Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Did Putin Play Trump?

News

Did Putin Play Trump?

Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks during the New Ideas For New Times Forum at the Russia National Center, July 3, 2025, in Moscow, Russia.

(Photo by Contributor/Getty Images)

President Donald Trump issued a warning to Russia this week. He demanded that Russian leader Vladimir Putin end the Ukraine war in 50 days, or else. But does anyone care?

“Putin played Trump” has resurfaced with renewed intensity as political analysts, former aides, and media commentators dissect the evolving dynamic between the two leaders. What was once a murmur has become a chorus, with even conservative voices acknowledging that Trump may have misjudged the Russian president’s intentions.


A deflated Trump made his favorite threat, economic sanctions—an about-face policy shift after months of failed diplomacy. For years, Trump touted that he alone could end the devastating war, but now he says, “We get a lot of bulls--- thrown at us by Putin. He’s very nice to us all the time, but it turns out to be meaningless," he told reporters at Monday's White House meeting.

Trump also warned of secondary tariffs on Russian trading partners China and India, and more weapons for Kyiv if Moscow didn't comply.

Putin has yet to respond publicly, but Russian leaders did in a similar way to Trump's request to halt missile strikes. “Trump issued a theatrical ultimatum to the Kremlin. The world shuddered, expecting the consequences,” Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chair of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, flippantly wrote in a post on the social platform X.

Investors have largely brushed off the ultimatum, according to reports from The Hill. The Moscow Stock Exchange grew by 2.7 percent as of Tuesday morning, signaling a lack of concern that Trump will follow through on his threat.

Trump Tries To Rewrite History

Trump is also backpedaling on his bromance with Putin, saying, “He’s fooled a lot of people. He fooled Bush. He fooled a lot of people. He fooled Clinton, Bush, Obama, Biden. He didn’t fool me,” Trump said.

However, just five months ago, Trump said he did trust Putin on the most central of issues – whether he wanted peace in Ukraine, reports CNN. “I believe he wants peace,” Trump said February 14, adding: “I mean, I know him very well. Yeah, I think he wants peace. I think he would tell me if he didn’t. … I trust him on this subject.”

Three years ago, Trump described Putin’s invasion of Ukraine as “genius” and “savvy,” praising a move that spurred universal condemnation from the U.S. government and its trans-Atlantic allies. “I went in yesterday, and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine — Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful,” Trump said in a radio interview with “The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show.”

Lukewarm Reaction to Trump’s Threat

CNN reports that officials, including European Union Foreign Affairs Chief Kaja Kallas, praised the tougher stance but cast the timeframe as a very long one.

Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who has often allied with Trump, praised him for “turning up the heat on Putin.”

“But why wait? Putin is butchering innocent people every day. Let’s get this thing over,” Johnson posted on X.

Fox News’ chief political analyst Brit Hume recently stated that Trump “got played by Putin,” citing the president’s initial reluctance to escalate the conflict in Ukraine and his belief that Putin was ready to negotiate peace. Hume noted that Trump was “jollied along” under the impression that Putin wanted to end the war, only to realize that the Russian leader had broader ambitions.

Fiona Hill, a former National Security Council official, offered a behind-the-scenes look at Trump’s interactions with Putin. She claimed that Putin often mocked Trump during their calls, using subtle language and tone that was lost in translation. Hill described the exchanges as “amateur hour,” suggesting that Trump was more focused on personal rapport than strategic diplomacy.

"Trump put Putin above U.S. national interests, and Putin hasn’t returned the favor," argues Nicholas Grossman, political science professor at the University of Illinois. "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," he writes in an opinion editorial.

Whether Trump is a victim of geopolitical gamesmanship or a willing participant in a flawed strategy, the consensus is shifting. The narrative that Putin outmaneuvered Trump is no longer confined to partisan corners—it’s being echoed across the political spectrum.

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network.






Read More

How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

A memorial for Ashli Babbitt sits near the US Capitol during a Day of Remembrance and Action on the one year anniversary of the January 6, 2021 insurrection.

(John Lamparski/NurPhoto/AP)

How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

In the wake of the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, President Donald Trump quickly took up the cause of a 35-year-old veteran named Ashli Babbitt.

“Who killed Ashli Babbitt?” he asked in a one-sentence statement on July 1, 2021.

Keep ReadingShow less
Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

Supreme Court, Allen v. Milligan Illegal Congressional Voting Map

Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

A wave of redistricting battles in early 2026 is reshaping the political map ahead of the midterm elections and intensifying long‑running fights over gerrymandering and democratic representation.

In California, a three‑judge federal panel on January 15 upheld the state’s new congressional districts created under Proposition 50, ruling 2–1 that the map—expected to strengthen Democratic advantages in several competitive seats—could be used in the 2026 elections. The following day, a separate federal court dismissed a Republican lawsuit arguing that the maps were unconstitutional, clearing the way for the state’s redistricting overhaul to stand. In Virginia, Democratic lawmakers have advanced a constitutional amendment that would allow mid‑decade redistricting, a move they describe as a response to aggressive Republican map‑drawing in other states; some legislators have openly discussed the possibility of a congressional map that could yield 10 Democratic‑leaning seats out of 11. In Missouri, the secretary of state has acknowledged in court that ballot language for a referendum on the state’s congressional map could mislead voters, a key development in ongoing litigation over the fairness of the state’s redistricting process. And in Utah, a state judge has ordered a new congressional map that includes one Democratic‑leaning district after years of litigation over the legislature’s earlier plan, prompting strong objections from Republican lawmakers who argue the court exceeded its authority.

Keep ReadingShow less
New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) (L) and Rep. August Pfluger (R-TX) lead a group of fellow Republicans through Statuary Hall on the way to a news conference on the 28th day of the federal government shutdown at the U.S. Capitol on October 28, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Chip Somodevilla

New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

Every January 1st, many Americans face their failings and resolve to do better by making New Year’s Resolutions. Wouldn’t it be delightful if Congress would do the same? According to Gallup, half of all Americans currently have very little confidence in Congress. And while confidence in our government institutions is shrinking across the board, Congress is near rock bottom. With that in mind, here is a list of resolutions Congress could make and keep, which would help to rebuild public trust in Congress and our government institutions. Let’s start with:

1 – Working for the American people. We elect our senators and representatives to work on our behalf – not on their behalf or on behalf of the wealthiest donors, but on our behalf. There are many issues on which a large majority of Americans agree but Congress can’t. Congress should resolve to address those issues.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two groups of glass figures. One red, one blue.

Congressional paralysis is no longer accidental. Polarization has reshaped incentives, hollowed out Congress, and shifted power to the executive.

Getty Images, Andrii Yalanskyi

How Congress Lost Its Capacity to Act and How to Get It Back

In late 2025, Congress fumbled the Affordable Care Act, failing to move a modest stabilization bill through its own procedures and leaving insurers and families facing renewed uncertainty. As the Congressional Budget Office has warned in multiple analyses over the past decade, policy uncertainty increases premiums and reduces insurer participation (see, for example: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61734). I examined this episode in an earlier Fulcrum article, “Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis,” as a case study in congressional paralysis and leadership failure. The deeper problem, however, runs beyond any single deadline or decision and into the incentives and procedures that now structure congressional authority. Polarization has become so embedded in America’s governing institutions themselves that it shapes how power is exercised and why even routine governance now breaks down.

From Episode to System

The ACA episode wasn’t an anomaly but a symptom. Recent scholarship suggests it reflects a broader structural shift in how Congress operates. In a 2025 academic article available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN), political scientist Dmitrii Lebedev reaches a stark conclusion about the current Congress, noting that the 118th Congress enacted fewer major laws than any in the modern era despite facing multiple time-sensitive policy deadlines (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5346916). Drawing on legislative data, he finds that dysfunction is no longer best understood as partisan gridlock alone. Instead, Congress increasingly exhibits a breakdown of institutional capacity within the governing majority itself. Leadership avoidance, procedural delay, and the erosion of governing norms have become routine features of legislative life rather than temporary responses to crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less