Tag: donald trump

US Threatens the UK: Increase Defense Spending, or Lose Support for Sovereignty Over the Falkland Islands

European territories in the Western Hemisphere are not safe anymore.

Today, The Telegraph has issued a bombshell report (picked up by several other outlets by now) that reveals that the US is threatening to oppose Britain’s sovereignty over the Falkland Islands unless Andy Burnham increases the UK defense spending.

The proposal is reportedly among measures being prepared at the Pentagon to force NATO nations to fulfill their 5 percent of the GDP defense spending pledge.

The Telegraph reported:

“A senior US official told The Telegraph that Britain was likely to receive ‘special attention’ in Washington’s review of its allies’ commitment to Nato, which will examine whether member nations have credible paths toward the target.

Officials in Washington believe that while Britain has the potential to be a leading defense partner, the defense investment plan, announced by Sir Keir Starmer in June, was not enough of a ‘step in the right direction’.

Keep reading

Trump Stuns By Outright Dismissing Notion Putin Preparing To Attack A NATO State

President Trump has added fuel to the fire of controversy and speculation over the question of why CIA Director John Ratcliffe made a surprise and highly rare trip to Moscow on Tuesday.

Media accounts which seek to explain the nature of his meeting with top Kremlin intelligence officials, while apparently being snubbed by Putin in terms of a direct interaction, have shifted in days since the visit. The early ‘consensus’ was that he delivered a stern warning for Russia not to attack any NATO state. But President Trump has poured cold water on this explanation, appearing to dismiss it outright in his latest comments. 

“I’ve had good talks with him. He’s not going to be attacking a NATO territory,” Trump said of Putin on Thursday while talking to reporters in the Oval Office.

Trump didn’t answer specifically when pressed on if the president directed Ratcliffe to deliver a warning to Putin to not attack NATO. “I don’t want to comment on that but they’re not going to attack,” Trump said.

While many times over the course of the Ukraine war, European heads of state have claimed that Russia is expansionist and seeks to attack countries in Europe beyond Ukraine, this has not ever been a public allegation of Trump, who has tended to downplay it as a possibility. 

Trump did deny the reports centered on Ratcliffe in an interview with Axios Thursday, saying “Ratcliffe sees his Russian counterpart once every six months or once every year. They have a very good relationship. There was no message and there was nothing unusual.”

And when asked over whether he’s concerned that Putin might attack NATO or deeper inside Europe, Trump replied, “I am not concerned … at all. There is no problem.” According to more:

The president called Ratcliffe’s trip “standard business” and expressed puzzlement over the media accounts of it.

But the reality is that no CIA director has made such a trip in well over four years. The prior time was November 2021, when then-CIA Director William Burns traveled to Moscow to meet with senior Russian officials and issued a stark warning against invading Ukraine.

It was also highly unexpected in terms of timing, given the stalemated nature of the Ukraine conflict, and the fact that zero peace negotiations are happening. There has not even so much as been any efforts at achieving a short-term ceasefire, akin to last year’s Christmas truce.

Keep reading

Trump Admin Hands Bill Gates’ GAVI Vaccine Syndicate $600 Million

The U.S. Department of State and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services last month revealed they “will immediately release all $600 million in Congressionally appropriated funds” for Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, Bill Gates’ international vaccine syndicate, according to a State Department press release.

In June 2025, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had withdrawn American funding from Gavi, citing child deaths linked to the vaccines the organization dispenses worldwide.

But one year later, Secretary of ​State Marco Rubio promised that the United States would “re-engage” with Gavi, citing a purported Ebola outbreak as justification.

The new State Department press release emphasizes President Donald Trump gave the directive himself.

Per the release:

“Last year, President Trump directed Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Secretary of State Marco Rubio to engage directly with Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance (Gavi), and secure meaningful reforms before the United States would consider future support. Those discussions resulted in significant commitments that strengthen vaccine safety, improve public health, and better align Gavi’s work with the principles of Gold Standard Science and transparency. Based on those commitments, the United States will immediately release all $600 million in Congressionally appropriated funds to Gavi for both FY25 and FY26.”

The agreement included “reducing reliance on mercury-containing vaccines, where suitable alternatives are available.”

The release didn’t specify which alternatives would be used nor cite any relevant safety studies.

But it did confirm vaccine manufacturers would benefit:

“Achieving these transitions will require manufacturers to expand production capacity, countries to adopt newer vaccine formulations, and Gavi’s governing Board to complete the necessary approvals. The United States recognizes these implementation challenges but welcomes Gavi’s commitment to work toward these goals through transparent governance and responsible stewardship.”

The Trump admin ultimately wants to “resume its place on the Gavi Board”:

“In addition, given the sizeable contribution the United States is making to improve access to vaccines, the United States expects to resume its place on the Gavi Board. In this role, the United States will continue to hold Gavi accountable for measurable progress toward these commitments. It will evaluate any future U.S. support based on demonstrated performance, accountability, and implementation of these reforms.”

Keep reading

Trump Strikes “Biggest Oil Deal In History”: US To Take Majority Stake In Over 65BN Barrels Of Venezuela Reserves

President Trump has made it official with a late in the day Friday Truth Social Post, announcing a deal has been struck with Venezuela for a US majority stake in more than 65 billion barrels of oil reserves, after six months of administration scrambling to control the Strait of Hormuz crisis.

On Truth Social he called it the biggest oil deal in world history which comes “at no cost to” U.S. taxpayers and which more than doubles the US oil reserve.

“This Transaction will greatly strengthen the already growing relationship between Venezuela and the United States,” Trump wrote in the post. Also…

Trump said the Venezuela deal should bring down prices at the pump. The average price of a gallon of gas in the U.S. reached around $4.09 on Friday, a 27% increase year over year, according to AAA.

Over a dozen productive oil fields are said be central to deal, following US officials having long hyped Trump’s “Donroe Doctrine” and what it can do to bolster American energy independence and security. Of course, instead of ‘talks’ or ‘negotiations’… in reality this is more simply about demands be dictated to the ‘new’ post-Maduro US client state in South America.

Focus on the Strait of Hormuz is shifting to South America late in the week as the Trump administration moves to secure new long-term crude supplies in Venezuela. The U.S. is nearing an agreement that could place 17 Venezuelan oil fields under 100-year leases operated by U.S. oil companies.

According to Bloomberg, sources told the outlet that Caracas has discussed a possible exit from OPEC with U.S. officials. The sources said no final decision has been made, but the discussions come as the U.S. negotiates 100-year leases on several Venezuelan oil fields that require billions of dollars in investment.

Such an exit from OPEC would be symbolic, given that the South American country was one of the organization’s five founding members in 1960 and played a key role in establishing the expanded OPEC+ alliance with Russia in 2016.

More recently, the United Arab Emirates became another producer to announce its departure from OPEC. Venezuela is only considering withdrawal, while Iraq has expressed frustration but has yet to announce a formal exit.

A Venezuelan exit would not result in an immediate surge in crude production because of years of underinvestment, which is why the U.S. is seeking to take a large stake in the nation’s oil fields.

Venezuela currently produces about 1.16 million barrels per day, according to a Bloomberg survey, and is not subject to an active OPEC quota.

For President Trump, a U.S.-Venezuela energy alliance could prove very valuable by weakening OPEC, increasing non-Middle Eastern crude supplies, pressuring oil prices and locking down a massive reserve base in America’s backyard.

Trump Close To ‘Massive’ Deal For Seizing Stake In Venezuela’s Vast Oil Fields

Amid ongoing global oil supply disruptions due to the Iran war and Hormuz Strait crisis, and also as Ukraine’s war on Russian oil refineries and export terminals heats up, the Trump administration has been scrambling to tap new reliable and long-term energy sources.

Now, nearly eight months since the US miliary raid on Caracas which removed from power and captured socialist President Nicolás Maduro, and the Trump administration is said to be on the brink of a massive deal to gain ownership stake in the countries vast oil resources.

Axios is newly reporting Thursday of ‘negotiations’ (sure) in the works: “The historic deal would more than double U.S. oil reserves by drawing from a country that has the world’s largest proven reserves.”

Keep reading

Not just a stunt: Head of U.S. Geological Survey confirms ‘Lake America’ designation

While some Trump detractors have scoffed at his signing an executive order Thursday to change the name of Lake Ontario to Lake America, the president post on Truth Social verification from the U.S. Geological Survey that the change has been made official.

As WND reported, Trump Wednesday posted a video declaring his intent to change the name of the lake, which straddles the U.S.-Canadian border, saying, “All it takes is a good pen and some intelligence.”

Then on Thursday Trump welcomed reporters into the Oval Office to sign the executive order.

Many commentators and activist routinely excoriate Trump when he seemingly unilaterally changes designations on the map, but now the man in charge of the official federal government records on geographic designations is confirming the change, in a memo to his boss, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum.

Keep reading

Trump Has Made Up to $15M in Oil and Gas Stock Rise Spurred in Part by Iran War

President Donald Trump’s deeply unpopular war on Iran has helped inject millions of dollars into his personal wealth while saddling everyday Americans with a $72 billion bill, a new report reveals.

Amid the war, oil and gas companies’ stocks have skyrocketed in value as companies report staggering earnings; ExxonMobil recently reported its profits doubling year-over-year, while Chevron’s net income has increased nearly 400 percent as a result of the disruptions to the global oil market. In all, oil and gas companies reported $125 billion in profits in the first half of 2026, with a corresponding jump in stock value across the fossil fuel industry.

As a result of that rise, Trump may have profited as much as $15.5 million, and netted at least $4.6 million, from his oil and gas holdings this year, Democrats on Congress’s Joint Economic Committee (JEC) found in a report this week. In all, his oil and gas holdings went from a maximum value of $45.5 million to as much as $61 million.

The analysis was based on stocks that Trump held at the end of 2025, including Exxon, Chevron, and seven other oil and gas companies. His profits may be even higher than the report suggests, as Trump bought additional oil and gas stocks in the first three months of 2026 worth up to $3.6 million. These were bought in a period when the U.S. seized control of Venezuela’s oil profits and launched a war on Iran that has sent oil prices sky-high.

Meanwhile, the rise in energy prices has cost Americans an additional $71.5 billion in gas prices at the pump, the Democrats found, or an average of over $600 a household. That’s before taking into account the hike in prices for things like groceries and other associated costs like increased mortgage rates caused by the war.

Keep reading

Trump Must Not Let Washington’s Korea Hawks Intimidate Him Again

One of the great foreign policy disappointments of Donald Trump’s first term was the failure to advance his initial promising initiative to begin normalizing relations with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK).  Trump had abandoned the threats and bluster toward Pyongyang that marked his early months in office.  Instead, he moved to open a personal dialogue with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un and facilitate productive negotiations on several important issues.  That approach led to an unprecedented U.S.-DPRK summit meeting in Singapore on June 12, 2018 and, later on, to a famous sight: the U.S. president crossing the Demilitarized Zone from South Korea into the communist North on June 29, 2019, to hold a brief chat with Kim.

Unfortunately, Trump failed to prevent hawks from both parties in Congress and in the overall national security establishment from sabotaging such conciliatory efforts.  Indeed, the president made a fatal blunder of his own by appointing the rabidly hawkish John Bolton as his National Security Advisor.  Congressional opponents of any meaningful relationship between the United States and the DPRK also excoriated Trump for moving to reduce Washington’s confrontational stance toward Pyongyang.

Indeed, hardliners in Congress and the broader policy community denounced the president for his willingness even to interact with Kim. The United States gave the odious dictator a huge boost in prestige, critics contended, merely by affording him a face-to-face meeting with the president and treating him as an equal. “In his haste to reach an agreement, President Trump elevated North Korea to the level of the United States while preserving the regime’s status quo,” intoned House minority leader Nancy Pelosi.

Despite that bruising political experience during his first term, Trump has indicated that he would be receptive to a new dialogue with the North Korean leader before the end of 2026.  “I get along with him well,” Trump stated.  “And you know what? The fact that I get along with him, that’s a very good thing, not a bad thing.”

On the delicate and difficult issue of relations with North Korea, Trump’s instincts are correct.  A new summit meeting would be a useful first step toward ending the dangerous policy rigidity that, except for Trump’s all-too-brief interlude, has plagued the U.S. stance toward North Korea for decades.

To achieve a constructive breakthrough, however, the president must go on the offensive against a host of vitriolic, often partisan, detractors.  Even his mild new outreach to Pyongyang is already drawing fire akin to the ideological and partisan attacks that doomed his efforts in 2018 and 2019.  The rhetoric of Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) was typical. “Kim Jong Un is not, I think, terribly impressed with Donald Trump.  And withdrawing forces from Korea, canceling exercises, plays into his game.”  Trump in a Truth Social post the previous Sunday stated that he told Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to “substantially reduce” planned joint military exercises alongside South Korean forces.

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board echoed Reed’s opposition to Trump’s conciliatory gestures to Pyongyang. “President Trump is nothing if not impulsive, and his latest brainstorm is to rekindle his courtship of North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un.”  The Journal’s editors were especially annoyed that Trump had cited his “very good relationship” with Kim and had contended that U.S. military exercises with South Korea “send a signal that is totally inappropriate and hostile, to a Country that, as long as Donald J. Trump has been President, has been unthreatening and respectful.”

The editors expressed alarm at the president’s approach.  “This will reinforce the growing belief in Asia and Europe that the U.S. is becoming an unreliable ally,” they fumed.  “It may also increase the calls in the South for Seoul to develop its own nuclear deterrent.”

Despite the shrill criticism, Trump’s latest initiative actually is a cautious, overdue effort to jump-start meaningful diplomacy with Pyongyang.  The real danger is that such a modest, conciliatory effort will be too little, too late.

Keep reading

VoterGA: Declassified Intelligence Reveals Massive China Election Interference Cover-up

President Donald Trump delivered a primetime address from the White House on July 16, 2026, on the subject of US election security.

During the speech, Trump announced the declassification of intelligence documents and made a series of allegations involving China, the 2020 election, and a subsequent effort by intelligence officials to withhold information from him and from Congress.

As reported earlier by Patriot Perspective, one CIA report outlined China’s broader objective as leveraging domestic and foreign groups opposed to Trump to reduce his support, pressure him to resign, or stop him from winning another term.

Another report alleged that information collected from millions of TikTok users could be used to place authentic names, addresses, and identification numbers on the fraudulent licenses, making them more difficult to detect.

The release by the US government in July, via an earlier TGP report by Patriot Perspective, revealed China’s massive, multi-year US election interference campaigns.

The documents depict a foreign adversary determined to exploit America’s political divisions.

The most alarming material concerns the collection of Americans’ personal information.

Keep reading

Welcome Home Stalin

I’ve been all over the world and have seen both its good and sordid countries. One of the best run, most decent and honest nations I’ve seen is Canada.

As George Bernard Shaw noted, Canada is a wonderful country, but it has nine months of winter and three months of fall.  It has vast forests, beautiful lakes, lots of beautiful animals and birds, lavish natural resources, and people, as I’ve found, who are the kindest, most honest and thoughtful in the world.

As an American, I have always regarded Canada as the best neighbor any country could have, a treasure house of nature, clean water and fresh air. Canadians also proved themselves formidable soldiers in three wars (including the distant Boer War) and commendable peace-seekers.  Canada is a country in which you can cross the street with your eyes closed and survive. Where bribery is little known, and where people – as I found – are taught to respect one another, their differences, and their various cultures and religions.

As a result, I have been horrified and shamed by the boorish, aggressive attitude of the Trump administration toward good neighbor Canada – claiming it’s the ‘51st state’ and a colony.  Canada’s fault was being under Great Britains thumb for far too long and accepting secondary social status.

The Trump administration is behaving in a similar manner to Russia’s dictator, Josef Stalin. Staging invasions of small countries; purging and terrorizing officials, curbing free speech and trying to monopolize culture. In this process, the current US regime has made itself the most hated government in the world. Most Americans used to be proud of their government. Not so anymore.

We wonder if the Trump regime really intends to invade Canada, Greenland, Cuba or even the Persian Gulf.  Who knows what transpires in the confused mind of an 80-year-old man who is angry at the world for not kissing his feet and who idealizes Israel – who has so far killed around 78,000 Palestinians and many Lebanese.  This is not self-defense. It’s Biblical fury.  The wars in Iran, Gaza and Lebanon are an effort by a failing president to distract public attention from the Epstein scandals in which he was likely involved, and a desperate attempt to whip up primitive nationalism and war fever prior to this fall’s elections.

Meanwhile, the Trump regime deploys every effort to stifle free speech, curb the media and silence critics. Stalin could have been proud.  We await the arrival of the American KGB on the scene.

Keep reading

The War Hawks’ Predictions Have Aged Like Milk

When Donald Trump launched the Iran War on February 28, the usual suspects were in full support. From the moment the conflict ignited, many couldn’t help but immediately express admiration for the president, saying that only a brave, noble, and strong leader would’ve had the courage to do what Trump did here. For weeks, we heard that this war was essential, that we would be better off as a result, and that to be unsupportive was to be siding with the IRGC.

As weeks went by, however, it became apparent that the rosy picture that had been painted in the war’s infancy was not based in reality. One month turned into two, and then three, and here we are now about six months later, with none of the war’s stated objectives having been achieved. Because of the historic nature of this defeat, it is important to reflect on how we got here.

Who were the voices cheering the administration on as it led us down this dark path?

Why did they have such hatred for those of us who opposed the war?

Most importantly, who can’t we trust going forward?

Ben Shapiro

Among the war’s top early cheerleaders was Ben Shapiro. From the first moments of the conflict, Shapiro was praising Donald Trump’s decision to launch the war.

“President Trump is the most courageous commander-in-chief in modern American history,” Shapiro excitedly said. “What he just did is the bravest move by a president of the United States of my lifetime, bar none, without a doubt.”

Shapiro also immediately made it his mission to smear the war’s critics. Doing his best play on David Frum’s 2003 article “Unpatriotic Conservatives,” Shapiro began labeling some of the most prominent anti-war voices – including libertarian Dave Smith – “America-haters.” In a March 4 episode of “The Ben Shapiro Show,” Shapiro makes some very bold – and uninformed – predictions for how the war would play out.

Addressing concerns early on in the war about U.S. munition stockpiles, Shapiro urged his audience to ignore the naysayers, and rest assured that “ we do have significant stockpiles.” To build on his narrative, he claimed that the Iranian’s were “running out of missile launchers.” “This is a major problem for them,” he emphasized.

“The status is pretty good,” Shapiro told his podcast listeners, “things are moving pretty well.”

Shapiro’s blind faith in the government narrative was not enough to will the U.S. to victory, however. His uncritical rereading of Trump’s Truth Social post – in which he claims that we have a “virtually unlimited supply” of munitions – may have convinced his audience to get on board with the war, but this trust in the administration eventually crashed against the rocks of reality.

The U.S. does not have “unlimited” munitions. The Iranian’s ability to launch missiles has not been effectively degraded. This war has not gone as the administration intended, and the biggest proof of this is the conflict’s length. The war was originally sold as a weeks-long offensive, but it turned out to be a drastically larger undertaking than the White House anticipated, and one that has engulfed the Trump presidency.

Keep reading