作者： root

Minneapolis has shown America is on the verge of a new racial reckoning

The Black Lives Matter signs that once graced front lawns across America are no longer fashionable. The best-selling anti-racism books gather dust. The armies of protesters that once poured like lava through cities chanting, “I Can’t Breathe” have disappeared.

But keep an eye on Minnesota. What’s been happening there marks the beginning of a new type of racial reckoning. It won’t have the spectacle or lofty expectations of the 2020 George Floyd protests. It could, however, have more staying power.

This claim may sound implausible. Floyd’s murder by a Minneapolis police officer sparked what some have called the largest protest movement in US history. White support for the Black Lives Matter movement reached an all-time high. Elected officials removed Confederate monuments, and former President George W. Bush, a Republican, issued a public statement asking, “How do we end systemic racism in our society?”

That reckoning, though, was more than sweeping protests. Many journalists who covered those protests, including me, defined them as a moment when White people were “forced to confront racism” and face “unpleasant truths.”

That moment failed to live up to expectations. It largely fizzled out in 2021. But some of those same dynamics from 2020 have been present this year in Minneapolis — along with something new. As the Trump administration ends its immigration enforcement surge in Minnesota, the anti-ICE protests there offer an approach for transformational change that blends old and new lessons.

And they’re built on a firmer foundation than the George Floyd protests — for three reasons.

There’s been a racial awakening on immigration

There are obvious links between the Floyd protests and the recent demonstrations in Minnesota. Both were ignited after bystanders recorded videos of citizens dying at the hands of law enforcement. Both took place roughly in the same South Minneapolis neighborhood. Both centered on civic resistance to accusations of law enforcement brutality.

And here’s another common factor: Both forced Americans to confront lessons about racism that had been ignored or forgotten.

President Donald Trump has described his aggressive immigration crackdown as a way to get rid of undocumented immigrants who’ve committed serious crimes, a group administration officials describe as the “worst of the worst.” But the events in Minneapolis have forced many White Americans to confront another possibility: Excluding racial and ethnic minorities is central to President Donald Trump’s immigration policies.

Trump has pushed to end birthright citizenship, the constitutional guarantee of citizenship to any child born on US soil, regardless of their parents’ immigration status — a change that would disproportionately impact people from Asian and Latin American countries.

He’s also banned travel to the US from many majority-Black countries while fast-tracking the resettling of White Afrikaners from South Africa. He recently said, “Somalia stinks and we don’t want them in our country,” but has openly wished more “nice people” would emigrate to the US from Norway, Sweden and Denmark.

The Trump administration says it dispatched federal agents to Minneapolis and St. Paul in part to target allegations of welfare fraud by undocumented Somali immigrants as well as rapists and pedophiles. But its operations have also been accused of sweeping up brown and Black US citizens, along with legal Somalis.

“There is nothing legal that can protect you from White supremacy and the racism that seems to be the compass for this operation,” Danez Smith, a Minneapolis resident who said they have a green card, told CNN last month.

After last month’s fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, there’s evidence that the actions of some federal agents in Minnesota have changed the way many Americans see the immigration crackdown.

Polls show the events in Minneapolis are shifting public opinion against Trump on what was his strongest issue: immigration. No wonder CNN’s Stephen Collinson recently concluded that the administration’s crackdown in Minnesota “has gone far beyond undocumented immigrants” and led to something else: “A national reckoning.”

White martyrs make it ‘everybody’s fight’

The 2020 Floyd protests and the recent ones in Minnesota both grapple with the same question: How do you convert outrage over the death of an American citizen by law enforcement into transformational political change?

George Floyd was too flawed to carry the full weight of that challenge. He was a felon – convicted for his role in a $18 drug deal – who had been imprisoned multiple times. He was a tall, dark and muscular Black man. And he had traces of drugs in his system when he died. For these reasons, some Americans struggled to see his humanity. One prominent conservative called him a “scumbag.”

But Pretti and Good, the two Minneapolis residents killed by federal agents, are more sympathetic figures because of another unpleasant truth about racism: Black lives may matter, but when it comes to eliciting sympathy for a protest movement: White lives matter more.

“What makes Good’s killing unique is that she was a blonde, white woman and a U.S. citizen. It’s Good’s whiteness and her American citizenship that has made her so dangerous to the Trump administration,” Adrian Carrasquillo wrote in The Bulwark, a news media outlet.

Pretti, meanwhile, was a White ICU nurse who worked with veterans and was legally carrying a holstered gun when he was killed.

Many White people have family and friends who look like both victims, and their deaths affect White America in a way that Floyd’s never could.

We’ve seen this dynamic before. It’s what shaped one of the civil rights movement’s most bittersweet victories.

The Selma, Alabama, campaign of 1965 is primarily known today for the Edmund Pettus Bridge march, when future US congressman John Lewis and other Black civil rights activists were clubbed and tear-gassed by Alabama state troopers while attempting to march for equal voting rights.

But the murders of two White people in Selma also galvanized support for that campaign. Viola Liuzzo was a Detroit housewife who was killed after traveling to Alabama to help demonstrators. Like Good, she was shot to death while driving a car. She was also falsely smeared by federal officials — not as a “domestic terrorist” like Good, but as a drug addict and promiscuous woman. Liuzzo’s murder helped reframe the civil rights movement as “everybody’s fight”— the rationale she gave her children before taking her ill-fated trip to Selma.

The Rev. James Reeb was a young father who was clubbed to death by White segregationists while walking through Selma one night. President Lyndon Johnson went on national television and praised Reeb as “a good man – a man of God” while urging Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act, which it did.

More people today know about Reeb and Liuzzo than another activist, Jimmie Lee Jackson. He was murdered near Selma while protesting for voting rights. His death, though, never got the same attention. He was Black.

‘Clicktivism’ can’t replace community

In the summer of 2016, leshia Evans gave the Black Lives Matter campaign one of its most powerful images.

She traveled from Pennsylvania to Baton Rouge, Louisiana, to protest the death by police of Alton Sterling, a Black man, and confronted police in the street. A news photographer captured an image of Evans facing a phalanx of helmeted police in riot gear. As they swarmed her, brandishing zip ties, she stood as still and tranquil as a statue of Buddha — staring resolutely ahead as her dress billowed in the wind.

The photograph became a rallying cry for racial justice protesters. It surfaced repeatedly on social media accounts and underscored the power of a single image to help send millions of Americans into the streets.

But it didn’t create something else that a social justice movement needs to sustain itself: community. In 2026, more Americans are aware of the limits of “clicktivism” — political protests driven by social media and carried out largely online.

The Floyd protests depended too much on the power of images to produce transformational change. Its leaders did talk about passing laws and changing policy. But the spectacle of those 2020 street protests wasn’t followed by a strong second act.

“Clicktivism is to activism as McDonalds is to a slow-cooked meal,” Micah Bornfree, co-creator of the short-lived Occupy Wall Street movement of 2011, once said. “It may look like food, but the life-giving nutrients are long gone.”

There were, of course, other reasons for the failures of the 2020 protests. Despite campaign promises by Joe Biden to address racial justice issues as president, Congress failed to reach an agreement on a proposed police-reform bill. Conservative activists engineered a critical race theory backlash that censured discussion of race in schools. In addition, Black Lives Matter’s credibility eroded after some of its leaders were accused of corruption and misusing donor funds.

Those nutrients for durable activism, though, are abundant in Minneapolis. Residents are trained and organized, and they’ve formed coalitions and built mutual aid networks. They are tracking ICE operations, filming federal officers in the streets with their phones and bringing food to immigrant families in hiding.

Those strong community ties often take years to build. The summer of 2020, with its Covid lockdowns, didn’t allow people to safely be physically present with allies. But the Minnesota protests, where the civic unity is as palpable as the biting cold, stand on more solid ground.

“The past couple of months… have shown that huge numbers of Americans do love their neighbors—enough to show up on frozen streets to confront federal agents, and even risk death,” Julie Beck wrote in The Atlantic. “The response to Border Patrol and ICE’s presence in Minnesota has prompted one of the greatest mass displays of neighborly love that I’ve seen in my lifetime.”

That kind of neighborly love crosses racial boundaries. It’s the type of love that made the Rev. James Zwerg a White hero of the civil rights movement. Zwerg was rejected by his family for joining Black civil rights activists in the early 1960s. He was almost murdered by a White mob in Alabama while protesting with John Lewis. Yet Zwerg continued to participate in the movement. He said he couldn’t have done so without the physical presence of his friends.

“Each of us was stronger because of those we were with,” Zwerg said. “If I was being beaten, I knew I wasn’t alone. I could endure more because I knew everybody there was giving me their strength. Even as someone else was being beaten, I would give them my strength.”

Protests are spreading beyond Minnesota

Will the reckoning in Minnesota spread to other parts of the country? There are signs that it already has.

The Minnesota protests are part of a growing movement that has also mounted fierce resistance in Chicago and Los Angeles. Parents, teachers, clergy members and community organizers in other cities are seeking training for what they can legally do when witnessing an immigration arrest. In Los Angeles and Chicago there are reports that ICE resistance has reached block clubs, neighborhood group chats, and Catholic parishes not typically aligned with the Democratic party.

Anti-ICE protests also have also spread to red states. In Springfield, Ohio, a network of Black, White and Latino churches called G92 has formed to protect the Haitian community.

The organizers of last year’s “No Kings” protests recently announced they will hold demonstrations nationwide March 28 to protest the Trump’s administration’s immigration crackdown, saying, “Black and brown communities are being terrorized” in Minnesota.

What’s happening in Minneapolis and across America this year will likely follow a different script than in 2020. But the needle won’t move unless Americans face some hard truths about race and ethnicity and what kind of country they want to live in.

Will there be demonstrations as large as those in the summer of 2020? Will protests be propelled by dramatic gestures shared online, such as police chiefs and corporate CEOs taking a knee for racial justice?

Probably not. And maybe that’s ok. Those #BlackLivesMatter optics turned out to largely be a sugar high. They led to some local and state reforms, but they didn’t give the Floyd protest movement the “life-giving nutrients” it needed to survive.

Those ingredients are present in Minnesota. What’s happening there has led to a “lasting shift in public opinion” on Trump’s handling of immigration.

Americans also are savvier today about what elements are needed for true change. Not all transformational change announces itself with viral images and dramatic clashes in the streets. The widespread acceptance of gay marriage, for example, was driven in part by everyday people quietly coming out to family, friends and co-workers.

Immigration will remain a complex issue. Most Americans want secure borders. And the country’s racial divisions are deeper than those in 2020. Even the Super Bowl, America’s premier sporting spectacle, can’t escape fierce debates over racial and ethnic identity.

But look deeper at what’s happening across the country, and you can dare say something that would have been unimaginable just a few months ago:

America is on the verge of a new type of racial reckoning.

---

John Blake is a CNN senior writer and author of the award-winning memoir, “More Than I Imagined: What a Black Man Discovered About the White Mother He Never Knew.”

美以同意施加最大压力 逼伊朗弃核减少对华石油出口

发布/2026年2月15日 21:16 | 联合早报

（华盛顿综合电）美国知情官员称，美国总统特朗普和以色列总理内坦亚胡同意对伊朗施加最大压力，以迫使伊朗放弃核计划，并减少对中国的石油出口。

美国新闻网站Axios星期六（2月14日）引述美国知情官员的话报道称，特朗普和内坦亚胡星期三（11日）在白宫会晤时达成共识，将“全力对伊朗施加最大压力”，包括伊朗对华出售石油问题。

报道称，中国占伊朗石油出口八成多，因此美方认为，打击两国之间的石油贸易，将显著增加对德黑兰的经济压力。此外，特朗普上周签署一项行政命令，让美国可对与伊朗有贸易往来的国家加征关税。

伊朗方面证实，调解方阿曼将于星期二（17日）在日内瓦主持新一轮美伊会谈。

美国国务卿鲁比奥星期六说，特朗普倾向于通过与伊朗达成协议解决争端，但这个过程“非常困难”。

一名美国官员则称，特朗普的特使威特科夫和女婿库什纳告诉特朗普，双方要达成核协议不容易，但伊朗在谈判中“说的都是正确的话”，美方将继续谈判并采取强硬立场。

美国若解除制裁 伊朗称愿妥协

伊朗副外长塔赫特－拉万希在英国广播公司（BBC）星期天发表的访问中说，如果美国愿意讨论解除对伊制裁，伊朗准备考虑妥协，与美国达成核协议，但没有说明希望美国全面或部分解除相关制裁。

他说：“现在球在美国那边，他们要证明自己想要达成协议。如果他们是真诚的，我相信我们终将走上达成协议的道路。”

他声言，伊朗准备稀释浓度为60%的浓缩铀，这表明伊朗愿意妥协。至于伊朗会否同意将400多公斤的高浓缩铀运出境，他仅回应称，目前还言之过早。

但他表明，伊朗不会接受“零浓缩”的要求，并拒绝将弹道导弹计划纳入谈判中。

他强调说：“当我们遭受以色列和美国袭击时，正是导弹拯救了我们，我们又怎能接受剥夺自身防御能力呢？”

此外，特朗普日前称，伊朗政权更迭是“可能发生的最好结果”。塔赫特－拉万希对此警告说：“如果我们认为这对国家存亡构成威胁，必将作出相应回应。”

伊朗末代王储称可领导伊朗过渡至世俗民主

伊朗末代王储礼萨·巴列维（Reza Pahlavi）星期六在慕尼黑举行的大规模集会上发表讲话，告诉约20万名支持者，他能够在过渡进程中领导伊朗，确保伊朗过渡到世俗民主的未来。

他说：“我致力于在这段过渡时期成为你们的领袖，终有一天，我们就能通过民主透明的投票程序，掌握决定国家命运的最终机会。”

警方估计，慕尼黑安全会议场外星期六聚集了多达25万人，要求伊朗政权更迭。全球其他城市，包括墨尔本、雅典、东京和伦敦等地，也爆发大规模示威活动。

美军又在印度洋拦截受制裁油轮

发布/2026年2月15日 20:54

美军再次在印度洋海域拦截一艘油轮，指这艘船试图违反美国总统特朗普的隔离令。

路透社报道，美国战争部星期天（2月15日）在X平台发文说：“美军于夜间在印太司令部责任区内对维罗妮卡三号（Veronica III）实施合法登临检查，行动未发生意外。”

声明称，这艘油轮违反特朗普在加勒比海地区对受制裁船只实施的隔离命令。“我们从加勒比海追踪它到印度洋，逐步逼近并成功拦截。”

一周前，美军以同样理由拦截名为阿奎拉二号（Aquila II）的油轮，随后进行登检。

特朗普去年12月下令，对所有进出委内瑞拉的受美国制裁油轮，实施“全面彻底的封锁”。

Transcript: Sen. Thom Tillis on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” Feb. 15, 2026

February 15, 2026 / 9:05 AM EST / CBS News

The following is the transcript of the interview with Sen. Thom Tillis, Republican of North Carolina, that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on Feb. 15, 2026.

*

ED O’KEEFE: We’re joined now by Sen.Thom Tillis from the Munich Security Conference in Germany. Senator, good to see you. Good morning. Thank you for taking a few minutes to be with us. A report that was published this week–

SENATOR THOM TILLIS: Thank you

ED O’KEEFE: –by the Munich Security Conference describes leaders who are taking an ax to existing rules and institutions, and says the era in which Europe could rely on the U.S. as an unquestioned security guarantor is over. You think that’s a fair assessment. Is the U.S. no longer a reliable partner to Europe?

SEN. TILLIS: Well, you know, in some ways, I hope that we’re going to enter an era where our reliance on Europe is improved. Look, I’ve got a challenge with some of the things coming out of the White House, but a lot of that frustration comes from a $2 trillion shortfall in investing in our mutual defense by far too many NATO Allies. Now, they’re- they’re making right now, but you have to give the administration and the president some latitude to point to the fact that a $2 trillion dollar shortfall over two decades- what has that done to our readiness? What has that done to our innovation? What’s that done to our military industrial base and manufacturing capacity? You know, we could be scaling up latent capabilities that would have been serving that $2 trillion to better serve Ukraine and better modernize their own weapons. So let’s make sure that people look at this with balance and understand that a part of the reason why we are where we are is because we had that deficit in the 20 years, in the first 20 years of this century. Now, the NATO alliance is the most important alliance in the history of mankind, and the- and the Article I branch, Congress, believes that, and they believe it in large numbers. So we’re going to commit- I’m here in Munich to basically remind everybody that we have three coequal branches of government. The president is trying to get our NATO allies to perform more strongly and have some level of independence, but the Congress has their back.

ED O’KEEFE: Yeah. So when the defense secretary sends the Pentagon’s number three to a NATO defense meeting this week and tells the rest of the alliance, the U.S.’s support for NATO will continue, but quote ‘in a more limited and focused fashion,’ is that the message that Europe should be receiving right now? Is that the way the administration should approach it?

SEN. TILLIS: I would not have used those words. I think what we want to do is be stronger and represent the deterrent capabilities of our alliance. The United States could possibly go it alone. But the reality is, our alliance is what makes us the world’s superpower, what keeps this world safer. We’re going to have malign actors for the- for- we’ve had them throughout history. We will continue to. Putin is a liar and a murderer. He should be expelled from Ukraine. I’ll accept a peace agreement if Volodymyr Zelenskyy wants one, but we need to make sure that our adversaries, unless they change profoundly, are viewed as adversaries that we have to coexist with but not appease. At the same time, Europe needs to step up, not let this be episodic, that they’re now starting to contribute to their mutual defense, their own capabilities, incidentally. It’s not like they’re writing a check and send it to the U.S. This is building up their capabilities, their interoperability, their ability to work with NATO allies if a conflict occurs. So, you know, it’s an emotional time. I’ve got a philosophy that nothing is ever as good as- bad as it seems. I think people coming to Munich, thinking that this is the end of NATO, are being a bit alarmist and that we just need to get things right and learn from the past mistakes of our allies, or- or learn from the past mistakes of people who have come up short. But the rhetoric about NATO somehow being a second tier sort of alliance going forward is- is clearly being spoken by somebody who doesn’t really understand the brilliance and the power of the NATO alliance.

ED O’KEEFE: On NATO, one of the things the alliance announced in recent days is this plan for a new Arctic Sentry mission to strengthen security across the Arctic region. The decision, of course, comes in the wake of the president in the last few weeks urging NATO to do more for Arctic security, dropping his threats of military invasion of Greenland. Is this new operation exactly what you’re talking about, what you want to see the alliance doing? And is it also the answer to the president’s concerns about Greenland?

SEN. TILLIS: Well, you know, we talked in Davos. The reality is, to me, it was irresponsible to go anywhere other than figuring out how we modernize the 1951 agreement, where Greenland and Denmark agreed to more or less give us unfettered access in Greenland to project power in the Arctic. So now let’s that- now that the temperatures have cooled, show a little bit of respect to Denmark and to Greenland. Figure out what part of Greenland- we need to up fit our space base, the only- the only instance of military- or U.S. presence in Greenland now to the north. Take a look at a base that they offered to us for a dollar and come up with a fiscally sound, sustainable way to project power in the east by working with Canada and their icebreakers, which are necessary for us to navigate there, working with Denmark and our Scandinavian and- and Arctic allies to really project the kind of power we need to defer- deter China and Russia.

ED O’KEEFE: The German chancellor, at the start of this conference, suggested that the world order as we know it is over. I know you were talking about hyperbole there at the start of this. Do- would you agree, though, with the chancellor that things are changing that rapidly?

SEN. TILLIS: Only if the chancellor allows it to. Look, if- if- if the NATO countries, who came up short for decades, would just admit that that was a mistake and then double their- redouble their efforts, I think that this goes just like the hyperbolic language around Greenland is now almost- it’s unbelievable that was only three weeks ago. But it’s almost in the distant past. I think we have to look ahead and recognize that the American people, the American Congress, and I believe, the administration is behind it, but they’re not wrong to point out the deficiencies of the past. Look, I’ve been in meetings where people talk about some of our social programs, and how we should really step up with the European world, and then at the same time, they’re funding some of those programs at the expense of their own defense. So let’s just have an honest discussion with family members and get the family right.

ED O’KEEFE: Let’s work through a few other issues here. European leaders this week also suggested that they’re not taking retaliatory tariffs off the table. Back here at home, the House voted to essentially reject the president’s tariffs on Canada, after a bunch of Republicans joined with Democrats to make that happen in the House. If that ever comes up in the Senate, are you someone who would agree with that, that the tariffs against Canada should be stripped away?

SEN. TILLIS: Well, I’ve- I’ve looked at- what I think we need to do is get the USMCA modernization the agreement on the table and address that in the context of strengthening our relationship with Canada and Mexico. Look, we’re a very important trading bloc, and we should build on our successes. As I’m sure you know, a lot of the tariffs, there’s a lot of exemptions because of the existence of USMCA. I think we ought to get in a room and sort them out. I’ve had- I’ve expressed publicly concerns with a lot of the tariffs that were imposed. I still, to this day, can’t figure out why we have a 50% tariff on Brazil when we have a trade surplus with Brazil. Those sorts of things are irrational to me. In other cases, I can justify it based on past behaviors of countries that we have a deficit with, but we need to be surgical and not use a blunt force object–

ED O’KEEFE: –Sure–

SEN TILLIS: –to negotiate trade relationships, particularly with China and Mexico, or, I’m sorry, with Canada and Mexico.

ED O’KEEFE: Should your party be distancing itself more from the president though on tariffs, especially the closer it gets to November, when the American public is not necessarily a fan of these moves?

SEN. TILLIS: See, I don’t think it’s a matter of distancing ourselves. That’s what’s wrong with Washington. We’ve gotten into this mode now to where we have some sort of a loyalty or fealty test, because we either disagree. Oftentimes, it’s not even the what, it’s the how. I do think the what of holding countries that have- we have had chronic trade deficits with accountable is necessary, and if tariffs are required to get their attention, fine. But the how is a very surgical approach, not a blanket approach, not one that actually creates froth and uncertainty because that’s not good for business and the U.S., if anything else, is really good when we’re at our best on certainty.

ED O’KEEFE: You reiterated this week, you’re going to block any confirmation hearings for a new Federal Reserve chairman or board member until the Justice Department’s investigation into Jerome Powell is, as you put it, resolved. But will there be confirmation hearings for Kevin Warsh, even if this DOG investigation- DOJ investigation into Powell is continuing?

SEN. TILLIS: Well, let’s make the distinction between a- a confirmation hearing and then a confirmation markup. Mr. Walsh [sic] is going to have to decide whether or not he wants to go through with this, because, as I’m sure you know, once the nominee is put forward, there are certain restrictions on what he can do in his- in his business life. But I’ve tried to make it very clear that I have no intention of supporting any confirmation of any Fed board member, chair or otherwise, to fill the Kugler seat, for example, until this is resolved. I think we had a young U.S. attorney with a dream trying to get the president’s attention, not even consulting with the administration and big DOJ on something that maybe they thought they’d get brownie points for. It’s not cute. And if this is only about two minutes of- of discussion that came before Chair Powell, that prosecutor should listen to the seven members, Republican members, who said they didn’t see any criminal intent or activity. And- and more importantly, the prosecutor should understand that the protocol normally would be a referral from the chair or a member of the committee to say, we think a crime was committed here. We’ve got a crime scene where seven Republican members say no crime was committed. How hard is that to understand?

ED O’KEEFE: But when the treasury secretary said Friday, there’s a deal to at least hold confirmation hearings for Kevin Warsh to serve as the next chairman of the Federal Reserve. Is he misguided on that?

SEN. TILLIS: Well, that’s not a deal. That’s a decision that the- that the chair makes unilaterally in his capacity as chair. The decision I get to make is whether or not I allow a markup, and if I do allow a markup, how I vote. And I’m saying that until the matter is solved, I’m a no.

ED O’KEEFE: Understood, and when you say resolved, when you want this investigation resolved, does that mean everything dropped by the Justice Department and other entities?

SEN. TILLIS: Well, keep in mind, everything is an investigation about two minutes of commentary.

ED O’KEEFE: Right.

SEN. TILLIS: Even for this guy, that’s not hard to figure out.

ED O’KEEFE: You have been quite critical of the administration on a suite of issues, whether it’s tariffs, how it’s engaging Europe, as you mentioned earlier, concerns about homeland security and whatnot, and you’ve said that it runs the risk of hurting your party going into November. So I’m curious, if the elections were held today, would Republicans hold on to the House and the Senate?

SEN. TILLIS: I think that we hold on to the Senate. I have questions about the House, and some of that comes from what I believe may have been a little bit of overreach with respect to- to redistricting. Plus, you have the historic challenge of a midterm election after a presidential election, a lot of complexities in it. But I- you know, we’ve got work to do. And again, my beef almost always relates to what I consider to be how things are being done. And I think the president has some advisers around him. You’ve heard me talk about Stephen Miller, you know my opinion about Kristi Noem. These are people that don’t look around corners and are not taking care of this president’s legacy, and I intend to. And if I have to speak bluntly, that’s what I’m going to do in my remaining time in the Senate.

ED O’KEEFE: Well, we appreciate you speaking bluntly with us this morning from the Munich Security Conference. Senator Tillis, thank you for your time.

SEN. TILLIS: Thank you.

ED O’KEEFE: And we’ll be right back.

Rubio defends US operation in Venezuela, calls out reporter for trying to start a fight

Secretary of State defends ‘successful’ operation that captured Venezuelan leader on narco-terrorism charges

By Anders Hagstrom
Fox News

Published February 15, 2026 9:59am EST | Updated February 15, 2026 10:16am EST

Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended the U.S. capture of former Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on Sunday, calling out a reporter for trying to stir trouble at a joint press conference with Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico on Feb. 15, 2026

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

Listen to this article

3 min

Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended the U.S. capture of former Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on Sunday, going on to call out a reporter for supposedly trying to stir up tension during a press conference.

Rubio made the statement during a joint appearance with Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico. A reporter referenced Fico’s previous criticism of the U.S. operation against Maduro and asked whether he stood by it, leading Rubio to address the issue first while he was answering other questions from the same reporter.

“I think you asked him a question in order to, like, see if you can get him against us, or something… A lot of countries didn’t like what we did in Venezuela. That’s okay. That was in our national interest,” Rubio said.

“I’m sure there’s something you may do one day that we don’t like, and we’ll say we didn’t like that you did this,” Rubio continued, while turning to Fico. “So what? That doesn’t mean we’re not going to be friends, we’re not going to be partners,” Rubio said.

TRUMP ANNOUNCES VENEZUELA TURNING OVER MILLIONS OF BARRELS OF OIL TO US GOVERNMENT ‘IMMEDIATELY’

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio (L) and Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico shake hands at the end of a joint press conference in Bratislava, Slovakia, on February 15, 2026.(Photo by Alex Brandon / POOL / AFP via Getty Images)

“We have very close allies that didn’t like what we did in that regard. I can tell you what, it was successful. It was necessary, because the guy was a narco-terrorist, and we made him a bunch of offers,” the secretary continued.

“And look what’s happened in Venezuela in the six weeks since he’s been gone,” Rubio said acknowledging that the country still has “a long way to go.”

“There’s still much work that needs to be done, but I can tell you Venezuela is much better off today than it was six weeks ago. So we’re very proud of that project. And I know some will disagree … I think everyone can now agree that Venezuela has an opportunity at a new future that wasn’t there six weeks ago,” he added.

Rubio’s statement comes days after President Donald Trump recounted the military’s strength during the operation to capture Maduro. Trump, speaking in Fort Bragg, North Carolina, honored U.S. special forces and their families for their roles in the operation.

STATE DEPT CONFIRMS ‘LIMITED NUMBER’ OF PERSONNEL IN CARACAS WORKING TO RESUME VENEZUELA DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS

Nicolas Maduro is seen in handcuffs after landing at a Manhattan helipad, escorted by heavily armed federal agents as they make their way into an armored car en route to a Federal courthouse in Manhattan on January 5, 2026 in New York City.(XNY/Star Max/GC Images via Getty Images)

“It was in a matter of minutes before (Maduro) was on a helicopter being taken out of there. They had to go through steel doors,” Trump said Friday afternoon. “The steels were like it was like paper-maché. You know what paper-maché is? That’s weak paper.”

U.S. special operations forces carried out the successful capture of Maduro and his wife on sweeping narcotics charges. Trump celebrated that there wasn’t single U.S. casualty during the operation, despite Maduro being housed on a heavily-armed military base.

“These guys blasted through every door,” Trump continued Friday. “They got up to him before he got to the big safe. But that wouldn’t have worked either, because they had equipment that was going to knock that out in a matter of minutes, but he never got there. It went so fast.”

https://a57.foxnews.com/cf-images.us-east-1.prod.boltdns.net/v1/static/694940094001/85caccb7-0738-47c1-a725-240f116bc5c3/241db480-1899-4ceb-a67e-c36203bf3294/1280×720/match/720/405/image.jpg?ve=1&tl=1

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Maduro was whisked off on a helicopter, before he was brought to the U.S., where he faces federal charges, including narco-terrorism conspiracy, cocaine-trafficking conspiracy and weapons-related offenses. He is being held in federal custody at the Metropolitan Detention Center in New York City.

Fox News’ Emma Colton contributed to this report.

Anders Hagstrom is a reporter with Fox News Digital covering national politics and major breaking news events. Send tips to Anders.Hagstrom@Fox.com, or on X: @Hagstrom_Anders.

美以同意施加最大压力 逼伊朗弃核减少对华石油出口

发布/2026年2月15日 21:16

流亡海外的伊朗末代王储礼萨·巴列维（台上右二），星期六在慕尼黑举行的大规模集会上发表讲话，称他能够在过渡进程中领导伊朗，确保伊朗过渡到世俗民主的未来。 （路透社）

（华盛顿综合电）美国知情官员称，美国总统特朗普和以色列总理内坦亚胡同意对伊朗施加最大压力，以迫使伊朗放弃核计划，并减少对中国的石油出口。

美国新闻网站Axios星期六（2月14日）引述美国知情官员的话报道称，特朗普和内坦亚胡星期三（11日）在白宫会晤时达成共识，将“全力对伊朗施加最大压力”，包括伊朗对华出售石油问题。

报道称，中国占伊朗石油出口八成多，因此美方认为，打击两国之间的石油贸易，将显著增加对德黑兰的经济压力。此外，特朗普上周签署一项行政命令，让美国可对与伊朗有贸易往来的国家加征关税。

伊朗方面证实，调解方阿曼将于星期二（17日）在日内瓦主持新一轮美伊会谈。

美国国务卿鲁比奥星期六说，特朗普倾向于通过与伊朗达成协议解决争端，但这个过程“非常困难”。

延伸阅读

---

特朗普：伊朗神权政府倒台是最好结果 特朗普增派第二艘航母赴中东 加大施压伊朗

一名美国官员则称，特朗普的特使威特科夫和女婿库什纳告诉特朗普，双方要达成核协议不容易，但伊朗在谈判中“说的都是正确的话”，美方将继续谈判并采取强硬立场。

美国若解除制裁 伊朗称愿妥协

伊朗副外长塔赫特－拉万希在英国广播公司（BBC）星期天发表的访问中说，如果美国愿意讨论解除对伊制裁，伊朗准备考虑妥协，与美国达成核协议，但没有说明希望美国全面或部分解除相关制裁。

他说：“现在球在美国那边，他们要证明自己想要达成协议。如果他们是真诚的，我相信我们终将走上达成协议的道路。”

他声言，伊朗准备稀释浓度为60%的浓缩铀，这表明伊朗愿意妥协。至于伊朗会否同意将400多公斤的高浓缩铀运出境，他仅回应称，目前还言之过早。

但他表明，伊朗不会接受“零浓缩”的要求，并拒绝将弹道导弹计划纳入谈判中。

他强调说：“当我们遭受以色列和美国袭击时，正是导弹拯救了我们，我们又怎能接受剥夺自身防御能力呢？”

此外，特朗普日前称，伊朗政权更迭是“可能发生的最好结果”。塔赫特－拉万希对此警告说：“如果我们认为这对国家存亡构成威胁，必将作出相应回应。”

伊朗末代王储称可领导伊朗过渡至世俗民主

伊朗末代王储礼萨·巴列维（Reza Pahlavi）星期六在慕尼黑举行的大规模集会上发表讲话，告诉约20万名支持者，他能够在过渡进程中领导伊朗，确保伊朗过渡到世俗民主的未来。

他说：“我致力于在这段过渡时期成为你们的领袖，终有一天，我们就能通过民主透明的投票程序，掌握决定国家命运的最终机会。”

警方估计，慕尼黑安全会议场外星期六聚集了多达25万人，要求伊朗政权更迭。全球其他城市，包括墨尔本、雅典、东京和伦敦等地，也爆发大规模示威活动。

立即订阅《联合早报》，洞察全球局势异动，把握世界经济发展脉搏，解锁国际热点评析。

---

特别优惠

早报数码配套个人版（每年付费）

每月S$9.90S$4.95

立即订阅
*第一年S$59.40，第二年起每年S$118.80

[](https://www.zaobao.com.sg/news/world/story20260215-8517848)

美国伊朗集会核协议

上一篇 美军又在印度洋拦截受制裁油轮下一篇 泽连斯基：乌克兰与欧洲盟友达成新一轮能源与军援协议

购买此文章

Border czar Tom Homan says “I don’t like the masks” on ICE officers, but they “have to protect themselves”

February 15, 2026 / 10:31 AM EST / CBS News

Washington — White House border czar Tom Homan said that while he doesn’t like that federal immigration enforcement officers agents wear masks, he believes they need to wear masks to protect themselves against threats and violence.

“I don’t like the masks either,” Homan said in an interview with Ed O’Keefe on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on Sunday.

Homan said assaults against Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers have increased by 1,500% while threats against them have increased by 8,000%. The Department of Homeland Security said in a Jan. 26 news release that assaults against ICE officers had increased by more than 1,300%. Neither Homan nor the release gave a timeframe for that surge, nor did they give a source for the assault and threat claims.

“These men and women have to protect themselves,” he said.

A partial government shutdown centered on DHS began early Saturday as congressional Democrats and the White House remain at odds on reforms to how ICE and Customs and Border Protection carry out immigration enforcement. Their conduct has been increasingly scrutinized since federal agents fatally shot Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minnesota in January.

Congress left town Thursday without any agreement on DHS funding and lawmakers aren’t expected to return until Feb. 23.

Requiring immigration agents to wear body cameras and identification, banning them from wearing masks, stopping racial profiling and mandating judicial warrants for arrests on private property are among Democrats’ demands.

1/1 Skip Ad Continue watching after the adVisit Advertiser website[GO TO PAGE]

Homan, who said he is not apart of negotiations on DHS funding, called some of Democrats’ demands “unreasonable.”

“They want to say, stop racial profiling. That’s just not occurring. ICE will detain, briefly detain and question, but question somebody based on reasonable suspicion. It has nothing to do with racial profiling.” Homan said. “There is no racial profiling.”

On obtaining judicial warrants, Homan said, “that’s not what the federal law requires.”

“If Congress wants that change, then Congress can legislate. But right now, ICE is acting within the framework of federal statutes enacted by Congress and signed by a president,” he said.

In a separate interview with “Face the Nation” on Sunday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries refused to budge on Democrats’ demands, saying “dramatic change” is needed “before any DHS funding bill moves forward.”

“These are common sense things,” the New York Democrat said.

泽连斯基：乌克兰与欧洲盟友达成新一轮能源与军援协议

发布时间 / 来源：2026年2月15日 21:37 / 联合早报

乌克兰总统泽连斯基说，乌克兰与欧洲盟友已达成新一轮能源和军援方案。 （法新社）

乌克兰总统泽连斯基说，在俄乌战争爆发四周年（2月24日）前夕，乌克兰与欧洲盟友达成新一轮能源和军援方案。

路透社报道，泽连斯基星期天（2月15日）在社媒平台X上文说：“在慕尼黑，我们与参与‘柏林模式’（Berlin format）的领导人达成共识，将于2月24日前为乌克兰提供具体能源和军事援助方案。”

在10多名欧洲领导人参与讨论乌克兰问题的“柏林模式”会议后，泽连斯基星期五（13日）说，希望获得防空导弹在内的新援助。

他补充说：“感谢伙伴国愿意提供援助，我们期待所有物资能及时送达。”

俄罗斯对基辅等乌克兰主要城市的袭击，重创乌克兰能源基础设施，导致数百万乌克兰民众在严寒天气中面对时长不一的断电情况。

泽连斯基也说，仅在过去一周内，俄罗斯就向乌克兰发射约1300架攻击无人机、1200枚制导航空炸弹以及数十枚弹道导弹。

泽连斯基：乌克兰与欧洲盟友达成新一轮能源与军援协议

2026年2月15日 21:37 / 联合早报

乌克兰总统泽连斯基说，乌克兰与欧洲盟友已达成新一轮能源和军援方案。 （法新社）

乌克兰总统泽连斯基说，在俄乌战争爆发四周年（2月24日）前夕，乌克兰与欧洲盟友达成新一轮能源和军援方案。

路透社报道，泽连斯基星期天（2月15日）在社媒平台X上文说：“在慕尼黑，我们与参与‘柏林模式’（Berlin format）的领导人达成共识，将于2月24日前为乌克兰提供具体能源和军事援助方案。”

在10多名欧洲领导人参与讨论乌克兰问题的“柏林模式”会议后，泽连斯基星期五（13日）说，希望获得防空导弹在内的新援助。

他补充说：“感谢伙伴国愿意提供援助，我们期待所有物资能及时送达。”

俄罗斯对基辅等乌克兰主要城市的袭击，重创乌克兰能源基础设施，导致数百万乌克兰民众在严寒天气中面对时长不一的断电情况。

泽连斯基也说，仅在过去一周内，俄罗斯就向乌克兰发射约1300架攻击无人机、1200枚制导航空炸弹以及数十枚弹道导弹。

Transcript: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” Feb. 15, 2025

2026-02-15T10:29:00-0500 / CBS News

Updated on: February 15, 2026 / 10:30 AM EST / CBS News

The following is the transcript of the interview with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Democrat of New York, that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on Feb. 15, 2026.

*

ED O’KEEFE: We turn now to House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who joins us this morning from New York City. Leader Jeffries, thank you for being here.

DEMOCRATIC LEADER HAKEEM JEFFRIES: Good morning. Great to be with you.

ED O’KEEFE: So as this shutdown continues, I want to remind our viewers what it is, exactly, congressional Democrats are seeking to reopen the Department of Homeland Security. You want immigration agents to show IDs, to wear body cameras, take off their masks, stop racial profiling and seek judicial warrants to enter private property. Talks between the White House and congressional Democrats are continuing. Are you willing to compromise, to let any of these go, to get the government reopened?

REP. JEFFRIES: Well, our value proposition is simple, taxpayer dollars should be used to make life more affordable for the American people, not brutalize or kill them, as we horrifically saw in Minneapolis with the cold blooded killings of Rene Nicole Good and Alex Pretti. We know, and the American people clearly know, that ICE is totally out of control and they need to be reined in. Because the American people deserve immigration enforcement that is fair, that is just, and that is humane. And so, we need dramatic change at ICE, including, but not limited to, the types of things that you laid out before any DHS funding bill moves forward.

ED O’KEEFE: With the exception of some flexibility on body cameras, because they’re starting to spend some money to get those out there, some Republicans have rejected this list of policy reform proposals. You guys still seem miles apart. So when, conceivably, will we see this resolved? And again, I ask you, if- are there any of these points that you’re willing to let go in order to get the government reopened?

REP. JEFFRIES: Well, we’re willing to have a good faith conversation about everything, but fundamentally we need change that is dramatic, that is bold, that is meaningful and that is transformational. And these are common sense things. For instance, judicial warrants should be required before ICE agents can storm private property or rip everyday Americans out of their homes. We need to make sure that there are actual independent investigations, so that if state and local laws are violated, in many cases, violently violated, that state and local authorities have the ability to criminally investigate and criminally prosecute anyone who has violated the law. Because we cannot trust Kristi Noem or Pam Bondi to conduct an independent investigation. We believe that sensitive locations should be off limits, sensitive locations like houses of worship, schools, hospitals or polling sites, and that fundamentally ICE should be targeting violent felons who are here unlawfully, as opposed to violently targeting law abiding immigrant families, which is completely inconsistent with what Donald Trump promised the American people he would do.

ED O’KEEFE: Right. And we, of course, this past week reported that about 14% of those detained had violent criminal records. About 60% of them were wanted on criminal records overall. But it was that 14%, violent criminals. Again, I just- it sounds like this is going to go on a while, because Tom Homan wasn’t terribly flexible on anything, especially on the issue of warrants and masks. You’re not ceding any ground. So there’s a few things coming up here. For example, State of the Union is scheduled for a week from Tuesday. Should it be held if the Department of Homeland Security is shut down?

REP. JEFFRIES: Well, we’ll cross that bridge when we get to it. It is certainly my hope–

ED O’KEEFE: –Sounds like you’re going to get to it, though. I mean–

REP. JEFFRIES:–we can come to a resolution in advance of it. Well, here’s the thing, the administration and Republicans have made a clear decision that they would rather shut down FEMA, shut down the Coast Guard and shut down TSA, than enact the type of dramatic reforms necessary so that ICE and other DHS law enforcement agencies are conducting themselves like every other law enforcement professional in the country. For instance, police officers don’t use masks. County Sheriffs don’t use masks. State troopers don’t use masks. Why is it that ICE agents who are untrained, are being unleashed on American communities with this type of lawlessness, violence and brutality. Unacceptable, unconscionable, and it’s un-American.

ED O’KEEFE: Yeah, and we went over this with Tom Homan a little earlier. Of course, they point out that assaults against ICE officers have gone up over 1,300% this past year, from about 275 compared to 19 the year before. So there are some legitimate concerns about those agents being targeted, but your broader point about–

REP. JEFFRIES: –We’re going to- yeah–

ED O’KEEFE:– whether or not law enforcement should behave the same as our law enforcement is heard.

REP. JEFFRIES: Yes, and we’re going to continue, of course, to encourage the American people to exercise their constitutional rights, their freedom of assembly and their freedom of speech and their freedom of expression peacefully, as we saw overwhelmingly done in Minneapolis.

ED O’KEEFE: All right, well we’ll stay tuned on the shutdown and the negotiations. Let me ask you a few other things while we have you. First of all, you’re a member of the Gang of Eight who gets briefed on national security matters. The Pentagon is reportedly planning for the possibility of sustained, weeks-long operations against Iran if diplomacy fails and the president opts to attack. What do you know about those plans? Or what would you want to learn as a member of the Gang of Eight?

REP. JEFFRIES: Well, the administration, as has been the case since the very beginning of this presidency, has been slow to provide information both to the Gang of Eight members of Congress, the legislative leadership and the top Democrats and Republicans on the Intel Committee and certainly hasn’t provided a significant amount of information to Congress in general. These people within the administration, the extremists, they don’t seem to believe that Congress is a separate and co-equal branch of government. We are. In fact, the power to declare war is exclusively given to Congress in Article I of the United States Constitution. Now, the American people want Donald Trump and Republicans to actually keep their promise and focus on driving down the high cost of living and fixing our broken health care system. It was Donald Trump, who promised, in fact, that costs will go down on day one. Costs haven’t gone down. We’re in the midst of an affordability crisis that hasn’t been resolved. Perhaps the president should focus on making life better for the American people. Period. Full stop.

ED O’KEEFE: I hear you on that. I want to remind our viewers of the current tick tock tight margins in the House. You’ve got to net at least three seats to take the majority at this point. I want to play for you part of what you had to say about the 2026 elections when you were asked this past Thursday. Take a listen.

(BEGIN TAPE)

REP. JEFFRIES: We only need to net three. It’s happening. Democrats are going to take back control of the House, and the only question is, what’s the margin?

(END TAPE)

ED O’KEEFE: Right now, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee considers 44 of the 435 seats in the House in play, including, you just added five new ones this past week, South Central Virginia, a district in South Carolina, southern Minnesota, central Colorado and the at-large seat in Montana. Parts of the country where Democrats don’t normally win elections, we should point out. So if the election were held today, at minimum, at minimum, how many seats do you see Democrats winning?

REP. JEFFRIES: Well, if the election were held today, we’re taking back control of the House of Representatives, and I’m not convinced that it would necessarily be close. But these are battles that are going to be waged, district by district by district, we know we’re winning seats now in deep red territory. We saw that in Miami in December, where we won the mayor’s race for the first time in 30 years by 20 points. And then in January, of course, we flipped a seat in the Texas State Senate that Donald Trump had just won by 17 points. The Democratic candidate won it by 14. That was a 31 point over performance. And then just last weekend in Louisiana, we flipped the House seat that Trump had won by 14. We won that- or 13–

ED O’KEEFE: So you won it–

REP. JEFFRIES: –by 24 points. That was a 37 point over performance. My point is we’re winning across the country, in blue states and purple states and red states, because the American people know we’re the only ones focused on driving down the high cost of living, fixing our broken health care system and making sure that immigration enforcement is fair and just.

ED O’KEEFE: You’ve got to get at least three. Twenty to 25 seats, all 44 seats. What do you think right now? Give me a number.

REP. JEFFRIES: Well, I’m not in the prediction business. I’m in the let’s win on behalf of the American people so we can end this national nightmare business.

ED O’KEEFE: All right. Leader Jeffries, to be continued on the shutdown and on the midterms. We appreciate you spending some time with us this morning. We’ll talk to you soon, and we’ll be right back with a lot more Face the Nation. Stay with us.