The Dictatorship
The real reason Trump’s so publicly frustrated with Putin
President Donald Trump is reportedly frustrated with Russian leader Vladimir Putin over the Ukraine war and is considering new sanctions and indirect military support via sales to NATO countries. But in his half year back in office, U.S. policy, on balance, has still shifted in an anti-Ukraine, anti-democracy, anti-NATO, pro-authoritarian, Russia-favorable direction.
“We get a lot of bulls— thrown at us by Putin,” Trump told reporters at a White House meeting. “He’s very nice to us all the time, but it turns out to be meaningless.”
But that’s always been the case. Ukraine supporters have said so since the beginning (it’s part of why they chose to support Ukraine).
So Trump is frustrated, but with what?
When Putin ordered that over three years ago, Trump gushed that it was “savvy” and “genius.”
Not that Russia aggressively invaded Ukraine. When Putin ordered that over three years ago, Trump gushed that it was “savvy” and “genius.” He has never denounced Russia’s attack as aggressive, illegal or wrong, nor expressed support for independence and sovereignty on principle. If anything, it’s been the opposite, as he threatens U.S. allies and partnerssaying he’ll take Greenland from Denmark or the canal from Panama, both in violation of signed treaties.
Nor is Trump frustrated that Russia frequently fires at civilian targets. Trump sometimes laments the war’s destructiveness, but always generically, without blaming Russia, like how people talk about natural disasters. To cite a recent example, Trump unspecifically said, “So many people are dying in that mess.” At a meeting in February at the White House with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Trump and Vice President JD Vance echoed Russian propagandablaming Ukraine for the war and denigrating Zelenskyy’s efforts to highlight Ukrainians’ suffering.
If Trump actually cared about Russia killing civilians, he never would have blocked aid for air defense. When he was asked at the news conference where he expressed frustration with Putin who ordered the pause, Trump said, “I don’t know. Why don’t you tell me.”
Support for Ukraine later resumed (for now), though that too seems primarily geared toward managing Trump’s image. His primary complaint is that Putin hasn’t dealt fairly with him, not that Russia’s war is illegitimate.
Most likely, what’s frustrating Trump is that events aren’t following his reality TV script, or Russia-sympathetic conspiracy theories. He promised he’d end the war on his first day back in office, using pressure on the Ukrainians and his personal rapport with Putin to stop the fighting, and get himself a Nobel Peace Prize. Now that self-aggrandizing fantasy is crashing into reality.
Trump put Putin above U.S. national interests, and Putin hasn’t returned the favor. Instead of prioritizing Trump’s image-crafting, Putin keeps prioritizing Russia’s national power. Putin wouldn’t even need to do much — he could just say this was all Joe Biden’s fault and give Trump something flimsy he can call a deal — but Putin won’t do even that. If anything, Putin seems to enjoy these displays of dominance, toying with Trump rather than giving him a fig leaf.
It may have finally been too much. Trump reportedly will authorize increased weapons sales to NATO countriesknowing they’re bound for Ukraine. If he follows through, it will improve Ukraine’s position, though even in that positive scenario it won’t undo the damage from six months of farcical negotiations.
At the end of May, Trump expressed frustration that talks hadn’t produced a deal and told reporters he might impose new sanctions on Russia. Then he didn’t, supposedly because doing so would hinder negotiations. But he had already eased sanctions enforcementreducing leverage over Russia before talks even began.
Congress is considering a new sanctions package, but Republicans won’t do it without Trump’s approval. Even if they pass it, enforcement could be lax and haphazard, and subject to the president’s moods.
Cultivating the president’s image is a different goal than ending the war.
Cultivating the president’s image is a different goal than ending the war. All it needs is something Trump can market as peace in the short term. In that way it’s similar to Trump’s trade wars, seeking to tout “deals” that the president “won,” rather than advance U.S. national interests.
Trump could impose economic penalties on Russia — currently one of the few countries exempt from his so-called reciprocal tariffs — but it will take work just to get back to the level of the pressure under Biden. In the short term, announcing more military sales to Europe might get Trump a diplomatic reaction, but won’t alter Russia’s core position, and, even with follow-through, will take time to impact conditions on the ground.
Occasionally pausing and overall reducing U.S. military aid to Ukraine made Russia less likely to negotiate, since battlefield gains improve their position in talks. That’s true even when some aid resumes, because the delays hinder Ukraine’s ability to fight, and make Russia think Ukraine will be weaker in the future. The only way to send a different message would be a big increase and credibly returning the American posture to unambiguously pro-Ukraine, with unqualified opposition to Russian aggression.
The fundamental truth of the Ukraine war today is the same it’s been since the beginning, no matter how many times Trump and others have denied it.
Putin attacked without provocation, for national and personal aggrandizement. He could stop it at any time, but chooses not to. That’s because he doesn’t want peacehe wants to dominate Ukraine, and thinks the death and destruction he’s causing is worth it.
Ukrainians, quite reasonably, don’t want to bow down to a foreign tyrant. They weren’t somehow tricked or forced into resisting Russia’s invasion — they chose to fight for their freedom.
That leaves only two possible paths to end the war:
1. Russia defeats the Ukrainian military, dismantles the Zelenskyy government and crushes Ukrainian independence.
2. Russia stops trying to conquer Ukraine, whether from a collapse of the war effort or deciding it’s no longer worth the cost, and either withdraws unilaterally or makes enough concessions that Ukraine takes a deal.
Only the second is a just peace with a chance of lasting, rather than another temporary pause in Russian aggression, during which they reconsolidate forces before attacking again.
But changing Russia’s calculus is hard. It’ll take time and sacrifice. It will bother Putin fans in Trump’s coalition, who genuinely want Russia to win because they see it as a culture war champion. It requires admitting that the Biden administration and America’s NATO allies got this one right from the start. And none of that is primarily about putting on a show to glorify Donald Trump.
So you can see why he’s frustrated.
If we see a sustained net increase in American weapons shipments and intelligence sharing with Ukraine, stepped up economic pressure on Russia, and real, sustained solidarity with NATO and democratic Europeonly then will it be true that Trump has changed his Putin-sympathetic position.
But to get a real peace deal, U.S. pressure must be high and sustained enough that Putin comes to believe he’ll get more by compromising most of his war aims than by continuing to attack while playing on Trump’s combination of incompetence and susceptibility to manipulation. Given Trump’s long record with Putin, that’s a tough sell.
Nicholas Grossman is a political science professor at the University of Illinois, editor of Arc Digital and the author of “Drones and Terrorism.”
The Senate Judiciary Committee postponed a vote on acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s nomination, a spokesperson said late Wednesday, as two retiring Republicans on the panel dug in over President Donald Trump’s personal “anti-weaponization” deal with the government he runs.
Sen. Chuck Grassley’s decision to delay the committee vote that had been set for Thursday marks a setback for one of Trump’s highest-profile Cabinet nominees, at the hands of Texas Sen. John Cornyn and Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, a pair of Republicans set to leave the chamber next year.
“Chairman Grassley works to set President Trump’s nominees up for success in committee, not failure. Senators Cornyn and Tillis want written assurances from the Department of Justice regarding the Trump-IRS settlement,” the committee spokesperson said.
Blanche’s nomination to permanently head the Department of Justice needs the support of either Cornyn or Tillis to make it out of the committee to a vote by the full Senate, assuming all Democrats remain opposed.
“Why don’t you call over the Department of Justice and tell them they have one hour and 50 minutes to get me what I asked for,” Cornyn told reporters Wednesday afternoon amid the hardening standoff over his demand that Blanche and the DOJ put in writing a commitment never to pursue the president’s prized “anti-weaponization” fund, and to clarify the terms of Trump’s personal deal with the Internal Revenue Service.
Tillis told MS NOW that the conversations were complicated by the need for the Justice Department to get “several parties” to agree on the language of the statement Cornyn and Tillis are seeking.
“What I’ve advised the chair, and I would assume Senator Cornyn said something similar, is that we’re not prepared to vote yes yet,” he added.
“The Department has been in regular communication with Committee members for weeks, and we look forward to continuing to work productively with Senators to address any concerns,” a Justice Department spokesperson said in response to the decision to postpone the committee vote.
Cornyn was set to meet with Blanche on Wednesday morning, but the meeting was called off after Blanche failed to meet the senator’s demand for written proposals to modify the controversial settlement agreement he brokered between Trump and the IRS. The Republican senator is set to leave Congress when his term ends in January after a bruising May primary loss to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, Trump’s chosen candidate.
“Maybe John Cornyn’s upset with me because I didn’t endorse him,” Trump told reporters Wednesday afternoon in the Oval Office. “I don’t know what it is, but I haven’t heard that there’s a problem. I heard (Blanche) is going through quite nicely.”
Cornyn made clear to Blanche during his confirmation hearing that he will not get his support until he agrees to reopen and modify the settlement. Due to the committee’s narrow Republican majority, one GOP “no” vote is enough to sink Blanche’s nomination.
The senator has asked Blanche to provide proof that the proposed nearly $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund established as part of the deal between Trump and the IRS is formally dead, and he has also demanded Blanche narrow the tax audit immunity provisions the settlement afforded to Trump and his family.
Blanche has publicly stated that his department has dropped the fund, but he and the DOJ have dodged requests from Cornyn and a federal judge to put that in writing.
After announcing his meeting with Blanche would not take place Wednesday morning, Cornyn told reporters that changes from Blanche “in a modified release form” would be acceptable, but that “for some reason … they simply refuse to do it,” referring to the DOJ.
Shortly after the meeting was called off, a Justice Department official told MS NOW that the department “provided a written proposal to Senator Cornyn’s staff yesterday following ongoing discussion with both the Committee and the Senator’s office.”
Cornyn said that proposal was “not responsive” to his demands because it did not address the tax audit immunity provisions in the settlement, one of his key demands.
In May, Blanche signed an addendum as part of the deal that granted Trump, his family and his businesses immunity from pending IRS tax audits. That agreement, which has been decried by former IRS officials and legal experts as unlawful self-dealing, is being contested in federal court.
Cornyn noted that Blanche testified under oath that he could meet the request during his confirmation hearing.
“Maybe they think I’m just going to give up or you know, go along, but they’re mistaken,” Cornyn said when asked why he thinks the DOJ could be slow-walking his request.
Kevin Frey contributed to this report.
Sydney Carruth is a breaking news reporter covering national politics and policy for MS NOW. You can send her tips from a non-work device on Signal at SydneyCarruth.46 or follow her work on X and Bluesky.
Mychael Schnell is a reporter for MS NOW.
Ebony Davis is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked at BLN as a campaign reporter covering elections and politics.
When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrived this week for his tour of Washington, he may have had a mission in mind.
Netanyahu needed to overcome his newly diminished stature and waning influence over his once close friend President Donald Trump as both leaders grapple with the unpopularity of a war they started together and is escaping their control.
His meeting at the White House with Trump on Tuesday, which was closed to the press, was the first face-to-face encounter between the two allies since the U.S. and Israel launched a joint attack against Iran on Feb. 28.
Trump gave him a muted welcome and afterwards simply described the meeting as “very good.” “Obviously, many important subjects were discussed,” the president wrote on Truth Social.
Rather than an intimate one-on-one setting, the Oval Office was full of top U.S. officials — Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine, and special envoy Steve Witkoff.
But Netanyahu continued the full court press on the Trump administration.
Over the course of two days, in addition to seeing Trump and attending Sen. Lindsey Graham’s funeral at the Capitol, Netanyahu also met separately with Vance, Hegseth, and Rubio, White House and Israeli officials confirmed to MS NOW.
The Israeli prime minister’s slate of meetings with key U.S. national security officials comes at a pivotal moment in the Iran conflict as tensions escalate in the region and Americans increasingly sour on the war. A recent Quinnipiac poll shows 60% of American voters opposing U.S. military action against Iran and 74% against sending U.S. ground troops into Iran.
Not only does Trump face pressure as Republicans face an uphill battle to retain congressional control in this fall’s midterms, Netanyahu’s fate as prime minister is at stake in Israel’s upcoming September elections – and he can’t afford to lose Trump’s favor.
The talks largely focused on what to do next as Iran continues to menace shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and retaliate against American bases in the region and launch attacks on Gulf allies.
According to a senior Israeli official who was granted anonymity to describe the closed-door meeting, President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu did not come to a final decision after discussing three paths forward: get a “good deal” focused on Iran’s nuclear program and enriched material, have no deal and instead continue the blockade and economic pressure, or take escalated military action.
But Netanyahu did not tell Trump what he should do – nor did he express a preference.
The senior Israeli official noted Netanyahu has not ruled out diplomacy – as long as it is coupled with “very strong pressures,” calling the push to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program “a contest of will and a contest of force.”
“There are ways of squeezing them and squeezing them and squeezing them and negotiating at the same time,” the official said.
Netanyahu did not present President Trump with new intelligence regarding the underground Iranian nuclear facility Pickaxe Mountain, per the senior Israeli official, noting the U.S. and Israel already are constantly sharing intelligence – and know where Iran’s highly enriched material is. “We don’t think it’s moved, and I think we have a pretty good grasp on that,” the official said.
During their meeting on Tuesday, Trump and Netanyahu discussed ways Israel and the U.S. can work together to stop Iran’s nuclear program and get the Strait of Hormuz open to maritime trade, the senior Israeli official said.
The two leaders also discussed a third goal: to continue to undermine the Iranian regime and “possibly create future conditions for a change in that area.” U.S. officials have backed away from pursuing paths that would overthrow the current leadership, but Netanyahu still believes that could happen.
“The chasm that has been created between the people and the regime is not about to be closed,” the senior Israeli official said of Netanyahu’s thinking.
Netanyahu advised Trump in February that Israeli intelligence indicated launching strikes against Iran would lead to the toppling of the Islamic Republic’s regime – and five months later, the slain ayatollah’s son retains power with a close circle of hardliners, calling into question the accuracy of Israel’s intelligence apparatus.
But the senior Israeli official said at the time, Netanyahu did not promise the Iranian people would take fate into their own hands following a coordinated attack. Rather, he chose his words carefully and said that an attack could create conditions to “advance the probability or the possibility that that would happen.”
The conditions needed for the Iranian regime to fall, “did not materialize,” the official told MS NOW, adding, “not for lack of insight, but for either operational failure or decisions that were made.”
Despite Netanyahu insisting Israel and the U.S. are on the same page, differences still remain: the sale of F-35 fighter jets to Turkey and the Saudi nuclear arrangement did not come up during Wednesday’s White House meeting, according to a second Israeli official granted anonymity to describe sensitive discussions.
Meanwhile, the conflict continues to spread, with an Iranian drone attacking a U.S. gas storage tanker off the coast of Egypt on Wednesday.
Trump indicated he would not let Iran’s latest action slide, telling reporters on Wednesday that the U.S. would retaliate against Iran even as he leaves room for diplomatic talks to resume.
“It’s our turn, and we’ll see if we get there with an agreement at some point,” Trump said. “But we’re going to hit them very hard.”
As for what it would take for Israel to join the U.S. strikes, the senior Israeli official said that if Israel is attacked by Iran, “We will respond very, very forcefully and very quickly. And I think Iran would make a great mistake.”
Julia Jester covers politics for MS NOW and is based in Washington, D.C.
International rage over FIFA’s close ties to President Donald Trump has reached a fever pitch after soccer’s governing body announced a plan to sell a significant stake to an investor group led by Joshua Kushner, the brother of Trump’s son-in-law.
The president and his family have all but turned the White House into their personal piggy bank. And FIFA — which has its own sordid history of corruption — seems to have made itself a party to Trump’s self-enrichment under Gianni Infantino’s leadership, such as by paying for space inside Trump Tower in New York. (The organization has defended the office rental as a World Cup outpost.)
Soccer is seen by many as a unifying game. But Trump’s incorporation of FIFA into his political dynasty is threatening that idea.
FIFA has announced plans to sell a large minority stake in a new company that will run its main events, including the World Cup and Club World Cup, as part of a plan to triple the amount of development money it dishes out to its 211 member associations.
Under the proposals — which are subject to approval by a majority of those national associations and FIFA’s 37-member council — a new entity called FIFA Forward Enterprises (FFE) will take over all commercial operations, while FIFA remains the game’s global governing body and retains a majority stake in FFE.
A press release from FIFA confirmed the plans and said Thrive Eternal, which was launched by Joshua Kushner, is expected to lead the investment group that would control FIFA Forward Enterprise. FIFA did not clarify why Thrive Eternal was selected, and Kushner was already dabbling in sports.
But Trump basically has already given son-in-law Jared Kushner carte blanche to dictate U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East while simultaneously hatching business plans in the region. (Jared Kushner has denied any conflicts of interest.)
Joshua Kushner reportedly has been a major donor to Democrats. But, predictably, the idea of another Kushner becoming financially entwined with the World Cup — the world’s most popular sporting event — and basically being dropped into a position of global significance isn’t going over well. Several other soccer governing bodies have expressed concerns, including Europe’s UEFA.
“This crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross,” UEFA said in a statement about The Athletic’s report, adding: “The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade — especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially. None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA’s to sell.”
Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee also rebuked the plan, writing on X: “Apparently the fake Peace Prize and giant lease with Trump Tower weren’t enough — now Infantino performs a kickback hat trick by pursuing a multibillion-dollar deal with Jared Kushner’s brother to sell ownership stakes in the World Cup to private investors.”
FIFA, Donald Trump’s favorite corrupt racketeering enterprise in world sports, is now going directly into business with the Trump family!
Apparently the fake Peace Prize and giant lease with Trump Tower weren’t enough—now Infantino performs a kickback hat trick by pursuing a… https://t.co/knSZibuMea
— House Judiciary Dems (@HouseJudiciary) July 28, 2026
Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., has already launched an investigation into the FIFA leader’s relationship with the Trump administration, while dozens of European lawmakers — citing concerns about “potential breaches of political neutrality” — have called for the FIFA Ethics Committee to investigate Infantino. This new proposal seems unlikely to assuage those concerns.
But what it does seem likely to do is fuel global anger toward the U.S. — the kind that has been growing since Trump retook office.
And when you consider that, it’s truly remarkable how the same MAGA movement whose members whined for years about politics mixing with sports is now in lockstep with a president who seems dead-set on casting his shadow over every sports event he can.
This post on X basically sums up the foul stench around FIFA’s latest proposal.
Sepp Blatter was Infantino’s predecessor as FIFA president and oversaw the organization amid some of its many scandals. When heof all people, is warning about how Trump and Infantino’s relationship is “deeply damaging” soccer, it’s a sign of how far FIFA has descended into the gutter.
Ja’han Jones is an MS NOW opinion blogger. He previously wrote The ReidOut Blog.
-
Politics2 years agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics2 years agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics2 years agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words