Trump Defends Waiving Russian Sanctions Amid Criticism
Left 50%
Center 0%
Right 50%
1 left · 0 center · 1 right
What happened
President Donald Trump signed an executive order waiving sweeping Russian tariffs and sanctions under the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act, legislation championed by the late Sen. Lindsey Graham. He issued the waiver shortly after striking a deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin to lift the embargo on Russian diesel. On Sunday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent defended the pause on NBC News’s Meet the Press. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and members of both parties in Congress criticized the waiver. Sen. Darline Graham (R-S.C.) said she would rather keep the sanctions on Russia.
Sourcing check · Fully on the record · 2 articles
2 of 2 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.
What these terms mean and how they're counted
- On the record · names a source 2 of 2
- On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Lindsey Graham and Scott Bessent
- Primary evidence · cites a document or data 0 of 2
- Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: None cited.
- Credits another outlet 0 of 2
- The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
- Unnamed sources 0 of 2
- The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
- How it developed
- When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Oct 18, 15:39 UTC by Washington Examiner, naming its source.
- Not counted 0
- Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out
Unpacked
Left-leaning coverage leaves out the Putin bargain that right-leaning coverage treats as the reason the sanctions were waived. A deal with Moscow to lift the embargo on Russian diesel is reported by the Washington Examiner as coming just before the waiver. The Hill never mentions Putin or that embargo, even while noting that Senator Darline Graham shares an aim of getting prices down.
Right-leaning coverage leads with Scott Bessent's claim that "no one has been tougher." Left-leaning coverage leads with a Republican senator who would rather keep sanctions on Russia, and it never mentions the Treasury secretary at all.
None of the coverage asks what legal authority lets an executive order pause a sanctions statute Congress already passed into law.
Bottom line
The Hill covers the waiver through Senator Darline Graham's preference to keep sanctions and never reports a Putin diesel deal. Only the Washington Examiner tells readers that bargain preceded the pause.
The receipts — 3 facts one side's coverage lacks
- The pause was described as an effort to lower energy prices ahead of the midterm elections
- The move drew criticism from both parties in Congress
- Trump signed an executive order to waive the penalties
The Left View
The Hill focused on Sen. Darline Graham’s preference to maintain the penalties, quoting her that she “would choose to keep the pressure on Russia.” She said she and the president “share the same goal, which is to end the war, get gas and diesel prices down,” but called “the sanctions bill” “one of the tools we can use,” treating those sanctions as an instrument she would keep rather than set aside.
The Right View
The Washington Examiner centered on Bessent’s claim that “no one has been tougher” on Russian sanctions than Trump, presenting his Meet the Press remarks as a defense of pausing the Graham Act. That coverage tied the waiver to lowering energy prices ahead of the midterm elections and recorded “fierce criticism” from Zelensky and from both parties in Congress.
Our Take (balanced)
The strongest argument in the left-leaning coverage is Graham’s: even while sharing the president’s stated aims of ending the war and bringing fuel prices down, she treats the sanctions statute as “one of the tools we can use” and would keep that pressure on Russia. The strongest argument in the right-leaning coverage is Bessent’s on-the-record claim that “no one has been tougher” than Trump, offered as the justification for pausing the Graham Act after the diesel arrangement and in connection with cutting energy prices. The central unresolved tension is whether that pause is an exercise of toughness and economic leverage or a release of pressure that Graham, Zelensky, and bipartisan members of Congress treat as forgoing a necessary tool.
2 sources
More stories
The week's bottom lines, in your inbox
One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.