Trump-Putin meeting live updates: No deal reached at Russia-Ukraine war summit in Alaska; leaders praise 'extremely productive' talks
President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin both said that significant progress was made toward an agreement for a potential ceasefire in the war in Ukraine, but that a final deal had not yet been reached during their high-stakes summit in Anchorage, Alaska, on Friday.
Trump said the talks were 'extremely productive' but added that 'there's no deal until there's a deal' during a joint press conference following nearly three hours of closed-door conversations between the two leaders. Details on what was agreed to and what issues have yet to be resolved were not shared.
Trump and Putin met at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, where they shook hands and posed for photographs on the tarmac before beginning their sit-down away from the press.
It was the first face-to-face meeting between Trump and Putin since 2019, and Putin's first with a U.S. president since his forces invaded Ukraine in 2022. The Russian leader had spoken on the phone with Trump since his reelection, but they had not yet met in person during the president's second term.
Trump has been trying for months to secure a deal to end the war, but Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was not invited to Friday's summit, and expectations that a ceasefire agreement can be reached are low.
'This is really a feel-out meeting,' Trump told reporters earlier this week. 'Probably in the first two minutes I'll know exactly whether or not a deal can be made.' The president also promised 'very severe consequences' if Putin doesn't agree to end the three-and-a-half-year conflict, which has caused a staggering number of casualties on both sides.
There were fresh attacks in the war overnight. Russia launched dozens of drone strikes across Ukraine, killing seven civilians and injuring 17 others, Ukrainian military officials said.
Yahoo News is providing live updates surrounding the summit in the blog below.
Russian President Vladimir Putin was seen heading into his plane less than an hour after his joint press conference with President Trump. As he entered the door, he turned around to give a wave and subtle bow.
Putin and his delegation had been scheduled to meet with Trump and other U.S. officials for a luncheon before leaving Alaska, but that gathering was canceled.
Not only was Russian President Vladimir Putin full of praise for President Trump after their meeting Friday in Alaska, but he also went out of his way to echo Trump in blaming former President Joe Biden for the war in Ukraine.
Describing Trump's personal involvement in negotiations as "precious," Putin predicted that it would ultimately help solve "the Ukrainian issue" and "help us bring back businesslike and pragmatic relations between Russia and the U.S."
Then he strategically pivoted to Trump's predecessor — and referenced a claim the president has often made about the latest phase of the war in Ukraine, which began when Putin invaded in 2022.
"In 2022, during the last contact with the previous administration, I tried to convince my previous American colleague that the situation should not be brought to the point of no return when it would come to hostilities," Putin said through a translator. "That [would be] a big mistake."
So "today, when President Trump is saying that if he was the president back then there will be no war, I'm quite sure that it would indeed be so," Putin added. "I can confirm that."
In 2022, Jeffrey Treistman, an assistant professor of national security at the University of New Haven, argued in The Hill that "Trump has a clear track record of undermining Ukraine's sovereignty and security" and that Trump "would not have stopped Russia's recent invasion of Ukraine" because his "foreign policies actually served to embolden Putin and weaken the trans-Atlantic alliance."
After meeting for nearly three hours with Russian President Vladimir Putin, President Trump emerged from behind closed doors Friday at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska, saying negotiations had been "extremely productive" — while also acknowledging that no comprehensive ceasefire agreement had been reached.
"We haven't quite got there, but we've got some headway," Trump said. "There's no deal until there's a deal."
The president went on to note that "many points were agreed to," while "just a few ... were left" unresolved — "one" of which, he added, is "more significant" than the others.
Earlier in the day, Trump said he wanted to "see a ceasefire, rapidly."
"I don't know if it's going to be today, but I'm not going to be happy if it's not today," he warned.
During his joint press conference Friday with Putin, however, Trump signaled that negotiations would continue in the near future, saying that he would "call" NATO and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky because it was "ultimately up to them to agree with" the parameters of what his team and Putin's team had discussed.
"We didn't get there, but we have a very good chance of getting there," Trump said. Then he addressed Putin directly, as "Vladimir."
"We'll speak to you very soon — and probably see you again very soon."
"Next time in Moscow," Putin interjected, drawing a chuckle from Trump.
"I'll get heat for that," Trump replied. "I can see that possibly happening."
As the world waits for President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin to emerge from behind closed doors and comment on today's nearly three-hour meeting, Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska says the benchmark for Trump should be securing a clear-cut ceasefire commitment from Putin.
"I think that the best that we could hope for is a commitment coming out of Putin to a ceasefire with enough contours to it that it is believable — that it will be more than just a brief moment to check a box here," Murkowski told CNN.
Earlier, David Sanger of the New York Times said that "if there isn't a cease fire with a date certain, and a specific length, it's going to be very hard for the president to spin that he got much progress here."
Trump supporters were seen congregating outside Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson to show their support for the president during the summit.
Negotiations with the American delegation in the "narrow format" have concluded, the Kremlin said in a short statement.
This presumably refers to the closed-door three-on-three meeting between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin that had been going on for nearly three hours.
Aides have just checked the microphones at the podiums where Trump and Putin are expected to address reporters for a joint press conference.
The Kremlin said this press conference will start soon.
Trump and Putin were originally supposed to speak to the media after a working bilateral lunch meeting between the larger U.S. and Russian delegations. It is unclear whether that larger meeting will take place.
Friday's meeting between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin has been a red carpet affair — a polished production orchestrated at least in part by Trump himself, who spent years co-producing and starring in his own reality television show (NBC's The Apprentice).
Alaska's Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy posted a video to social media Friday in which he described a conversation he had with the president on Air Force One before Trump's meeting with Putin.
In addition to mentioning that Trump said he 'loves Alaska,' Dunleavy addressed rumors suggesting that granting Russia access to the state's bountiful natural resources could be a bargaining chip to help convince Putin to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine.
'We talked to the president about these rumors that Alaska's minerals are going to be sold off to the Russians or that Alaska's gas is going to be transported by the Russians. … That's not true,' Dunleavy said in the video. 'Some would say that's fake news.'
The British newspaper the Telegraph reported earlier this week, citing unnamed sources, that Trump would consider 'opening up Alaska's natural resources to Moscow.' A high-ranking Russian lawmaker added more fuel to the claim by commenting that it 'would be interesting' for companies from his country to be granted the right 'to work on the lands of Alaska.'
Trump didn't rule anything out when he was asked directly whether Alaska's resources might be part of a potential deal with Russia on Thursday, saying only, 'We're going to see what happens.'
The scheduled working lunch with more parties has not started yet, Dan Scavino, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff, said on X.
This means the meeting between Trump, Putin and their chosen aides has lasted almost two hours so far.
The White House did not issue a strict schedule for today's summit, but some have speculated the timing could be a sign that Trump has not felt obligated to "walk," as he told Fox News host Bret Baier he would do if he was not happy with how the conversation was going.
A lot of phone calls between Trump and Putin this year have lasted up to 90 minutes, CNN reported. There are also two translators who are in the room facilitating the conversation.
During his 2024 reelection campaign, Donald Trump repeatedly said he would end the war between Russia and Ukraine within 24 hours of returning to the Oval Office — or sooner.
Actually, repeatedly is an understatement. According to CNN, Trump predicted he would resolve the conflict by Day One of his second term at least 53 times.
'Before I even arrive at the Oval Office, I will have the disastrous war between Russia and Ukraine settled,' Trump said in Maryland on March 4, 2023, for example. 'I will get the problem solved and I will get it solved in rapid order and it will take me no longer than one day. I know exactly what to say to each of them.'
Given that today is Day 208 of Trump's second term and the war still isn't over, critics have accused Trump of breaking his promise.
In response, the president has claimed that he 'said that figuratively… as an exaggeration… to make a point.'
The important part, he added, was that he said the war 'will be ended.'
Today's 'high stakes' meeting with Putin in Alaska proves how much striking a peace deal matters to Trump — in part because he spent much of 2023 and 2024 vowing to do it.
The path to peace in Ukraine is the most pressing issue for Trump and Putin's summit, but it's not the only critical subject that the two leaders are expected to discuss.
The last remaining arms control agreement between the world's two nuclear superpowers is set to expire at the beginning of next year and both leaders have expressed optimism that a new pact can be reached during their meeting in Alaska.
The U.S. and Russia have by far the largest nuclear arsenals in the world, together controlling 90% of the world's nuclear weapons. The two nations have been working under some form of nuclear arms control deal since 1972. The current agreement, known as the New START treaty, limits the number of warheads each country can keep on alert at any given time.
That deal expires in February and cannot be extended. If a new agreement isn't reached before then, the U.S. and Russia will be operating without a mutual nuclear agreement for the first time in more than half a century.
On Thursday, Putin suggested that the summit could create 'the long-term conditions of peace between our countries … and in the world as a whole, if we reach agreements in the field of strategic offensive arms control,' while speaking with top Russian officials in Moscow.
Trump expressed similar sentiments last month, telling reporters, 'That's not an agreement you want expiring. We're starting to work on that.'
Neither leader has offered details of what might be included in a new nuclear agreement or how a future deal might differ from the one currently in place.
As Trump and Putin continue their meeting, here's a recap of what's already happened so far today:
The summit turned into a three-on-three meeting. It was initially planned for Trump and Putin to meet alone, but they both now have two advisers sitting with them. Trump has U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, while Putin has Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and foreign policy adviser Yuri Ushakov.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who was not invited to the meeting, said in a social media post that Ukraine is "counting on America," although Trump told reporters this morning, "I'm not here to negotiate for Ukraine." Trump has suggested that, if his conversation with Putin is successful, he could set up another meeting with Putin and Zelensky.
Trump said he "would walk" if the conversation doesn't go well. He told Fox News host Bret Baier on Air Force One that he will "head back home real fast" if everything doesn't "work out very well."
President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin have been meeting for an hour behind closed doors at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska.
U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio are sitting alongside Trump. Putin is flanked by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and foreign policy advisor Yuri Ushakov.
The only other people in the room are translators.
For the duration of this sit-down, there will be no reports about what Trump and Putin are saying to each other.
Once they are done, broader "talks within the delegations, possibly in the form of a working lunch" are likely to follow, according to Kremlin spokesman Dmitr Peskov.
"After that, the heads of state will withdraw for some time" to consult with their advisors "and then come together for a joint press conference."
All told, the process could last for six or seven hours, according to Peskov, meaning it might wrap up around 9 or 10 p.m. ET.
Or not. Trump has previously said that while he thinks the summit is "going to work out very well ... if it doesn't, I'm going to head back home real fast.'
Alternately, the president also said Thursday that if he and Putin make real progress, he might remain in Alaska and ask President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine to fly in, which he said 'would be by far the easiest way' to mediate.
Either way, Trump plans to sit for an interview with Sean Hannity of Fox News Friday night. He is scheduled to depart Alaska for Washington, D.C., before midnight local time.
While Trump meets with Putin, his team sent out a fundraising email, according to screenshots an Associated Press reporter shared on X.
"I'm meeting with Putin in Alaska! It's a little chilly," the email says. "THIS MEETING IS VERY HIGH STAKES for the world."
The email encouraged people to donate, adding, "No one in the world knows how to make deals like me!"
President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin did not answer questions from reporters while posing earlier today for a red carpet photo op at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska.
But that didn't stop the press from asking — or rather, shouting — their questions anyway.
And in one instance, it didn't stop Putin from gesturing in response.
'President Putin, will you agree to a ceasefire?'
'Mr. President, what's your message to Vladimir Putin?'
'Mr. Putin, did you underestimate Ukraine?'
None of these queries provoked any real reaction from the two leaders, other than a few words to each other and a handshake for the cameras.
But then someone asked Putin if he would 'stop killing civilians.'
At that, Putin grimaced, pointed to his ear — as if to suggest that he couldn't hear — and shrugged.
Trump and Putin then exchanged a few more words, smiled and stepped into the presidential limo.
'President Putin, how can the U.S. trust your word?' a reporter shouted as Trump ushered Putin away.
The U.S. president raised his hand, as if to wave goodbye or signal 'that's enough' — and an aide said, 'Thank you, press.'
Putin was again asked about "killing civilians" during a second photo op with additional U.S. and Russian officials, and he again reacted — this time by narrowing his eyes skeptically, cupping his hands around his mouth and addressing the reporter directly (though inaudibly to the microphones).
The two leaders arrived at the building at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, where they plan to meet and hold their news conference later tonight.
The fact that Trump and Putin rode together — without top aides and officials — in the U.S. presidential limo from the tarmac to the site of today's summit is significant.
Why? Because it's so unusual.
When Trump wanted North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un — another U.S. adversary — to join him in his car during their meeting in Singapore in 2018, advisers talked him out of it.
Today's meeting with Putin was expanded from a one-on-one to a three-on-three at the last minute. But Trump and Putin still made sure to get some alone time beforehand — even if they had to carve it out during a brief car ride.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Putin's foreign affairs adviser Yuri Ushakov will be joining Putin in his conversation with Trump, RIA Novosti, a Russian state news agency, said, according to the Associated Press. RIA Novosti got the names from Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.
Putin, Lavrov and Ushakov will meet with Trump, Marco Rubio and Steve Witkoff soon.
President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin emerged from their respective planes and proceeded down an L-shaped red carpet at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska, before meeting for a handshake.
At 11:07 a.m. local time, Trump deplaned first from Air Force One. Putin followed seconds later. Trump waited for Putin to approach him for the handshake; he briefly applauded as Putin got closer. The two exchanged words for several seconds before walking together toward reporters and posing for a side-by-side photo op while American fighter jets flew overhead.
The two leaders then entered the U.S. presidential limo (nicknamed "The Beast") to ride together to today's summit.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has landed in Anchorage, Alaska.
Air Force One touched down about 30 minutes ago at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, the military base in Anchorage where President Trump will meet with Putin this afternoon. Trump has been greeting Alaska lawmakers on board as he awaits Putin's arrival.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The rich already know how private equity mints money — and it's not from a 401(k)
The ultrawealthy are envied for many reasons. For instance, we wish we could access the same private-market investments that they favor. Now, after the White House issued an executive order on Aug. 7, you may be able to invest like the billionaires do. Homeowners rush to refinance as mortgage-rate plunge opens window of opportunity My wife and I are in our 50s and have $11 million. We're not leaving it to our kids. Is that wrong? You could receive up to $7,500 from the AT&T settlement. Here's how class-action suits work. But would you want to? The executive order allows ordinary retirement savers to invest in private assets and cryptocurrency. This will expand investment options for anyone with a 401(k) or similar tax-advantaged retirement plan. It is a big deal — opening part of America's $12.4 trillion defined-contribution market to private-asset managers. The largest private-equity firms and other asset managers are salivating at the opportunity to pitch this untapped market of retirement savers. Private assets encompass a range of investments that do not trade on a public exchange. Examples include hedge funds, private equity, private credit and infrastructure. The case for private assets is they can provide a buffer against inflation — plus steady returns. The downsides include high fees, illiquidity and complexity. The nation's biggest asset managers welcome the executive order. They want to develop funds that make private assets easier for people to buy, and argue that the added diversification serves savers' best interests. Larry Fink, chief executive of BlackRock BLK, says retirement savers should replace the traditional 60% stocks/40% bonds asset-allocation model with a 50/30/20 split: 50% stocks, 30% bonds and 20% private assets. Read: Larry Fink proposes an alternative to the 60/40 portfolio. It means more fees. Should you be excited about this widening menu of investment choices? It depends on whom you ask. Some investment professionals like the idea of making private assets more available to more people. 'Historically, a number of private-market strategies have produced higher performance and additional diversification in defined-benefit pensions,' says Peter von Lehe, head of investment solutions and strategy at Neuberger Berman. 'It's appropriate that a broader range of investors have access to private assets in their defined-contribution plans because of the potential for return and diversification that these long-term investments can provide.' However, von Lehe cautions that these investments are illiquid and 'have a higher degree of complexity.' He says his 'most appropriate use case' for private-market investments is through professionally managed target-date funds or other funds that allocate a percentage of defined-contribution money to these complex but potentially more lucrative alternatives. Read: Here's something the rich know about managing investment risk that can help you, too Financial advisers have differing views on the role of private assets in client portfolios. Steven Roge, a certified financial planner in Bohemia, N.Y., says private markets are not for everyone. 'It's for people in the wealth-accumulation phase, say 40 to 50 years old, who have a long time horizon and a high risk tolerance,' Roge says. 'And they have to be sophisticated enough to understand it. We know if they don't understand it, they may not stick with it.' Of the firm's 300 clients, he says that 'only about a dozen' fit the bill for adding private-market assets to their retirement accounts. Even with the expanded investment options that may result from the White House's action, Roge remains a fan of passive strategies for most investors. 'Indexing is how they will win over the long run,' he says. 'But some clients want something that's special and different' as they seek market-beating returns. Given the illiquidity of private assets, Roge anticipates setting expectations for those clients who tend to monitor their portfolio daily — and who engage in frequent trading. 'These private investments may only price four times a year,' Roge says. 'That's not enough action for certain clients who track their portfolio like a hawk.' In his personal portfolio, Roge uses private markets — especially private equity — to diversify his holdings. He says he allocates about 25% to alternative assets. 'It helps me sleep at night knowing my portfolio isn't being pushed around by the volatility of public markets,' he says. Roge adds that he is not concerned about the current high valuations of private-equity funds. 'The valuations [of private-equity funds] are more realistic than the erratic valuations we see in public markets on a daily basis,' he says. Other advisers are more skeptical of the White House executive order. 'It's less being done out of interest for the general public and more for private industry lobbying the [Trump] administration,' says Alex Ruda, an adviser in Silver Spring, Md. The executive order undoubtedly pleases asset managers and private-equity firms. For years, they've wanted to attract retirement savers' money. These savers bear primary responsibility for managing their 401(k) compared with today's older retirees, many of whom receive employer-funded defined-benefit pensions. While some younger savers enjoy picking their investments, others dread it. 'The average American worker isn't equipped to navigate these complex [private-market] investments,' Ruda says. 'And they may fall prey to a little performance chasing given where we are in the market cycle' — as private markets have outperformed publicly traded stocks since 2000. Ruda feels so strongly about not incorporating private assets into client portfolios that he's willing to forgo newcomers who express such interest. 'If I wanted to broaden my client base, I'd have to play to what they want,' he says. 'But I don't have to do that. So I'd say to them, 'I'm not the best fit.'' Read next: Here's what it's like to invest in private equity — and why you don't want it in your 401(k) More: As private equity enters retirement plans, is it too dangerous for average investors to jump in? I'm a senior who barely survives on $1,300 a month. No way could I live on $1,000. 'I am a senior citizen': My car needs $3,500 for repairs, but only has a trade-in value of $6,000. Do I bother fixing it?


The Hill
29 minutes ago
- The Hill
‘South Park' mocks Trump all the way to the bank
President Trump's newest high-profile foil is 'South Park,' the long-running animated show that has been packing episode after episode with raunchy and sometimes violent jokes about the president and members of his Cabinet. The mockery has been no-holds-barred and has included depictions of Trump in bed with Satan, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem shooting cute cartoon dogs, and Dora the Explorer giving a massage at Mar-a-Lago, Trump's resort Florida. It has not gone unnoticed. The Trump administration, seemingly in no joking mood, has issued angry statements attacking the show's creators and dismissing 'South Park' as irrelevant and out of touch. Entertainment business and political observers, however, say the fight may be breathing new life into the politically incorrect satire program and providing the comedians behind it with more fodder for their weekly shows than ever. 'This in some ways feels like two rival TV shows fighting with one another,' said Matt Sienkiewicz, chair of the Boston College Communication Department and an expert on pop culture and comedy. ''South Park' is trying to do their old school style of critique of the government, and this government has gotten so cartoonish, the back-and-forth is what makes this so significant.' The attacks on Trump also appear to have been good for ratings. The show's Season 27 premiere in late July earned Comedy Central its highest-rated episode since the late 1990s while social media platforms have been filled with clips from Season 27 in recent weeks. The White House this week declined to comment on the show's sustained attacks, but a West Wing official sought to dismiss the show's relevance after its season premiere late last month mocked Trump. 'The Left's hypocrisy truly has no end — for years they have come after 'South Park' for what they labeled as 'offense' content, but suddenly they are praising the show,' a White House spokesperson told Variety at the time. 'Just like the creators of 'South Park,' the Left has no authentic or original content, which is why their popularity continues to hit record lows.' Last week, Noem tore into the show after it portrayed her face melting off due to heavy makeup. 'It's so lazy to just constantly make fun of women for how they look. Only the liberals and the extremists do that,' Noem said. The show's creators, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, responded this week by publishing an alternate ending to last week's episode on social media, showing Noem walking into a pet store and killing dogs inside with a gun. Noem received criticism last year after she revealed in a book she put a family pet down after a hunting trip. Jim Mendrinos, a comedy writer and a producer at Gotham Writers Workshop in New York, suggested the Trump administration, by responding so forcefully, is handing Parker and Stone a gift. 'This administration has no sense of humor,' Mendrinos said. 'And any good comic knows if you're under somebody's skin, you're gonna burrow in. That's the essence of roast comedy and that's what they're doing here.' To be certain, 'South Park,' has a long history of mocking prominent politicians and figures on the left, from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to former President Obama. The program has sparked controversy and backlash from progressives on multiple occasions during its more than two-decade history on the air for its satirical representations of religious figures, extensive use of racist language and ribbing of climate change activists. But the recent tension with the president and leading MAGA figures comes at a unique moment both in national politics and the business of entertainment. Earlier this year, Parker and Stone signed a five-year streaming deal with Hollywood giant Paramount, which owns Comedy Central, worth more than $1 billion. Paramount is facing increased scrutiny over its relationship with the president's administration after promising to change CBS's editorial direction and canceling 'Late Night,' the show hosted by Stephen Colbert, a frequent Trump critic. With its season premiere last month, 'South Park' called out Paramount over a $16 million payment the company made to the president's foundation to settle a lawsuit against CBS News, a deal that was seen by many as a capitulation to the administration made in order to secure its recent merger with Skydance. 'Matt and Trey are incredibly talented,' Paramount's newly appointed CEO David Ellison told CNN after the episode mocking his company aired. 'They are equal opportunity offenders and always have been.' Ellison's tolerance for Stone and Parker's attacks on Trump and even his own company could have something to do with the show's newfound popularity. Longtime observers of 'South Park' noted the program has always carried a modest but dedicated following, fading from the public discourse during President Biden's administration. Some attribute this to a decline in linear cable viewership, the creation of more animated comedy shows on other networks and what some regard as a slower churn of political news over the last four years. But with Trump's return to the White House, 'South Park' has seen a ratings boom. 'This whole thing has brought the spotlight back to 'South Park' in a way it hasn't enjoyed in a really long time,' Jeffrey Andrew Weinstock, a researcher and editor who authored a book on the show's impact on American pop culture. 'It seems there is a lot of dissatisfaction on the left with some institutions, including the news media, sort of soft-balling Trump and here's 'South Park' taking off the gloves.' How long the fight between 'South Park' and Trump World lasts remains to be seen, but in the short term most observers agree Parker and Stone's mission to take aim at the president is paying off in a big way. ''South Park' has always been able to do things its own way by being light on its feet and the way they've worked their contracts,' Sienkiewicz said. 'There's a lot of freedom in the financial success they've had, and they seem to pick and choose their battles carefully. There are very few others in the entertainment space that can operate like they have.'


USA Today
29 minutes ago
- USA Today
Notice a theme to Trump's planned takeovers of cities? These Black mayors do.
President Trump has warned he might send the National Guard to other cities. The Black mayors of those cities vow to push back. OAKLAND, California ‒ Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee and other officials in this California city are treating President Donald Trump's warning that he might send the National Guard there as more than just an offhand comment. They're bracing for a fight. Lee and other Black mayors, along with civil rights activists and lawmakers across the country are increasingly concerned about Trump singling out cities like Oakland, Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, Baltimore and Washington, DC. All of them are led by Black mayors and all of those leaders are Democrats. 'We just can't help but feel in some kind of way that we're being specifically profiled," said Van R. Johnson, president of the African American Mayors Association and mayor of Savannah, Georgia. 'That's not right. That's not fair. We want our federal government to work with us. We're just a phone call away.' New York Rep. Yvette Clarke, chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, called Trump's takeover of DC's policing a 'blatantly racist and despicable power grab.' 'It won't stop in Washington, DC," she said in a statement. 'The stakes are high not just for Washington, DC, but for the future of democracy in every corner of this country.' Trump used his presidential powers in early August to take over policing in Washington, DC, complaining crime is rampant and officials haven't done enough to address it ‒ despite statistics showing crime in the district is at a 30-year-low. Trump also threatened to deploy the National Guard to help fight crime in other communities. "We're going to take back our capital," Trump said Aug. 11. "And then we'll look at other cities also." He called it a "historic action to rescue our nation's capital from crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor and worse." Different visions for tackling urban problems White House officials argue the nation's capital is filthy and that Trump has seen that firsthand. In March, Trump signed an executive order titled "Making the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful," which sets up a task force of federal officials to clean up the city. 'If Democrats had any common sense, they would follow President Trump's lead to crack down on violent crime that has plagued our nation's capital – and Democrat-run cities across the country," Taylor Rogers, White House assistant press secretary, said in an email to USA TODAY. "Instead of criticizing President Trump's popular, tough-on crime policies, they should focus on cleaning up their own cities which are some of the most dangerous places in America." Many big cities are run by Democrats, but both violent and property crimes have fallen nationwide in recent years, federal data shows. Civil rights leaders criticized Trump for portraying cities, especially those led by Black mayors, as crime ridden. "Painting a false picture of the city's largest Black-majority cities, led by Black mayors, is part of the Trump administration's ongoing strategy to exploit racial distrust for political gain,'' Marc Morial, president of the National Urban League, and George Lambert, president of the Greater Washington Urban League President, said in a statement. If Trump really wanted to help cities, several mayors argued, he wouldn't be cutting funding for anti-poverty programs and community policing efforts. 'We need to have this federal government invest in cities like Oakland instead of disinvesting in us,' said Lee, who spent 27 years in Congress, including during Trump's first term. 'It doesn't make any sense what this government is doing if they want to see cities not just survive but thrive.' More: 'DC has a right to govern itself': Civil rights leaders denounce Trump's takeover move 'Reasonable people can look at the optics' Trump has yet to publicly bring up race in his criticisms of those cities, but experts point to his history of racially disparaging remarks, including during his first term when he questioned why the United States would let in people from countries like Haiti and parts of Africa, which he referred to using an expletive. Trump also called Baltimore, a predominately Black city, a 'disgusting, rat and rodent-infested mess.' While the president didn't specifically mention race then or in his recent references, it's clearly implied, said Jason Williams, a professor of Justice Studies at Montclair State University in New Jersey. Williams said urban centers historically have been code for talking about Black people or communities of color. 'He doesn't necessarily have to say it in order for his base to know what the implications are,' said Williams, adding that most people know DC has a significant Black population. 'It does give him some plausible deniability. Not that I think this president would care." Oakland's Lee told USA TODAY she finds Trump's actions "fearmongering and diversionary." "A lot of what he does is to provoke unrest and that gives him an excuse, so we have to be prepared and ready to fight," she said. Oakland has a contingency plan if Trump tries to send in National Guard, Lee added. When asked if she could provide any details, the mayor replied, 'I'm not at liberty to do that right now. That would be inappropriate at this point.' In DC, Trump justified his actions by citing a recent overnight assault of a former federal official and in Los Angeles, he called in the National Guard to quell civil protests spurred by the aggressive immigration crackdown. He might take advantage of other isolated incidents to target other big cities, said Insha Rahman, vice president of advocacy at the Vera Institute of Justice, a nonprofit organization focused on criminal justice. "It's the red meat that Trump uses to rile up the MAGA base and it is effective as bait only when it's left unchecked," Rahman said. 'We've been here before' Federal officials have sometimes used their powers to undermine Black urban leadership and portray them as chaotic and incompetent or crime prone, Williams said. He pointed to examples such as the urban renewal of the 1960s and 1970s when federal officials displaced Black neighborhoods with highways and a century earlier, after Reconstruction, when governments dismantled post-Civil War gains. 'We've been here before with federal overreach and an attempt to try to roll back hard-won wins," Williams said. The nation's capital has long been in the crosshairs of Trump and GOP congressional leaders. Earlier this year, Republican lawmakers threatened to withhold funds if Bowser didn't remove a Black Lives Matter mural from a street near the White House. 'DC has always been this sort of political football for the Republicans,' Williams said. While some Black mayors are concerned about their cities becoming a Trump target, they're continuing their work to combat crime, Johnson, the Savannah mayor, said. 'We're worried about fighting our federal government as well as fighting crime," he said. 'It's a continuous 'what if, what next,' which we think are distractions from what the American people are really talking about.' Johnson said the ideologies and approaches of some Black mayors may be different than Trump's, but that doesn't mean they can't be partners on issues, including crime. 'We understand elections. We're politicians ourselves," he said. 'We're charged with playing with whoever is on the field. When Donald Trump became president, he became president of our cities too.' Contributing: Phillip Bailey