A dramatic escalation of hostilities unfolded in Ukraine as Russian forces launched an unprecedented drone assault on multiple regions just days after failed peace negotiations.
According to the New York Post, Russia unleashed its largest drone offensive since the war began in 2022, deploying 273 exploding drones and decoys across Ukraine on Saturday night, resulting in civilian casualties and widespread damage.
The massive aerial assault targeted the capital region of Kyiv along with the eastern regions of Dnipropetrovsk and Donetsk, claiming the life of a 28-year-old woman and wounding three others, including a four-year-old child. Hours before the drone strikes, a separate Russian attack on a civilian bus in the northeastern Sumy region killed nine passengers and left seven others wounded.
Ukrainian officials view the unprecedented drone assault as a direct response to Friday's unsuccessful US-mediated peace talks in Istanbul. Andriy Kovalenko, head of Ukraine's Center for Countering Disinformation, emphasized Russia's pattern of using military force as an intimidation tactic during negotiations.
The attack surpassed the previous record set in February when Russia launched 267 drones during the third anniversary of the conflict. Ukrainian air defenses managed to intercept 88 drones, while 128 were reportedly lost due to electronic jamming measures.
President Volodymyr Zelensky condemned the bus attack through social media platform X, calling for increased international pressure on Russia. The Ukrainian leader's response underscored the growing tension between the two nations following the failed peace talks.
The first in-person negotiations between Russian and Ukrainian officials since the start of the war ended without any agreement on a ceasefire. Ukrainian representatives accused Russia of undermining the talks by introducing new demands that had not been discussed previously.
Members of Ukraine’s delegation were particularly frustrated by Russia’s push for territorial concessions. One Ukrainian official said Russia had put forward unrealistic proposals, seemingly designed to cause the talks to collapse.
President Zelensky, responding to ongoing violence, described the situation as a deliberate targeting of civilians. He urged the international community to take stronger action in response to Russia’s continued aggression.
President Trump announced plans to conduct phone conversations with both Russian and Ukrainian leaders on Monday, aiming to halt what he termed the "bloodbath" in Ukraine. The diplomatic initiative comes as speculation grows about a potential direct meeting between Putin and Zelensky.
Zelensky's challenge to Putin for a meeting in Turkey went unanswered, with the Russian leader opting to send representatives instead. The Ukrainian president's subsequent meeting with US Vice President JD Vance in Rome during Pope Leo's inaugural mass marked their first encounter since a contentious White House meeting in February.
The diplomatic relationship between Ukraine and the US has shown signs of strain, particularly following Vice President Vance's criticism of Ukraine's appreciation for American support. However, the two leaders maintained a cordial appearance during their Rome meeting.
Ukrainian air defense systems demonstrated both capabilities and limitations during the massive drone assault. The successful interception of 88 drones and the electronic jamming of 128 others highlighted the effectiveness of Ukraine's defensive measures.
Large portions of eastern Ukraine remained under air raid alerts into Sunday morning, indicating ongoing security concerns. The sustained threat level suggests that Russian forces may continue their aggressive stance following the failed peace negotiations. Military analysts note this attack represents a significant escalation in Russia's drone warfare capabilities, potentially signaling a new phase in the conflict's aerial dimension.
Russia's unprecedented drone offensive and the collapse of peace talks have created a critical juncture in the Ukraine war. President Trump's scheduled intervention and the possibility of direct talks between Putin and Zelensky represent potential diplomatic breakthroughs. The death toll from Saturday's attacks, including both the drone strikes and the bus attack, underscores the conflict's continuing humanitarian cost. These events have heightened international concerns about the war's escalation and the urgent need for successful peace negotiations.
President Trump's recent diplomatic tour across the Middle East has generated significant attention from both sides of the political aisle.
According to the New York Post, even Democratic officials have started drawing unfavorable comparisons between Trump's recent diplomatic achievements and Biden's perceived limitations during his presidency, particularly regarding stamina and negotiating capabilities.
The president's three-nation Middle East tour, which began Monday, has already yielded substantial results. His team successfully negotiated the release of Edan Alexander, the last surviving American hostage held by Hamas since October 7, 2023.
In Riyadh, Trump announced the lifting of long-standing economic sanctions on Syria and met with interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa, a former Al Qaeda terrorist who has expressed new views on religious diversity.
Trump's Middle East visit has secured approximately $2 trillion in business commitments across three nations. Saudi Arabia pledged $600 billion, Qatar committed $243.5 billion, and the UAE promised $200 billion in various deals.
A significant portion includes agreements with Qatar Airways and UAE's Etihad Airways to purchase 238 American-made Boeing aircraft valued at over $110 billion.
The diplomatic achievements extend beyond economic gains. During his visit to Syria, Trump revealed that al-Sharaa had privately agreed to establish diplomatic relations with Israel. This development followed Trump's call for Saudi Arabia to join the Abraham Accords in recognizing the Jewish state.
Former Biden administration officials have openly acknowledged the stark differences in diplomatic approaches between the two presidents. Some have specifically pointed to Trump's ability to command respect and attention from Middle Eastern leaders.
A senior congressional Democratic aide provided a particularly stark assessment of the situation. The aide mentioned how Trump's successful Middle East tour highlighted the differences in presidential capabilities.
Another high-ranking Biden White House aide shared their perspective on the negotiation requirements:
This whole Middle East trip shows [that] for a lot of these negotiations, you do really need somebody who has that energy and level-headedness. I'm the first person to say I do not agree with all of Trump's policies, especially some foreign policies, but when it comes to showing up and showing strength and power, I think his team and [Trump] do a really great job of that.
Some former Biden staffers have emphasized the different power structures within the two administrations.
While Secretary of State Antony Blinken maintained regular access to Biden during his presidency, current Secretary of State Marco Rubio reportedly has less influence in the Trump administration. This dynamic has led to more direct presidential involvement in foreign policy decisions under Trump.
Not all former Biden officials view Trump's approach positively. Critics argue that while Trump's style creates immediate impact, the long-term outcomes remain uncertain. They point to ongoing challenges in Ukraine, continuing Hamas conflicts, and persistent Houthi threats in the Red Sea as evidence that faster diplomatic movement doesn't necessarily translate to better results.
President Trump's diplomatic mission to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE has demonstrated significant differences in presidential approaches to Middle East relations. His tour secured massive business deals worth approximately $2 trillion and achieved several diplomatic breakthroughs, including progress toward normalizing relations between Syria and Israel.
While some Democratic officials praise Trump's energy and negotiating style, others remain skeptical about the long-term effectiveness of his diplomatic strategy and question whether these achievements will lead to lasting positive changes in the region.
A high-profile interview with FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino has reignited scrutiny over how Jeffrey Epstein died while in federal custody.
According to Fox News, both top FBI officials insisted that Epstein's death was a suicide after personally reviewing his case file, despite years of public suspicion and conspiracy theories.
Epstein, a well-connected financier awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges, was found dead in his Manhattan jail cell in August 2019. The New York City medical examiner ruled his death a suicide by hanging, but the decision triggered a firestorm of speculation, with many suggesting he was murdered to protect powerful figures.
FBI Director Patel, speaking to Fox News' Maria Bartiromo, strongly dismissed alternative theories about Epstein’s death, referencing his own experience in the prison system and legal field. Patel said he was confident in the official finding, emphasizing his background as a public defender and prosecutor and familiarity with jail environments.
Patel told Bartiromo that, in his view, the forensic and circumstantial evidence matched what he had seen in other jail suicides. Bongino, for his part, maintained that he had reviewed all the relevant documentation and echoed Patel’s conclusion. He stated firmly that the facts in the file left no reasonable doubt about the manner of Epstein’s death.
Epstein’s social ties fueled widespread suspicion after his death. He was known to associate with President Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, MIT Professor Noam Chomsky, and Prince Andrew. The phrase “Epstein didn’t kill himself” spread rapidly online, reflecting deep public skepticism. Patel addressed the public’s right to question official findings but stood by his professional assessment of the evidence.
In February, the Justice Department under President Trump released a trove of Epstein-related documents. However, the release was met with anger from some conservatives, who said it fell short of expectations. Instead of a so-called “client list” or new revelations, the documents largely contained Epstein’s contact list.
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., voiced her frustration publicly, stating that Congress and the public had not received the information they sought. She described the document release as “a complete disappointment.”
Attorney General Pam Bondi later told Fox News in March that the DOJ had received thousands of additional pages from the Southern District of New York. She indicated a detailed FBI report was forthcoming, though one has yet to be released.
In April, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, a prominent Epstein accuser who had sued Prince Andrew, died by suicide at age 41. Giuffre had claimed Epstein’s then-girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell recruited her at age sixteen and that she was trafficked to powerful men, including Prince Andrew. Her death reignited debate about the fallout from the Epstein case and the fate of other potential witnesses.
Despite intense public speculation, Patel and Bongino remain firm in their position. They argue that those doubting the suicide ruling are entitled to their opinions but reiterate that the official findings are based on the facts.
Before concluding the interview, Patel summarized his position:
As someone who has worked as a public defender, as a prosecutor who's been in that prison system, who's been in the Metropolitan Detention Center, who's been in segregated housing, you know a suicide when you see one, and that's what that was. He added that those who disagree with him "have a right to their opinion."
Bongino also stood by his conclusion, stating that after reviewing the complete file, he was convinced it was a suicide.
Kash Patel and Dan Bongino have publicly stated, after reviewing Jeffrey Epstein’s file, that he died by suicide in his Manhattan jail cell. Their statements come amid renewed outrage over the Justice Department’s release of documents that critics say lacked substantive new information.
Both the FBI and DOJ remain under pressure to provide further details, and with additional evidence reportedly turned over, the story is unlikely to fade from public attention in the near future.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Vice President JD Vance crossed paths at Pope Leo XIV's inaugural mass, marking their first public encounter since their contentious White House meeting.
According to the New York Post, the two leaders not only exchanged pleasantries at St. Peter's Basilica but also held a subsequent private meeting at Villa Taverna, the U.S. ambassador's residence in Italy, to discuss ongoing peace negotiations and sanctions against Russia.
The cordial interaction stands in stark contrast to their heated February exchange in the Oval Office, where Zelensky and Vance clashed over diplomatic approaches to ending the conflict with Russia. Second lady Usha Vance joined her husband in greeting the Ukrainian president, while Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who led the U.S. delegation alongside Vance, was also present at the gathering.
The meeting occurred as Ukraine grappled with one of the largest drone attacks from Russia, with over 273 unmanned aircraft targeting the central Kyiv region, Donetsk, and Dnipropetrovsk regions. Ukraine's air force confirmed the scope of the assault, which came shortly after the first direct Russian-Ukrainian negotiations since 2022.
These recent negotiations in Istanbul resulted in an agreement to exchange 1,000 prisoners of war. However, the talks failed to achieve the broader ceasefire agreement that negotiators had initially hoped to secure. The Russian delegation consisted of lower-ranking officials without decision-making authority.
Zelensky took to X to share details about his meeting with Vice President Vance, stating:
We discussed negotiations in Istanbul to where the Russians sent a low level delegation of non-decision-makers. I reaffirmed that Ukraine is ready to be engaged in real diplomacy and underscored the importance of a full and unconditional ceasefire as soon as possible. We have also touched upon the need for sanctions against Russia, bilateral trade, defense cooperation, battlefield situation and upcoming prisoners exchange.
The relationship between Vance and Zelensky has been notably strained, particularly after Zelensky labeled the vice president as "too radical" during the 2024 campaign. This criticism stemmed from Vance's advocacy for a peace plan that would have required Ukraine to surrender significant territory.
Recent weeks have shown a shift in positions from both sides. The Trump administration has been pushing for a ceasefire, which Ukraine now supports, though Russia continues to reject such proposals. Vance has also modified his stance, publicly acknowledging that Moscow's current demands are excessive.
President Trump recently met with Zelensky at the Vatican during Pope Francis's funeral last month, indicating ongoing diplomatic engagement between the two nations. The meeting at St. Peter's Basilica included European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, highlighting the international focus on resolving the conflict.
The February confrontation between Vance and Zelensky in the Oval Office centered on differing views about Russian President Vladimir Putin's trustworthiness and negotiation strategies.
Their heated exchange, which occurred during discussions about a mineral rights deal, led to Vance accusing Zelensky of disrespect for attempting to debate the issue before American media.
Vice President Vance has since taken a more measured approach in international forums. At a recent Munich Security Conference-affiliated event, he articulated a more nuanced position on peace negotiations, acknowledging the complexity of the situation while maintaining support for Ukraine's sovereignty.
The meeting between Vice President Vance and President Zelensky at the papal mass represents a significant diplomatic reset in U.S.-Ukraine relations. Their private discussion at Villa Taverna, which included Secretary of State Rubio and Ukrainian presidential aide Andriy Yermak, focused on practical steps toward ending the conflict and strengthening sanctions against Russia.
Despite ongoing Russian aggression, as evidenced by the recent massive drone attack, both leaders appear committed to finding common ground in their approach to ending the war.
Their ability to move past their previous public disagreement suggests a potential path forward in U.S.-Ukraine cooperation, even as the conflict continues to present significant challenges for both nations.
President Donald Trump's newly appointed pardon czar, Alice Marie Johnson, embarks on a mission to identify and assist non-violent offenders trapped in what she describes as a corrupt system.
According to Fox News, Johnson, who received both a commutation and full pardon from Trump after serving 21 years in prison, now works within the administration to evaluate potential pardon candidates and advocate for criminal justice reform.
Johnson's appointment represents a remarkable transformation from her past life, where she faced a life sentence without parole for her involvement in a Memphis cocaine trafficking operation. Despite claiming she never directly handled drugs, she admitted to facilitating communications between dealers following personal hardships, including her son's death, financial difficulties, and a divorce.
In an interview with Lara Trump on "My View," Johnson expressed her disbelief at the dramatic turn her life has taken. She emphasized the importance of her unique perspective, having experienced the justice system firsthand.
Johnson shared her vision for the role with host Lara Trump, explaining that while she cannot help everyone, she intends to maximize her impact. She plans to focus on identifying deserving candidates while simultaneously pushing for systemic changes.
The former inmate expressed that her personal experience makes her uniquely qualified for this position. She understands the challenges faced by those seeking pardons and the complexities of navigating the justice system.
Johnson spoke candidly about her observations of the criminal justice system's failures during her interview:
There are laws that have to be changed because, even in my position, I'm not going to be able to find everyone. I am going to find as many as I possibly can find, but I'm also going to be advocating [for change] and looking at the things that are out there, on the books, that need to be changed, but to also do what the president has entrusted me to do, and let's find those individuals who need their second chance, those individuals who had lost hope in a system that was totally corrupt.
Her assessment of the current system highlights deep-rooted issues that extend beyond individual cases. Johnson emphasized that wealth alone cannot protect individuals from systemic corruption.
The new pardon czar plans to implement a comprehensive approach to evaluating candidates. This includes assessing their readiness to reintegrate into society and their potential for positive community impact.
Johnson's approach focuses on identifying individuals who have demonstrated genuine reform during their incarceration. She believes in thorough evaluation of each case to ensure pardons are granted appropriately.
The position allows her to leverage her unique perspective as both a former inmate and now a government official. This dual experience informs her understanding of both the system's flaws and potential solutions.
Her role extends beyond simply identifying pardon candidates to include advocacy for broader systemic reforms. Johnson sees this as an opportunity to address fundamental issues within the criminal justice system.
Trump's selection of Johnson as pardon czar reflects a commitment to criminal justice reform that incorporates lived experience. Her appointment marks a significant shift in how pardons and commutations are evaluated and granted.
Alice Marie Johnson's journey from serving a life sentence in an Alabama prison to leading White House efforts for criminal justice reform spans seven years. In her new role as pardon czar, she combines her personal experience with a mission to identify deserving candidates for presidential pardons while advocating for systemic changes to address what she describes as a corrupt system.
Her work focuses on non-violent offenders who have demonstrated rehabilitation and are prepared to reintegrate into their communities.
A bronze statue honoring first lady Melania Trump was cut down and taken by unknown individuals this week near her hometown in southeastern Slovenia, according to police.
The bronze artwork replaced a wooden statue that had been destroyed in an arson attack in 2020 and had stood in the town of Sevnica as a tribute to Trump’s Slovenian roots, as Fox News reports.
The latest incident occurred earlier in the week and was first reported to Slovenian police on Tuesday, authorities confirmed. The statue had been situated near Sevnica, where Melania Trump -- born Melanija Knavs in 1970 -- spent her early years when Slovenia was part of then-Communist Yugoslavia.
According to police spokesperson Alenka Drenik Rangus, officials are actively investigating the vandalism and theft. The statue was reportedly sawed off at the ankles before being removed from its position, but no suspects have yet been identified or apprehended.
The bronze statue was created following the destruction of the original wooden version in 2020. That earlier version, erected as a public tribute to Slovenia’s most famous native daughter, was burned in an act of arson less than a year after it was unveiled. Both statues were the result of a collaboration between American artist Brad Downey, based in Kentucky, and local Slovenian craftsman Ales “Maxi” Zupevc. A chainsaw sculptor by trade, he carved the initial statue from the trunk of a local linden tree using hand tools and mechanical sanders.
The wooden artwork depicted Melania Trump in a blue dress similar to the one she wore at Donald Trump’s presidential inauguration in 2016. When that version was destroyed, it was replaced by the bronze figure that followed a similar design and was mounted on the same stump.
When unveiling plans for the replacement statue in July 2020, Downey emphasized that durability had become a top priority. He said it would be constructed using strong materials to better withstand acts of vandalism or weather-related decay. “As solid as possible, out of a durable material which cannot be wantonly destroyed,” Downey told The Guardian at the time. The decision to use bronze for the new version reflected that commitment to permanence.
Yet despite these efforts, the statue still fell prey to destruction. It is unclear whether political motivations played a role in the recent theft or whether it was an act of opportunism.
Although the statue was intended as a tribute, not all local residents embraced its presence in Sevnica. Some viewed the sculpture with skepticism or felt unsure about its artistic representation of an American first lady with strong ties to the region.
Franja Kranjc, a bakery worker in town, expressed that the statue didn’t resonate broadly within the community. She said that even Melania Trump herself might not have been pleased by it and noted, “I think it’s OK that it’s removed.” Despite mixed public opinion, the statue had developed a certain prominence among tourists visiting the area, many of whom linked it to Sevnica’s growing recognition tied to Trump’s global profile.
For Zupevc, the craftsman who sculpted both versions, creating the statue carried personal meaning. He stated during a documentary by Downey that he and Melania Trump were born in the same medical facility, a fact that gave him added interest in the project.
Describing his creative process, Zupevc recalled how his brother had remarked that the statue resembled a local waitress, underscoring the subjective nature of art. “Then, I called my brother, who said, ‘Spitting image of our waitress,’” Zupevc remembered, as he detailed how he sculpted the hair and facial features. Though the statues sparked conversation, neither Melania Trump nor her representatives ever officially commented on them or visited their locations publicly.
Following the initial burning of the wooden figure, a plaque was installed at the stump where the statue had stood. It bore a simple message stating that it commemorated a monument previously erected in tribute to Melania Trump.
The commemorative marker remains at the site after the bronze replica was removed, and it currently serves as the only evidence that a statue once stood there. Its wording carries a somber tone, recognizing that both attempts to create a lasting tribute were ultimately short-lived. As of now, local police are investigating the circumstances surrounding the most recent disappearance. Authorities have not released any information on potential suspects or motives behind the act.
Sevnica, home to just a few thousand people, has garnered international attention in recent years due to its connection to the first lady. With Slovenia now a European Union and NATO member, the town has seen increased tourism from visitors curious about Melania Trump’s origins.
The statue served as a photo opportunity for some tourists and helped advertise local businesses, including a bakery that sold sweets named in Trump’s honor. Despite this, not all locals appreciated the attention or the depiction itself. The outcome of the ongoing police investigation may determine whether Sevnica sees a third attempt to commemorate Trump, or whether the site will remain marked only by the existing plaque and memories of what once stood there.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) is urging fellow Republicans to avoid sweeping cuts to President Joe Biden’s major climate legislation as discussions heat up over funding new policy goals under President Donald Trump.
The Alaska senator is opposing calls from within her party to broadly eliminate clean energy tax incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act, instead advocating for a more targeted approach to protect key provisions that benefit her state, as the Daily Caller reports.
Passed in 2022 with no Republican support, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) offered extensive support for clean energy, but it is now under fire as Republicans pursue a reconciliation bill to fund Trump-era initiatives. The Republican-led House is proposing to slash large portions of the IRA, especially its climate-related sections, to redirect funds toward new priorities.
Murkowski has pushed back against what she describes as a blunt-force approach. She advocates for protecting parts of the law that support ongoing energy development in Alaska, including clean energy projects that are just starting to gain traction. According to the senator, simply repealing wide sections of the IRA could derail investments already set in motion. “Taking a more cautious and conscientious approach” is essential, Murkowski said, noting the consequences that abrupt policy reversals could have for her state.
She has joined three other GOP senators in formally requesting that Senate Republican leadership preserve a number of the IRA's clean energy tax provisions. The appeal was made in April, signaling a growing divide within Republican ranks over how aggressively to dismantle the legislation.
Known for crossing party lines, Murkowski has often set herself apart from mainstream Republican positions. She has stated she is “not attached to the Republican label,” reflecting a more centrist strategy. Though she supported most of President Biden’s Cabinet picks, she voted against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, one of only two Republicans to do so. Her independent posture has also put her at odds with party hardliners. In April, the senator admitted she was concerned about “retaliation” from Trump’s circle due to her positions.
At the same time, Murkowski was not shy about criticizing the Biden administration. She has taken issue with decisions that restrict resource development in Alaska, such as canceling oil leases and removing land from eligibility for future drilling or mineral exploration. Yet, she still defends many of the IRA’s climate provisions.
Across the aisle, some Republicans are pushing for a swift and total repeal of the IRA, which could cost over $1 trillion by 2032, with long-term projections reaching nearly $5 trillion. These lawmakers view the law as fiscally irresponsible and skewed in favor of foreign competition, especially Chinese companies tapping into U.S. subsidies.
Rep. Chip Roy of Texas has emerged as one of the law’s fiercest critics. In a statement, he described the IRA as the “Green New Scam,” arguing that it provides “massive unlimited subsidies” to large corporations and international manufacturers at the expense of “American energy freedom.” Roy insists that full repeal is essential if Republicans want to advance their energy agenda. “We have no choice,” he said, “but to fully -- and immediately -- repeal the Green New Scam.”
Despite pressure for full repeal, Murkowski is not alone in her call for moderation. At least a dozen House Republicans are reportedly asking GOP leadership to reconsider dismantling the IRA completely. Many of them are open to altering specific parts of the law while preserving its more economically or regionally beneficial aspects. These members are less interested in ideological victory and more focused on ensuring existing projects are not upended by sudden law changes. Their approach reflects a growing awareness of how deeply the IRA has become woven into the country’s renewable energy infrastructure over the last three years.
Nevertheless, the House appears on track to move forward with its proposed reconciliation bill. A vote is expected soon before the measure is passed on to the Senate, where Murkowski and likeminded senators will likely attempt to revise or soften the proposed rollbacks.
A particularly contentious feature of the IRA is its “transferability” option, which allows clean energy project sponsors to sell tax credits to third parties. This practice has made financing easier and jump-started activity in the green energy sector. Republican lawmakers, however, argue the mechanism is open to abuse and could be exploited by non-U.S. companies.
Murkowski’s defense of that mechanism appears grounded in Alaska’s economic landscape, where remote locations and harsh conditions often require unique financing strategies to launch energy projects. Removing such tools at once could result in gridlock for efforts to modernize the state’s energy systems and reduce reliance on diesel fuel in rural communities. The senator seems determined to build consensus around a more calibrated approach.
As the legislative process unfolds, the debate over the IRA reflects deeper divisions within the Republican Party about how to manage environmental policy and government spending. Murkowski’s stance highlights a faction of Republicans who are willing to support some level of clean energy investment, even as fiscal conservatives press for major cuts.
With the Senate expected to take up the reconciliation bill after the House’s vote, negotiations will likely intensify. The final shape of the bill may well depend on how persuasive lawmakers like Murkowski can be in rallying others to back a more surgical retrenchment. What remains clear is that the Inflation Reduction Act, now a centerpiece of U.S. climate and energy policy, has become a lightning rod in partisan efforts to reshape federal spending and policy priorities — and its future hangs in the balance.