Bono Shares Bold Statement After Bruce Springsteen's Controversial Political Comments
shared a strong statement when recently asked about the situation involving Bruce Springsteen's political comments criticizing and the President's response.
While visiting the late-night show, Jimmy Kimmel Live!, host Jimmy Kimmel brought up the recent events, asking Bono, "Whose side are you on, Trump or Bruce Springsteen?"
🎬
The U2 singer took a moment to consider his answer before saying, "I think there's only one 'Boss' in America," referring to Springsteen's famous nickname, "The Boss."
But then Kimmel brought up a message from Trump posted to his social media platform Truth Social in which he claimed that people like Bono, Springsteen, , and were paid by Kamala Harris for endorsements during her presidential campaign.
Bono first stated, "To be in the company of Bruce Springsteen, Beyoncé, and Oprah, I'd play tambourine in that band," before clarifying that he and U2 "have never been paid or played a show to support any candidate from any parts."
The Irish activist hypothesized that part of the reason Trump included him in that group was that he co-founded the nonprofit organization One Campaign, which states on its website that it "fights for a more just world by demanding the investments needed to create economic opportunities and healthier lives in Africa."
Bono went on, saying that people from all walks of life are "very, very, very angry with the person that they voted into office having demolished instruments of mercy and compassion, like USAID and PEPFAR."
He then shared a strong final statement: "They are not happy, and there will be trouble."Bono Shares Bold Statement After Bruce Springsteen's Controversial Political Comments first appeared on Parade on May 28, 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
China's trade war gambit puts Trump on defense
If international trade is a game of chess, China has the U.S. in check — with few good options for the next move. Why it matters: The trade war has exposed just how deeply the U.S. economy is at the mercy of an accident of geology — China's supply of the rare earth minerals that power our modern high-tech society. The big picture: China's control of the global rare earths supply has left the U.S. playing defense in a trade war of its own design. China loosening up on rare earths exports was a key part of the trade truce the two countries struck in mid-May. But its slow-walking of those exports is now at the heart of another breakdown in the relationship. Between the lines: The White House says President Trump and China's President Xi Jinping will get on the phone and sort it out, but the call hasn't happened yet, and the Chinese side won't even confirm it's happening. Trump already hinted the call might not result in a breakthrough, posting to Truth Social that Xi was "extremely difficult" to negotiate with. Whatever leverage the Trump administration thought it had going into a spree of "90 deals in 90 days" has thus far not delivered much, and now courts are threatening to stand in the president's way. State of play: The U.S. economy has been resilient thus far, defying predictions of immediate tariff chaos. But new signs suggest private-sector hiring is weakening, and supply chains are breaking down. Consumer prices are starting to rise, manufacturers' profits are being squeezed, and the specter of inflation looms larger by the day. Factories are beginning to shut down because they can't get the necessary components, and some companies are reportedly considering the extraordinary step of shipping their unfinished products to China to add the components there. None of that was the point of the trade war; most of it is the exact opposite. Zoom out: Typically, these sorts of fundamental reorderings of an economy don't happen in real time — businesses plan on long-term cycles, governments build out policy infrastructures, and changes happen in something resembling an orderly fashion. Not now. "The economy is somewhat of a living organism. It does not sit still. It adjusts; it reacts ... it changes over time," Siebert Financial chief investment officer Mark Malek wrote Wednesday. "Unfortunately, we are all hoping for a short-term solution to a long-term challenge." The intrigue: In absolute terms, rare earths imports are small, about $190 million a year, per government data. But if you buy any of a list of more than 200 products, from cell phones to lasers, then you're buying something that can't be built without rare earths. Reality check: China's economy is facing its own challenges, and the trade war isn't exactly helping there either. The Chinese government is scrambling to increase domestic consumption, with mixed results. The Trump administration's position is that China can't hold out economically and needs access to the American consumer. While China may have its rare earths to use as a cudgel, the U.S. believes it has weapons, too — like choking off China's largest export market. Efforts to secure an alternate supply chain of minerals have also gained steam, as the Trump administration and both parties in Congress quietly assemble the pieces of a comprehensive policy, including permitting reform, new global partnerships and trade investigations. Those efforts may give the U.S. side some confidence that even if the Chinese can use their minerals as leverage, that won't last forever. For the record: "The United States and China, as the two largest economies in the world, have a critical economic relationship that has global ramifications," White House spokesperson Kush Desai said in a statement. "The Trump administration remains committed to levelling the playing field for American industries and workers by negotiating with China to obtain more reciprocal and balanced bilateral trade relations." The bottom line: "Trade wars are good, and easy to win," Trump once said — but at the moment, China has the U.S. economy in check, with the clock ticking loudly on the next move.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Donald Trump and Elizabeth Warren Find Themselves in Surprise Agreement
As the age-old adage goes: keep your friends close, but your enemies closer. In a change of pace on Wednesday, President Donald Trump found himself agreeing with one of his biggest Democratic adversaries, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, taking to Truth Social to rally for some bipartisan unity regarding his 'Big, Beautiful Bill.' 'I am very pleased to announce that, after all of these years, I agree with Senator Elizabeth Warren on SOMETHING,' Trump wrote. 'The Debt Limit should be entirely scrapped to prevent an Economic catastrophe. It is too devastating to be put in the hands of political people that may want to use it despite the horrendous effect it could have on our Country and, indirectly, even the World.' 'As to Senator Warren's second statement on the $4 Trillion Dollars, I like that also, but it would have to be done over a period of time, as short as possible. Let's get together, Republican and Democrat, and DO THIS!' he concluded. Trump was referring to an X post Warren made on May 30, where she echoed that she and the president were in agreement about scrapping the debt limit. '@realDonaldTrump and I agree: the debt limit should be scrapped to prevent an economic catastrophe,' Warren posted at the time. 'Let's pass a bipartisan bill and get rid of it forever. But jacking up the debt limit by $4 trillion to fund more tax breaks for billionaires is an outrage.' The comments came after a warning from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent last month that the U.S. will reach its debt limit cap by August. Lawmakers must face a vote to raise the limit or face the consequences of being unable to pay the bills. Trump's bill, which passed the House, included a $4 trillion debt ceiling hike, though that figure could change as it moves through the Senate. Trump is currently vying for the Senate to pass the over-1,000-page bill detailing plans for tax cuts and spending cuts among other measures, including immigration. The president has dubbed it 'One, Big, Beautiful Bill.' The bill has notably drawn concern and criticism over its potential ability to spike deficits, notably $2.4 trillion in national debt over the next decade. Opponents of the bill, including Democrats, say it simply provides tax breaks to the rich while leaving low-income Americans at a loss. A number of Republicans, including Sen. Rand Paul and Elon Musk, have spoken out against the bill. Warren released a statement of her own in response to Trump's Truth Social post. 'The independent non-partisan Congressional Budget Office confirmed today that Donald Trump's Big Beautiful Bill will rip away health care from millions of people and increase the debt by $2.4 trillion to fund tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy. That's a disgusting abomination, as Elon Musk made clear,' Warren wrote, referencing Trump's former buddy's sudden U-turn on the bill this week. 'I've argued for years that a default on the national debt would be an economic catastrophe that must be avoided by getting rid of the debt limit permanently,' wrote Warren. 'If Republicans in Congress were serious about preventing that economic disaster, they would scrap the debt limit entirely like President Trump has called for—not increase it by $4 trillion to finance tax cuts for billionaires and billionaire corporations.' Warren and Trump have long clashed, with Warren being a vocal critic of the president's administration and his policies. 'Donald and Elon are bullies,' Warren told a crowd in March. 'They think calling people names or waving a chainsaw makes them look manly.' Trump referred to the Massachusetts Democrat as 'Pocahontas' for years in mockery after Warren stated Native American ancestry. He brought it back in March during his first joint address to Congress.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
What Trump Doesn't Understand About Putin
Russian leader Vladimir Putin looks increasingly cornered. The Ukrainians just staged a stunning drone attack on strategic bombers in far-flung Russian air bases. Putin's battered troops are struggling to gain significant territory in Ukraine, and the frontline has barely shifted in two years. His economy is a mixed bag, with inflation slowing growth and other danger signs flashing. President Donald Trump, who has long admired Putin's brash leadership style, is now questioning the Russian leader's sanity and urging him to 'STOP!' his attacks on Ukraine. And U.S. lawmakers are mulling a heavy new sanctions and tariffs package aimed at Moscow — the type one senator describes as 'bone-crushing.' Given all these challenges, why won't Putin abandon his goal of conquering Ukraine? I have been asking former U.S. officials versions of this question in recent days. Finally, I realized it's the wrong question — and the wrong way to think about this whole war. Putin will never abandon his ambition of conquering Ukraine, and convincing him to do so shouldn't be the aim of Ukraine's global supporters. Instead, the goal should be to make it impossible for Putin to fulfill that ambition. In simpler terms: You can't make Putin walk away from Ukraine; you have to put Ukraine out of his reach. Trump and some of his top aides do not seem to understand this about Putin. They've sent mixed signals about their views of Russia's strongman, with Trump acting as if the carrots of economic deals and Truth Social posts can sway him. With new sanctions on the table, many Russia watchers hope Trump will seize the moment to show Putin that even if he can't control his ambitions, he can make it too painful for Putin to achieve them. But those same analysts warned that new sanctions alone won't make Putin back down. Neither will continued military aid to Ukraine, nor tough-talking posts on social media. Showing Putin that he absolutely cannot subsume Ukraine will require all these tactics and more. It will also require patience. 'That's why you do these missions, like Ukraine taking out some of their strategic bombers. That hurts. It's expensive,' said Andrea Kendall-Taylor, a former U.S. intelligence official. 'Can we impose enough costs that he eventually says, 'I cannot do this indefinitely?'' I'm not the first person to posit that Putin will never change his belief that Ukraine belongs to Russia. Putin's own writings make clear that he's convinced Kyiv must be under Russia's thumb if Moscow wants to achieve new heights on the global stage. Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken suggested Putin's view is 'theological.' One analyst has argued that the West's best strategy on the war may require waiting until Putin dies. A White House official, in response to a request for comment from the administration, told me Trump 'has always been tough on Putin.' The official, whom was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomatic issues, added: 'This president's foreign policy is unique in that he can be tough on our adversaries, but he is simultaneously able to look anyone in the eye to try to deliver peace.' But many of Trump's words and actions indicate that he has limited appreciation for how hard-core Putin is about pursuing Ukraine. During the campaign, Trump declared numerous times that he could end the war in his first 24 hours back in office — a claim that he now says was in jest but which nonetheless cast Putin as easy to persuade. In the months since, the president has seemed bewildered that Putin isn't easing up on Ukraine. Trump recently said, with a tone of surprise, that the Russian leader has gone 'absolutely CRAZY.' Trump also seems frustrated with Putin's lack of seriousness in ceasefire talks. The tough talk from Trump is striking given his past efforts to win Putin over. But his methods are not always consistent. Trump came across as passive in a social media post Wednesday after speaking to Putin, saying the Russian made it clear he'd have to retaliate against the Ukraine drone strikes. 'It was a good conversation, but not a conversation that will lead to immediate Peace,' Trump wrote, not saying if he'd urged Putin to avoid escalation. Comments and moves by others in the administration also suggest a lack of clarity about the Kremlin boss, who first invaded Ukraine more than a decade ago. Vice President JD Vance's dismissal of Ukrainian concerns that Putin will not uphold a peace deal — most famously in that awkward Oval Office meeting in February with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy — indicates that he doesn't fully grasp the depth of Putin's desires. It also likely boosted Russian confidence that its efforts to drive wedges between Washington and its allies, including Ukraine and the European Union, are working. Secretary of State Marco Rubio's assertion that the United States may simply walk away from trying to resolve the crisis didn't exactly help Kyiv, either. It suggests the U.S. lacks patience and that the Russians should forge ahead in seeking a decisive edge in the war. And if there's one thing Putin believes he has on his side, it's time. What exactly is Putin's breaking point, or the point at which he'll give up on taking over Ukraine? 'This kind of stuff — it's very hard to quantify. It's the psychology of one man,' Eddie Fishman, a former State Department official who dealt with Russia sanctions, told me. Some of these Russia specialists said Putin is likely aware of the concept of 'TACO Trump' — the 'Trump Always Chickens Out' notion that's swept Wall Street and other realms. Trump's policy inconsistency and his frequent backtracking, such as on tariffs, may suggest to Putin that the U.S. president will try to drive a hard bargain but ultimately cave, giving Moscow wiggle room. The sanctions bill is a test of sorts for Trump and whether he truly understands Putin's mindset. It has garnered support from the majority of U.S. senators and includes harsh provisions aimed at choking off Russia's last major source of income: its energy exports. The legislation would impose 500 percent tariffs on countries that continue buying Russian oil, gas, uranium and other materials. It's questionable whether the 500 percent figure will survive talks between the White House and Capitol Hill. The tariffs would land on major U.S. trading partners in Europe, China and India and wreak havoc on the global economy. Still, whatever version of the bill survives could deal a major blow to Russia. If Trump signs the bill, the Kremlin should worry because it will mean he's not afraid to escalate things with Moscow. But if he signs the bill and then delays, waives or otherwise doesn't enforce the sanctions and tariffs involved, Putin will believe Trump is backing down yet again and that he can take advantage of the American leader's capriciousness. If Trump also fails to take other meaningful steps to help Ukraine, especially on the military aid front, it could further boost Putin's confidence that he and his troops can ultimately overpower Kyiv. Of course, the Kremlin chief could still agree to peace talks — he already has, in a way, though he tends to send powerless underlings to the sessions in his place. Those motions seem to be about buying time with Trump, a self-styled dealmaking expert who is eager for a compromise. Even if Putin agrees to a sustained ceasefire or other type of pause in the fighting, Russia analysts I spoke to believe he'll use the downtime to regroup and eventually make another move against Kyiv. One Trump tactic unlikely to work on Putin is promising him economic deals, should he come to terms with Ukraine. To be fair, Putin himself has raised this prospect in a bid to get sanctions relief from Trump, who largely sees the world through a business lens. The reality is that the Russian economy has been transformed since the February 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It is now heavily fueled by the war itself. There are signs that this cannot go on forever, but it has continued longer than many Western officials and analysts predicted. Putin is also likely aware that even if Trump were to lift all U.S. sanctions on Russia, American businesses are unlikely to jump into the Russian market anytime soon. There are too many risks, including the possibility that a future U.S. president could reimpose the sanctions. Besides, European sanctions are likely to remain in place. 'Given sanctions and export controls that need to be lifted, not to mention the reputational risk and the operating environment in Russia, it's hard to see that Western companies would be rushing to go back to that market,' Randi Levinas, a former chief operating officer of the now-dissolved U.S.-Russia Business Council, told me. Putin is in a corner. But while everyone is watching him, he's still got his eye on Ukraine — all of Ukraine.
