Tag: donald trump

Trump at Zelenskyy Presser: ‘If the 2020 Election Weren’t RIGGED and STOLEN, You Wouldn’t Have Had This War’

President Donald Trump hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at Mar-a-Lago on Sunday to discuss ongoing peace negotiations aimed at ending the Russia-Ukraine war.

Flanked by American and Ukrainian flags, Trump delivered a no-holds-barred assessment of the conflict, tying its origins directly to the stolen 2020 election.

Trump didn’t mince words, stating, “I’ve said and nobody’s disputed it: If the election weren’t rigged and stolen in 2020, you wouldn’t have had this war. It didn’t happen for four years. Never was even thought to happen.”

The US president emphasized his good relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, despite what he called the “total hoax” of the Russia-Russia investigation, and noted that he had recently spoken with Putin about Ukraine.

“Russia WANTS to see Ukraine succeed! It sounds a little strange! But I was explaining to [Zelensky], Putin was very generous in his feeling toward Ukraine succeeding. Including supplying energy, electricity and other things at very low prices,” Trump said. “A lot of good things came out of that call.”

Keep reading

Peace President? Yeah, Right.

On December 17, surrounded by festive holiday decorations, US president Donald Trump delivered an upbeat — one might even say manic — address to the nation, preempting — and enraging fans of — network TV shows such as Survivor, The Floor, and Christmas in Nashville.

While many expected something weighty (perhaps announcement of further military escalation versus Venezuela), what they got was laundry list of Trump’s “accomplishments” since his inauguration in January.

Most of those “accomplishments” — ruinous tariffs on American consumers, immoral and economically damaging immigration raids, etc. — were things we already knew about from watching our bank balances draw inexorably down.

One, however, stood out to me as the most risible. “For the first time in 3,000 years,” Trump said, he’s brought “peace to the Middle East.”

He said that, with as close to a straight face as he ever shows, hours after saluting the flag-draped caskets of two US National Guard members and a civilian interpreter killed in Syria the previous week.

He said that as thousands of Saudi-backed (and therefore US-backed) forces massed on the Yemeni border, preparing for an offensive against one of that country’s dueling political/military factions.

He said that as (US-backed) Israeli forces continued to conduct deadly strikes in Gaza and Lebanon, and raids in Palestine’s occupied West Bank, despite supposed “ceasefires.”

Words can mean more than one thing, but only in the Newspeak Dictionary from George Orwell’s 1984 might we expect to find any of the above defined as “peace” — or Donald Trump described as a “peace president.”

In his first term as president, Trump escalated every war he inherited and re-started the previous war in Somalia. He “surged” troops into Afghanistan and Syria.

In Syria, he dectupled the US military presence, had Marines fire more artillery rounds than were used in the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, briefly feinted toward withdrawing, then decided to stay to “keep the oil.”

In Afghanistan, he eventually negotiated a US withdrawal … but then failed to complete that withdrawal, leaving it to his successor and complaining bitterly about it.

He reneged on the US government’s obligations under the “Iran nuclear deal,” and ordered an Iranian general assassinated while on a diplomatic mission in Iraq.

In Yemen, he ordered the murder of eight-year-old American girl Nawar Anwar al-Awlaki by US Navy SEALs.

The list goes on and on.

Keep reading

US Missiles Hit Two Nigerian Villages Far From Intended Target: Nigerian Government

Two villages in Nigeria that were hit by US missiles as part of the first US strikes in Nigeria launched on Christmas Day were not the intended target, according to a statement from the Nigerian government.

On Friday, Nigeria’s Information Minister Mohammed Idris said the strikes, which were launched by a US warship in the Gulf of Guinea, targeted “two major Islamic State (ISIS) terrorist enclaves” in the forests of the Tangaza district in Nigeria’s northwest Sokoto State, an area that’s not known as a hub for ISIS-affiliated militants, raising questions about why it was the US’s first target.

Idris also said that debris from US missiles landed in the village of Jabo in Sokoto, as well as Offa, a village in the central western Kwara state, hundreds of miles from Sokoto. Idris downplayed the damage to the villages, saying there were no civilian casualties, but residents of Offa say several homes were destroyed by the US missile, and some injuries were reported.

“At first, we were confused about what happened,” Benji Omale, a resident of Offa, told News Central TV, describing the loud sound he heard when a munition landed on the village. “So, we ran toward the area to find out. When we got there, we saw that several houses had been destroyed and many properties damaged.”

Omale added that the residents of the village are now “appealing to the government to take steps to address the destruction and provide some form of assistance.” Reports based on images of debris posted on social media suggest that at least three Tomahawk missiles fired by the US warship fell short of their target.

Tajudeen Alabi, a former special assistant to the Kwara State governor, told the BBC that some people were injured by the falling debris. “At least about five structures were destroyed in different locations. We saw some objects in a popular hotel, which we call Offa Central Hotel. It looked like a bomb,” he said.

In Jabo, residents described fear and confusion after US missile debris landed in a field, though there were no casualties in the village. “Our rooms began to shake, and then fire broke out,” Abubakar San, a resident of Jabo, told The Associated Press. “The Nigerian government should take appropriate measures to protect us as citizens. We have never experienced anything like this before.”

Residents of Jabo questioned President Trump’s claims that he launched the airstrikes to defend Nigeria’s Christians. “In Jabo, we see Christians as our brothers. We don’t have religious conflicts, so we weren’t expecting this,” Suleiman Kagara, a villager, told CNN.

Keep reading

Soviet Europe? Trump BANS Euro Officials From U.S. in Free-speech War

My, how the worm has turned. It was in 2009 that talk-show giant Michael Savage, along with others, was banned from Britain for exercising speech. Now, 16 years later, certain European officials are being banned from the United States for banning people for exercising speech. It’s just the latest in an unprecedented development: a war over liberty between an increasingly authoritarian Europe and a U.S. that under Donald Trump’s administration is championing Americanism.

At issue, too, isn’t merely certain European countries closing their borders to a few Americans. Nor is the problem just that European Union (EU) nations suppress their own citizens’ tongues via tendentious “hate speech”-law application. It’s also that, reflecting China’s efforts to censor the U.S.’s movies, the EU’s online restrictions could suppress Americans’ online expression. This is because Big Tech companies often apply EU-compliant changes worldwide.

Not Your Father’s Europe

Interestingly, shortly before this story broke I published the article “Should We Be Defending Left-wing Europe From Right-wing Russia?” In it, I explained how Western Europe is becoming a sort of woke, morally weak USSR. Others are noticing this as well, too. As Tampa Free Press writes, reporting on the current story:

A simmering diplomatic feud between Washington and Brussels over online speech regulations boiled over on Wednesday after the Trump administration barred five prominent European figures from entering the United States. The State Department accused the group — which includes a former top EU official and several NGO leaders — of leading efforts to censor American viewpoints.

The move marks a significant escalation in the administration’s campaign against what it views as “extraterritorial censorship” by foreign entities.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the restrictions on Tuesday, citing a policy unveiled in May that targets foreign nationals believed to be coercing U.S. technology companies into suppressing protected speech. Rubio framed the decision as a necessary defense of American sovereignty against ideological pressure from abroad.

“For far too long, ideologues in Europe have led organized efforts to coerce American platforms to punish American viewpoints,” Rubio stated.

The banned individuals are:

  • Thierry Breton — ex-EU commissioner for internal markets. He helped devise the EU’s “Digital Services Act” (DSA), which censors social media. He also publicly warned social-media platforms about content.
  • Imran Ahmed — CEO of the Center for Countering Digital Hate, a misnamed propaganda outfit.
  • Josephine Ballon and Anna-Lena von Hodenberg — co-founders and leaders of German organization HateAid, another misnamed propaganda outfit.
  • Clare Melford — CEO of the misnamed Global Disinformation Index, a U.K.-based nonprofit that rates media sites, unfairly. It seeks to alienate advertisers from, among others, Truth-oriented outlets. For instance, all of its 10 “riskiest” U.S. sites are conservative/libertarian.

Keep reading

Watchdog group demands answers after ‘unbelievable security lapse’ by Trump’s Secret Service team

The Secret Service continues to endanger the president’s life with lax security, and the government is sitting on information that might expose recent failures which allowed President Trump to get shouted down by Code Pink protesters during a recent outing to a Washington DC restaurant, advocates fear.

“I’m just really concerned about the president’s safety,” Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch told The Post.

“He was almost killed twice supposedly under the protection of the Secret Service and then they walked him into a potentially dangerous ambush,” he said of the September incident at Joe’s Seafood, Prime Steak & Stone Crab.

The watchdog group has been trying for three months to get information on how the protesters got advance notice about Trump’s closely-held movements — at an event intended to demonstrate that the city was thriving under new federal security protection.

“These people were allowed to get within arm’s length of the sitting president with knives and who knows what else in the restaurant available to them,” Fitton said.

Keep reading

75 US Deportees To End Up On Tiny Island In Cash Deal With Local Rulers

In the Trump administration’s latest display of creativity when it comes to unloading unwanted immigrants, the United States has made a deal with the rulers of the tiny Pacific island nation of Palau, which will take 75 rejected migrants off Uncle Sam’s hands in exchange for $100,000 per head. The deportees in question will be a diverse group, but they’ll likely share one thing in common — none of them are from Palau, or ever heard of it.  

Palau will serve as a small relief valve for situations where a migrant’s home country refuses to take them back. “Palau and the United States signed a Memorandum of Understanding allowing up to 75 third country nationals, who have never been charged with a crime, to live and work in Palau, helping address local labor shortages in needed occupations,” said Palauan President Surangel Whipps in a statement. 

Located in the Pacific region of Micronesia, Palau comprises some 350 tiny coral and volcanic islands, with a population of only 18,000. It was administered by the US government from World War II to 1994, when it became independent. However, it has maintained close relations with America via an arrangement called “free association,” which lets Palauans work, live or study in the United States — but we’re guessing that privilege won’t be extended to the 75 deportees. Palau also uses the US dollar as its currency, and its mail is delivered by the USPS.

Keep reading

Trump pours cold water on Zelensky’s ‘peace plan’

US President Donald Trump has expressed skepticism about Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s latest peace proposal to end the conflict with Moscow, arguing the discussions could move forward only with his blessing.

Trump’s remarks come as he is expected to hold talks with Zelensky in Florida on Sunday. Earlier this week, Zelensky presented a 20-point peace framework, which included a freeze of the frontline in Russia’s Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson regions, Moscow’s withdrawal from several Ukrainian regions, and an 800,000-strong Ukrainian army backed by NATO members. The plan also envisages “Article 5-like” security guarantees from the US, NATO, and European states to Kiev.

In an interview with Politico on Friday, Trump signaled he was in no rush to rally behind Zelensky’s demands. “He doesn’t have anything until I approve it,” Trump stressed. “So we’ll see what he’s got.”

Keep reading

Trump Posts Ominous Christmas Message Savaging Democrats who Visited Epstein Island – “Enjoy What May be Your Last Merry Christmas!”

President Trump on Thursday released another Christmas statement, slamming the Democrats over the Epstein controversy, which he described as a “Radical Left Witch Hunt.”

“Merry Christmas to all, including the many Sleazebags who loved Jeffrey Epstein, gave him bundles of money, went to his Island, attended his parties, and thought he was the greatest guy on earth, only to ‘drop him like a dog’ when things got too HOT,” Trump said of the Democrat politicians who associated with the late pedophile.

But now, the Democrats “blame, of course, President Donald J. Trump, who was actually the only one who did drop Epstein, and long before it became fashionable to do so,” he added.

Last month, President Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law to release all files related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, The Gateway Pundit reported. Last Friday, the Department of Justice released damning documents and photos of former President Bill Clinton, prompting multiple responses from his PR team, attempting to run cover for Slick Willy.

Trump’s statement continues, “There will be a lot of explaining to do, much like there was when it was made public that the Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax was a fictitious story – a total Scam – and had nothing to do with ‘TRUMP.’”

He further slammed the New York Times, which Trump sued in a $15 billion libel suit in September, for their dishonest reporting. “The same losers are at it again, only this time so many of their friends, mostly innocent, will be badly hurt and reputationally tarnished. But sadly, that’s the way it is in the World of Corrupt Democrat Politics!!!” Trump said.

“Enjoy what may be your last Merry Christmas!” he added ominously.

Keep reading

President Trump Announces Deadly Christmas Day Strikes Against “ISIS Terrorist Scum” in Nigeria Who Are Killing Christians

President Trump on Thursday announced the US launched deadly strikes against “ISIS terrorist scum” in Nigeria.

“Tonight, at my direction as Commander in Chief, the United States launched a powerful and deadly strike against ISIS Terrorist Scum in Northwest Nigeria, who have been targeting and viciously killing, primarily, innocent Christians, at levels not seen for many years, and even Centuries!” Trump said on Truth Social.

“I have previously warned these Terrorists that if they did not stop the slaughtering of Christians, there would be hell to pay, and tonight, there was. The Department of War executed numerous perfect strikes, as only the United States is capable of doing. Under my leadership, our Country will not allow Radical Islamic Terrorism to prosper,” Trump said.

“May God Bless our Military, and MERRY CHRISTMAS to all, including the dead Terrorists, of which there will be many more if their slaughter of Christians continues,” Trump added.

Keep reading

Trump’s big, bad battleship will fail

President Trump announced on December 22 that the Navy would build a new Trump-class of “battleships.” The new ships will dwarf existing surface combatant ships. The first of these planned ships, the expected USS Defiant, would be more than three times the size of an existing Arleigh Burke-class destroyer.

Predictably, a major selling point for the new ships is that they will be packed full of all the latest technology. These massive new battleships will be armed with the most sophisticated guns and missiles, to include hypersonics and eventually nuclear-tipped cruise missiles. The ships will also be festooned with lasers and will incorporate the latest AI technology.

If you think you have heard this story before, you would be right. This will be the fourth time this century that the national security establishment has attempted to build a new surface combatant ship for the Navy. For those of you who may not be keeping score, the previous three attempts have been horrendous failures.

Just to refresh everyone’s memory, the Navy already attempted to build a modern version of the battleship in the early 2000’s. That was the Zumwalt-class destroyer program. Navy leaders wanted to build 32 such ships that would be armed with a futuristic gun system to support Marine amphibious assaults. The gun could never be built in a cost effective way so it was cancelled. That left the ship without a clear mission and the entire program was stopped after only three ships had been built. Each of those ships still don’t have a clear mission and now exist as $8 billion anchors around the Navy’s neck.

Less than a month before the president announced this latest shipbuilding program, the Secretary of the Navy cancelled the Constellation-class frigate program after Navy leaders sunk nearly $9 billion into it and before a single hull had been commissioned. That announcement was shocking because the Constellation frigates were intended to be a low risk replacement for the earlier, failed Littoral Combat Ship program.

The Littoral Combat Ships were supposed to be the Navy’s workhorse ships that would hunt mines and submarines, fight other surface ships, and provide security for the rest of the fleet. They were originally to employ a complicated modular design that would see each ship have mission systems swapped out in port to give them the specialized capabilities for their next deployment. The scheme failed spectacularly when modules didn’t work and cost soared. The ships also proved to be quite fractious and suffered several embarrassing mechanical breakdowns. Several Littoral Combat Ships had to be rescued at sea and towed back to port.

The Littoral Combat Ship program was expected to help the Navy increase the size of the fleet because each ship was supposed to cost a mere $220 million when the program began in 2002. By the time Navy officials gave up on the program 15 years later, the cost of each hull had grown to over $600 million.

Keep reading