Ukraine Targets St. Petersburg

Ukraine launched extensive drone attacks against Russian refineries and military facilities around the city of St Petersburg on 6/6/2-26, in what one Russian official described as an “unprecedented” attack. Targets included naval facilities, as well as oil depots and terminals, the Ukrainian military said.

It’s the second time in the past few days that scores of Ukrainian drones have targeted the Leningrad region, where St Petersburg is situated. Russia said it downed about 60 over the region early on 6/2/2026, hours before the start of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF), often dubbed Russian President Vladimir Putin’s version of Davos.

“A total of 141 UAVs have been shot down over the Leningrad Region,” said Aleksandr Drozdenko, the Regional Governor, describing it as an “unprecedented attack. Last night, our drones covered a distance of about 1,000 kilometers to the St. Petersburg region, to the enemy navy’s arsenals and a base in Kronstadt,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said 6/6/2026.

Kronstadt is the main base, repair, and supply hub for Russia’s Navy in the Eastern Baltic and also has a Naval Academy. A Russian Warship in dock there was struck by a Ukrainian Drone on 6/3/2026. The town of Kronstadt was closed to traffic for several hours 6/6/2-26, according to the Official News Agency TASS.

“St. Petersburg came under a large-scale attack by military drones,” the City’s Governor, Aleksandr Beglov, posted on Telegram on 6/6/2026, saying Three People had been injured. Drozdenko said efforts continued to extinguish a Fire in a village called Bolshaya Izhora, where more than 600 people had been Evacuated. CNN Geolocated Video of thick plumes of smoke rising from a location in the area, which houses a Russian Naval Arsenal.

Zelensky also said that Ukraine’s “long-range sanctions also reached about 500 kilometers into the Krasnodar region, and hit an oil depot,” posting Videos of large Fires in both Krasnodar, in Southern Russia, and Kronstadt. “At least three tanks containing petroleum products are engulfed in flames,” claimed Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU). “This oil depot is a vital rear-area hub for the storage and supply of fuel to Russian troops in the southern and eastern sectors.”

The Strikes came Two days after Zelensky sent an Open Letter to Putin, urging Him to End the Countries’ four-year War, as the Russian Leader was preparing to Address the Forum. Putin responded with Dismissiveness, calling the Letter “Rude” and Voicing skepticism about Zelensky’s True Intentions. The Ukrainian President can “come to Moscow” if he wants to talk, a Kremlin Spokesperson said.

Ukraine appears currently to have the Upper Hand in some Areas along the Front Llines of the War. The Timing of Zelensky’s Letter, in the middle of the event where Russian Billionaires schmooze with Political Leaders and Decision Makers, was seen as No Coincidence. The Russian Economy is Struggling and Zelensky is Hoping He can Capitalize on Rising Disquiet among Bbusiness Eelites. Russian Emergency Services acknowledged 6/6/2026 that a Fire had Broken Out at the Oil Depot in Krasnodar. They said Dozens of People had been Evacuated, and more than 50 pieces of Fire-Fighting Equipment were Deployed to Combat the Fire.

Some 2,300 kilometers (1,400 miles) away, Regional Authorities Reported a Fire at the Tyumen Oil Refinery in the Urals. “The fire broke out in one of the purification units as a result of a technical malfunction,” the Authorities said. “Reports that the fire was caused by a drone attack are untrue.” Kyiv has SteppedUup Attacks on kKy Russian Oil Infrastructure in recent months, Firing Hundreds of Long-Range Drones, Squeezing Fuel Supplies and compounding the Economic Strain on Residents.

Both sides regularly launch Hundreds of Drones at each other’s Territory at night but Ukrainian Long-Range Drones have become increasingly Effective in Targeting Russian Energy Facilities, Military Bases, and Factories. The Ukrainian Military said Russia had Launched 272 Drones Overnight 6/5/2026 into 6/6/2-26, of which 249 were Intercepted. There were Impacts at 11 Locations, the Air Force said.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

DOD Drops Hundreds of Faiths from Religion List

The Department of Defense (DOD/DOW) moved this Week to Dramatically Reduce the Number of Recognized Religions, Faiths, and Belief Systems from more than 200, All the way to 31. The Move was Announced to Troops in a Memo Signed by Anthony Tata (R), Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel, and Readiness of the U.S., and Shared with the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF).

In the Memo, Tata says that the move comes at the Direction of Pentagon Chief Pete Hegseth (R), who said the Move was Done to “streamline the DOD/DOW collection of religious preferences collection for service members, to enhance the delivery of targeted religious support from the chaplaincy”.

Founder and President of the MRFF, Mikey Weinstein, Called the Move to Reduce the Number of Recognized Religions a Direct Hit on the Constitution's First Amendment. “Reducing the number of religious faiths from hundreds down to 31 is another absolute, clear, filthy, and disgusting, unconstitutional, immoral and unethical attempt to force only the approved solution, getting closer and closer to Christian nationalism,” Weinstein, a Retired Air Force Officer, said in a Press Release.

Weinstein also Added that His Organization was “very seriously considering” Filing a Federal Class Action Suit on Behalf of Members of the U.S. Military and Civilians Who have been Impacted by the DOW’s Move. The Reduction of Recognized Religions is Set to Reduce the Number of Religious Affiliation Codes, which are used in Part to Connect Service Members with Necessary Faith Resources.

The List of 31 Religions still Recognized by the DOD/DOW was First Reported 6/4/2026. Some of the Faiths that were Dropped include: Atheists, Deists, Druids, Humanists, Magick, New Age churches, Pagan, Shaman, Spiritualists, and Unitarian Universalists. According to the Memo the following Religions are Still in the List of "religious affiliation codes” for Sservice Members.

Agnostic (AN) Baha'i faith (BH)
Buddhism (BU)
Christian - Assemblies of God (AG)
Christian - Baptist (BA)
Christian - Brethren (BR)
Christian - Catholic (CA)
Christian - Church of Christ (CC)
Christian - Church of God (CG)
Christian - Church of the Nazarene (CN)
Christian - Episcopal/Anglican (EA)
Christian - Evangelical (EV)
Christian - Jehovah's Witnesses (JW)
Christian - Lutheran (LU)
Christian - Methodist (ME)
Christian - Non-Denominational (ND)
Christian - Orthodox (OX)
Christian - Other (CO)
Christian - Pentecostal (PE)
Christian - Presbyterian (PR)
Christian - Quaker (QU)
Christian - Reformed (RE)
Christian - Scientist (SC)
Christian - Seventh Day Adventist (SA)
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (CJ)
Hindu (HI)
Islam (Muslim) (IS)
Judaism (Jewish) (JU)
No Religion (NR)
Other Religions (OR)
Sikh (SI)










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Northeast AGs Sue Trump Over Offshore Wind Payout

A Multistate Lawsuit is Putting a National Spotlight on the Trump (R) Administration's Plan to Send nearly $928 Million to TotalEnergies, to Cancel Two Offshore Wind Leases Off New York.

New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) is calling the Agreement a "Sham Deal," Arguing that it Trades Clean Energy, Union Jobs, and Grid Support, for more Oil and Gas Investment.

James, joined by Attorneys General from: Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Vermont, Sued the Administration in Federal Court this week, over the Payout.

The States Argue that the Federal Government Broke the Law by Agreeing to Refund TotalEnergies for the Leases and by Planning to Use the Treasury's Judgment Fund, Money Typically Reserved for Legal Settlements, to make the Payment.

In Exchange for walking away from the Offshore Wind Projects, TotalEnergies would Invest a Matching Amount in U.S. Oil and Gas Projects, according to the Interior Department's (DOI) Announcement.

"After repeatedly losing in court, this administration cooked up a sham deal to pay a foreign energy company hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to abandon offshore wind and invest in oil and gas instead," James said. She Added that the Agreement Threatens to "erase over a thousand union jobs" and "cheat millions of New Yorkers out of clean, affordable energy."

The Lawsuit also says Federal Officials Skipped Required Procedures before Moving to Cancel the Leases, including Hearings and Co-Ordination with Affected Governors.

The States say the Canceled Projects would have Helped meet Rising Electricity Demand, Replace Aging Power Plants, and Advance Climate Goals, while Creating Jobs and Broader Economic Activity.

In New Jersey, One of the Affected Projects, Attentive Energy Two, was Expected to Generate 1.3 Gigawatts, enough to Power roughly 650,000 Homes. The Suit says the Project also could have Brought an estimated $3.1 Billion in Economic Benefits to the State.

In New York, where Grid Officials have Warned of Reliability Risks as Older Plants Retire, the Loss of Offshore Wind Capacity Could make it Harder to Keep Electricity Affordable and Dependable.

The Interior Department pushed back on the lawsuit, saying the "only thing blatantly unlawful here was the process by which these offshore wind leases were negotiated and imposed under the Biden administration."

Clean Energy Aadvocates Welcomed the Lawsuit. Liz Burdock, President and CEO of the Oceantic Network, said the Governors were Right to Challenge Actions that Threaten "jobs, investment, and the nation's ability to meet growing electricity demand with an affordable and reliable energy source."










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Female Navy Officers Fear Career Cap

After Secretary of Defense/War Pete Hegseth (R) Cut Nine Navy Officers, including All the Women, from a Promotion List, several Female Officers say they see the Unusual Intervention, as a Sign that their Careers now have a Ceiling and Worry for the Future Generation of Female Military Leaders. The Navy had Selected 31 Sailors to Promote from the Rank of Captain to One-Star Admiral, but Hegseth recently Intervened to Strike Nine People from the List, including Three Women and Two Black Men, according to a Defense Official who Spoke on Condition of Anonymity to Discuss Information Not Permitted to be Released Publicly.

As a Result, the Navy is Not Promoting a Single Woman to the One-Star Admiral Rank 2026, even though Women make up about 1/4th of All Navy Officers and nearly 1/3rd of the Sea Service's Midgrade RRnks, according to Military Data from 2024.The more Junior Officers said they saw the Development as aSsign that their Careers would become Politicized, if they Rose too Far in the Ranks, and some said they felt they now had a Limit on how far they could be Promoted.

Some said it made them feel Less Valued within the Military and Wondered whether that wasn't part of the Intent. Sean Parnell (R), the Pentagon's Top Spokesman, said on Social Media this week, that “military promotions are given to those who have earned them” and that the Pentagon “will never consider the color of a service member’s skin or their gender as a factor in promotions."

The Navy's Process for Choosing which Officers to Promote to the One-Star Rank, has been relatively Constant and Transparent over the years. The Service Convenes a Group of Officers, called a Promotion Board, that Examines the Records of Eligible Officers and Chooses the Most Qualified. The Board that Selected the Initial Slate of 31 Officers for Promotion was Directed by then Navy Secretary John Phelan (R), an Appointee of Trump, to “recommend for promotion the best qualified officers within their respective competitive category.”

The Order from Phelan, who later Abruptly Departed His Post in 4/2026, said the Board should Consider an Officer's Performance, Competence, and Character, among other Traits, as part of those Qualifications. It also said that given China's Prominence in the Trump Administration's National Defense Strategy, “special consideration shall be given to officers who have excelled in their knowledge of the political military affairs and U.S. strategic interests in the Indo-Pacific region, and operational contingency planning for Indo-Pacific war plans.”

Hegseth has long Argued, without Offering Evidence, that Women in the Military Benefit from Preferential Treatment and are Not Suited for Combat Roles. "For too long, we’ve promoted too many uniformed leaders for the wrong reasons based on their race, based on gender quotas, based on historic so-called firsts,” Hegseth told Hundreds of Military Leaders in 9/2025. The Approach, He Asserted, made the Pentagon “less capable and less lethal.”

Phelan's Order said the Navy Cannot Discriminate based on Criteria such as Race and Sex, and it Specifically Noted that “this guidance shall not be interpreted as requiring or permitting preferential treatment of any officer or group of officers on the grounds of race, religion, color, sex.” The Full List of 31 People to be Promoted was Approved by Phelan, other Navy Leaders, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Dan Caine (R), before it Reached Hegseth, who Chose to make the Changes, the Defense Official said.

While Hegseth is within His Rights to Intervene in the List, “it’s just not the norm” and its “a break from tradition” said Katherine Kuzminski, a Researcher Specializing in Military Recruiting and Retention at the Center for New American Security Think Tank. She said that Promotions Historically have been seen “the services’ business.” Kuzminski noted that “this is a decision that’s not being made by the U.S. Navy, it’s being made by the Secretary of Defense” and said Hegseth's growing Interference in Operational aspects of the Military Services such as Promotions is Creating “Tension" about what “normal” will look like going forward.

Some of the more Senior Navy Officers, Expressed Concerns about the Message it sends to the Next Generation of Young Ssailors. In addition to Pulling the recent Promotions of Three Women to Admiral, Hegseth shortly after He took Office Fired Adm. Lisa Franchetti, the Service's Top Officer and the First Woman to Hold the Job. He never Explained His Rationale.

Since then, He also has Fired Two other Female Three-Star Admirals without Explanation. Some of the Officers who Spoke to the AP, said that while they were Encouraging Female Sailors to Stick with the Navy, they Acknowledged that Message is coming at a Difficult Time. Kuzminski said the Rhetoric and Actions surrounding Women in the Military “affects individual service member decision-making and it also affects family unit decision-making,” including whether People make a Career of the Military.

Kuzminski said that following the Monthslong hold on Military Promotions by Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL). during the Biden Administration, Surveys showed that Partisan Politics Spilling into the Day-to-Day Lives of Troops Affected their Decision-Making. One Officer said this Impact was Not Cconfined to Women.

In Conversations with other Sailors in Her Unit, She said that Male Sailors were Hesitant to Deal with what Appears to be a Growing Politicization of Simply following the Orders of Administrations.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

White House AI Policy Adviser Leaves

White House Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy Adviser Sriram Krishnan (I) on 6/6/2026, said He will Leave His Position at the End of June, Marking the Exit of a Leading Figure helping Craft Policies for Frontier Technologies.

"This journey has been the privilege of a lifetime," Krishnan posted on Social Media Platform X. He did Not give a Rreason for Leaving.

Krishnan has been involved in Trump (R) Administration efforts to Create a National Framework for Regulating AI Ddevelopments, as Security Fears in Washington have Mounted over Powerful New Systems.

Anthropic's Mythos, for example, has Reportedly Demonstrated the Ability to Expose Cybersecurity Weaknesses in Computer Systems such as at Banks.

The White House on 6/2/2026 Released an Executive Order (EO) that Directs Federal Agencies to Ask Leading AI Developers, to Voluntarily Submit their Most Capable Models for Government Cybersecurity Tests, before ‌Releasing them to the Public.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Trump SNAP Restrictions Hit Legal Roadblock

The lawsuit was brought in March 2026 by a coalition of Democratic-led states, which argued that the USDA had imposed unlawful requirements on federal funding approved by Congress. The combined plaintiff states receive more than $74 billion annually from the USDA and claimed the new conditions could put critical programs at risk.

A USDA directive issued at the end of last year required states to certify compliance with federal “policies” in order to continue receiving funding. The lawsuit challenged those funding conditions imposed by USDA, known as the “2026 Conditions,” which became effective at the end of 2025 and applied to all USDA programs, grants, cooperative agreements, and mutual interest agreements.

According to the attorneys general who filed the lawsuit, the requirement was vague, potentially forcing states to comply with matters unrelated to agricultural or nutrition programs. Among the requirements challenged in the lawsuit were restrictions related to “gender ideology,” “immigration,” and “fair athletic opportunities” for women and girls.

The states argued that the USDA had “thrown unconstitutional and unlawful roadblocks between the programs created by Congress and the States that rely on them, threatening critical nutrition support, vital agricultural research, and the safety of our national food chain and communities.”

The states also contended that the USDA lacked the authority to impose the conditions and argued that the requirements violated the Constitution’s Spending Clause. They also alleged the policy was implemented without following required legal procedures.

The challenged conditions could affect a range of programs administered by the department, including the SNAP, school lunch programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).

The Plaintiffs include: California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, New York, and Wisconsin. Government attorneys opposed the preliminary injunction, saying the requirements were intended to strengthen oversight of federal funds.

In a court filing, lawyers for the administration said “these new requirements would help promote the sound stewardship of taxpayer dollars, strengthen USDA’s control and oversight of obligated funds, and ensure that grant recipients comply with federal laws, regulations, and policies.”

The Trump administration has also argued that if states must comply with federal anti-discrimination laws and regulations as a condition of receiving federal funding, other federal policies should be treated similarly.

Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell (D) welcomed the decision in a post on Bluesky, writing: “When Trump tried to gut billions in USDA funding for states refusing to comply with his anti-immigrant agenda, we sued. The court just ruled in our favor, blocking his cuts while our case continues. These grants are a lifeline—I’ll always fight to protect food assistance for families.”

New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) posted on X: “We won a court order protecting billions of dollars in @USDA funding as our lawsuit continues. My office will keep fighting to protect New Yorkers and stop the federal government from punishing our state for refusing to bend.”










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

NYS Passes Bill Banning Prices Based on Personal Data

New York State (NYS) Lawmakers on 6/4/2026, Passed a Ban on Businesses Ssetting Individualized Prices for Consumers, using Their Personal Data, in the Strongest Move yet by a State against the Practice.

The New York Governor Kathy Hochul (D) Signs it into Law, the One Fair Price Act, would Prohibit Companies from Setting Prices Based on Data that could be Traced to a Person or their Device, such as Browsing Purchase History, Income, and Real-Time Location.

• Discounts for Seniors, Teachers and other Specific Groups, as well as Discounts Offered through Loyalty Programs, would still be Allowed.

• Companies would also have to Disclose when they are using Prices that Fluctuate Automatically Based on an Algorithm, also called "Dynamic Pricing."

• New York would be the Third State, to Prohibit the Practice. Grace Gedye, a Policy Analyst at the Consumer Advocacy Group Consumer Reports, said the Bill Improves upon thosePpassed in Connecticut and Maryland, but Still has Flaws the Iegislature should Address in the Future.

• Hochul is likely to Face Corporate Lobbying to Weaken the Bill, Gedye said. A Spokesperson for Hochul said She is Reviewing the Bill. The gGvernor has Until the End of 2026 to Act on the Legislation.

• The Proposal would Replace a Law Hochul Signed Last Year that Requires a Disclaimer when Prices are Set by an Algorithm using Individuals' Personal Data.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker