The Dictatorship
Team Trump lowered expectations before the Putin summit. Now we may know why.
Last week, the White House blew past its own deadline of imposing sanctions on Russia for continuing its three-year invasion of Ukraine, and then, in a misguided effort to clean up that mistake, President Donald Trump gifted Russian President Vladimir Putin a one-on-one meeting in Alaska. It was impossible to make sense of what Trump expected to gain by doing so. It’s not even clear what Trump wants, other than a Nobel Peace Prize.
Trump said he and Putin had decided not to try for a ceasefire at all, “which often times do not hold up.”
It’s even less apparent now what Trump wanted and expected. But after Trump and Putin met for more than two hours Friday, and then praised each other to the media for about 12 minutes, it was clear that Trump, in his rush to meet with Putin, not only risked whatever was left of his image as a dealmaker-in-chief, but he also may have damaged the United States’ image as a global champion for democracy.
Did the meeting bring us any closer to a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine? Trump said the two countries “haven’t quite gotten there” but “made some headway” and then landed on the tried-and-true holding statement that “there’s no deal until there’s a deal.”
He said, “I will call up NATO in a little while. I will call up the various people that I think are appropriate. And I’ll, of course, call up President Zelenskyy and tell him about today’s meeting. It’s ultimately up to them.”
Then, early on Saturday, a few more details were released. Trump said he and Putin had decided not to try for a ceasefire at all, “which often times do not hold up,” but instead work directly on a peace agreement. Zelenskyy confirmed he would visit Trump in Washington to discuss that possibility on Monday. But the end result of Friday’s meeting remains unchanged.
Notably, before the summit, Trump had upset Zelenskyy and Europe when he said, with no input from Ukraine, that in a ceasefire deal “there’ll be some swapping of territories to the betterment of both.” Russia elaborated that it anticipated getting control of all of eastern Ukraine. At the same time, the Trump team planned to move ahead with revoking the legal statuses of more than 200,000 Ukrainian refugees living in the United States.
While even anodyne meetings between friendly heads of state are typically highly choreographed, with goals and discussion boundaries outlined well in advance by other officials, Trump’s freewheeling style and misplaced confidence that he has a personal relationship with Putin, a former KGB officer, created an unnecessary level of unpredictability to the proceedings in the days leading up to the so-called “Pursuing Peace” event.
“If you roll into the meeting not prepped, you can get jammed by Putin,” Michael McFaul, who was U.S. ambassador to Russia in the Obama administration, said last week. “Summits are to achieve an objective that advances American national interests. They’re the means to end, and I sometimes feel that Trump feels the meeting is an end in itself.”
Trump’s misplaced confidence that he has a personal relationship with Putin, a former KGB officer, created an unnecessary level of unpredictability to the proceedings.
When it appeared that Trump was going to walk into that meeting with Putin and offer him part of Ukraine on a platter, other countries took up the pro-democracy mantle the U.S. had dropped. The European Union objected to the concept of appeasing invaders who ignore national boundaries, an experience Europeans are keen to avoid after the infamous 1938 meeting that preceded World War II. Also, after a virtual meeting with Trump and other leaders, French President Emmanuel Macron affirmed that “the territorial issue relating to Ukraine cannot and will not be negotiated by anyone but the Ukrainian president.” But Macron maintained that something needed to come out of this meeting, such as a ceasefire and a return of kidnapped Ukrainian children.
The pressure on Trump to actually consider the details and impacts of his statements worked — at least to a degree. The White House dramatically lowered the expectations that any ceasefire or peace settlement would be reached by referring to the summit as “a listening session,” during which Trump would simply tell Putin, “You’ve got to end this war.” Shortly before the meeting began, Trump also stated he is “open to the possibility of security guarantees” for Ukraine, though how that can be managed without membership in NATO — the multinational entity holding the line against Russian aggression — remains to be seen.
At the beginning of the meeting, there was a palpable sigh of relief from European allies as the real-time decision was made for Trump and Putin to meet alongside their senior diplomats. This at least guaranteed that there’d be some level of note-taking, that American officials would have basic insight into the discussions and that the world would not be left to rely solely on the Russian spin of the events. The idea of Trump meeting Putin without those parameters in place wouldn’t have been a worry if Trump hadn’t had secret meetings with Putin in the past where no one else knows what really happened.
But Russia clearly felt like it could flex its muscle even heading into this meeting. The Russian foreign minister arrived in the U.S. wearing a CCCP sweatshirt, something he has not done before. Russian officials began telling media outlets they anticipated getting mineral rights in Alaska.
While the Russian energy sector and economy is suffering, the truth is Putin didn’t need anything more than a photo of him on the same military base the U.S. once used to counter the Soviets. Trump legitimized Putin as the leader of a superpower that must be dealt with directly and not a rogue state kicked out of the G8. Trump completely ignored U.S. sanctions and the international arrest warrant for Putin, essentially siding with Putin against the democratic world order. He again illustrated how potentially easy it is for him to be manipulated into playing second fiddle to Putin’s imperial ambitions, gaining nothing for himself or the U.S. in return.
The Russian foreign minister arrived in the U.S. wearing a CCCP sweatshirt.
After 20 minutes of speaking in Russian to the mostly American media, Putin, who speaks English well enough, closed out his time in Alaska by saying: “Next time, in Moscow.”
Trump said Putin’s remark would get him “a little heat,” but that he “could see it possibly happening.”
Putin naming Moscow as the site of a follow-up meeting is another way way of proclaiming that Russia is back in the great power game.
Thanks to the president who wants us to believe he’s the world’s best negotiator and maker of deals.
Nayyera Haq is an assistant dean at Syracuse Maxwell School of Public Affairs. She previously served as a senior director focusing on national security and economic policy at the White House, a senior adviser at the State Department and spokesperson at the U.S. Treasury, where she advised the country’s top leaders. She hosts conversations on SiriusXM talk radio and was an evening news anchor and chief foreign affairs correspondent for the Black News Channel.
California voters will consider a controversial proposal in November to temporarily raise taxes on billionaires after the labor union backing the measure announced Thursday it would forge ahead despite pressure from critics to withdraw it.
The proposal, backed by the Service Employees International Union Healthcare Workers West, would impose a one-time 5% tax on individuals whose net worth exceeds $1 billion and who were living in the state as of Jan. 1, 2026. The goal is to generate $100 billion in revenue, mainly to fund the state’s Medicaid system after federal cuts.
“I am all in on this,” union President Dave Regan said on a Zoom call, adding that opponents of the proposal are “totally out of touch.”
Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom and many traditional allies of the union oppose the measure. They argue it is a temporary fix for an ongoing problem and that it would push the ultrawealthy to leave the state, taking the money they would contribute in income taxes with them. Newsom, who is considering a presidential run as he prepares to leave office in January, has generally opposed tax increases during his time as governor.
A coalition of healthcare, education and housing groups — including the California Medical Association and California School Boards Association — banded together last week to fight the tax.
“The dangerous wealth tax directly threatens vital funding for education and schools, healthcare and clinics, public safety, and infrastructure projects by making California’s revenue even more volatile,” the coalition said in a statement.
Brian Brokaw, a Newsom political adviser who is leading a political committee opposing the tax, said it would “make California’s biggest challenges worse.”
“Driving away the state’s sustainable tax base for a one-time grab is bad policy and an even worse deal for 40 million Californians who will be left holding the bag,” he said in a statement.
Under the proposal, the state would spend the money generated from the tax over multiple years. The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that the proposal would generate tens of billions of dollars in the first few years, but that income tax revenues would subsequently decline by hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
Many of the Silicon Valley tech moguls who oppose the measure have already moved their assets to other states or threatened to do so to avoid the possible tax. They have also spent millions to try to defeat it.
Since the proposal was announced in October, Google co-founder Sergey Brin has donated $82 million to a political committee called Building a Better California that backs a variety of initiatives designed to blunt the billionaire tax proposal. It has raised more than $118 million, counting Brin’s contributions, from fewer than a dozen donors.
California relies on its top 1% of earnersfor nearly half of its personal income tax revenue.
The union offered to scale back its proposal last week, asking Newsom to back a 2% tax on billionaires instead. But the governor’s office said the lower rate didn’t change his stance.
The proposed tax may have piqued the interest of many Democrats because it comes at a time when they are particularly concerned about affordability, income inequality and federal cutbacks to government programs, said Martin Gilens, a political science professor at the University of California, Los Angeles.
“There’s kind of a perfect storm that sort of bolsters preexisting inclinations to be sympathetic to the idea of raising taxes on the well-to-do,” he said.
But there’s a catch. Support for ballot initiatives often declines as the election nears, and if the measure passes, it’s likely to face legal challenges, Gilens said.
Since taking office one week ago, Bill Pulte, the acting director of national intelligence, has busied himself on social media posting flattering photos of President Donald Trump, trivia about a former counterintelligence agent and praising his current staff.
What the Trump loyalist with no intelligence experience has not done is address the public about his plans, or calm the unease and confusion inside the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which is being described by top officials as “chaotic” amid firings of senior personnel with threats of more to come.
One image posted to the official X account of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, apparently artificial intelligence-generated, features Trump raising a clenched fist in the air with two B-2 stealth bombers in the sky behind him. Another is an image of the president, his fist clenched, glowering as he stands behind the Oval Office’s Resolute Desk.
In another post, Pulte, who was expected to gut the workforce of the National Counterterrorism Center, instead declared the staff there “true professionals and American patriots” after he said he spent time with them, adding “it is a privilege to work beside them.”
And in an apparent attempt at levity, Pulte reposted a message reminding Americans that Tuesday was “National Typewriter Day” and informing them of the role that a former Army counterintelligence agent played.
“Fun CI fact,” the post reads. “Former Army CI Special Agent Leroy Anderson composed ‘The Typewriter’ on October 9, 1950.”
But Pulte’s arrival has sparked anxiety and fear among the office’s workforce, three former U.S. intelligence officials told MS NOW, granted anonymity to address a sensitive topic.
They said that a half dozen political appointees were removed from their posts and several dozen staffers were sent back to their home intelligence agencies. Beyond that, little else is known about Pulte’s plans.
Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told MS NOW that his requests for more information from the office, known by the acronym ODNI, have been rebuffed.
“I’ve been calling over there all day and can’t get my calls returned,” said Himes.
He later said, “I spoke directly to their office of congressional affairs. They said they had nothing for me.”
“It seems like it’s totally chaotic at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence,” Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said on a podcast Wednesday. “There was word that there was going to be firings and then he said he changed his mind. We don’t know.”
Marc Polymeropoulos, a former senior CIA official and now an MS NOW contributor, said that staff in the intelligence community do not know what to think.
“Everyone is in the same boat and unsure of what is going on,” he said. “That said, there is no love lost for the DNI, as many believe that there is redundancy that does need to be cut.”
The other former U.S. intelligence officials said they agree that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence is in need of reform. The agency was created after a lack of information sharing among U.S. intelligence agencies played a role in the failure to stop the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. ODNI’s mission is to ensure that the country’s now 18 different intelligence agencies share information with one another.
But the former intelligence officials said Pulte is patently unqualified to design or carry out those reforms.
“As with many things Trump alights upon, there is a sliver of truth here but he goes about addressing it in the worst possible way,” a former senior U.S. intelligence official told MS NOW, granted anonymity over concerns of retaliation. “But mass firings without any kind of sense of what you are trying to accomplish is addressing it in the most ham-handed way.”
That former official, as well as Warner and Himes, have said they fear that Pulte’s mission is to use his position as the nation’s top intelligence official to help Trump interfere in the midterm elections in November.
Pulte, who simultaneously serves as the Trump administration’s top federal housing official as head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, used government mortgage information to file several criminal referrals against Democrats whom Trump considered enemies, including Sen. Adam Schiff of California and New York State Attorney General Letitia James. None of Pulte’s referrals have resulted in criminal convictions.
One fear expressed by Warner and some former intelligence officials is that Pulte may try to falsely claim that his office has found evidence that foreign governments are secretly funding Democratic candidates.
One way he could do that, they say, is by falsely claiming foreign actors have hacked U.S. voting machines and altered vote totals in favor of Democrats. And Pulte and FBI agents could seize voting machines, ballots and election records in November — as Gabbard did in Fulton County, Georgia, last year at Trump’s behest — as part of voter fraud investigations that please the president.
“I have to tell you, I was extraordinarily concerned about the former director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, interfering in our election,” Warner told NPR earlier this month. “The concerns I had with Tulsi Gabbard now, upon reflection, look small versus the concerns I have with Bill Pulte.”
David Rohde is the senior national security reporter for MS NOW and a two-time winner of the Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting. Previously he was the senior executive editor for national security and law for NBC News.
Former President Barack Obama slammed President Donald Trump for obsessing over him while serving in the nation’s highest office.
“I obviously, you know, have a room in his head. A suite in his head,” Obama said an an episode of the podcast “All The Smoke,” posted Wednesday.
“Look, first of all, when I was president, the last thing I had time to do was worry about what somebody said, or what my predecessor did,” Obama told the two hosts, former NBA players Matt Barnes and Stephen Jackson. “They’re gone. I’ve got work to do.”
Trump has a long history of publicly insulting the former president, often invoking Obama’s middle name, Hussein.
Trump has also heavily promoted the false and racist “birther” conspiracy theory, which claimed that Obama was ineligible to serve as president because he was born in Kenya rather than the United States.
Earlier this year, Trump drew criticism after sharing a racist artificial intelligence-generated video on his Truth Social account depicting the former president and former first lady Michelle Obama as apes. The video was later deleted, and Trump did not apologize.
Before launching the war against Iran with Israel on Feb. 28, Trump repeatedly criticized the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the 2015 diplomatic agreement primarily negotiated by Obama that also limited Iran’s nuclear capabilities in exchange for sweeping economic sanctions relief.
More recently, Trump trashed the newly debuted Obama Presidential Center in Chicago as a “very unattractive building” and “total disaster,” adding that when his presidential library opens, it will be “on time, on budget, best location in Miami.”
Without mentioning Trump by name, Obama criticized leaders who fixate on their predecessors, characterizing their priorities as misplaced.
“If you’re doing the job right, everyday, you’ve got five, ten things that are real hard. And you have to be constantly focused,” Obama said.
“The idea that I’d be worrying about somebody who came before and me trying to measure, ‘What’s he done today?’ Constantly worrying about that is a strange thing to me. It shows me somebody who’s not focused on the American people and the job they’re supposed to do.”
Erum Salam is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW, with a focus on how global events and foreign policy shape U.S. politics. She previously was a breaking news reporter for The Guardian.
- Capitol agenda: House GOP agenda gets tenuous Trump lifeline
- Wes Moore lays out his vision for America
- California voters to decide billionaire tax measure in November
- Flattery, secrecy and chaos: Bill Pulte’s first week as intel chief
- Barack Obama says Trump gives him a ‘room in his head’
- The hypocrisy of moderate Democrats who are furious over Mamdani’s insurgency
- Thursday’s Mini-Report, 6.25.26
- NATO chief’s playbook with Trump: Show him the money
- The Lincoln Memorial should be green with envy: This reflecting pool stayed clear
- President Trump spoke to Live Nation CEO before antitrust case was settled, company lawyers reveal
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
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 Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship10 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words