miller may have been one of the few people in the Mar-a-Lago “war room” as President Trump monitored US military strikes against Venezuela. He is also credited with being one of the key architects of ICE, having served as senior adviser to the President during his first term. Even after leaving office, Miller continued to defend ICE and shape immigration rhetoric, making good on the pledge to “oversee the largest deportation operation in American history.” It’s why critics often describe ICE as being “run from the White House,” with Miller as one of its most powerful behind-the-scenes drivers.

Until recently, Miller, whose twin roles currently include Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Adviser, appeared content with modest titles, so long as he retained the power to enact policy and ensure its delivery. But this week, he thrust himself into the limelight like never before with his forthright and contentious statements that America should, and could, “take” Greenland.

One of the President’s inner circle since the 2016 campaign, Miller’s influence stretches back to the melee of Trump’s first run, and in the second presidential incarnation he has become the prime implementer of “America first” thinking. From national security decisions to the endgame of Ukraine-Russia talks, and now the withdrawal from dozens of UN-led and climate-crisis-combating organizations, Miller cuts a saturnine figure feared by many for his brutal teardowns of those around him.

One UK trade official says: “If you fall on the wrong side of what he wants, whatever else you’ve agreed counts for nothing,” adding: “Miller doesn’t just have the President’s ear, he shapes what goes into it, which is far more important.” While figures such as Scott Bessent at the Treasury or Howard Lutnick at Commerce maintain friendly relations with the UK — particularly as a new ambassador, Christian Turner, takes up his post — Miller is no cocktail-sipping diplomat. His days are a relentless round of pressure, and brow-beating anyone who gets in his way.

Even in this gloves-off realm, Miller is seen as a bare-knuckle fighter for the MAGA cause. While Secretary of State Marco Rubio suggested the issue of Greenland could be handled more delicately to shore up security in a way that suits US interests, Miller went straight into fight mode, telling CNN: “What is their basis for having Greenland as a colony of Denmark? The United States is the power of NATO… Obviously, Greenland should be part of the United States.”

One view of these abrupt “Millerisms” is that they serve to make the final outcomes of Trump’s foreign policies seem less extreme. Democrats such as Newsom needle Miller mercilessly, trolling him as a glum-faced automaton and posting: “AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, WE ARE GIVING SERIOUS THOUGHT TO TAKING AWAY STEPHEN MILLER’S CALIFORNIA RESIDENCY.”

The only authoritative biography of Miller is Hatemonger: Stephen Miller, Donald Trump, and the White Nationalist Agenda, by American reporter Jean Guerrero, published in 2020. She describes his early childhood in a $1m, five-bedroom home in the North of Montana area of Santa Monica — one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in greater Los Angeles.

At school, Miller was known for baiting liberal-minded peers and teachers, reportedly throwing rubbish on the floor and demanding the cleaning staff pick it up. “Am I the only one here who is sick and tired of being told to pick up my trash when we have plenty of janitors who are paid to do it for us?” he once said.

While many classmates found his behaviour abhorrent, Miller cast himself as a free-speech champion. An aversion to immigration drove his trajectory from California schooldays to Duke University, where he read politics, and later to Breitbart — the right-wing news website. When Trump declared, “Our whole country is rotting, like a third-world country,” Miller emailed friends: “Trump gets it… I wish he’d run for President.” A year later, Trump launched his campaign, and Miller, barely 30, joined it.

More than almost anyone else in Trump’s orbit, Miller now pushes the pace and scope of the President’s doctrine. He is still seen as the central force driving immigration enforcement and asylum removals, turning ICE into one of the most feared federal agencies in the country.

Miller set targets of thousands of deportations a day, blurring the distinction between asylum seekers and undocumented migrants. The use of force as a means to an end has been normalised, at home and abroad. On Monday night, talking about Greenland on CNN, Miller shared what might be called the Trump Doctrine, telling Jake Tapper: “We live in a world, in the real world, Jake, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world since the beginning of time.”

Many figures in Trump’s universe love to talk — JD Vance rarely stops issuing opinions — but Miller is known for his tart tongue and terse delivery. “Donald Trump without the sense of humour,” says one veteran of the 2016 campaign.

I first encountered him that year, as he lurked at the edge of the cordon in the plush velvet of the massive Trump Hotel, his famous perpetually sulky expression a contrast to the giddy roar and glitz of the rest of the Trump team. Among them was Ivanka, Trump’s daughter, who is married to Jared Kushner, the Middle East and Ukraine talks envoy. Miller was seen as “a bit too much”. Later, as a “zero tolerance” immigration policy led to thousands of children being separated from their parents at the southern border, Melania Trump — along with Ivanka — expressed discomfort and urged Trump to change course. They did not prevail, and Miller’s continued rise is cited as one possible reason for Ivanka’s decision to step back during Trump’s second presidency.

His demanding nature is notorious. The Atlantic recently cited a senior official who has participated in his infamous progress-chasing calls: “He pushes everybody to the absolute limit because he knows that the clock is ticking,” the source said. “He gets on the phone and he yells at everybody. Nobody is spared from his wrath.” Miller “counts in thousands,” one figure who defends illegal migrants tells me, speaking anonymously for fear of reprisals against his clients and colleagues.

Miller is so purist in his beliefs that even the President jokes about his zeal. When I attended a Christian Conservative-MAGA event not long ago at the Liberty University, General Mike Flynn spoke at length in biblical terms about America being “one step away from destruction” and locked in a battle with the “forces of darkness.” That language is religious in inspiration and has been honed by Miller as a way of adding a Christian Conservative framework to the personality cult of MAGA. As The Nation noted in a recent profile of Miller, the most memorable line of Trump’s 2017 inauguration — “This American carnage stops right here and stops right now” — came straight from Miller’s pen.

Miller’s glamorous wife, Katie, a Conservative podcaster targeting middle-America mums, is on-message too, unnerving European leaders with a social media post depicting a stars and stripes flag covering a map of Greenland under the word “SOON”. Even the couple’s marriage in 2020 was blessed in Trump’s presence at the Trump Hotel.

How Vance views Miller’s growing prominence is unclear, but, make no mistake, the fight for MAGA’s future is already underway. With Rubio another contender, it is no coincidence that Miller has played a prominent role in the capture of Nicolas Maduro and the escalation over Greenland, signaling a new phase in the administration’s disregard for international norms.

“Stephen’s mode is always to outdo any other competitor on the Trump team,” says one former aide. Even Trump has joked about Miller “sitting at the top of the totem pole” in his hierarchy. The public profile Miller now enjoys is a far cry from the sweaty backroom world of Breitbart websites and trying to keep the 2016 election message centred. While Newsom’s barbs about Miller as Voldemort, the incarnation of bad intentions, might amuse America’s battered liberals, it is worth remembering that Voldemort wielded power for a very long time before his downfall.

Trump without Miller, reflects a former campaigning colleague, “would be far less effective across so many areas of this presidency.” Beyond the Trump era, the fight for the future of the right is already starting — and Miller shows every sign of being a central player at the heart of what could be a very fraught battlefield.

Anne McElvoy is host of the ‘Politics at Sam and Anne’s’ podcast and executive editor at Politico

Your dream cruise formula: From Caribbean islands to European cities

If your ideal holiday is one that blends fuss-free adventure with great culinary choices and sumptuous relaxation, then book yourself onto a cruise immediately. From experiencing rich cultures, visiting breathtaking beauty spots, and dining on delicious delicacies – cruising has become one of the most luxurious ways to travel.

This dream-holiday formula is something that Virgin Voyages has perfected with its multi-award-winning, adult-only cruises, which sail across Europe, North America and the Caribbean. From entertaining onboard experiences and modern facilities to exciting escapades on land, these are the types of trips that are worth writing home about, and why Virgin Voyages has been named Travel + Leisure ® World’s Best #1 Mega Ship for an impressive three years in a row.

Here’s what would-be Sailors can expect from a Virgin Voyages cruise…

Whichever of the 150-plus destinations you choose to sail to, one thing remains guaranteed, you’ll get an unforgettable journey, and leave with happy stories to share with loved ones back home. Why not make those memories on Virgin Voyages’ impressive Lady Ships, with Scarlet Lady, Valiant Lady, Resilient Lady and Brilliant Lady each offering a distinct personality which is encapsulated in everything from decor to destinations. Expect enough amenities and activities to entertain a small city: from tequila tasting to spa days and over 20 premium eateries serving menus curated by Michelin starred chefs. There’s a whole holiday’s worth of experiences before you’ve even docked at your first port.

Be gone any thoughts of pokey, old-fashioned interiors and get ready to embrace charming cabins with a super-yacht aesthetic. No matter which of the Virgin Voyages sleeping quarters you choose from, you’ll be met with super comfortable beds, a roomy rainshower, mood lighting, free Wi-Fi and a large flat-screen HDTV. Want to really push the boat out? Opt for luxury suites that promise five-star comfort and opulence, with champagne tables, sun loungers, handwoven terrace hammocks and in-room bars. Virgin Voyages ‘RockStar’ Sailors can also enjoy everything from VIP entrances to private access to rooftop terraces.

Whether your spirit is one of a dancing queen or a sophisticated theatre-goer, Virgin Voyages has nightlife and entertainment options to suit every taste – developed with the help of the world’s most-talked-about directors, choreographers, and artists. Choose from 80s parties, festival acts or classic stories like Romeo and Juliet – reinvented with a circus twist. Each ship offers something different, so if you’re a Virgin Voyages regular, you’ll never see the same thing twice. Save your vocal chords for the private karaoke rooms, while the casinos and gaming arcades could elevate an already winning mood even further.

Don’t want to leave your full-on fitness regime behind when you go on holiday? Or are you just curious to try a new healthy group class? Whatever your wellness wishes, there’s plenty to keep you busy onboard with workouts for every level. There’s yoga, HIIT, weight training, boxing, meditation and more, plus running or walking the signature 255-metre-ish Virgin red running track, which curves around the top of the ship in a halo shape. If relaxation is your main goal, head to the spa for everything from steam room and sauna to hot stone massage and seaweed wrap. The beauty salon offers a range of professional treatments, from manicures, pedicures and nail art to IV therapy, Botox and fillers.

While you’re free to enjoy port cities at your own leisure, Virgin Voyages also curates an array of land excursions or ‘Shore Things’ for those who want to immerse themselves in local culture. Why not enjoy a barefoot fish cookout on the Mexican island of Cozumel, a late night party on the Greek Island of Mykonos or visit the historic halls of Harvard University when sailing through Boston, Massachusetts. If you’re cruising the Caribbean, choose from a beach day in St Vincent and The Grenadines; explore the private island of Mustique or visit the colourful buildings of the capital Kingstown. Do as much or as little as you like – you’re always in charge!

Proving that there really is a cruise for everyone, Virgin Voyages’ child-free cruises visit almost endless destinations that span Europe, North America and the Caribbean. Choose a five-night cruise from New York to Bermuda, taking in the paradise pink-sand beaches, maritime history and cafe culture of the island, or maybe a seven-night voyage starting in Los Angeles and sailing to Cabo San Lucas and Mazatlan in Mexico. For a trip closer to home, soak in the Mediterranean sunshine while visiting Europe’s most famous cities and islands starting in the homeports of Greece and Spain. Tick off an array of bucket list destinations with the Idyllic Ibiza cruise aboard the Valiant Lady; set sail from Rome to Barcelona with stop offs at the superluxe Amalfi Coast, Cannes and Ibiza – now, that’s what you call an A-list adventure.

With so many incredible destinations to visit and on-board luxury to explore, a cruise with Virgin Voyages is a holiday you’ll never stop talking about.

Discover Virgin Voyages luxury range of cruises and plan your next adventure today

Republicans break ranks to halt future Trump attacks on Venezuela

A group of Republican senators delivered Donald Trump a message of opposition to begin the new year as they voted to limit the president’s ability to launch new attacks on Venezuela.

Five members of the president’s party broke ranks to support a War Powers Act resolution sponsored by Sen. Tim Kaine, a Democrat from Virginia, aimed at preventing the White House from using resources to support further military action inside Venezuela following the capture of the country’s leader Nicolas Maduro. The new resolution blocks the president from using the military against Venezuela without authorization from Congress.

One of them, Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), denied that his vote was not a rebuke of the president: “This is all about going forward. If the president should determine, you know what, I need to put troops on the ground in Venezuela, I think that wouldn’t require Congress.”

But after Thursday, a vote of 52-47 now stands as one of the largest shows of Republican resistance on Capitol Hill so far during Trump’s second presidency.

And the president clearly didn’t feel the same way. He quickly dropped a bomb on the wayward Republicans, naming them on Truth Social and writing that “Republicans should be ashamed of the Senators that just voted with Democrats…Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Rand Paul, Josh Hawley, and Todd Young should never be elected to office again.”

The resolution passed with a greater showing of Republican support than had manifested for a similar resolution in the fall, which took place before the raid on Venezuela’s capital to capture Maduro. Just one Democrat, John Fetterman, expressed support for the president’s actions in response to the Maduro raid, but even he fell into line and voted with his party Thursday.

Just two Republicans previously voted to restrict the president’s warmaking in the fall, as a campaign of military strikes against small boats the U.S. has accused of being used for drug smuggling escalated in the Caribbean: Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Rand Paul of Kentucky.

Three of their colleagues joined them this week. Sens. Susan Collins, Josh Hawley and Todd Young voted in the affirmative, and indicated to reporters that the capture of Maduro changed the calculation.

The legislation will be sent to the House, and can still be vetoed if it reaches the president’s desk.

White House officials including the president have refused to take the use of U.S. forces, including a ground invasion, off the table to stabilize Venezuela in the wake of Maduro’s capture.

Paul spoke to reporters after the vote and was equally averse to describing it as a firm break with the president.

“I think it’s part of the healthy debate that we have in a republic,” he contended.

But the senator admitted that lawmakers and Americans alike were spooked by the rhetoric coming out of the White House, both from Trump who indicated that he’ll pursue potential efforts at regime change or efforts to stop drug trafficking elsewhere, and the likes of Stephen Miller and Karoline Leavitt who repeatedly refused this week to rule out a military invasion of Greenland, which is controlled by a fellow Nato member-state.

Trump and his allies have been cagey about details regarding his future plans for the Western Hemisphere. He has reignited calls for the U.S. to acquire Greenland, while pointedly not ruling out military force and drawing condemnations from European leaders, who say such an act would shatter the NATO alliance. Officials have also revealed only the hints of a solid plan for Venezuela’s future amid questions of who the administration views as the country’s rightful leader, when elections will be held and whether the U.S. has plans to take over or seize parts of Venezuela’s oil reserves.

“I think it concerns people the more they hear loose rhetoric like, Columbia, you’re next green Greenland, you’re next. Watch out. And so the more it becomes that, well, that the President can make these decisions without any kind of authorization from Congress. I think that’s starting to worry more people,” said Paul.

Paul did not answer when asked by The Independent whether he would support similar legislation, introduced by Sen. Ruben Gallego, to restrict military force against Greenland. But he and other lawmakers in both chambers have warned against such saber-rattling from the White House.

“[A]ny effort to claim or take the territory by force would degrade both our national security and our international relationships,” wrote Murkowski, one of Thursday’s yes votes, on Wednesday evening.

Todd Young, her colleague, added of his yes vote on Thursday: “Although I remain open to persuasion, any future commitment of U.S. forces in Venezuela must be subject to debate and authorization in Congress.

“President Trump campaigned against forever wars, and I strongly support him in that position. A drawn-out campaign in Venezuela involving the American military, even if unintended, would be the opposite of President Trump’s goal of ending foreign entanglements,” the Indiana Republican wrote in a statement.

The Senate’s vote follows an all-senators briefing on the subject earlier in the week and complaints from Democrats that the administration gave no forewarning, including to lawmakers with intelligence backgrounds, regarding the strike.

Members of the opposition party who exited the briefing on Wednesday said that the president planned to “steal” Venezuela’s oil “at gun point,” while the future of the country remained unclear.

“This is an insane plan. They’re talking about stealing Venezuelan oil at gunpoint for an undefined period of time to micromanage an entire country,” claimed Sen. Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, as he spoke with reporters after Wednesday’s briefing. “The scope and insanity of this is absolutely stunning.”

Even some Republicans who voted against the War Powers resolution on Thursday expressed the need for the administration to guarantee stability within Venezuela in the immediate term, and expressed doubts that American energy companies would make long-term investments without that guarantee. Those with concerns included Thom Tillis, who excoriated the White House this week over rhetoric from Miller and others about Greenland.

“I think [success] depends largely on whether or not we can help the President by passing legislation that sustains the effort. Because, frankly, if we don’t do that, why on earth would anybody in the energy sector invest in something that may only be a stable it may be stable for three years?” Tillis asked.

Martinelli sins leave sour taste in Arsenal and Liverpool’s drab draw

Arsenal wanted a statement, but there won’t be much more said about this 0-0 draw with Liverpool at all – outside the controversy surrounding Gabriel Martinelli’s shameful moment. It was perhaps surprising that Arne Slot‘s players didn’t respond with even greater fury after he pushed a clearly injured Conor Bradley off the pitch.

It was otherwise very much like the game in August, except without a moment of magic to settle it, or pretty much any creativity at all.

An otherwise great Christmas for Arsenal still ends up feeling, well, like a rainy midweek evening in January. The entire occasion involved a certain restlessness, but the home crowd can at least remind themselves that they are in a better position than they were a month ago, and a commanding six points clear.

It was just that Mikel Arteta’s side were too willing to cede control, in a game that can at least offer Slot some solace.

This was a third successive draw, but one that wasn’t like the others.

If Arsenal are to end up winning the title, they will have done so without actually beating last season’s champions in the league. Liverpool have claimed four points against them, out of two matches where the best you can say is that both showed each other an awful lot of respect. That’s despite constant murmurs that they don’t really like each other too much.

Perhaps that was seen in Martinelli’s stunning intervention, but there’s absolutely no excuse for that. That could be one moment from this match that provokes further discussion – and a lot of controversy – but Slot did take the temperature out of it by almost speaking on the Brazilian’s behalf. The Liverpool manager said that time-wasting is a general problem in football and it should be understood that frustrated players might feel that every incident is such in the heat of the moment – even if this obviously wasn’t.

“You cannot expect Martinelli to think so clear in the 94th minute,” Slot said.

Liverpool did enough to remind the world of their quality without actually showing it, while Arsenal weren’t allowed to play their game. Liverpool had most of the possession in the second half.

Ultimately, though, very little actually happened in a match from which everyone expected so much.

And, for want of an actual discussion, it’s impossible not to say that more was by now expected of Viktor Gyokeres. It is a talking point.

Arsenal may still be in firm control of their destiny, but one of the lingering doubts is over the forward line, and what Arteta actually ends up deciding to do there.

How long will he keep faith with Gyokeres?

The recovering Gabriel Jesus is already a ball of energy any time he comes on, something that stands out all the more when it’s put in immediate contrast with the Swede’s relative sluggishness. Kai Havertz is, meanwhile, expected back on Sunday.

There’s even an argument that midfielder Mikel Merino is a more useful option right now.

It’s hard not to think that Gyokeres will soon be on the bench, which is probably better for Arsenal than five yards behind a ball that flashes across the box.

This isn’t to immediately dismiss the player. He’s clearly still adapting to the leap that the Premier League represents, and isn’t quite up to speed.

It is very much speed that is the issue, though.

There were three big moments in the first half, where you would have expected a striker of his profile to do everything to get there.

One was a Jurrien Timber head back. One was a Saka cut back. Another was a flashed Leandro Trossard ball across the box.

Yet, for each, Gyokeres ended up around five yards behind play.

He ended up going off on 64 minutes after making a mere eight touches.

A bit more force for even one of those chances, and it could have been nine and a goal.

For Gyokeres’ part, he did offer one fine moment with a smart reverse pass for Timber. Arsenal didn’t even have another shot until the 90th minute, either, but that wasn’t completely down to the attacking options.

Arteta was evidently willing his team to be much more contained.

That was despite Liverpool not having much in attack themselves, which is much more explainable.

Three of their attacking stars are out, and they ended up playing a forward up front who has occasionally filled in at left wing-back.

Liverpool did begin to get control of the game in the second half, but couldn’t do much with it.

They didn’t have the individual creativity or the collective integration.

Florian Wirtz was often left looking frustrated near the area as another Liverpool attack went nowhere, and certainly not towards him.

This is maybe the greater concern for Slot. His team aren’t really building. They’re now too dependent on individual inspiration.

The difference in what Liverpool were and are could be seen in one set piece, albeit not from Arsenal. Back in August, Dominik Szoboszlai struck a 30-yard free-kick that flew into the top corner. Here, it flew into the crowd.

Wayward, indulged and not looking like anything it was expected to be: a bit like the team right now.

He did get closer with one that was nearer to the goal. Like so much in this match, though, it did not ultimately end with a shot on target.

Arsenal couldn’t even do that with one of their late set. pieces, with the final whistle going just after Gabriel headed down and wide.

Even the last word was muted.