Donald Trump Reposts Kayla Harrison Video; Internet Goes Wild
Donald Trump's cage-side appearance at UFC 316 has stirred more than just cheers, it's ignited a firestorm online. After champion Kayla Harrison leapt out of the cage to celebrate with him, Trump shared the moment on Truth Social. But what really grabbed attention was that he posted the same video twice. The clip shows Trump hugging Kayla, kissing her cheek, and patting her exposed stomach. As it went viral, critics accused him of overstepping and using the moment for political optics. Comments poured in, ranging from 'Be careful with that felon' to 'Left would say you groped her.' While supporters praised the gesture as patriotic, the trolling hasn't stopped. Trump doubling down has left many wondering: was this genuine admiration, or calculated media bait?
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
35 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Why Trump's ‘two weeks' timeline for a decision on Iran is déjà vu for many
US President Donald Trump says he will be ready to make his decision about bombing Iran or not 'within the next two weeks'. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt offered this new timeline during her Thursday afternoon briefing, but some in the room couldn't help but feel a sense of déjà vu, as the phrase sounded more than a little familiar. 'I have a message directly from the president, and I quote,' Leavitt said. ''Based on the fact that there is a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks.'' As The New York Times noted, 'two weeks' is one of Trump's most favoured and most ambiguous units of time. Sample this. Trump was asked eight weeks ago whether he could trust Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump replied: 'I'll let you know in about two weeks.' Over the years, the same timeframe has been deployed for tax plans, health care policies, evidence of conspiracy theories, the fight against ISIS, the reopening of coal mines, and infrastructure announcements — all of which he promised to clarify 'in about two weeks.' As NYT puts it, 'It is a slippery thing, this two weeks — not a measurement of time so much as a placeholder. Two weeks for Trump can mean something, or nothing at all. It is both a yes and a no. It is delaying while at the same time scheduling. It is not an objective unit of time, it is a subjective unit of time. It is completely divorced from any sense of chronology. It simply means later. But later can also mean never. Sometimes.' The pressing question now is whether the US is going to bomb Iran? No one knows and we may have to wait two weeks to find an answer to that question. A reporter tried to pin down the timeline, reminding the press secretary of Trump's repeated 'two-week' promises, particularly in relation to Russia. 'How can we be sure he's going to stick to this one on making a decision on Iran?' Leavitt's answer? Essentially, that one situation can't be compared with another. As NYT says, 'This was really a question of metaphysics more than anything else.'
Time of India
43 minutes ago
- Time of India
A strike on Tehran? The alarming fallout America might face if Trump pulls the trigger
US president Donald Trump is reportedly on the verge of making one of the largest decisions of his political career, whether or not to join Israel in carrying out a military strike on Iran, as per a report. Donald Trump on the Edge of a Defining Decision When talking to reporters on Wednesday at the White House, Trump expressed that he had "ideas" regarding what he wanted to do but had not made his mind up, as per The Hill. The US president said, he likes 'to make a final decision one second before it's due," quoted The Hill. Strike Plans Signed, But Not Yet Ordered The Wall Street Journal reported later that day that the previous day, Trump had told senior aides he had signed off on plans to attack Iran but had not ordered those plans be put fully into motion until he saw whether Iran would abandon its nuclear program, reported The Hill. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like The Simple Morning Habit for a Flatter Belly After 50! Lulutox Undo ALSO READ: Trump considers tactical nuclear bomb on Iran's Fordow site — reports claim even bunker busters won't work Why Israel Needs the US to Hit Iran's Nuclear Site While, even though Israel has launched strikes on Iran, it would need direct support from the United States to destroy Iran's main nuclear enrichment facilities, which is deep underground in a mountain, as per the report. Destroying the facility would mostly be possible with the use of enormous 30,000-pound bunker buster bombs, which only the US possesses or has a plane capable of transporting them, the B-2 bomber, reported The Hill. Live Events MAGA Movement Divided on War Talk But Trump's decision to join Israel's ongoing war with Iran has led to a split within his movement of Make America Great Again (MAGA). Though many MAGA voices in Trump's party have shown support for America backing its Middle East ally, with figures like Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), there are also Trump allies who are highly sceptical of such a potential decision, as per the report. The divide between his supporters was seen during a long and contentious interview between Cruz and Tucker Carlson on this topic, which went viral on Wednesday, reported The Hill. Carlson might be the most influential MAGA figure warning against the United States getting involved in another major foreign conflict after years of being mired in Iraq and Afghanistan, reported The Hill. FAQs Is the US about to go to war with Iran? Not yet, Trump has approved strike plans but is waiting to see if Iran will back down on its nuclear program before acting. What's Trump's position right now? He hasn't decided yet. He says he likes making decisions 'at the last second,' but he's seriously considering it.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Gulf monarchs on edge as Trump's unpredictability could leave them exposed if war with Iran breaks out
Gulf monarchs on edge as Trump's unpredictability risks war with Iran: As tensions rise between the U.S. and Iran, Gulf monarchs are growing increasingly anxious about what Donald Trump might do next. The Gulf region — led by Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Oman — is walking a tightrope, trying to balance diplomacy with Iran while maintaining long-standing military ties with the United States. For leaders across the Gulf, a potential U.S. strike on Iran could turn their countries into battlegrounds, especially those hosting American military bases. Trump's unpredictable approach to foreign policy has only heightened fears. And with Israel's ongoing conflict fueling the fire, Gulf monarchies now find themselves scrambling to protect their sovereignty, oil exports, and national security. Why are Gulf countries so worried about a U.S. strike on Iran? Gulf states like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Kuwait are home to major U.S. military installations. If Trump chooses to strike Iran, these bases could become prime targets for Iranian retaliation. According to Bader Al-Saif, an assistant professor at Kuwait University, U.S. involvement would be the "worst-case scenario" for Gulf allies — not because they support Iran, but because their geography and military alliances would put them directly in harm's way. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Buy Brass Idols - Handmade Brass Statues for Home & Gifting Luxeartisanship Buy Now Iran has already warned that if attacked, it will strike back 'wherever necessary', according to Majid Takht-Ravanchi, Iran's deputy foreign minister. In short, Gulf leaders worry they could be caught in the crossfire of a war they didn't start. Missiles have already been spotted in the skies over Kuwait, and Bahrain tested emergency sirens earlier this week, signs that the region is bracing for a possible escalation. These fears are not unfounded — in 2019, a missile and drone strike believed to have been orchestrated by Iran crippled half of Saudi Arabia's crude oil production. Live Events How are Gulf monarchies managing ties with Iran during this crisis? In a surprising diplomatic shift, Gulf leaders have made direct contact with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian in recent days. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and UAE President Mohamed bin Zayed both spoke to Pezeshkian to express solidarity and condemn Israeli military actions in Gaza. Even Qatar's Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani received a letter from Pezeshkian, while the Sultan of Oman and Gulf foreign ministers have been engaging with Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. These talks show that Gulf monarchies are doing whatever it takes to cool tensions and avoid confrontation. Despite their historically rocky relationships with Tehran, the UAE and Saudi Arabia — traditionally strong backers of Trump's 'maximum pressure' campaign — are now leaning on diplomacy. They've called for a ceasefire, pushed for a return to U.S.-Iran nuclear negotiations, and are even relaying Tehran's willingness to talk with Washington via Qatar and Oman. What role is Trump playing in the Gulf's growing unease? While Trump enjoys warm ties with Gulf rulers — especially after a high-profile visit to the region last month — his unpredictability is causing major concern. He drew applause in Riyadh for criticizing past U.S. interventions, but leaders are still uncertain about how far he might go if Iran escalates. After Israel launched its offensive last week, Trump called both the Emir of Qatar and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, showing continued engagement. But behind the scenes, Gulf leaders are telling Washington not to use their bases for any strikes against Iran — a clear sign of their fear of retaliation. 'Bound to be guilty by association,' said Abdulkhaleq Abdulla, a senior fellow at Harvard Kennedy School, referring to how Gulf countries could be dragged into a broader conflict just for hosting U.S. troops. And that's not the only concern. Gulf leaders are worried that Washington won't fully commit to their defense if war breaks out. After all, Iran's 2019 attack on Saudi oil infrastructure was met with a muted U.S. response, frustrating Gulf allies and pushing them to hedge their bets with diplomacy. Are Gulf states choosing between Iran and Israel? The region finds itself stuck between two powerful rivals: Iran and Israel. While some Gulf states — including the UAE and Bahrain — normalized relations with Israel in 2020, the long war in Gaza and Israeli strikes in Syria have raised questions about Israel's regional ambitions. Arab leaders have grown frustrated with what they see as Israeli overreach, despite privately welcoming the weakening of Iran-backed groups like Hezbollah. As one Gulf analyst put it, 'An imperial Israel is not good for the region.' Gulf leaders now fear a destabilized balance of power. They still see a nuclear-armed Iran as a grave threat, but not at the expense of a dominant Israel that could upend regional equilibrium. Republican Congressman Don Bacon, who recently visited the region, said Arab officials were united in their view: 'Iran, a nuclear-armed Iran, is an existential threat.' Yet, those same leaders are also worried that Trump's confrontational style could push Iran to lash out — and their nations could pay the price. Can diplomacy hold off another Gulf crisis? Right now, Gulf monarchs are betting on back-channel diplomacy to keep the fire from spreading. They've opened communication lines with Tehran, urged restraint from Washington, and are even acting as regional mediators. But with Trump's decision-making up in the air, and the U.S.–Israel alliance as strong as ever, Gulf leaders know things can spiral quickly. They're trying to avoid a repeat of 2019 or worse — a full-scale war that could pull the entire Gulf into chaos. The situation remains tense, but for now, the Gulf is talking more and striking less — a risky but necessary move in one of the world's most volatile neighborhoods.
