Hear incredible moment Trump reveals threat to ‘bomb the s*** out of Moscow and Beijing' – & Putin's gobsmacked reaction
A recording of a private meeting during a fundraiser appears to expose what Trump actually told Russia and China in phone calls in his first term.
7
President Donald Trump speaks to the media in June
Credit: Reuters
7
Taiwan-made Cheng Kung PFG-2 missile frigate fires October 2 a standard surface-to-air missile during a rehearsal
Credit: Reuters
7
A general view shows Red Square during a military parade on Victory Day in Moscow
Credit: Reuters
7
Russian President Vladimir Putin attends a meeting in June
Credit: Reuters
The audio from 2024 captures Don revealing what he apparently said to mad Vlad during his presidency between 2017 and 2021.
He's heard saying: "With Putin I said, 'If you go into Ukraine, I'm going to bomb the s*** out of Moscow. I'm telling you I have no choice.'"
Trump then claims gobsmacked Putin responded: "I don't believe you, no way."
To which Don bluntly spat back: "Way."
read more news
Later in the bombshell recording, the President can also be heard claiming he gave a similar warning to China's President Xi Jinping if he invaded Taiwan.
Trump appears to say: "I said the same thing to them, I said, 'If you go into Taiwan I'm going to bomb the s*** out of Beijing.'
"He thought I was crazy. He said 'Beijing! You can't even bomb [inaudible].'
"I said, 'I have no choice'. He believed me 10 per cent… and we never had a problem."
Most read in The US Sun
The unbelievable comments have been exposed in a string of audio tapes created while the Republican was on his campaign trail at fundraisers in New York and Florida.
They were obtained by journalists Josh Dawsey, Tyler Pager and Isaac Arnsdorf, who then shared the audio recordings with
Trump blasts 'are we still talking about this creep-' over Epstein as mystery swirls around 'missing CCTV & client list'
In the latest of Trump's expletive comments, on Tuesday the raging President slammed Putin for
It came imminently after he
vowed to send more weapons to Ukraine as he
appears to be
with the Russian tyrant.
"We get a lot of bull**** thrown at us by Putin, if you want to know the truth," Trump told reporters during a televised cabinet meeting at the White House.
"He's very
nice
all the time, but it turns out to be meaningless."
Trump reiterated that he was "very unhappy" with Putin since their phone call last week made no progress on the Ukraine peace deal - something the US president has pushed for since returning to power.
But
Trump's criticism of Putin came a day after he said he would send more weapons to Ukraine - a sweeping reversal of Washington's announcement last week that it was halting some arms shipments.
The White House confirmed on July 1 that shipments of certain air defence missiles and other precision bombs to Ukraine had been stopped because of concerns about dwindling weapons stockpiles.
7
Firefighters extinguishing a fire after a Russian attack in Kyiv region
Credit: AFP
7
R2FM38 City of Capitals buildings, MIBC, Moscow International Business Center, Moscow City, Moscow, Russia
Credit: Alamy
7
President Donald Trump, left, meets with Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2019
Credit: AP
However, Trump reversed the decision, adding: "We're going to send some more weapons.
"We have to. They have to be able to defend themselves. They're getting hit very hard now."
"We're going to have to send more weapons, defensive weapons, primarily."
Moscow had no immediate reaction to Trump's strongly worded comments about Putin, but the Kremlin said that sending arms to Ukraine only serves to prolong the conflict.
"It is obvious of course that these actions probably do not align with attempts to promote a peaceful resolution," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov was quoted by Russian
news
agencies as saying in a briefing.
And the US Defence Secretary said in May that
Pete Hegeseth said that Communist Beijing was "rehearsing for the real deal" and described the looming threat as a "wake-up call" for the world.
Speaking at the annual Singapore defence forum Shangri-la Dialogue, Hegeseth said China was preparing to use military force to upend the balance of power.
The Pentagon boss also accused Beijing of carrying out cyber attacks, harassing its neighbours, and "illegally seizing and militarising lands" in the South China Sea.
Three ways China could seize Taiwan in 'unstoppable' attack
By
WITH an overwhelming military force, advanced warfare techniques and a fragmenting West, Xi Jinping will likely feel more confident than ever to seize Taiwan, experts warn.
And if China does decide to attack, it's feared it will go in with "full force" using three major military strategies that would wreak havoc on the island.
Military experts have long believed China is planning to use sea blockades to cut off the island - forcing them to surrender when military supplies dwindle.
Currently, China has a whopping 2.1 million active soldiers and a further, 1.17 million reserve personnel in its army.
It is a stark contrast to Taiwan's forces, which just has a little over 160,000 soldiers.
Others believe
Experts told The Sun that China would likely combine blitzing aerial strikes to disable Taiwan's defences with naval forces encircling the island.
Defence experts say it's the
The unpredictability of US foreign policy under
Experts say the dictator is happy with a fragmenting West and the US saying it's not interested in being the kind of security ally it was.
Read the full story
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Irish Sun
an hour ago
- The Irish Sun
Why is Putin so scared of meeting Zelensky? How showdown with hero Vlad dismissed as a ‘Nazi comic' exposes his FAILURE
VLADIMIR Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky have only met in person once before. The next time they set eyes on each other, it could expose the Russian tyrant as a fraud and a failure before the eyes of his people. 5 Zelensky and Putin attend a meeting on Ukraine with French President and German Chancelor at the Elysee Palace in 2019 Credit: AFP 5 Within three years of the meeting, their two countries would be locked in a full-scale war Credit: Reuters 5 In the days since Trump's separate meetings with the two leaders, Moscow has been quick to pour cold water on the prospect of a Putin-Zelensky summit Credit: Reuters When they first met, Zelensky was the freshly elected President of Ukraine, who soared to office with a landslide win - despite having no political experience. His past career was as an actor and comedian - rising to international fame with his role as an accidental president in the Ukrainian show Servant of the People. The contrast with the stony-faced macho image cultivated by Vladimir Putin could not have been more stark as they say down in 2019 for a summit in France. The pair did not shake hands at the tense, fruitless meeting. Within three years, their two countries would be locked in Europe's bloodiest war since 1945. Putin forced to 'accept failure' Donald Trump's renewed drive to bring the war to a close could bring a once unthinkable second meeting between Zelensky and Putin to reality. However, in the days since Trump's separate meetings with the two leaders, Moscow has been quick to pour cold water on the prospect. Zelensky, whose first language is Russian and performed in Moscow during Putin's rise to power, has said he is "ready" for a meeting with Vlad. But the very act of meeting with Zelensky could undermine Putin and the entire rationale for his war in the eyes of Russia. Scheming Putin WON'T draw a line under Ukraine - here's why he won't give up the Donbas Orysia Lutsevich, director of Chatham House's Russia and Eurasia program, told CNN that Putin "will have to accept the failure of sitting down with a President he considers a joke from a country that doesn't exist". Undermines Russia's war aims When the Russian despot ordered tanks to assault Kyiv in February 2022, his warped justification was based on claims that Ukraine was a fake country run by Nazis. Zelensky's Jewish identity makes the claim patently absurd, but for Putin to sit down with him would be a tacit admission of how ludicrous the claim was. For Vlad to meet Volod for talks, they would be sat there as two Presidents of legitimate, sovereign nations - something that the Kremlin's narrative could not possibly abide. And so long as Ukraine remains armed and sovereign, concession to Zelensky would prove Putin's war goals a failure. Russia has shown little indication of making major concessions so far, with the handover of vast swathes of Ukrainian territory to Moscow still Putin's core condition for peace. But to avoid Trump's wrath if talks fall through, Putin will want to shift the blame to Zelensky. Loggerheads over location His suggestion that the trilateral summit be held in Moscow - a predictably unacceptable proposal for Ukraine - could have been a calculated move to weasel out. And had the meeting been held in Russia's capital against the odds, Putin would have hailed it as a diplomatic coup for the Kremlin - and a chance to humiliate Ukraine's war leader. But Vlad's surrogates have taken to the airwaves to dampen expectations around a summit. Russia' Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said a meeting would have to be prepared "gradually... starting with the expert level and thereafter going through all the required steps". Lavrov added today that not involving Russia in discussions around Ukraine's security guarantees is a "road to nowhere". Disputes around the proposed location for the summit have also presented headaches for diplomats. While a Moscow meeting between the pair remains unlikely, other venues have also proved controversial. Suggestions for it to be held in Budapest were lambasted by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk. He said: "Not everyone may remember this, but in 1994 Ukraine already got assurances of territorial integrity from the US, Russia and the UK. "In Budapest. Maybe I'm superstitious, but this time I would try to find another place." Switzerland, Qatar and Austria have been floated as other prospective venues. But Putin will be wary of a European location - where most states would be obliged to arrest him under an ICC warrant. 5 Disputes around the proposed location for a summit have presented headaches for diplomats Credit: EPA
Irish Examiner
3 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Intel needs Ireland: Why US stake could help Leixlip, not harm it
The US Government's plan to take a 10% stake in Intel poses big questions for the future of the embattled chipmaker and its global operations. Having largely missed out on the recent boom in chips to power AI, the California-based giant is struggling to catch up with rivals Nvidia and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), which have both benefited from the soaring demand for generative AI. Intel's operational lapses are reflected in its latest earnings, with its most recent quarterly profit from the end of June of €3.5bn lagging significantly behind Nvidia's €26.7bn and TSMC's €17.6bn. The White House's potential deal aims to help Intel strengthen its US operations, serving as another means for President Donald Trump to fulfil his promise to grow domestic business and bring US companies home. The significant investment, which the Trump administration is also justifying on national security grounds, will likely carry a list of terms and conditions, if similar previous deals are anything to go by. Last year, the US government took an ownership stake in US Steel as part of a merger agreement with Japan-based Nippon Steel, enabling the controversial takeover while maintaining veto power over certain investment decisions in the interest of national security. These included strategic decisions such as plant closures, import levels and technology transfers - powers that would help the government protect US jobs and safeguard domestic production. At the outset, it seems a similar deal between the White House and struggling chipmaker Intel could have significant ramifications for Ireland, where its Leixlip hub serves as the key gateway to the European market. But should its Leixlip operations, Intel's second-largest base after the US, employing almost 5,000 people, really be worried about this potential new partnership? Since 1989, Intel has invested more than €30bn in its Irish operations, the majority of which has been injected in the last few years. In 2023, the chipmaker opened its €17bn Fab 34 facility, the largest construction project ever undertaken in Ireland, according to Intel, doubling the chipmaker's manufacturing space at its Leixlip hub. In June last year, asset management firm Apollo Global committed €10bn to Intel for a 49% stake in the Fab 34 facility, which allowed the chipmaker to retain majority ownership while gaining access to additional funding for future expansions. Leixlip's "critical role" The Leixlip campus is also poised to produce the majority of its Intel 4 technology, which includes the company's extreme ultraviolet (EUV) chips, the most advanced semiconductor manufacturing technology on the market. According to Intel, EUVs play a 'critical role' in driving the company towards its goals of delivering five nodes in four years and regaining leadership in process technology by 2025. Intel's Irish base also seems to have escaped the worst of global restructuring measures brought in by CEO Lip-Bu Tan to cut its workforce by 20%, with the expected job losses from its current round of layoffs far less than what would be considered proportionate. Intel's European operations are extremely intertwined, and the Leixlip facility is the epicentre. The Fab 34 facility in Leixlip is also part of what the company calls a 'first-of-its-kind end-to-end leading-edge semiconductor manufacturing value chain in Europe,' with the site being combined with a wafer fabrication facility in Germany and an assembly and test facility in Poland. EU chip production The company is also nicely positioned to benefit from the EU's goal to increase its global share of chip production to 20% by 2030 as the bloc seeks to enhance competitiveness on the back of the eye-opening Draghi report published last year. The EU is ready to give away billions to enable domestic semiconductor and chip manufacturing. If Intel moves its operations back to the US, it risks losing out on significant gains that it cannot afford to miss. While a government stake may help its financial woes, Intel's biggest problem is its lack of paying customers, a problem that President Trump could actually help fix by putting pressure on other US companies with large European operations to switch to Intel for their manufacturing needs. The US wants Intel to be a leader in chipmaking. For that to happen, Intel also needs to lead in Europe, for which a European hub is critical to prepare for a growing semiconductor market with ample money to spend. If it plays its cards right, Intel can simultaneously increase its customer base and benefit from the EU's push to strengthen its semiconductor industry. This will require a skilled workforce and a state-of-the-art manufacturing facility with a strong gateway to Europe. As much as Ireland needs Intel, Intel needs Ireland.
Irish Examiner
4 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Why are there so many conspiracy theories around wind farms?
When Donald Trump recently claimed, during what was supposed to be a press conference about an EU trade deal, that wind turbines were a 'con job' that 'drive whales loco', kill birds and even people, he wasn't just repeating old myths. He was tapping into a global pattern of conspiracy theories around renewable energy — particularly wind farms. (Trump calls them 'windmills' — a climate denier trope.) The idea fossil companies would delay access to renewable energy was nicely illustrated in a classic episode of 'The Simpsons', when Mr Burns builds a tower to blot out the sun over Springfield, forcing people to buy his nuclear power. Like 19th-century fears telephones would spread diseases, wind farm conspiracy theories reflect deeper anxieties about change. They combine distrust of government, nostalgia for the fossil fuel era, and a resistance to confronting the complexities of the modern world. And research shows that, once these fears are embedded in someone's worldview, no amount of fact checking is likely to shift them. Although we've known about climate change from carbon dioxide as probable and relatively imminent since at least the 1950s, early arguments for renewables tended to be seen more as a way of breaking the stranglehold of large fossil-fuel companies. The idea fossil companies would delay access to renewable energy was nicely illustrated in a classic episode of The Simpsons, when Mr Burns builds a tower to blot out the sun over Springfield, forcing people to buy his nuclear power. Back in the real world, similar dynamics were at play. In 2004, Australian prime minister John Howard gathered fossil fuel CEOs help him slow the growth of renewables, under the auspices of a Low Emissions Technology Advisory Group. Meanwhile, advocates of renewables — especially wind — often found it difficult to build public support, in part because the existing power providers (mines, oil fields, nuclear) tend to be out of sight and out of mind. Public opposition has also been fed by health scares, such as 'wind turbine syndrome'. Labelled a 'non-disease' and non-existent by medical experts, it continued to circulate for years. Academic work on the question of anti-wind farm activism is revealing a pattern: conspiracy thinking is a stronger predictor of opposition than age, gender, education or political leaning. In Germany, the academic Kevin Winter and colleagues found belief in conspiracies had many times more influence on wind opposition than any demographic factor. Worryingly, presenting opponents with facts was not particularly successful. If you think climate change is a hoax or a beat-up by hysterical eco-doomers, you're going to be easily persuaded that wind turbines are poisoning groundwater, causing blackouts or, in Trump's words, 'driving the whales loco'. In a more recent article, based on surveys in the US, UK and Australia which looked at people's propensity to give credence to conspiracy theories, Winter and colleagues argued opposition was 'rooted in people's worldviews'. If you think climate change is a hoax or a beat-up by hysterical eco-doomers, you're going to be easily persuaded that wind turbines are poisoning groundwater, causing blackouts or, in Trump's words, 'driving the whales loco'. Wind farms are fertile ground for such theories. They are highly visible symbols of climate policy, and complex enough to be mysterious to non-specialists. A row of wind turbines can become a target for fears about modernity, energy security, or government control. This, say Winter and colleagues, 'poses a challenge for communicators and institutions committed to accelerating the energy transition'. It's harder to take on an entire worldview than to correct a few made-up talking points. What is it all about? Beneath the misinformation, often driven by money or political power, there's a deeper issue. Some people — perhaps Trump among them — do not want to deal with the fact fossil technologies, which brought prosperity and a sense of control, are also causing environmental crises. And these are problems which are not solved with the addition of more technology. It offends their sense of invulnerability, of dominance. This 'anti-reflexivity', as some academics call it, is a refusal to reflect on the costs of past successes. It is also bound up with identity. In some corners of the online 'manosphere', concerns over climate change are being painted as effeminate. Many boomers, especially white heterosexual men like Trump, have felt disorientated as their world has shifted and changed around them. The clean energy transition symbolises part of this change. Perhaps this is a good way to understand why Trump is lashing out at 'windmills'. Marc Hudson is a visiting fellow at the University of Sussex Business School, University of Sussex
