Good Morning, and Happy Saturday! Welcome to The Flag's Five, your nonpartisan breakdown of the week’s five most pressing headlines. Dive into what happened, why it matters, and how perspectives from the left and right shape the conversation.

Want more? Upgrade today to unlock The Flag's Sunday Edition, where we uncover fascinating American historical stories—and enjoy an ad-free reading experience while you're at it. History, clarity, and no interruptions await!

1. Putin Offers Three-Day Ukraine Ceasefire

Here’s what happened: On April 30, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Russian forces will halt offensive operations from May 8–10 to mark Victory Day. Ukraine’s government rejected the move, insisting on an immediate 30-day truce. The White House said President Trump still wants a permanent cease-fire before resuming broader talks. (David Brennan, ABC News)

Here’s why it matters: Ukrainian commanders report heavier shelling near Pokrovsk despite the announcement, raising doubts that Moscow will honor any pause. Military analysts warn a 72-hour lull could let Russia rotate units and showcase foreign dignitaries at May 9 parades without audible bombardment. (Anna Pruchnicka et al., Reuters)

Here’s what right-leaning sources are saying: The Washington Examiner calls the proposal “Kremlin theater,” citing almost 3,000 violations after January’s Easter truce. Columnists argue any U.S. concession now would “reward deceit,” urging negotiators to demand verifiable pullbacks before easing sanctions. They add that Putin is using the holiday to project domestic strength while stalling Western aid packages. (Mike Brest, Washington Examiner)

Here’s what left-leaning sources are saying: The Guardian frames the offer as a bid to “stage-manage” Victory Day optics, quoting Kyiv officials who call it “a parade, not peace.” Reporters note that civilian areas in Kharkiv and Odesa were struck within hours of the statement, bolstering claims of manipulation. Commentators add that any cease-fire limited to a Russian holiday signals Moscow’s priority is public relations over real de-escalation. (Pjotr Sauer & Luke Harding, The Guardian)

Sponsored by FinMC

Your FREE Stock Hotsheets Await!

Discover the best days to consider trading top stocks like Apple, LULU, and Walmart. These hotsheets are based on 10 years of historical data, giving you a clear edge. No confusing charts—just actionable trade opportunities.

Tell us where to send your FREE copy (Just Pay Shipping)!

2. House Backs Deepfake & Revenge-Porn Crackdown

Here’s what happened: On April 28, the House voted 409-2 for the bipartisan Take It Down Act, which criminalizes posting non-consensual intimate images—including AI-generated deepfakes—and forces major platforms to remove flagged content within 48 hours. The bill, endorsed by First Lady Melania Trump, now heads to the president. (Will Oremus, The Washington Post)

Here’s why it matters: Supporters tout the measure as the first federal law targeting AI-enabled sexual abuse and a template for child-online-safety reforms. Civil-liberties groups warn vague definitions could prompt over-removal and FTC “weaponization,” while tech firms face steep fines for non-compliance. (Charlotte Alter, TIME)

Here’s what right-leaning sources are saying: The Daily Wire applauds the bill’s “victims-first” approach, crediting Melania Trump for uniting Congress. Writers urge lawmakers to toughen penalties so executives—not just corporations—face jail if platforms ignore orders. They also dismiss free-speech objections, arguing that sharing fabricated sexual images constitutes “theft of dignity,” not expression. (Daniel Chaitin, Daily Wire)

Here’s what left-leaning sources are saying: Politico highlights fears that powerful figures could exploit takedown rules to scrub embarrassing but newsworthy content. Free-speech advocates liken the act to an “NCII DMCA” that may chill investigative journalism. Commentators also question whether small platforms can meet the 48-hour deadline without automatic filters that often misfire. (Brendan Bordelon, Politico)

3. Trump Rings Bezos Over Amazon Tariff-Fee Plan

Here’s what happened: Reuters revealed on April 29 that Amazon considered labeling tariffs as a separate “surcharge” on some listings. President Trump phoned Jeff Bezos, calling the idea a “hostile political act.” Amazon insists the test applied only to its discount “Haul” site and was never approved for Amazon.com. (David Shepardson et al., Reuters)

Here’s why it matters: The spat spotlights how Trump’s 145 % China tariffs and new 10 % global floor are rippling through supply chains. Transparent labels could reveal tariff costs to shoppers, intensifying public backlash and complicating the administration’s inflation messaging. (Joe Hernandez, NPR)

Here’s what right-leaning sources are saying: The Washington Examiner praises Trump for “calling out corporate blame-shifting,” arguing Amazon hoped surcharge labels would redirect consumer anger toward the White House. Commentators say Bezos wants to “politicize the checkout page” instead of trimming margins. They add that letting companies itemize tariffs could undermine U.S. leverage in future trade talks. (Mabinty Quarshie, Washington Examiner)

Here’s what left-leaning sources are saying: Al Jazeera counters that clear pricing would simply educate consumers on the real cost of protectionism. Analysts say the administration’s pressure campaign shows it fears voter blowback if shoppers link rising prices to tariff policy. They also note that Europe already mandates cost-breakdown labels on imports, suggesting Amazon’s plan aligns with global transparency norms. (Al Jazeera Staff, Al Jazeera)

4. Trump’s 100-Day Rating Hits 80-Year Low

Here’s what happened: An ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll released April 30 finds only 39 % of Americans approve of President Trump’s performance—the worst 100-day mark since modern polling began in 1945. Majorities disapprove of his handling of tariffs, inflation and executive power. (Gary Langer, ABC News)

Here’s why it matters: Slumping approval threatens Trump’s legislative agenda just as first-quarter GDP turned negative. Reuters notes the president is “struggling to defend” tariff-driven price spikes and warning critics to “be patient” for economic benefits. (Trevor Hunnicutt, Reuters)

Here’s what right-leaning sources are saying: Fox News opinion writer Liz Peek dismisses the survey as “skewed,” pointing to Rasmussen tracking that shows stronger Republican enthusiasm. She argues voters will reward Trump once border crossings drop and manufacturing jobs return. Columnists also accuse mainstream outlets of under-sampling non-college whites, the core of Trump’s base. (Liz Peek, Fox News)

Here’s what left-leaning sources are saying: Vanity Fair contends the numbers reveal “buyer’s remorse,” citing concerns about mass deportations, tariff-driven grocery prices and “chaos” inside the West Wing. Writers note a surge in small-donor contributions to progressive groups since the poll’s release. They add that low early approval historically correlates with heavy midterm losses. (Molly Jong-Fast, Vanity Fair)

Sponsored by FinMC

Your FREE Stock Hotsheets Await!

Discover the best days to consider trading top stocks like Apple, LULU, and Walmart. These hotsheets are based on 10 years of historical data, giving you a clear edge. No confusing charts—just actionable trade opportunities.

Tell us where to send your FREE copy (Just Pay Shipping)!

5. U.S., Ukraine Seal Rare-Earths Partnership

Here’s what happened: On May 1 in Washington, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Ukrainian First Deputy PM Yulia Svyrydenko signed a fund to jointly develop Ukraine’s titanium, lithium and other critical minerals. Each side gets equal voting rights, and wartime U.S. aid need not be repaid. (Tom Balmforth et al., Reuters)

Here’s why it matters: Axios says the pact could lock in bipartisan U.S. support by tying economic upside to Ukraine’s recovery and shifting supply chains away from China. Critics warn Washington could wield leverage over Kyiv’s resources and complicate EU reconstruction plans. (Barak Ravid, Axios)

Here’s what right-leaning sources are saying: The Washington Examiner calls the agreement a “Trump-brokered win” that secures strategic minerals for U.S. industry while rewarding Ukraine for governance reforms. Commentators urge Congress to ensure permitting stays “fast-track” and stress profits go toward Kyiv’s defense—not bureaucracy. They also see the deal as an answer to China’s dominance in rare-earth processing. (Naomi Lim, Washington Examiner)

Here’s what left-leaning sources are saying: The Guardian cautions that pegging aid to resource profits risks creating a new form of extractive dependency. European analysts fear the fund could undercut Brussels’ reconstruction blueprint by steering investment toward U.S. firms. Activists also question environmental safeguards for mining projects in war-torn regions. (Helen Livingstone et al., The Guardian)

Sunday Sneak Peak

🏛️ The White House once lit up the night, but its first spark came with a flicker of fright. Find out why America’s highest home was scared to flip the switch—subscribe now to The Flag.​