U.S. President Donald Trump said Sunday that Russia and Ukraine had agreed to an "energy ceasefire," but offered no details on its terms.

Trump's brief social media post said only that the ceasefire took effect immediately and that both sides had agreed to it. "Do not break it!" he wrote. Neither Moscow nor Kyiv immediately commented on the announcement, and The White House did not immediately clarify the president's post or add detail.

His announcement came as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, in an interview aired Sunday, said Ukraine was ready to stop striking Russian refineries if Moscow halted attacks on Ukraine's energy system, and asked Trump to press the Kremlin to agree.

"We are asking President Trump, (to) give them (a) signal, not (to) attack energy infrastructure of Ukraine," he told ABC's "This Week."

Trump spars with Zelenskyy

Trump said Saturday it was time for Ukraine to get a new president, suggesting Zelenskyy has not done enough to end the war and blaming him for high diesel prices in the U.S.

Zelenskyy said in response to Trump's comments that Ukraine could hold elections if Russia agreed to a 60-day ceasefire. "Give us two months, 60 days off. Total ceasefire, 60 days, and we will organize elections," he said, adding that Ukraine would be ready to accept whatever choice its people made.

"With all respect to President Trump, it's up to our society, up to our people to choose one or another leader," he said. Zelenskyy added that holding a vote during the war would be unlawful and that Ukraine would need security guarantees to allow people to vote safely.

Ukraine has been under martial law since Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022, and the Ukrainian Constitution bars elections while it remains in force. Beyond the legal barrier, a nationwide vote would be vulnerable to Russian missile and drone attacks, and organizing one is widely seen as logistically impossible, with roughly a fifth of the country under occupation, millions of Ukrainians displaced abroad and soldiers on the front line. Zelenskyy's term formally expired in May 2024, but the constitution allows him to remain in office until a new president is sworn in.

The exchange came as Kyiv pressed its campaign against infrastructure deep inside Russia, with a drone attack on Sunday shutting down a data center run by Russian technology giant Yandex, the third strike on the company's facilities in four days. Russia and Ukraine are locked in a long-range aerial war while their armies remain largely deadlocked on the front line.

The U.S. president, who on Friday struck a deal with Putin to buy diesel from Russia in an attempt to address high fuel prices ahead of U.S. midterm elections, has been urging Zelenskyy for weeks to stop strikes on Russian energy infrastructure.

He has sought to blame record U.S. diesel prices on Ukraine rather than the U.S.-led war in Iran, which has driven up world energy prices. Ukrainian and European officials reacted to the diesel deal with dismay, saying it will help pay for Russia's war effort.

Ukrainian strike on Russian data center triggers outages

The Ukrainian drone attack on the Yandex data center in the city of Vladimir, east of Moscow, caused outages across the company's services, leaving users in dozens of Russian cities and in Kazakhstan, Belarus and Armenia unable to order taxis or access banking services, according to Russian independent news outlet Astra.

"As a result of the drone attack, the infrastructure of Yandex's data center in Vladimir was damaged. Operations at the data center have been completely halted. There were no injuries," said the Yandex Cloud Telegram channel, which provides operational updates on service availability.

In Moscow, residents described disruption to everyday tasks. Pavel Belyavskiy, a driver for Yandex Taxi, said it was unclear whether orders were coming through at all, and that on several rides he had to cancel after waiting a long time because he could not reach the passenger.

"I'd press the 'call' button to contact them, but nothing happens," he said, "There's nothing I can do, so I'm just forced to cancel."

Igor Mann said he went to check the status of an order on the Yandex Market shopping platform but the page was unavailable, and connecting through a VPN did not help. "Nothing worked," he said.

Another Moscow resident, Eduard Malyavko, said the outages had "direct impact" and weren't just about "convenience."

"It's also about work," he said, adding that they also affected "healthcare, and everything else."

On Thursday, a drone attack took a Yandex data center offline in the Ryazan region, southeast of Moscow. A day later, Ukrainian drones hit the company's major data center in the Kaluga region, southwest of Moscow, partly putting it out of action, Yandex said.

Yandex, often described as Russia's Google, runs the country's most popular search engine and a wide range of digital services, and is heavily involved in Russia's artificial intelligence development.

Sen. Flávio Bolsonaro, an ally of U.S. President Donald Trump, and Brazil's incumbent President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva will face off in a runoff Oct. 25 for the top job of Latin America's powerhouse economy after neither won a majority in Sunday's vote.

The country's electoral court in Brasilia said neither the 80-year-old incumbent, seeking his fourth non-consecutive term, nor the 45-year-old son of former President Jair Bolsonaro would garner the majority vote needed for an outright win.

The court had Bolsonaro with just over 56 million votes to Lula's 53.7 million, with 99.8 percent of the vote reported. The next presidential term is set to begin Jan. 5.

The winner will be in charge of Latin America's biggest economy and a population of 214 million. A win for Bolsonaro would increase U.S. influence in Latin America. If Lula wins, Brazil will keep its distance from Washington and continue to deepen its relationship with China.

Flávio Bolsonaro addressed the press and a small group of supporters, including some wearing green and yellow Brazil jerseys and one woman wrapped in the Israeli flag, outside his Brasilia house.

"Brazil wants change, that's the reading of what happened today," Bolsonaro said. "It's the end of the Workers' Party era," he added, in a reference to Lula's party. Lula, seeking to be encouraging ahead of an uphill battle to beat Bolsonaro in the runoff, said the result was "unexpected" as he had thought he could win in the first round.

"Tomorrow we start a new campaign," Lula said. "I am very good in the knockout stage. We will see who has the best plan."

Both Lula and Bolsonaro will have three weeks to reach moderate voters who did not support them in the first round. Augusto Cury, a writer who finished in third place with 3.4 million votes, said he would not endorse either in the runoff. Ronaldo Caiado and Renan Santos, two candidates who garnered about 5.3 million votes combined Sunday, have previously said the same.

In the campaign ahead, Lula is expected to try to capitalize on the popularity of his social policies and his rival's many legal woes.

While the once widely popular Lula saw his approval ratings plummet during his third term, standing up to the U.S. gave him a boost. And he still enjoys a strong base of supporters who credit his social policies for improving millions of Brazilians' lives.

Bolsonaro will likely lean into his messaging on affordability and link the president to corruption scandals.

He has promised to crack down on Brazilian criminal groups and insisted that Brazil needs to strike better deals with the Trump administration, including in the rare minerals economy, second only to China. Bolsonaro also has campaigned on releasing his father and bringing him back to politics.

Both candidates face image problems: Roughly half of Brazil's population disapproves of the Bolsonaro family, and roughly half disapprove of Lula's Workers' Party, according to multiple polls.

Four years ago, Lula beat then incumbent Jair Bolsonaro by about 2.1 million votes.

While it was a successful night for Bolsonaro, nothing is won yet, said Mayra Goulart, a political scientist from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Lula should "look at the votes for Augusto Cury and Ronaldo Caiado and try to reduce abstention," she said.

Reacting to the result, Alvaro Senra, 65, a history professor and Lula supporter in Rio de Janeiro said he felt "calm but very sad." He watched the count with friends at a bar.

"I think this is the result of conservatives working under the radar, including by neo-Pentecostal churches. But I think Lula can still win," he said.

Earlier in the day, Maria Ribeiro, a 50-year-old cellphone vendor from Brasilia, said she voted for Bolsonaro's eldest son because she wants freedom to express her evangelical religion. She hopes he follows in his father's footsteps.

Moderate Democrat David Crowley won the Wisconsin primary for governor, defeating a democratic socialist who fell short while trying to deliver another win for progressives in a battleground state.

Crowley, the Milwaukee county executive, is vying to become Wisconsin's first Black governor and pitched himself as the candidate best positioned to win in November against Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, who is endorsed by President Donald Trump.

Crowley narrowly defeated democratic socialist Francesca Hong, who was hoping to ride the wave of recent victories by progressive candidates, including Abdul El-Sayed in neighboring Michigan's U.S. Senate race last week.

El-Sayed's win was the movement's first major success in a purple state. It also fed fears in the party's leaders that such candidates, farther afield and often carrying political baggage of past stances such as defunding the police, would struggle to beat Republicans and imperil the party's hopes of recapturing control of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House.

Crowley didn't address supporters Tuesday night but was expected at a unity event later Wednesday.

"Now, David is focused on bringing people together, earning the support of Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and anyone who believes Wisconsin is at its best when we work together and deliver results," Crowley's campaign manager Garren Randolph said in a statement.

Hong's loss in Wisconsin may have doused the momentum, but it's far from snuffing it out. A democratic socialist coming close to victory in a battleground state sends a clear message: There's unignorable angst among the party's voters.

"We have built something that will change politics forever," Hong told supporters as the outcome of the race hung in the balance late Tuesday. "The work we have done will be remembered forever. I know we don't have the final results right now, but what I do know is we are ready to keep fighting."

Her campaign manager Becky Cooper said after Hong conceded that she was "proud of the race we ran."

"Our team campaigned clean, our souls are intact and we really made meaningful change for the progressive movement," she said.

The Associated Press declared Crowley the winner once Hong's concession removed the possibility of a recount in the exceptionally close race.

Hong could have requested a recount since Crowley's margin of victory was less than 1 percentage point. But because it was wider than 0.25 points, Hong's campaign would have had to pay for it.

Sanders and other top progressives stayed out of the Wisconsin race

Progressives had wanted to notch a clear win, but national progressive leaders, most notably Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, sat out the race and did not endorse.

The movement is not entirely aligned. Not all candidates are democratic socialists or have endorsements from Sanders, but they are often tilling similar voter anger with politics and the party: over military aid to Israel, the amount of money wielded in campaigns, the Trump administration's immigration raids and the high cost of daily life.

In New York City in the June primary elections, two democratic socialist candidates and a progressive came out on top, booting two Democratic incumbents from Congress in the process. All three were backed by the city's mayor, Zohran Mamdani, himself a democratic socialist who framed the upsets as a question of electing "better Democrats."

Democrats in Wisconsin are hoping to capitalize on low approval ratings for Trump in a state he won in 2016 and 2024 to retain control of the governor's office and flip both chambers of the Legislature to earn full control of Wisconsin state government for the first time since 2010.

Lawmakers said Kathryn Ruemmler, the former top lawyer at Goldman Sachs and White House counsel to President Barack Obama, was not being truthful Wednesday about her relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, rejecting her testimony that Epstein had merely "used" her.

Ruemmler in her opening remarks told members of the House Oversight Committee that "it was a mistake to deal with" Epstein, but she insisted she never witnessed criminal activity. She said Epstein "used me and other respectable people to legitimize his standing."

Democrats emerged from questioning Ruemmler saying she was not being forthcoming about her ties to Epstein.

"It is difficult to see how she's being completely truthful in there with the answers she's given the committee," Rep. Robert Garcia of California, the top Democrat on the committee, told reporters.

Jennifer Connelly, a spokeswoman for Ruemmler, said in response that Ruemmler had "testified openly and truthfully for six hours and answered every question the committee asked."

Ruemmler is the latest prominent figure called before the House Oversight Committee as lawmakers investigate the network of powerful people connected with Epstein. The bipartisan inquiry has already included testimony from more than a dozen high-profile witnesses, including Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates and former President Bill Clinton, as lawmakers examine how Epstein's wealth and influence may have helped shield him from scrutiny.

Ruemmler served as White House counsel under Obama from 2011 to 2014 and was briefly considered for attorney general. She served as Goldman Sachs' general counsel for six years before announcing in February that she would step down amid backlash over her correspondence with Epstein. Although she said she would step down on June 30, she remains employed by Goldman Sachs.

Lawmakers have focused on Ruemmler's close relationship with Epstein in the final years of his life, pointing to affectionate communications between the two.

"For her to deny that there was any type of real relationship there, I just don't buy it," Garcia said. "And so, again, the fact she is not under oath is very problematic."

While Ruemmler has tried to downplay their relationship in more recent statements, thousands of documents released by the Justice Department showed that Ruemmler and Epstein had an extensive relationship. The files included personal emails, social plans and gifts that extended beyond formal legal work. Documents showed she had called Epstein "Uncle Jeffrey" in emails and said she adored him.

Ruemmler said in her opening remarks that she first met Epstein in 2014 regarding potentially working with him and Gates "to set up a large donor-advised fund." Soon after, according to Ruemmler, she learned about Epstein's 2008 conviction on sex crimes, when he became a registered sex offender.

She said Epstein expressed remorse about it, and that he did not know the women were underaged. She said she "relied on the resolution reached by federal and state prosecutors and validated by a judge as being a proportionate and final resolution of his criminal conduct."

Comer said Wednesday that Ruemmler is the 18th person to testify as part of their broader investigation.

Billionaire investor Leon Black was subpoenaed last month after lawmakers said he refused to answer some questions about his yearslong relationship with Epstein.

Comer said Wednesday that Black will appear for a formal deposition on Sept. 3 but that he expects to have Black's nondisclosure agreements by "the end of the week."

The committee has also expressed interest in questioning acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, whose nomination to permanently lead the Justice Department is pending before the Senate.

The Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration Thursday in upholding the power of federal regulators to enforce data privacy laws on telecommunications companies.

The 8-1 decision preserved one of the Federal Communications Commission's key tools, though the companies also won a concession from the Republican administration that could shift the regulatory landscape.

The appeal from telecommunications giants Verizon and AT&T challenged a combined $100 million in penalties imposed after the agency determined that the companies had failed to safeguard customer location data.

The companies argued that the FCC's process was unconstitutional because it gave them little opportunity to tell their side of the story in front of a jury.

The administration defended the fines as an essential regulatory tool. But the government also said companies did not have to pay the penalties right away, a regulatory shift in the companies' favor.

The Supreme Court agreed, affirming the FCC's power to order fines when challenges are still available.

"The orders at issue did not settle the carriers' legal obligations because, stated simply, they did not create an obligation to pay," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority.

Justice Clarence Thomas, the lone dissenter, said he would have given the two telecom companies a clearer path to recouping the fines they already paid.

Other agencies use similar enforcement methods, so a sweeping victory for AT&T and Verizon could have had widespread effects, advocates said.

The environmental group Earthjustice applauded the ruling, saying it has direct implications for other agencies and a key energy-efficiency case.

"By rejecting this unsupported attack on agency authority, the Court's decision safeguards the government's ability to enforce laws that protect people, communities, and the environment," said Caroline Flynn, the group's Supreme Court counsel.

The libertarian-leaning New Civil Liberties Alliance was disappointed by the decision, but expected it to help other companies in the future. "In fact, it may even buttress their willingness to challenge future agency orders in federal court before paying any penalties," said the alliance's president, Mark Chenoweth.

A few more carriers may decide to litigate, but the decision leaves the FCC with the power to "publicly announce large fines with much fanfare," said Doug Orvis, a veteran telecom attorney. "It will be interesting to see what happens going forward."

The Supreme Court's conservative majority has sided against federal agencies and limited their power before. That includes overturning a decades-old decision that had given regulators an advantage in court and stripping another agency of a major tool in fighting securities fraud.