Showing posts with label trump. Show all posts

Monday, July 14, 2025

Trump’s 50-Day Ultimatum to Putin: Strategic Options, Risks, and the Road Ahead

On July 14, 2025, President Donald Trump issued a stark 50-day ultimatum to Russian President Vladimir Putin: agree to meaningful progress toward a ceasefire in Ukraine or face sweeping economic retaliation. Specifically, Trump has threatened to impose 100% tariffs on Russian imports and enforce secondary sanctions on countries continuing to purchase Russian oil, such as China, India, and Türkiye. This strategy appears to mirror an earlier ultimatum issued to Iran, which resulted in coordinated U.S.-Israeli military strikes on Iranian nuclear sites in June 2025.

Trump’s move signals mounting frustration with the prolonged stalemate in Ukraine, Putin’s continued military offensives, and stalled diplomatic negotiations. As the September 2 deadline looms, the U.S. and its allies—alongside global markets—are bracing for what Trump’s next steps might be. This analysis outlines five potential paths forward, evaluates their feasibility and consequences, and compares this ultimatum to the Iran scenario earlier in 2025.

Option 1: Impose 100% Tariffs and Secondary Sanctions

Overview:
Trump has vowed to impose 100% tariffs on Russian imports and penalize countries—including strategic partners like China and India—through secondary sanctions for purchasing Russian energy.

Feasibility:
Trump can implement tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. Secondary sanctions could be enforced by designating violators on the U.S. Treasury's Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list, effectively cutting them off from the U.S. financial system.

Implications:

On Russia: Tariffs and sanctions would significantly strain Russia’s already sanctioned economy. Roughly 45% of Russia’s federal budget comes from energy revenues, so disrupting oil exports could have severe fiscal consequences. Yet, Moscow has increasingly pivoted to non-Western markets and may try to deepen trade with China and the Global South.
On Global Markets: Oil prices could spike, inflation could rise, and trade frictions with India and China could destabilize fragile supply chains. India, in particular, may resist pressure, citing strategic autonomy and energy needs.
Domestic Political Risks: Higher fuel prices could hurt American consumers, though Trump may attempt to shield his base with targeted fuel subsidies or messaging on energy independence.
Geopolitical Risks: NATO allies reliant on stable energy markets, such as Germany, may oppose a hardline economic decoupling.

Likelihood:
High. Tariffs and sanctions are a familiar tool for Trump, and his administration has signaled readiness. However, the scope may be narrowed to avoid destabilizing relations with India and China.

Option 2: Escalate Military Support to Ukraine

Overview:
Trump has greenlit a $10 billion arms transfer deal—funded primarily by NATO partners—to send advanced weapons to Ukraine, including Patriot missile systems, air defense batteries, and artillery shells. Additional long-range offensive weapons, such as AGM-158 cruise missiles, are under review.

Feasibility:
Trump is reversing his earlier opposition to Ukraine aid. The U.S. still has $3.85 billion in drawdown authority, and NATO logistics operations are already underway under Matthew Whitaker’s coordination.

Implications:

On the Battlefield: Increased arms deliveries could significantly bolster Ukraine’s capacity to defend against drone and missile barrages, helping regain territory and protect civilians.
Escalation Risk: Providing long-range offensive systems risks drawing a stronger Russian response, including cyberattacks or retaliatory strikes on NATO logistics hubs.
Domestic Politics: Trump walks a tightrope. This move might alienate parts of his base that favor non-intervention, but it could satisfy Republican hawks and European allies pushing for firmer support.

Likelihood:
Moderate to high. Trump appears committed to arming Ukraine—but likely with an emphasis on NATO-led funding and coordination to minimize U.S. costs.

Option 3: Double Down on Diplomacy

Overview:
Trump may extend the ultimatum and intensify diplomacy, using the threat of tariffs and arms as leverage. Talks through intermediaries such as Turkey (which hosted peace discussions in May 2025) could be revived.

Feasibility:
Despite limited past success, Trump has emphasized personal diplomacy and has spoken with both Putin and Zelensky multiple times. U.S. mediation of the May Istanbul talks showed initial promise but stalled over Russia’s refusal to make concessions.

Implications:

Ceasefire Potential: A temporary ceasefire might stem civilian deaths (over 230 killed in June 2025 alone) and restore refugee return efforts. However, Ukraine has refused to accept territorial losses, and Russia remains unyielding.
Credibility Risk: If diplomacy fails again, Trump may be perceived as ineffective. Previous ceasefire talks have allowed Russia to regroup while continuing attacks.
Legacy Play: Successful diplomacy could cement Trump’s image as a peacemaker—a narrative he may use for reelection positioning.

Likelihood:
Moderate. Trump favors deal-making but could pivot to punitive measures if Putin remains obstinate.

Option 4: Military Escalation Beyond Ukraine

Overview:
This would involve non-conventional military measures, such as cyberattacks, covert sabotage, or support for anti-Russian proxy groups in conflict zones like Syria. Some commentators have speculated about a campaign dubbed “Operation Sickle,” analogous to June’s “Operation Hammer” against Iran.

Feasibility:
Direct military strikes are unlikely given the nuclear stakes. However, covert or cyber operations are more plausible, especially in coordination with NATO intelligence networks.

Implications:

Escalation Spiral: Russia may retaliate against U.S. or NATO assets. Moscow’s recent destruction of a British surveillance drone over its airspace suggests low tolerance for Western provocations.
Domestic Resistance: Trump’s base, wary of “forever wars,” may view escalation as betrayal of non-interventionist principles.
Global Disruption: Military escalation could ripple across flashpoints like the South Caucasus, the Middle East, or the Black Sea region.

Likelihood:
Low. Trump prefers economic and diplomatic tools over direct military engagement.

Option 5: Backtrack or Extend the Deadline

Overview:
Trump could claim partial progress or cite ongoing negotiations to justify delaying tariffs or sanctions. Historically, he has used deadlines more as negotiating tools than hard triggers.

Feasibility:
Trump has delayed tariff deadlines before (e.g., with China in 2019). He may use even a symbolic Russian concession—such as a pause in airstrikes—as pretext to buy time.

Implications:

Credibility Cost: Allies and adversaries alike may see Trump as bluffing, weakening future U.S. leverage.
Putin’s Read: Moscow could interpret delays as weakness, doubling down militarily.
NATO Pressure: Allies that have already committed arms may insist on follow-through, complicating backtracking.

Likelihood:
Moderate. Trump often prefers flexible timelines and may prioritize optics over policy consistency.

The Iran Comparison: Lessons for the Russia Case

In June 2025, Trump issued a reported 50-day ultimatum to Iran—likely over its nuclear program. After Tehran failed to comply, the U.S. and Israel bombed multiple nuclear facilities, setting back Iran’s program and triggering a temporary freeze in enrichment activities.

Key Takeaways:

Military Strikes Were Feasible: Iran lacked nuclear retaliation capabilities, reducing the risk. Russia, by contrast, is a nuclear superpower, limiting Trump’s maneuverability.
Post-Strike Diplomacy Continued: The bombing was followed by renewed back-channel talks between Russia, the U.S., and Gulf intermediaries—highlighting Trump’s “pressure-plus-negotiation” strategy.
Economic Disruption Was Manageable: Iran’s role in global energy markets is smaller than Russia’s. A similar approach toward Russia risks greater global economic fallout.

Critical Analysis

Trump’s Strategy: The ultimatum projects strength while attempting to shift blame onto Putin. Trump has reframed the Ukraine conflict as “not my war,” even while increasing NATO-aligned military support. His “pay-to-play” arms deal with Europe allows him to avoid directly spending U.S. taxpayer dollars, a key political calculation.
Putin’s Response: Thus far, the Kremlin appears unfazed. Russian officials like Konstantin Kosachev dismissed the ultimatum, and Moscow’s financial markets barely reacted. This may indicate that the Kremlin anticipates Trump either softening his demands or using the threat as mere theatrics.
Media Polarization: U.S. and European sources emphasize Trump’s toughness and NATO coordination, while Russian outlets dismiss him as erratic. The reality likely falls in between: Trump is serious about increasing pressure but constrained by global interdependencies.
Unintended Consequences: The risk of miscalculation looms large. If Putin misreads Trump’s intentions, escalation could ensue. If Trump miscalculates Putin’s resolve, a failed bluff could damage U.S. credibility and encourage bolder Russian aggression.

Most Likely Scenario Post-Deadline (September 2, 2025)

Trump is likely to pursue a hybrid approach:

Limited Tariffs or Sanctions: Likely targeting specific sectors—such as Russian energy exports or shipping insurers—instead of a sweeping economic embargo.
Expanded NATO-Funded Weapons Deliveries: Focused on defensive systems like air defense, with possible symbolic delivery of long-range systems.
Deadline Extension Framed as Progress: If even minor diplomatic movements occur, Trump may extend the deadline to maintain flexibility while preserving political optics.

This strategy allows Trump to maintain his image as a strong negotiator without risking uncontrolled escalation with a nuclear-armed adversary.

Conclusion

Trump’s 50-day ultimatum to Putin is a high-stakes diplomatic maneuver that blends threat, pressure, and showmanship. While multiple pathways exist—tariffs, weapons, diplomacy, escalation, or retreat—the most probable outcome is a calibrated combination of economic sanctions, NATO-aligned military support, and continued negotiation. The Iran precedent shows that Trump is willing to escalate if he believes the risks are manageable—but Russia is not Iran, and the global consequences are far greater. The world now watches how Trump, Putin, and Zelensky play the next move on the 2025 geopolitical chessboard.

ट्रंप की पुतिन को 50-दिन की अल्टीमेटम: रणनीतिक विकल्प, जोखिम और आगे की राह

14 जुलाई 2025 को अमेरिकी राष्ट्रपति डोनाल्ड ट्रंप ने रूसी राष्ट्रपति व्लादिमीर पुतिन को एक स्पष्ट अल्टीमेटम जारी किया: यदि रूस 50 दिनों के भीतर यूक्रेन में संघर्षविराम की दिशा में कोई ठोस प्रगति नहीं करता, तो अमेरिका रूस पर कड़े आर्थिक प्रतिबंध लगाएगा। इनमें 100% टैरिफ और उन देशों (जैसे चीन, भारत और तुर्की) पर सेकेंडरी प्रतिबंध शामिल हैं जो रूसी तेल खरीदते हैं। यह रणनीति जून 2025 में ईरान को दी गई एक समान चेतावनी की याद दिलाती है, जिसके बाद अमेरिका और इज़राइल ने ईरान की परमाणु सुविधाओं पर बमबारी की थी।

यह कदम यूक्रेन में गतिरोध, पुतिन की सैन्य कार्रवाई और विफल कूटनीतिक प्रयासों से ट्रंप की हताशा को दर्शाता है। जैसे-जैसे 2 सितंबर की समयसीमा नज़दीक आती जा रही है, दुनिया भर की सरकारें और बाजार इस बात पर नज़र गड़ाए हैं कि ट्रंप आगे क्या कदम उठाएंगे। नीचे पांच संभावित विकल्पों की समीक्षा की गई है, उनकी व्यवहारिकता, प्रभाव, और ईरान के मामले से तुलना करते हुए विश्लेषण प्रस्तुत किया गया है।

विकल्प 1: 100% टैरिफ और सेकेंडरी प्रतिबंध लगाना

संक्षेप में:
ट्रंप रूस पर 100% टैरिफ और उन देशों पर सेकेंडरी प्रतिबंध लगाने की बात कर रहे हैं जो रूसी तेल और गैस खरीदते हैं, जिनमें भारत और चीन जैसे रणनीतिक साझेदार शामिल हैं।

व्यवहारिकता:
IEEPA (International Emergency Economic Powers Act) और 1974 के Trade Act की धारा 301 के तहत ट्रंप को यह अधिकार है। SDN (Specially Designated Nationals) सूची के माध्यम से सेकेंडरी प्रतिबंध लगाए जा सकते हैं।

प्रभाव:

रूस पर असर: रूस की अर्थव्यवस्था पहले से ही प्रतिबंधों से जूझ रही है। ऊर्जा निर्यात उसके राजस्व का एक बड़ा हिस्सा है। लेकिन रूस चीन और वैश्विक दक्षिण की ओर अपने व्यापार को मोड़ चुका है, जिससे प्रभाव सीमित हो सकता है।
वैश्विक बाजार पर असर: तेल की कीमतें बढ़ सकती हैं, आपूर्ति शृंखलाएं बाधित हो सकती हैं, और अमेरिका-भारत-चीन संबंधों में खटास आ सकती है।
घरेलू राजनीति: अमेरिकी उपभोक्ताओं पर ईंधन मूल्य बढ़ने का असर पड़ सकता है, लेकिन ट्रंप इसे "अमेरिकन एनर्जी इंडिपेंडेंस" के रूप में पेश कर सकते हैं।
भूराजनैतिक जोखिम: जर्मनी जैसे देश जो स्थिर ऊर्जा की आपूर्ति पर निर्भर हैं, इसका विरोध कर सकते हैं।

संभाव्यता:
उच्च। ट्रंप पहले भी टैरिफ को विदेश नीति के उपकरण के रूप में इस्तेमाल कर चुके हैं, लेकिन वे व्यापक आर्थिक संकट से बचने के लिए लक्षित प्रतिबंध चुन सकते हैं।

विकल्प 2: यूक्रेन को सैन्य सहायता बढ़ाना

संक्षेप में:
ट्रंप ने $10 अरब के हथियारों का सौदा मंजूर किया है, जिसमें पैट्रियट मिसाइल सिस्टम, वायु रक्षा हथियार और तोपखाना शामिल है। यूरोपीय देश फंडिंग कर रहे हैं, और NATO समन्वय में आपूर्ति कर रहा है।

व्यवहारिकता:
$3.85 अरब की शेष ड्रा-डाउन अथॉरिटी और NATO की लॉजिस्टिक्स संरचना के माध्यम से यह संभव है।

प्रभाव:

युद्धक्षेत्र पर असर: यूक्रेन की रक्षा प्रणाली मज़बूत होगी, जिससे रूसी मिसाइल और ड्रोन हमलों का बेहतर जवाब दिया जा सकेगा।
वृद्धि का जोखिम: लंबी दूरी के हमलावर हथियार देने से रूस जवाबी कार्रवाई कर सकता है।
राजनीतिक पहलू: इससे ट्रंप का नेता छवि मज़बूत हो सकती है, लेकिन उनके "नो वॉर" समर्थक आधार में असंतोष उत्पन्न हो सकता है।

संभाव्यता:
मध्यम से उच्च। ट्रंप पहले से इस राह पर हैं, लेकिन संभवतः वे केवल रक्षात्मक प्रणालियों तक ही सीमित रहेंगे।

विकल्प 3: कूटनीतिक दबाव और वार्ता का विस्तार

संक्षेप में:
ट्रंप समयसीमा बढ़ा सकते हैं और तुर्की जैसे मध्यस्थों के माध्यम से बातचीत को पुनर्जीवित कर सकते हैं।

व्यवहारिकता:
ट्रंप व्यक्तिगत कूटनीति को प्राथमिकता देते हैं। हालांकि, अब तक की बातचीत से बहुत कम प्रगति हुई है।

प्रभाव:

संभावित संघर्षविराम: अस्थायी युद्धविराम से नागरिक हताहतों की संख्या कम हो सकती है।
विश्वसनीयता का संकट: बार-बार विफल वार्ताएं ट्रंप की प्रतिष्ठा को नुकसान पहुँचा सकती हैं।
राजनीतिक लाभ: यदि वार्ता सफल होती है तो ट्रंप "शांति-दूत" की छवि बना सकते हैं।

संभाव्यता:
मध्यम। ट्रंप डील करना पसंद करते हैं, लेकिन यदि पुतिन अड़े रहते हैं तो वे कठोर कदम उठा सकते हैं।

विकल्प 4: यूक्रेन से परे सैन्य कार्रवाई

संक्षेप में:
संभावित गुप्त सैन्य कार्रवाई जैसे साइबर हमले, सीक्रेट ऑपरेशन, या प्रॉक्सी संघर्षों को समर्थन देना।

व्यवहारिकता:
सीधी सैन्य कार्रवाई कम संभावित है, लेकिन साइबर या गुप्त ऑपरेशन संभव हैं।

प्रभाव:

वृद्धि का जोखिम: रूस सीधे या अप्रत्यक्ष रूप से प्रतिक्रिया कर सकता है।
घरेलू विरोध: ट्रंप के समर्थक युद्ध-विरोधी हैं, और इस तरह की कार्रवाई उन्हें नाराज़ कर सकती है।
वैश्विक अस्थिरता: सीरिया या ईरान जैसे क्षेत्रों में तनाव बढ़ सकता है।

संभाव्यता:
निम्न। ट्रंप सीधे सैन्य हस्तक्षेप से बचते रहे हैं।

विकल्प 5: अल्टीमेटम टालना या पीछे हटना

संक्षेप में:
ट्रंप समयसीमा को आगे बढ़ा सकते हैं या प्रगति का हवाला देते हुए प्रतिबंधों को टाल सकते हैं।

व्यवहारिकता:
ट्रंप पहले भी डेडलाइन टालते रहे हैं (जैसे चीन के साथ 2019 में)।

प्रभाव:

विश्वसनीयता पर असर: सहयोगी और विरोधी दोनों ही इसे ट्रंप की कमजोरी के रूप में देख सकते हैं।
रूस की प्रतिक्रिया: पुतिन इसे संकल्पहीनता समझकर और आक्रामक हो सकते हैं।
NATO दबाव: ट्रंप पर कठोर रुख बनाए रखने का दबाव बढ़ सकता है।

संभाव्यता:
मध्यम। ट्रंप अक्सर लचीलापन बनाए रखते हैं।

ईरान की तुलना: क्या संकेत मिलते हैं?

जून 2025 में ट्रंप ने ईरान को भी एक अल्टीमेटम दिया था, जिसके बाद अमेरिकी और इज़राइली सेनाओं ने उसकी परमाणु सुविधाओं पर हमला किया।

मुख्य सबक:

सैन्य कार्रवाई संभव थी: ईरान के पास परमाणु प्रतिशोध की क्षमता नहीं थी, जिससे जोखिम कम था।
बातचीत जारी रही: बमबारी के बाद भी कूटनीति चलती रही।
आर्थिक दबाव कारगर रहा: ईरान की अर्थव्यवस्था को झटका लगा, जिससे ट्रंप को रूस पर इसी तरह का दबाव डालने का आत्मविश्वास मिला हो सकता है।

लेकिन रूस की परमाणु ताकत और वैश्विक ऊर्जा बाज़ार में उसकी भूमिका ईरान से कहीं बड़ी है।

समालोचनात्मक विश्लेषण

ट्रंप की रणनीति: वह शक्ति प्रक्षेपण कर रहे हैं, लेकिन युद्ध को "मेरा युद्ध नहीं" कहकर खुद को इससे अलग भी कर रहे हैं।
पुतिन की गणना: रूसी अधिकारी ट्रंप की धमकी को गंभीरता से नहीं ले रहे हैं, और बाजारों ने भी बहुत प्रतिक्रिया नहीं दी।
सूचना स्रोतों की आलोचना: अमेरिकी मीडिया ट्रंप को मज़बूत दिखा रहा है, जबकि रूसी मीडिया उन्हें कमजोर दिखा रहा है। सच्चाई संभवतः बीच में कहीं है।
अनपेक्षित परिणाम: यदि पुतिन इसे एक ‘ब्लफ़’ समझते हैं, तो वे आक्रामकता बढ़ा सकते हैं।

समयसीमा के बाद सबसे संभावित परिदृश्य (2 सितंबर 2025)

सीमित टैरिफ और प्रतिबंध: रूसी ऊर्जा या शिपिंग जैसे खास क्षेत्रों पर लक्षित प्रतिबंध।
रक्षा उपकरणों की आपूर्ति बढ़ाना: विशेष रूप से वायु रक्षा प्रणाली।
बातचीत का विस्तार: यदि मामूली प्रगति दिखे तो समयसीमा बढ़ाकर राजनीतिक चेहरा बचाना।

निष्कर्ष

ट्रंप की 50-दिन की अल्टीमेटम एक उच्च दांव वाला राजनयिक दांव है, जो दबाव, दिखावा, और रणनीति का मिश्रण है। वे शायद टैरिफ, सैन्य समर्थन और कूटनीति का संयोजन अपनाएँगे—जैसा उन्होंने ईरान के साथ किया था। लेकिन रूस कोई ईरान नहीं है, और परमाणु संघर्ष का खतरा बहुत अधिक है। अब देखना यह है कि आने वाले हफ्तों में ट्रंप, पुतिन और ज़ेलेन्स्की इस जियोपॉलिटिकल शतरंज की बिसात पर कौन-सा अगला चाल चलते हैं।

World War III Is Unnecessary
Grounded Greatness: The Case For Smart Surface Transit In Future Cities
The Garden Of Last Debates (novel)
Deported (novel)
Empty Country (novel)
Trump’s Default: The Mist Of Empire (novel)
The 20% Growth Revolution: Nepal’s Path to Prosperity Through Kalkiism
Rethinking Trade: A Blueprint for a Just and Thriving Global Economy
The $500 Billion Pivot: How the India-US Alliance Can Reshape Global Trade
Trump’s Trade War
Peace For Taiwan Is Possible
Formula For Peace In Ukraine
A 2T Cut
Are We Frozen in Time?: Tech Progress, Social Stagnation
The Last Age of War, The First Age of Peace: Lord Kalki, Prophecies, and the Path to Global Redemption
AOC 2028: : The Future of American Progressivism

14: Putin

Saturday, July 12, 2025

12: Nepal

Amid Trump Tariffs, US Customs Duty Collection Exceeds $100 Billion In A Fiscal Year For The First Time: Report
US economy poised to slow as Trump's tariffs hit consumers
Federal judge orders Trump administration to stop California immigration raids
WSJ destroys key Trump talking point in scathing editorial “… [W]hen the budget bill is excluded, the Administration has proposed a cut after inflation for 2026. Absent more annual GOP bills, which may not be possible if Republicans lose Congress, defense spending could fall to about 2.65 percent of the economy by 2029 at the end of Mr. Trump’s term. That’s comparable to … European levels that Mr. Trump thinks are so pathetic,” WSJ argues. ........ It’s a bad time, they say, for the U.S. to have to deal with rising China, an imperial Russia, and intimidating new technology that gives low-power enemies surprising new strength.

Apple CEO Tim Cook has created more shareholder value than Steve Jobs. But suddenly his weaknesses are on display in the AI era

Thursday, July 10, 2025

10: Immigration

Africa, in the words of a Brookings Institution research paper from January, “is increasingly recognized as the next frontier for global economic growth. Its potential is vast, characterized by diverse natural resources, a burgeoning youth population, and untapped innovation.” ........ And in recent years it’s also become a battleground for global influence in the U.S.-China geopolitical rivalry—a battleground on which analysts say China appears to be winning through consistent development investment, security engagement, and media charm. ........ “Chinese success in Africa is perhaps partly due to the failure of US foreign policy, which ranges from outright disrespect to moralistic treatment,” wrote Chinese political scientist Wenfang Tang in the South China Morning Post in 2024, compared to “the Chinese approach of treating Africans as comrades and business partners.” ......... In an effort to combat China’s growing influence and set the U.S.-Africa relationship on a stronger footing, Trump invited his counterparts from Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mauritania, and Senegal to the White House on Wednesday to discuss commercial opportunities as part of a diplomatic pivot he characterized as “from aid to trade.” ........ “We treat Africa far better than China or anybody else,” Trump asserted during the meeting. ........ In turn, Trump responded: “Thank you. And such good English. Such beautiful. Where did you learn to speak so beautifully? Where were you educated? Where?” ........ When Boakai answered that he learned the language in Liberia, Trump responded: “That’s very interesting. Beautiful English! I have people at this table who can’t speak nearly as well.” ........... An unnamed Liberian diplomat told CNN that he found it “a bit condescending.” U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D, Texas) said it was “peak ignorance” in a post on X. “Trump never misses an opportunity to be racist and wrong, and every day he finds a new way to be embarrassing,” Crockett wrote. “I’m pretty sure being blatantly offensive is not how you go about conducting diplomacy.” .......... English is the official language of Liberia, a country of 5 million people on Africa’s western coast that was founded in 1822 by the American Colonization Society (ACS), which aimed to resettle freed slaves, and declared independence in 1847. ........... In mid-February, he bypassed an Indian reporter’s question after remarking, “I can’t understand a word he’s saying. It’s the accent. It’s a little bit tough for me to hear that.” .......... “It’s a beautiful voice and a beautiful accent,” he told an Afghan reporter earlier the same month, twice again using what seems to be his favorite adjective. “The only problem is I can’t understand a word you’re saying.” .......... And just last month, Trump told German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, “you speak such good English … very good, very good.” ........... “It’s pretty much universal,” sociophonetician Nicole Holliday told the Washington Post in 2016. “You can go anywhere in the world and ask who speaks the ‘bad’ version of the language — and invariably, it’s the people who are marginalized, who are rural, poor, or belong to religious minorities.” ........... studies show that people “tend to rate their own dialects as very pleasant.”

Trump never misses an opportunity to be racist and wrong, and every day he finds a new way to be embarrassing.

Asking the President of Liberia where he learned English when it’s literally the official language is peak ignorance.

I’m pretty sure being blatantly offensive is not… https://t.co/Jhvf9dvqZE
— Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett (@RepJasmine) July 9, 2025

Trump's Approval Rating Plummets
Judge blocks Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship
Trump administration returns to trade, tariff chaos — and no new deals
Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov floats a “new concept” to halt Ukraine conflict at meeting with counterpart Rubio in Asia The Kremlin has maintained cordial relations with the Trump administration despite the stalled ceasefire talks, as Russian President Vladimir Putin's best chance for having sanctions lifted in his lifetime is to use Trump to broker a deal with Bankova (Ukraine’s equivalent of the Kremlin). ....... 'Putin gives us a lot of shit. If you want to know the truth, he's always very nice, but it turns out that's irrelevant,' the president said this week. ......... the US only has 25% of the missiles it needs to meet its strategic goals after recent deployments depleted stockpiles in the Middle East and experts say it will take years to fully restock. ........ In a parallel meeting in Rome of the Ukraine Recovery Conference (URC25) Trump's Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg met with Zelenskiy to discuss options for rebuilding the country if the war should end.

Economist warns Wall Street of big mistake over Donald Trump But as Wolfers warns, premising financial decisions on the assumption Trump will backtrack underestimates the centrality of tariffs to his economic agenda. ......... "Everyone has gotten used to this dance where Trump says something outrageous and then walks it back," Wolfers said on Wednesday. "And I think much of Wall Street is betting yes, he's saying big numbers and making big threats. But their bet is he's not going to follow through."

Maddow Blog | Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship blocked by federal judge
How tariffs will be a weapon for countries to put the squeeze back on Trump and his red-state allies several countries that have lingering unresolved disputes with the U.S. could return to a tested and familiar practice: putting the squeeze on red states and GOP-held districts. ......... “You know when products like Kentucky bourbon are in the headlines, you know something's going on” ......... Agricultural imports were a top target: America’s northern neighbor took aim at dairy products, poultry, and a wide range of foodstuffs. China did the same with a particular focus on U.S. soybean exports. .......... China’s soybean duties will have the greatest impact in Illinois, a blue state — and the only solidly-Democratic state in the top 10 soybean producers in the country. The remaining nine lean Republican with the exception of Minnesota, a battleground state that typically votes Democratic in presidential elections. ......... Especially as the congressional midterm elections near, and Republicans shift their attention to defending thin majorities in each chamber. ......... During Trump’s first term in Washington he attempted a similar reorientation of the global trade order, though on a much smaller scale. Yet his efforts were met with outright threats of tariffs microtargeted to states from which GOP congressional leaders hailed as well as the reddening swing state of Florida .......... “We will put tariffs on Harley-Davidson, on bourbon and on blue jeans — Levis,” then-European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker declared in March of 2018. ...........

And there’s still no signs yet of the kind of major onshoring of manufacturing or supply chains which top administration officials have presented as the end goal of the new U.S. tariff regime.

.......... Experts fear that some industries, like pharmaceuticals, may experience players leaving the market entirely rather than attempt to reorient production — leading to possible product shortages.

Donald Trump’s Latest ‘Golden Age’ Move Is Wired For Chaos, Critics Fume
India, US hopeful of inking trade deal, but New Delhi firm on protecting key sectors
Joe Rogan ‘pushed Trump to back off on mass deportations’ at a dinner before slamming him over ICE raids Joe Rogan pushed Donald Trump to back off deporting migrant workers with no criminal records at a private dinner, just days before slamming the president over the “insane” raids by ICE agents. ....... The podcast host, whose endorsement is credited with helping Trump secure the presidency, dined with him and UFC boss Dana White on June 30 ....... “There’s two things that are insane,” he said on The Joe Rogan Experience. “One is the targeting of migrant workers. Not cartel members, not gang members, not drug dealers. Just construction workers. Showing up [at] construction sites, raiding them. Gardeners. Like, really?” ......... Prior to the private dinner with Trump, Rogan had stated that the aggressive push for deportations of migrants was not what voters had “signed up for.” ......... “The Trump administration, if they’re running and they say, we’re going to go to Home Depot and we’re going to arrest all of the people at Home Depot, we’re going to construction sites and we’re just going to, like, tackle people at construction sites, I don’t think anybody would have signed up for that,” Rogan said, on June 18. ........ “I got myself into a little trouble because I said I don’t want to take people away from the farmers,” the president said at a rally in Iowa last week, before adding that
he was working on legislation that would allow undocumented workers in the farm and hospitality industries to remain in the U.S.
.......... After admitting that some long-time workers had been “thrown out, pretty viciously,” the president added: "We can't do it. We've got to work with the farmers and people that have hotels and leisure properties." ........ However on Tuesday, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said there would be “no amnesty” for migrant farm workers........ “The mass deportations continue, but in a strategic way, and we move the workforce towards automation and 100 percent American participation,” she said. ....... Rollins suggested that able-bodied U.S. citizens, who are the recipients of Medicaid benefits, could serve as an alternative to migrant labor.