Latest news with #foreignPolicy
Daily Telegraph
3 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Telegraph
What it would take for Putin to be fazed by Trump's threats
Don't miss out on the headlines from World. Followed categories will be added to My News. It's been six months since Donald Trump walked back into the Oval Office. This time, four years older, with a batch of felonies under his belt and a slew of shiny new promises. One of which was that he would quickly end Russia's three-year war with Ukraine – hopefully within 'six months'. The deadline was a backtrack from his highly touted campaign promise he would end the conflict in a mere 24 hours. But after hitting the half-yearly milestone this week, Mr Trump's ambitious plan has not panned out as he hoped, and his patience is seemingly wearing more and more thin with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Donald Trump initially said he would the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. Picture: Andrew Harnik/Getty 'Trump thinks because of the aid the United States supplies to Ukraine, he has leverage over Ukraine and because of his own personal relationship with Putin, he has leverage over Putin so he can get the two of them to come together to have a peace deal and that will cement his legacy,' Dr Charles Miller, a senior lecturer in the School of Politics and International Relations at the Australian National University, told 'So he ties this strategy, puts pressure on Ukraine, makes nice with Russia with the hope that Putin is going to stop at the point where he is at, accept the gains he's already made and end the war for a few years.' But as Mr Trump would soon learn, Mr Putin didn't follow the script. 'Putin more or less rejects any of the overtures that Trump has made to try and end the war … (Trump) has kind of put himself out for Putin and Putin's kind of rejected him,' Dr Miller said. It's been more than three years since Mr Putin announced a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Picture: Kristina Kormilitsyna/Pool/AFP 'A useful idiot' Even before returning to office in January, Mr Trump and Mr Putin had a complicated relationship, with the US President taking a relatively tough approach on Moscow during his first term and claims that Mr Putin had sought to help Mr Trump in the 2016 election later sparking a number of investigations - an issue which has recently been brought back into the spotlight. A 2021 US intelligence later stated Mr Putin had authorised a campaign to assist Mr Trump in the 2020 election - won by former President Joe Biden. Mr Trump also hasn't been shy about publicly praising Mr Putin over the years. He described Mr Putin as a 'big hero in Russia', defended him against accusations that he was a killer and called his move to declare two regions of eastern Ukraine as independent states 'genius'. While some have used the term 'bromance' to describe Mr Trump and Mr Putin's relationship, Dr Miller argues it is much more 'unequal'. While Mr Trump shows an 'admiration' for Mr Putin, he believes the Russian leader views Mr Trump with more 'amusement and bemusement'. 'There's a sense that perhaps he has himself a useful idiot, basically. So I don't think there's very much in the way of admiration,' Dr Miller said. '(Trump's) the kind of person that you don't really get so much in Russia. He's a very American kind of character. He's very individualistic, flamboyant, almost camp in a certain sense, and that's just not the kind of person that you really find in Russian culture. 'So, I think he's kind of baffled him … I don't think that he really admires him or respects him to any great degree.' Mr Trump and Mr Putin's dynamic is 'unequal', Dr Miller says. Picture: Saul Loeb/AFP Others have also pointed out the relationship imbalance, with John Bolton, who served as the national security adviser to Mr Trump from 2018-2019, saying Mr Putin sees Mr Trump as an 'easy mark'. 'Trump thinks Putin is his friend. He trusts Putin,' Mr Bolton told the Kyiv Independent newspaper in March. 'As a former KGB agent, Putin knows exactly how to manipulate him, and I think that's what he's been doing since the inauguration, if not before.' Trump's recent shift towards Putin After Mr Trump's inauguration, the President said he shared a rare 90-minute phone call with Mr Putin in February to discuss a possible ceasefire in Ukraine. It was the first confirmed direct conversation between Mr Putin and a sitting US President in two years. 'We both agreed, we want to stop the millions of deaths taking place in the War with Russia/Ukraine,' Mr Trump posted to Truth Social at the time. 'President Putin even used my very strong Campaign motto of, 'COMMON SENSE.' We both believe very strongly in it. We agreed to work together, very closely, including visiting each other's nations.' Mr Putin sees Mr Trump as an 'easy mark', commentators say. Picture: Mikhail Metzel, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo/AP Later that month, things looked more favourable for Russia when Mr Trump sensationally clashed with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in a heated Oval Office row – an interaction former US Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul called a 'gift to Vladimir Putin'. 'That is not in our national interest to be on that side,' he toldNBC News. But by March, Mr Trump was singing a different tune, telling NBC News he was 'p***ed off' with Mr Putin when he criticised the credibility of Mr Zelensky's leadership. 'I was very angry – p***ed off – when Putin started getting into Zelensky's credibility, because that's not going in the right location, you understand?' Mr Trump said. 'But new leadership means you're not gonna have a deal for a long time, right?' Mr Trump and Mr Zelensky clashed in the Oval Office of the White House on February 28. Picture: Saul Loeb/AFP But Dr Miller said the real shift in actions towards Russia has taken place in 'the past couple of weeks' – during which time Mr Trump has also stepped up rhetoric against the Russian leader, saying 'I don't want to say he's an assassin, but he's a tough guy' and declaring the US 'get a lot of bulls**t thrown at us by Putin' among other remarks. Dr Miller said one sign of the shift was the White House's announcement on July 1, US time, that it had stopped the shipment of some air defence and precision-guided weapons that were on track to be sent to Ukraine – a decision that was reversed days later. 'This was interpreted as being obviously something that's very damaging and an intention towards Ukraine and it absolutely was but then we saw a reversal of that policy,' he said. The following week, Mr Trump said he was 'very, very unhappy' with Mr Putin and warned Russia it would face massive new economic sanctions if it did not end the war within 50 days. 'We're going to be doing very severe tariffs if we don't have a deal in 50 days, tariffs at about 100 per cent,' Mr Trump said during an Oval Office meeting with with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte on July 14. He further threatened 'secondary tariffs' targeting Russia's remaining trade partners and announced a deal whereby the US would send 'top of the line weapons' to NATO to support Ukraine. Reacting to the news, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov initially told reporters 'the US president's words are very serious' and said Russia needed time to 'analyse what was said in Washington'. But former President Dmitry Medvedev, now deputy chair of Russia's Security Council, simply brushed off the threats. 'Trump set a theatrical ultimatum to the Kremlin. The world trembled in anticipation of the consequences, Europe was disappointed – and Russia doesn't care,' he wrote in a statement on X. Meanwhile, senior Russian diplomat Sergei Ryabkov warned 'any attempts to make demands, especially ultimatums, are unacceptable to us'. 'If we cannot achieve our goals through diplomacy, then the SVO (war in Ukraine) will continue … This is an unshakeable position,' he said. Russia 'doesn't care' about Mr Trump's threats, former President Dmitry Medvedev said. Picture Brendan Smialowski/AFP Dr Miller also isn't confident Mr Trump's threat was enough to pressure Mr Putin, suggesting 'it's quite possible Putin has considered that he's just bluffing'. 'The problem that Trump has is that if he's going around threatening people with tariffs and then giving them a deadline and then not doing anything and then reversing the tariffs and changing his mind, he makes it really really difficult for anybody to really take him seriously.' Instead, he said it will be pressure on the battlefield rather than Mr Trump's ever-changing threats that could prompt Russia to make a deal with Ukraine. What it would take to actually faze Putin? Dr Miller said Mr Trump would have to follow up his words with 'more serious action' such as secondary sanctions or send more aid to Ukraine, for there to be a 'reason for Putin to genuinely be fazed' by the US President. 'There have been many times when Trump has appeared to shift against Putin and then not do something … I think that the key thing to look out for is not necessarily what Trump says but what Trump does,' he said. Dr Miller said if Mr Trump followed through with his threat of secondary tariffs, it would be 'very damaging' for Russia. 'If you were a Chinese company, then you're basically faced with a choice to either do business with the United States or with Russia. In that kind, of situation, I think most Chinese companies would choose to do it with the United States and cut Russia off because it is simply not as lucrative as a market. So that would hurt Russia.' Dr Miller said if Mr Trump followed through with his threat of secondary tariffs it would be 'very damaging' for Russia. Picture: Andrew Harnik/Getty He said a change in Mr Trump's administration, such as the replacement of the Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard – who has alleged former President Barack Obama created a false assessment of Russia's role in the 2016 election – would also be a clear sign of a change in Mr Trump's focus. 'I think that's a big sign especially if she's replaced by a more conventional Republican figure. Also if there are other people from the prior Trump administration who come back in who are more conventional Republicans,' Dr Miller said. He added it's possible Mr Trump could turn on Mr Putin – even if he did still admire him. 'When your think about the people that Trump has been involved with over the course of his life, there's a great pattern of instability in his personal relationships … he's had close business partners and close political friends that he then chucks out. 'So the idea that he could turn on Putin eventually for some reason is not implausible at all.' As for Mr Trump's big campaign promise to end the war, Dr Miller said it's possible Russia and Ukraine will reach a ceasefire before the next US election in 2028, but that doesn't mean Mr Trump will be the one behind it. 'There are plenty of other countries that could, Turkey, for example, could mediate the ceasefire. Already both of those countries are talking to Turkey, they've met in Istanbul. 'So, maybe it will ultimately be (President Recep Tayyip) Erdogan rather than Trump who gets the credit for ending the war between Russia and Ukraine.' Originally published as Expert reveals what it would take for Putin to be fazed by Trump's threats
News.com.au
3 days ago
- Politics
- News.com.au
Expert reveals what it would take for Putin to be fazed by Trump's threats
It's been six months since Donald Trump walked back into the Oval Office. This time, four years older, with a batch of felonies under his belt and a slew of shiny new promises. One of which was that he would quickly end Russia's three-year war in Ukraine – hopefully within 'six months'. The deadline was a backtrack from his highly touted campaign promise he would end the three year conflict in a mere 24 hours. But after hitting the half-yearly milestone this week, Mr Trump's ambitious plan has not panned out as he hoped, and his patience is seemingly wearing more and more thin with Russian President Vladimir Putin. 'Trump thinks because of the aid the United States supplies to Ukraine, he has leverage over Ukraine and because of his own personal relationship with Putin, he has leverage over Putin so he can get the two of them to come together to have a peace deal and that will cement his legacy,' Dr Charles Miller, a senior lecturer in the School of Politics and International Relations at the Australian National University, told 'So he ties this strategy, puts pressure on Ukraine, makes nice with Russia with the hope that Putin is going to stop at the point where he is at, accept the gains he's already made and end the war for a few years.' But as Mr Trump would soon learn, Mr Putin didn't follow the script. 'Putin more or less rejects any of the overtures that Trump has made to try and end the war … (Trump) has kind of put himself out for Putin and Putin's kind of rejected him,' Dr Miller said. 'A useful idiot' Even before returning to office in January, Mr Trump and Mr Putin had a complicated relationship, with the US President taking a relatively tough approach on Moscow during his first term and claims that Mr Putin had sought to help Mr Trump in the 2016 election later prompting a number of investigations - an issue which has recently been brought back into the spotlight A 2021 US intelligence also stated Mr Putin had authorised a campaign to assist Mr Trump in the 2020 election. Mr Trump also hasn't been shy about publicly praising Mr Putin over the years. He described Mr Putin as a ' big hero in Russia ', defended him against accusations that he was a killer and called his move to declare two regions of eastern Ukraine as independent states 'genius'. While some have used the term 'bromance' to describe Mr Trump and Mr Putin's dynamic, Dr Miller argues it is much more 'unequal'. While Mr Trump shows an 'admiration' for Mr Putin, he believes the Russian leader views Mr Trump with more 'amusement and bemusement'. 'There's a sense that perhaps he has himself a useful idiot, basically. So I don't think there's very much in the way of admiration,' Dr Miller said. '(Trump's) the kind of person that you don't really get so much in Russia. He's a very American kind of character. He's very individualistic, flamboyant, almost camp in a certain sense, and that's just not the kind of person that you really find in Russian culture. 'So, I think he's kind of baffled him … I don't think that he really admires him or respects him to any great degree.' Others have also pointed out the relationship imbalance, with John Bolton, who served as the national security adviser to Mr Trump from 2018-2019, saying Mr Putin sees Mr Trump as an 'easy mark'. 'Trump thinks Putin is his friend. He trusts Putin,' Mr Bolton told the Kyiv Independent newspaper in March. 'As a former KGB agent, Putin knows exactly how to manipulate him, and I think that's what he's been doing since the inauguration, if not before.' Trump's recent shift towards Putin Shortly after Mr Trump's inauguration, the President shared a rare 90-minute phone call with Mr Putin to discuss a possible ceasefire in Ukraine. It was the first known direct conversation between the pair in two years. 'We both agreed, we want to stop the millions of deaths taking place in the War with Russia/Ukraine,' Mr Trump posted to Truth Social at the time. 'President Putin even used my very strong Campaign motto of, 'COMMON SENSE.' We both believe very strongly in it. We agreed to work together, very closely, including visiting each other's nations.' The following month, things looked more favourable for Russia when Mr Trump sensationally clashed with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in a heated Oval Office row – an interaction former US Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul called a 'gift to Vladimir Putin'. 'That is not in our national interest to be on that side,' he told NBC News. But by March, Mr Trump was singing a different tune, telling NBC News he was 'p***ed off' with Mr Putin when he criticised the credibility of Mr Zelensky's leadership. 'I was very angry – p***ed off – when Putin started getting into Zelensky's credibility, because that's not going in the right location, you understand?' Mr Trump said. 'But new leadership means you're not gonna have a deal for a long time, right?' But Dr Miller said the real shift in actions towards Russia has taken place in 'the past couple of weeks' – during which time Mr Trump has also stepped up rhetoric against the Russian leader, saying 'I don't want to say he's an assassin, but he's a tough guy' and declaring the US 'get a lot of bulls**t thrown at us by Putin'. Dr Miller said one sign of the shift was the White House's announcement on July 1, US time, that it had stopped the shipment of some air defence and precision-guided weapons that were on track to be sent to Ukraine – a decision that was reversed days later. 'This was interpreted as being obviously something that's very damaging and an intention towards Ukraine and it absolutely was but then we saw a reversal of that policy,' he said. The following week, Mr Trump said he was said he was 'very, very unhappy' with Mr Putin and warned Russia it would face massive new economic sanctions if it did not end the war within 50 days. 'We're going to be doing very severe tariffs if we don't have a deal in 50 days, tariffs at about 100 per cent,' Mr Trump said during an Oval Office meeting. He further threatened 'secondary tariffs' targeting Russia's remaining trade partners and announced a deal whereby the US would send 'top of the line weapons' to NATO to support Ukraine. Reacting to the news, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov initially told reporters 'the US president's words are very serious' and said Russia needed time to 'analyse what was said in Washington'. But former President Dmitry Medvedev, now deputy chair of Russia's Security Council, simply brushed off the threats. 'Trump set a theatrical ultimatum to the Kremlin. The world trembled in anticipation of the consequences, Europe was disappointed – and Russia doesn't care,' he wrote in a statement on X. Meanwhile, senior Russian diplomat Sergei Ryabkov warned 'any attempts to make demands, especially ultimatums, are unacceptable to us'. 'If we cannot achieve our goals through diplomacy, then the SVO (war in Ukraine) will continue … This is an unshakeable position,' he said. Dr Miller also isn't confident Mr Trump's threat was enough to pressure Mr Putin, suggesting 'it's quite possible Putin has considered that he's just bluffing'. 'The problem that Trump has is that if he's going around threatening people with tariffs and then giving them a deadline and then not doing anything and then reversing the tariffs and changing his mind, he makes it really really difficult for anybody to really take him seriously.' Instead, he said it will be pressure on the battlefield rather than Mr Trump's ever-changing threats that could prompt Russia to make a deal with Ukraine. What it would take to actually faze Putin? Dr Miller said that until Mr Trump follows up his words with 'more serious action' such as secondary sanctions or sends more aid to Ukraine, then there would be a 'reason for Putin to genuinely be fazed' by Mr Trump. 'There have been many times when Trump has appeared to shift against Putin and then not do something … I think that the key thing to look out for is not necessarily what Trump says but what Trump does,' he said. Dr Miller said if Mr Trump followed through with his threat of secondary tariffs, it would be 'very damaging' for Russia. 'If you were a Chinese company, then you're basically faced with a choice to either do business with the United States or with Russia. In that kind, of situation, I think most Chinese companies would choose to do it with the United States and cut Russia off because it is simply not as lucrative as a market. So that would hurt Russia.' He said a change in Mr Trump's administration, such as the replacement of the Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard – who has alleged former President Barack Obama created a false assessment of Russia's role in the 2016 election – would also be a clear sign of a change in Mr Trump's focus. 'I think that's a big sign especially if she's replaced by a more conventional Republican figure. Also if there are other people from the prior Trump administration who come back in who are more conventional Republicans,' Dr Miller said. He added it's possible Mr Trump could turn on Mr Putin – even if he did still admire him. 'When your think about the people that Trump has been involved with over the course of his life, there's a great pattern of instability in his personal relationships … he's had close business partners and close political friends that he then chucks out. 'So the idea that he could turn on Putin eventually for some reason is not implausible at all.' As for his big campaign promise to end the war, Dr Miller said it's possible Russia and Ukraine will reach a ceasefire before the next US election in 2028, but that doesn't mean Mr Trump will be the one behind it. 'There are plenty of other countries that could, Turkey, for example, could mediate the ceasefire. Already both of those countries are talking to Turkey, they've met in Istanbul. 'So, maybe it will ultimately be (President Recep Tayyip) Erdogan rather than Trump who gets the credit for ending the war between Russia and Ukraine.'
Al Jazeera
20-07-2025
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
Japan votes in election seen as key test for Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba
Voters in Japan are going to the polls in an upper house election seen as a test of the popularity of Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and his ruling coalition. Polling stations opened nationwide at 7am on Sunday (22:00 GMT, Saturday) and will continue until 8pm (11:00 GMT) in most places, according to Japan's national broadcaster, NHK. The rising cost of living, especially for the staple food of rice, is a key issue for many voters, with population decline and foreign policy also on the agenda, according to NHK. Opinion polls suggest Ishiba's Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and coalition partner Komeito may fall short of the 50 seats needed to retain control of the 248-seat upper house of parliament in an election where half of the seats are up for grabs. A poor performance on Sunday would not immediately trigger a change of government because the upper house lacks the power to file a no-confidence motion against a leader, but it would certainly deepen uncertainty over Ishiba's fate and Japan's political stability. Ishiba would face calls from within the LDP to resign or to find another coalition partner. Opinion polls also suggest smaller opposition parties pushing for tax cuts and increased public spending are set to gain. These parties include right-wing Sanseito, which is promising to curb immigration, oppose foreign capital inflows and reverse gender equality moves. 'I am attending graduate school, but there are no Japanese [people] around me. All of them are foreigners,' said Yu Nagai, a 25-year-old student who said he voted for Sanseito. 'When I look at the way compensation and money are spent on foreigners, I think that Japanese people are a bit disrespected,' Nagai told the Reuters news agency. Other voters, meanwhile, voiced concern about escalating xenophobia. Yuko Tsuji, a 43-year-old consultant, who came to a polling station inside a downtown Tokyo gymnasium with her husband, said they support the LDP for stability and unity and voted 'for candidates who won't fuel division.' 'If the ruling party doesn't govern properly, the conservative base will drift toward extremes. So I voted with the hope that the ruling party would tighten things up,' she told The Associated Press news agency. Self-employed Daiichi Nasu, 57, said he hopes for a change towards a more inclusive and diverse society, with more open immigration and gender policies such as allowing married couples to keep separate surnames. 'That's why I voted for the CDPJ,' he said, referring to the opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan. 'I want to see progress on those fronts.' More than 20 percent of registered voters, some 21 million people, voted early, significantly more than three years ago, NHK reported. Ishiba, 68, a self-avowed defence 'geek' and train enthusiast, became prime minister on his fifth attempt last September before immediately calling snap elections for late October. Those polls marked a significant defeat for the new prime minister's ruling coalition, which won just 209 seats in the lower house of parliament, down from the 279 it previously held. In April, Ishiba announced emergency economic measures to alleviate any impact on industries and households affected by new tariffs imposed by the United States on Japanese exports. The country is still frantically seeking to secure a reprieve from US President Donald Trump's proposed 25 percent tariffs before a new August 1 deadline touted by Washington. Ishiba's centre-right LDP has governed Japan almost continuously since 1955, albeit with frequent changes of leader. He is the third prime minister to lead the country since former leader Shinzo Abe resigned in September 2020. Abe was assassinated two years later, leading to revelations and public outrage about ties between the former prime minister, his LDP and the Unification Church.
Yahoo
18-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Memo on protesters cautioned that authority used to strip visas would face scrutiny
Action memos on pro-Palestinian protesters sent by government officials to Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the authority he used to strip their visas had never before been used and would likely face scrutiny, a government official testified in court Friday. Rubio used what the government says is his authority to find someone deportable "if the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe that the alien's presence or activities in the United States would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States," citing the Immigration and Nationality Act. A section of a government memo that was read in court noted "it is likely that courts will closely scrutinize this determination" because the basis of it could be considered "protected speech." MORE: DHS investigated over 5,000 student protesters listed on doxxing website: Official The contents of the memo were revealed during an ongoing bench trial in which the Trump administration is accused of instituting a constitutionally illegal ideological deportation policy against pro-Palestinian protesters, including Columbia University's Mahmoud Khalil and Mohsen Mahdawi and Tufts University's Rumeysa Ozturk. The lawsuit was filed by the American Association of University Professors and the Middle East Studies Association, which represents hundreds of professors and students across the country. An action memo sent by government officials to the secretary of state proposing Rubio strip Khalil and Yunseo Chung of their visas was cleared by 10 people and departments within 24 hours before it was sent to Rubio, John Armstrong, the senior bureau official in the bureau of consular affairs at the State Department, testified Friday. The White House, Department of Homeland Security, State Department and Department of Defense had over 20 conversations about student protester visa revocations, most of which took place in March, Armstrong testified. Armstrong also testified that he had conversations with people on the Homeland Security Council over the visa revocations, naming Homeland Security Adviser Stephen Miller and his deputy. In a two-page memo from earlier this year outlining why Khalil should be deported, Rubio cited Khalil's alleged role in "antisemitic protests and disruptive activities, which fosters a hostile environment for Jewish students in the United States." Asked about how officials identify what constitutes antisemitism, Armstrong testified Friday that he can't remember receiving "any concrete guidance" as to what can be treated as antisemitic, and also testified that he doesn't know of any of his deputies having received formalized training on what antisemitism is. It's my understanding that "antisemites will try to hide their views and say they are not against Jews, they are just against Israel" -- but "it's a dodge" to hide their antisemitism, Armstrong said. Support for a foreign terrorist organization or terrorist activity is grounds for a visa revocation, Armstrong testified, saying, "Support for Hamas will get your visa revoked." Asked by plaintiffs attorneys, Armstrong also testified that criticizing Zionism, criticizing Israel's actions in Gaza, saying that the actions of the Israeli government are "worse than Hitler," saying "from the river to the sea," calling Israel an apartheid state and calling for an arms embargo could all be considered cause for removal under the executive order combatting antisemitism. MORE: Mahmoud Khalil case: Ordered to show evidence, government asserts Rubio's authority Armstrong, who personally authorized the decision to strip Ozturk of her visa, testified that he based the decision on her actions protesting Tufts' relationship with Israel and her "activities and association" with groups that are "creating a hostile environment for Jewish students." That alleged association was based on an op-ed she co-authored with someone who is part of a student group that supported the call for Tufts to divest and cut ties with Israel -- a proposal that was made by Tufts Students for Justice in Palestine, a group which is now banned from campus. DHS and Homeland Security Investigations found that Ozturk was not part of the activities that resulted in Tufts SJP's ban from Tufts, according to documents read aloud in court by attorneys. Nonetheless, Armstrong maintained that Ozturk had ties to Tufts SJP. Ozturk's visa was revoked under a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act that allows the government to revoke a visa for any reason, Armstrong testified. On Thursday, Andre Watson, the assistant director for the national security division at Homeland Security, testified that he has made 10 to 15 referrals of student protesters to the Department of State for possible visa revocation since the establishment of the Tiger Team task force looking into student protesters. He said he referred every individual on whom the Homeland Security Investigations task force has filed a report, including Khalil, Ozturk and Mahdawi. After the conclusion of testimony on Thursday, U.S. District Judge William Young informed the parties of definitions he will be relying on while making a decision after the conclusion of the bench trial. "Criticisms of the state of Israel are not antisemitism. They are political speech, protected speech," Young said. Commentary on "conduct of the state of Israel, if it involves war crimes, involves genocide ... is protected speech with respect to our constitution," Young said. While condemning antisemitism and saying the government should discourage antisemitism and hate against any group of people, he said, "Antisemitism ... is not illegal. It is protected under the First Amendment." MORE: Trial challenging administration's deportation of pro-Palestinian scholars gets underway On the pivotal question of whether visa holders and lawful permanent residents have the same First Amendment rights as U.S. citizens, the judge said, "Probably they do." Young also said criticizing the state of Israel "does not constitute pro-Hamas support." After new evidence is entered on Monday, closing arguments will begin in the trial.
Yahoo
08-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Donald Trump Was Asked About A Key Promise. What Followed Was Pure Gibberish.
Donald Trump was asked by a reporter on Monday to explain what had happened to his administration's promise to seal '90 trade deals in 90 days.' Instead of outlining the dozens of deals with foreign countries that he previously boasted would be completed by Wednesday — the 90-day mark since his so-called April 'Liberation Day' — the president just waffled, talked about a couple of frameworks and possible deals in place and then appeared to suggest his plan now mainly involved sending letters to foreign governments and telling them the tariffs that their products will now be subjected to, when they are imported into America. Watch here: Here is Trump's response in full: 'Oh, we've spoken to everybody. We know every. It's all done. I told you. I told you we'll make some deals, but for the most part we're gonna send a letter. We're gonna saying, 'Welcome to the United States. If you'd like to participate in the greatest, most successful country ever.' I mean, we're doing better than ever. We have. I don't think. And you're gonna see these numbers soon. We've never had numbers like this. We've never had investment like this. Uh, we have more than 90. We're gonna have much more than 90. But most of those are gonna be sent a letter. This is exactly what I said. Now, we've made a deal with United Kingdom. We've made a deal with China. We've made a deal. We're close to making a deal with India. Others, we've met with, and we don't think we're gonna be able to make a deal. So, we just send them a letter. 'Do you wanna, do you wanna play ball? This is what you have to pay.' So, we're, as far as I'm concerned, we're done. We're sending out letters to various countries, telling them how much tariffs they have to pay. Some will maybe adjust a little bit depending if they have a, you know, cause. We're not gonna be unfair about it. And actually, it's a small fraction compared to what we should be getting. We should be. We could be asking for much more. But for the sake of relationships that we've had with a lot of really good countries, we're doing the way I do it. But we could be getting a lot more. We could ask for a lot more than what we're asking for.' Critics were puzzled: This Statue Of Liberty Street Art Made MAGA Mad — And The Artist Is Unrepentant Trump Just Launched His Own TV Streaming Platform. Seriously. Trump Admits He Misses Sports Team's Old, Racist Name CNN Data Chief 'Never Thought I'd See' This Stunning Shift In Sentiment
