Yeah I know that Donald Trump appears to have metamorphosed from a clueless halfwit who stood no chance of achieving anything that he out set to achieve, into some sort of evil genius whose cunning plan could well see him establish a one man dictatorship,
FFS why do you keep repeating this utter bollocks. People arent saying that. Are you really incapable of grasping this sort of basic point or are you just trolling?
yes but they had a far right christian nationalist government - they now have a left of centre social democratic one
How about Spain? Not heading rightwards. the basic thesis is wrong. all european nations are not moving rightwards
Again you have to remember Trump is a psychopath. He has no conscience or morals and in his mind if he says something is true it is. He has very disordered thinking. I am reasonably confident he actually believes his nonsense. He really does think he is saving the US and he is the best president ever thus in his mind its his duty to remain president.
Do not look at his actions as if he thought normally as he does not.
the basic thesis is wrong. all european nations are not moving rightwards
The basic thesis that a lot of money is being poured in by hard right groups and they have had a reasonable amount of success is true.
For Poland the attempts to undermine the rule of law didnt succeed under PiS but there is a lot of work to do to simply undo the damage. The right wing funders will be back for round 2 though and unless the damage caused is undone it will be easier next time.
Spain the hard right have gained some votes although havent managed to translate that into power. I suspect their history has something to do with that. However its worth noting that similar patterns were on display in other European countries so it might just be they are slightly behind and with more investment they will get better results.
Or it might just be that the fightback is and can be successful as in Poland, Netherlands, Spain and Scotland
No mention of Scotland but Le Mondeo has a different take on what is happening in Europe
Latest from Canada...
https://www.youtube.com/live/iXqQ_yk5RsA?si=Uu6tthkt11uEn7zJ
Trump lives in Trumpland basically all his life he’s lived in a totally different world from reality, he’s basically been media savvy all his life and managed to bend his fake world into the real world.
I think he’s literally unique in this actually being an influencer before the internet and being quick to se the power of tools of the internet age.
Watching the news last night reporting from a research ship in Antarctica. Trump has slashed funding for the research station by half and the scientists that work there are banned from using the words climate change 😡
The arrogance of the man knows no bounds does it ?
Gavin Newsom's Court request for a Restraining Order will be heard today (Thursday). That'll be overnight UK time
President Trump's legal team started their legal notice with the following sentence,
Defendants President Donald J. Trump, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and the U.S. Department of Defense file this notice of their opposition to Plaintiffs’ request for an ex parte temporary restraining order.
US legal process and democracy are still alive
US legal process and democracy are still alive
Yup, the only issue is whether the United States law enforcement agencies and military are loyal to the US Constitution or Donald Trump.
Based on the oath they have all made and how they behaved in January 2021 I am confident that the US Constitution will prevail.
Or it might just be that the fightback is and can be successful as in Poland, Netherlands, Spain and Scotland
Uh huh. Leaving aside the dubiousness of your claims I will just note that much the same got said about the USA in 2020.
Went well that didnt it?
Trump is already running roughshod over the constitution. He has made sure that the judiciary is loyal to him not the constitution so there are no checks and balances that are independent
Military and law enforcement are already acting in a way not allowed in the constitution under orders from Trump
I'd go with hopeful, rather than confident. Especially the way Trump removed many senior leaders who might feel that way.
You do realise that it would require a lot more than "many senior leaders" don't you?
Because as long as rank and file coppers and the military remain loyal to their personal pledge to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, then the American Constitution is perfectly safe.
The suggestion that a majority of law enforcement officers and the military might back Donald Trump in an attempt to overthrow the Constitution really isn't feasible.
Sure he might get a bare-chested shaman with a horned furry headdress to support him it would definitely end in tears for Trump.
Because as long as rank and file coppers and the military remain loyal to their personal pledge to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, then the American Constitution is perfectly safe.
Like they are doing in LA?
Like they are doing in LA?
Absolutely, one hundred percent.
I don't doubt for a moment that all law enforcement agencies in L.A. believe they acting within the US Constitution and remaining loyal to their pledge to defend it.
Which is of course precisely why California is going to the courts to challenge the decisions made by the Trump administration. Otherwise there would be absolutely no point in doing so.
Come off it. The national guard must know they are not acting constitutionally. the Army must know they are not acting constitutionally. Are they refusing illegal orders? No
Come off it. The national guard must know they are not acting constitutionally. the Army must know they are not acting constitutionally
Why, I know the case California is making is that Trump has exceeded his powers and is acting unconstitutionally but how can you be sure until the courts have decided......are you an expert on the US constitution?
What defines whether something is constitutional or not are the courts, if they say yes then it is, if they say no then it isn't.
And do you honestly expect national guards to make their own personal decisions whether what they are doing is constitutional before a decision has been made by a court?
I believe that there are something like 4,000 national guards in L.A. the idea that they are all knowingly ignoring their pledge to defend the US Constitution is just daft, get a grip.
How much support do you believe Donald Trump has btw, if you think 4,000 national guards are putting their loyalty to Donald Trump before their loyalty to the US Constitution?
its open and shut Ernie. National guard disposition is a state matter not federal. Trump may well win in court because he has appointed sycophants to the courts. the judiciary is no longer impartial
And yes I have been reading stuff from constitutional lawyers. Its clear cut as are numerous other constitutional violations
The author of the article appears to have a history of being no great friend of Republican presidents but seeing all of the actions Trump has carried out that erode that which might protect the US from his actions written out together and the resulting difficulties of challenging further erosions is certainly very sobering:
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/can-anything-stop-a-donald-trump-dictatorship
(Hopefully this will not reignite the interminable debates about whether the d-word is being used correctly and is appropriate, fascinating as it was to see them dominate several pages of this thread.)
Remember TJ... walk away sooner...
yes I have been reading stuff from constitutional lawyers
You should offer your expertise on the United States Constitution to the Guardian, they appear to be struggling and unlike you they don't think it is an "open and shut" case.
According to the Guardian "the laws are a bit vague" and "The national guard is a hybrid entity that serves both state and federal interests"
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/07/trump-national-guard
Anyway assuming you are right and they are wrong you still haven't answered my question.....how much support do you believe Donald Trump has?
The Trump administration decides to call up 4,000 national guards and all of them decide to put their loyalty to Donald Trump before their loyalty to the constitution and knowingly act unlawfully, according to you, so how did that happen, are all the national guards throughout the United States loyal first and foremost to Donald Trump or are these special volunteers?
The Trump administration decides to call up 4,000 national guards and all of them decide to put their loyalty to Donald Trump before their loyalty to the constitution and knowinglyact unlawfully, according to you, so how did that happen, are all the national guards throughout the United States loyal first and foremost to Donald Trump or are these special volunteers?
Or another possibility. They are doing exactly what they've been instructed to do by their senior leaders, those who are supportive of Trump, even if they don't fully agree with it.
It's one thing pledging an oath, it's another facing a court marshal or being sacked for refusing orders. I suspect many of the troops are questioning what they are doing there, but aren't prepared to take a stand for that very reason.
Like any job, folks go along with things they disagree with ..up to a point. And we are nowhere near that point yet.
I suspect if Trump had ordered the national guard to suspend elections and arrest all opponents, thus effectively ending democracy in the US, then you'd see far more dissent.
Yup, precisely tpbiker. Which is why I asked :
"Do you honestly expect national guards to make their own personal decisions whether what they are doing is constitutional before a decision has been made by a court?"
Anyway we will know this evening, UK time, what the federal judge who is deciding whether Trump had the legal authority to federalize the Californian National Guard has to say.
The judge btw was appointed by Bill Clinton and is a former Watergate prosecutor.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/12/los-angeles-national-guard-troops-marines-morale
"California national guards troops and marines deployed to Los Angeles to help restore order after days of protest against the Trump administration have told friends and family members they are deeply unhappy about the assignment and worry their only meaningful role will be as pawns in a political battle they do not want to join."
.. not forgetting that some of the top-level JAG Corps decision-makers (interpret military law) were fired early on to ensure they didn't pose any "roadblocks to orders that are given by a commander in chief."
Just to quote myself from a few pages back - one of the roles of the JAG Corps is (was?) to assess and advise over the legality of what the military are being asked to do. More info here.
That jet is going to be an albatross around the Republican's neck for years to come.
https://twitter.com/BulwarkOnline/status/1932829192724398372
These aren't protests they're riots. People are burning cars, looting, attacking police and ice agents. If Newsom can't or won't deal with the situation Trump is right to step in.
I'm sure this thread would look very different if these "protesters" were all wearing maga hats.
Violence should never be the answer no matter which side does it.
Is that the lesson of 6th Jan 2021, and what's followed, including the pardons?
These aren't protests they're riots. People are burning cars, looting, attacking police and ice agents.
Reports I’ve read all indicate that the violence has been very minimal and the vast majority of protest has been peaceful. As I said above, the “police” (National Guard, marines, ICE etc) will always find a pretext to make matters worse, but they have by and large failed and the local police have controlled the situation. The rest is just political agitation.
What defines whether something is constitutional or not are the courts, if they say yes then it is, if they say no then it isn't.
And Trump always obeys the court’s orders, right? Or does he actually just ignore them and then pass a law to make himself immune to contempt charges? You guess which …
trump just likes inciting this kind of violence
whether its the ridiculous small dick energy of sending in the marines to provoke or spreading insane conspiracy theories about an election being stolen ....
he feeds off this kind of divisiveness
If Newsom can't or won't deal with the situation Trump is right to step in.
As I understand it the National Guard are simply protecting federal buildings. It's the police who are facing the rioters. Deployment is nothing more than Trump posturing.
As I understand it the National Guard are simply protecting federal buildings.
Its all they can do without the governors approval
its open and shut Ernie. National guard disposition is a state matter not federal.
Actually its not.
They can be federalised under certain conditions. The most obvious and ironic examples are during the civil rights era where several presidents federalised the national guard in order to support desegregation efforts against the wishes of the state governors (in some cases it was as much about stopping the governors being able to call on them as opposed to actually deploying them).
However thats under specific conditions which havent been met here.
The maga lot are claiming there is a loop hole allowing them to be used to protect federal buildings. Which I guess we will see in court.
These aren't protests they're riots.
They're overwhelmingly peaceful.
Background to the Senator being removed rather forcibly here
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/06/12/us/la-protests-trump-marines-ice
Yup, the only issue is whether the United States law enforcement agencies and military are loyal to the US Constitution or Donald Trump.
Based on the oath they have all made and how they behaved in January 2021 I am confident that the US Constitution will prevail.
From what I’ve seen of the stormtroopers they are jacking off at the possibility of swinging their dicks around
Dont worry.
Any minute now the NRA are going to leap into action and show that having the well armed militia is worth a few school shootings.
Yup, the only issue is whether the United States law enforcement agencies and military are loyal to the US Constitution or Donald Trump.
Based on the oath they have all made and how they behaved in January 2021 I am confident that the US Constitution will prevail.
Didn't Trump[ recently though sack a bunch of generals ? Probably replaced them with his own toadies.
It didn't look great for the Trump administration in court today, the judge compared Donald Trump to King George. The judge should give his decision sometime tomorrow.
I think the Justice Department can sense they are going to lose because they have requested that the judge issues only a preliminary injunction so that the government can appeal.
The judge isn't totally sympathetic to California though, he refused to issue an emergency order to block the federalisation of the National Guard a couple of days ago.
The updated version is that Gavin Newsom won. The defendants (President Trump, SecDef Hegseth, etc) immediately appealed and the Appeals Court paused the order, but didn't reverse it.
EDIT: It's significant that the first Court went beyond what California wanted, which was a judgement limiting NG to protection of Federal buildings. The judgement ordered control of the NG be passed back to California.
The Appeals Court was composed of two Trump appointees and one Biden appointee and will decide on Tuesday whether to return control of the NG to California https://www.reuters.com/world/us/marines-prepare-los-angeles-deployment-protests-spread-across-us-2025-06-12/
Dont worry.
Any minute now the NRA are going to leap into action and show that having the well armed militia is worth a few school shootings.
Yeah, that Second Amendment might come in handy after all.
Good of Trump to give Netanyahu the nod to start bombing Iran yesterday, while everyone was looking at India.
They didn’t hang around once they got the green light. Just what the world needs right now… further escalation in the Middle East.
I don’t know about you, but Trump saying he was going to have all these conflicts resolved in no time is starting to look like a bit of a dubious claim.
He’s put so much effort in though. It’d be a terrible injustice if he doesn’t end up with that Nobel Peace Proze
It didn't look great for the Trump administration in court today, the judge compared Donald Trump to King George.
That's not a good look 😎
(Hopefully this will not reignite the interminable debates about whether the d-word is being used correctly and is appropriate, fascinating as it was to see them dominate several pages of this thread.)
The problem isn't what a person is, or is not, but what they can achieve.
You can apply the "d-word" to a head of state, which implies that the state is also a "d-word" and that simply isn't the case here.
It also stops the debate on the future of the US, which is hugely important to all of us. It isn't about one person, it's about the largest economy in the world and includes lessons on the future trajectory of European states.
Justice and democracy are still working, the big question is whether that will continue to be the case before the mid-terms. If the military is sent back to their bases by the State of California, following constitutional legal process, then that will be a massive relief
Yup, the only issue is whether the United States law enforcement agencies and military are loyal to the US Constitution or Donald Trump.
After sacking the previous incumbent, Trumps' nomination to the Chair of the Joint Chiefs; Dan Caine, was a retired 3 star. The first non 4 star ever to be appointed, and the first retired Air Guardsman to be appointed and was so underqualified that he had to get special dispensation to get the job, how did he get to such a lofty position? From Wikipedia:
According to Trump, Caine told him, "I love you, sir. I think you're great, sir. I'll kill for you, sir."[7] Caine allegedly claimed that ISIS could be defeated in a week. Caine was said by Trump to have worn a MAGA hat
I think it's reasonable to assume Caine is loyal to Trump first.
I don’t know about you, but Trump saying he was going to have all these conflicts resolved in no time is starting to look like a bit of a dubious claim.
[I get the sarcasm] The irony is that if Trump hadn't walked away from talks with Iran in 2018 then we wouldn't be discussing this.
The trajectory of the process was that Iran's enrichment of nuclear fuel would have paused then. Here we are, seven years of enrichment later, and Iran surprisingly doesn't want to give that development up
I think the US is actually a Trumptatorship 🙂
and we aren’t quite sure exactly what the definition is yet other than the country is ran to fulfil the daily whims of the Trumptator.
If the military is sent back to their bases by the State of California, following constitutional legal process, then that will be a massive relief
Yes that would only leave the Marines on the streets of LA Phew!!
and we aren’t quite sure exactly what the definition is yet
A kleptocratic oligarchy that is transitioning towards authoritarian dictatorship.
Yup, the only issue is whether the United States law enforcement agencies and military are loyal to the US Constitution or Donald Trump.
After sacking the previous incumbent, Trumps' nomination to the Chair of the Joint Chiefs; Dan Cairne
I think it's reasonable to assume Caine is loyal to Trump first.
Yes quite possibly. And it is also reasonable to point out that Dan Caine doesn't represent the entirety of the United States law enforcement agencies and military.
Donald Trump can fantasise about becoming US president for life as much as he wants but without a very substantial portion of the law enforcement agencies and military, probably the majority, it is never going to happen, it simply cannot happen.
Trump attempted a coup 4 years ago, all the law enforcement agencies remained one hundred percent loyal to the constitution. Even state officials who were loyal Republican Trump supporters refused his requests to rig the election results and remained loyal to the constitution, as even his vice president did.
What is quite remarkable is that a man who attempted to openly overthrow the US Constitution was allowed to stand for election again 4 years later, how many countries would allow that?
And surprise surprise he is now abusing the POTUS's very extensive and ill-defined powers.
The United States is parading its dirty laundry before the entire world as it provides an excellent example of how not to do this liberal democracy thing.
If the military is sent back to their bases by the State of California, following constitutional legal process, then that will be a massive relief
Yes that would only leave the Marines on the streets of LA Phew!!
They're part of the same deployment, so if the appeal court finds for California and they turn around as well then we'll have a better idea of what the regular military think (as opposed to just the NG)
There are more US troops deployed in California than in the whole of Syria
Donald Trump can fantasise about becoming US president for life
Does he?
Erosion of civil protections and circumvention of the law in the service of one man’s whims can take many forms.
And it doesn't make him a president for life
Trump will be gone in less than 4 years.
And it doesn't make him a president for life
Round and round the argument bot goes.
Donald Trump can fantasise about becoming US president for life as much as he wants
It's always important to remember that Trump has very little political ambition of his own - he has less interest in what he does as President than he has in being seen to be the President. His political skill really is just reading the room and reflecting what people think back at them and getting the appropriate boo or cheer.
I think all the 'third term' and 'president for life' stuff may be more him parroting the voices around him than any deep-seated ambition of his own. 'Always being president' would have an attraction to him as it'll keep his legal woes in check. But really it's the noises around him that he's voicing. Trump is a vehicle for a lot of other people's interests but theres no successor - in the sense that Trump himself has no interest in anyone other than him being president and he genuinely doesn't care what happens next, he fundimentally isn't a republican, so he has no interest in the future electoral success of the republican party (in fact he'd see their electoral demise as a personal endorsement - that they are nothing without him). He'd rather be a critic of whoever the next president is, and keep the conversation about him, than see the torch passed.
The republican primaries - which Trump won without even attending - revealed that theres a block of voters who don't want an alternative to Trump such as Haley, they don't want a facsimile of Trump such as Desantis. They want Trump. But theres no-one like Trump. So once Trump is either electorally out of contention- constitutionally unable to run for a third term - or incapacitated, or dead they've lost that block of voters.
There isn't anyone who is either as electable as him in the eyes of that base of voters, or as sufficiently empty a vessel for the political ambitions of the Heritage Foundation et al.
So they know once this term ends (or come the mid terms really) the game is pretty much up, which is why they are moving at such speed. They just have to make as much hay as they can between now and then. But that doesn't stop them at least running thought experiments about how this moment could be made to last and probing every possible weakness as they do so. The constitutional aspect they seem most interested in is a 'state of emergency' simply because the constitution doesn't outline anything regarding emergencies at all.
Trump's renowned for accusing people of things he'll go on to then do - so his condemnation of Zelensky for not holding an election because the country is in a state of emergency maybe shows that options are being explored to create conditions to justify doing the same thing.
Powers surrounding emergencies and declaring them were almost all devolved to the office President from Congress in the mid 1970s - and presidents have declared loads since then - nearly 100, more than half of them are still currently active. As it stands a declared emergency unlocks around 500 other political mechanisms to the President and the idea when the act was created was to try and streamline the nations response to emergency - remove red tape. But its Congress, not the Constitution, that gave those powers to the president and congress can also repeal it and take those powers back. A mechanism exists 'The Congressional Review Act' to repeal a previous act and unlike changing the constitution it only requires a simple majority to do it. Oddly and interestingly - a feature of the CRA is that anything repealed by the act is gone for ever - a bill that is in any way similar to the one repealed can never be put forward again. So should control of the the two houses return to the democrats next year they'll have the option to take those powers away from Trump and any future president.
All this talk about him being a President for life - he could have a heart attack next Tuesday, so he would then technically have been a President for life.
He'd rather be a critic of whoever the next president is, and keep the conversation about him, than see the torch passed.
I think this is quite brilliant succinct analysis of the last nine years. No idea if that might change with the team he has with him in office now, but they seem to have a better idea how to work "with" him, rather than just being Republicans doing a job for the leader they've been landed with.
but theres no successor - in the sense that Trump himself has no interest in anyone other than him being president and he genuinely doesn't care what happens next
That in itself is part of the problem, in dismantling the state so that it cannot resist his whims, it is handing power to a small group of oligarchs, whether he is head of state or not. This is what neoliberalism has done over the past 40+ years, it has chipped away and eroded the power of democracy and handed it to a small group oligarchs/elites/1%ers, whatever the term, power is concentrated within a small powerful group.
Trump is accelerating that process even further, dismantling even the weakened protection the state currently offers, and creating an authoritarian state. It probably doesn't whether Trump is himself dictator, as the authoritarian far right regime he is creating will be a "systematic" dictatorship, power will be concentrated within a small group that cannot be resisted by the law and state, even if the figurehead changes, the life impacts on people will be the same.
Good of Trump to give Netanyahu the nod to start bombing Iran yesterday, while everyone was looking at India.
He was well aware of it before the plane crash. He had started to pull diplomatic staff out of Syria knowing there would be reprisals against US targets.
All this talk about him being a President for life - he could have a heart attack next Tuesday, so he would then technically have been a President for life.
I understand there’s drugs to aid that sort of event….just saying……
So it looks like the court of appeal will decide on Tuesday whether to uphold the decision made yesterday that Trump had acted unlawfully in taking command of the Californian National Guard.
The Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is Mary H. Murguia who was appointed judge by Bill Clinton and to the Court of Appeals by Barack Obama, so no Trump stooge it would appear.
Snip) The Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is Mary H. Murguia who was appointed judge by Bill Clinton and to the Court of Appeals by Barack Obama, so no Trump stooge it would appear.
The panel is normally three judges.
The appeal overnight temporarily suspended the decision made by Judge Breymer, rather than overturned it, which is good
That panel was two Trump appointees and one Biden, dunno if they'll hear the full appeal on Tuesday. See^^
Doesn’t mean she makes the ruling. Not sure who’s on the panel for this, but it’ll be picked from a list stacked with Trump appointees.
I don't know if this link will circumvent the paywall but an interesting analysis here of how Trump the Evil Genius is doing on the international stage:
He must be hoping that he will have better luck on the domestic front.
On Thursday night, Israel launched a huge series of strikes on Iran that may have driven the Middle East closer to all-out war than it has been for decades. The assault’s success in killing several senior Iranian military leaders and scientists, as well as damaging key facilities, has left Iran embarrassed as well as assaulted, with its inability to anticipate the strikes laid bare for all to see.
But if Israel’s strikes are a humiliation for anyone, it is Donald Trump, who had made clear both privately and publicly that he did not want Israel – one of America’s closest allies in the world – to launch the attack. The US had been due to hold talks with Iran on Sunday, a process now undermined, potentially fatally, by the actions of Israel.
Israel’s relationship with the United States is essential to its survival. Military and financial aid from the US to Israel is worth around $4bn (£3bn) a year in “normal” times, but since the Hamas attacks of 7 October 2023, the US stepped up its financial and military support to between $12-18bn (£8.9bn-£13.3bn), around a quarter to a third of Israel’s defence spending. Israel relied on direct military and intelligence assistance from the US (and UK) to successfully intercept Iran’s last missile salvo in its direction.
In other words, Israel is reliant on the US being on its side. And despite that, its government felt confident that it could publicly and spectacularly disregard the wishes of Trump, undermine his negotiations, and get away with it. As public displays of disrespect towards an ally go, there are few cases to match it.
What makes things worse for the US President is that this is neither an isolated incident nor is it confined to Israel. Trump campaigned through 2024 telling Americans that they were being humiliated and disrespected on the world stage – and that he was the man who could correct that.
Trump famously claimed on more than 50 occasions that he would be able to end the conflict between Russia and Ukraine on “day one” of his presidency. He suggested that Hamas would not have dared to carry out the atrocities of 7 October if he were in the presidency. He promised to achieve a lasting ceasefire in Gaza within days.
And, of course, a central pillar of Trump’s campaign was the suggestion that the rest of the world was taking the US for a ride on trade, and Trump would walk in and introduce tariffs that would quickly get the US a vastly better deal than ever before.
To an unusual extent, Trump made America’s position on the world stage a major part of his pitch for the presidency, promising he could deliver unprecedented wins and denigrating the performance of Biden.
Now, mere months into his presidency, all of this has fallen apart in front of him. Any hopes of a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine have faded into nothing, as Putin repeatedly embarrassed Trump by refusing to make even minor concessions – or stick to short-term ceasefires – to hand the President a “win”. Instead, Russia’s largest attacks on Kyiv have now come during Trump’s second presidency.
Trump’s idea that tariffs would deliver quick results has similarly come to nothing. The US briefly raised tariffs on China as high as 145 per cent, only to back down with zero concessions from China. Trump introduced and then suspended worldwide tariffs promising “90 trade deals in 90 days”, but so far has struggled to sign even a single one.
And on Israel, Trump’s team helped to secure a ceasefire in Gaza in the last days of Biden’s presidency, but this soon collapsed into a fresh occupation of Gaza, which has come closer to starvation in recent months than at any other time during the conflict. Prospects of any deal there now look remote.
In his desperate search for something he could sign, or anything he could sell to the American people as a win, Trump was exploring signing an Iranian nuclear deal similar to the one agreed by Barack Obama – which Trump withdrew from during his first term. Trump would surely have pretended an agreement was somehow new, different and better, but now even this option is lost to him, as Israel has essentially done what it wished and dared the President to do anything about it.
Trump has approached diplomacy as if it was reality TV deal-making as if a tough show for the cameras will do most of the work and the details will sort themselves – disregarding the slow, agonisingly detailed diplomacy that typically delivers real results.
The consequence is an America that is flailing, insulting its allies for no purpose, and flattering its enemies for nothing in return. Benjamin Netanyahu’s decision to publicly show up Trump is the most blatant humiliation inflicted on Trump to date, but it is an inevitable consequence of the President’s own empty bluster. The man truly believes himself to be the world’s greatest negotiator and has come back with nothing. That must be quite the blow to the ego.
In other words, Israel is reliant on the US being on its side. And despite that, its government felt confident that it could publicly and spectacularly disregard the wishes of Trump, undermine his negotiations, and get away with it. As public displays of disrespect towards an ally go, there are few cases to match it.
Where we with that conversation about Israel and Putin pissing off Trump....
Though I wouldn't be surprised if Trump was on board with the attack on Iran just for his own posturing
Where we with that conversation about Israel and Putin pissing off Trump....
We were saying, at least I was suggesting, that it wouldn't be a particularly smart move to deliberately piss the president of the United States off. In the case of Israel that article explains why :
Israel’s relationship with the United States is essential to its survival. Military and financial aid from the US to Israel is worth around $4bn (£3bn) a year in “normal” times, but since the Hamas attacks of 7 October 2023, the US stepped up its financial and military support to between $12-18bn (£8.9bn-£13.3bn), around a quarter to a third of Israel’s defence spending. Israel relied on direct military and intelligence assistance from the US (and UK) to successfully intercept Iran’s last missile salvo in its direction.
Israel’s relationship with the United States is "essential" to its survival the article claims, so Trump pulling the plug on Israel would be a total disaster for them.
Of course Netanyahu might feel that he can predict exactly what Trump's reaction will be but that makes no sense because firstly, the stakes are so high that he can't afford to get it wrong, secondly no one can accurately predict how Trump will behave, and thirdly because I can't think many, if any, personal negatives for Trump if he pulls the plug on Israel.
And Trump did after all snub Netanyahu and Israel in a recent Middle East tour in which he focused on the super wealthy Gulf States that unlike Israel which sucks up money from the United States are actually pumping large amounts of money into the US.
The truth I suspect is that Netanyahu despite being aware of all that simply doesn't care, he wants wars on multiple fronts because firstly it maintains his political survival and secondly because zionism is currently dealing with its worse crisis in its history and resorting to war and violence is their go-to solution. They have no long term plans and Israel's future as the world's new pariah state looks bleak.
Do you think that potentially alienating Trump is a smart move by Netanyahu? A lot of what Netanyahu does makes little sense it seems mostly driven by his ego and needs for self survival.
Wow! 😳
https://www.thepoke.com/2025/06/13/donald-trump-claimed-putin-fought-in-world-war-ii-reactions/
Of course Netanyahu might feel that he can predict exactly what Trump's reaction will be but that makes no sense because firstly, the stakes are so high that he can't afford to get it wrong, secondly no one can accurately predict how Trump will behave, and thirdly because I can't think many, if any, personal negatives for Trump if he pulls the plug on Israel
It doesn't make sense on several levels:
Bombing a nuclear facility. Fortunately Iran reported to the IAEA that there weren't any leaks
Bombing a nuclear facility without the bombs needed to destroy it. They're US inventory and were used to attack Houthi underground storage by the US to prove a point to Iran. Shirley that's Israel poking both tigers?
Bombing a nuclear facility in circumstances bound to implicate the US. That'll please them!
Hoping that Syria, who you've invaded and bombed recently won't allow Iran to transit.
Bombing... there's a theme
That's the really odd thing about trump supporters...
I mean, let's just assume for whatever reason, for arguments sake, a person thinks 'yes I like those policies and ideas'.
But then he opens his mouth and talks abject nonsence... it's beyond lies, it doesn't even make any sense.
I mean, let's just assume for whatever reason, for arguments sake, a person thinks 'yes I like those policies and ideas'.
But then he opens his mouth and talks abject nonsence...
Because they see it from a different perspective. The fact that he isn't a slick speaking politician and seems to get a bit confused with detail is part of his appeal. It makes him appear to be more human and more like them, faults and all, and less like discredited but smooth talking mainstream politicians.
And because their starting position isn't hostility towards Trump they are likely to cut him some slack by recognising that Trump was referring to Putin as a representative of Russia and not suggesting that he personally fought in WW2.
The reference to 51 million dead is because Trump mistakenly used one estimate of the total deaths caused by WW2 rather than the figure for Russia.
As they say, one death is a tragedy a million deaths is a statistic.
Ronald Reagan also sometimes got quite confused when he was US president and that too was part of his appeal. Instead of seeing it as proof that he was a clueless halfwit it reminded many people of their dopey old grandad who everyone loved but sometimes got confused.