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

The dome of the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., stands tall against a blue sky with the American flag waving proudly

A look at this week's congressional agenda, including House votes on Iran, Ukraine, FISA, appropriations, and key legislative priorities.

Getty Images, aire images

Legislative Preview for June 1, 2026

There will be plenty of coverage around the likely drama involved in picking up where House and Senate Republicans left off before this most recent week off. (For a recap, see our last post.) So we’re not going to go into any detail about what might happen with the reconciliation bill (originally only for two departments in the Department of Homeland Security; now enlarged with funding for the President’s ballroom project and overshadowed by the announcement of the President’s plan to pay off political allies with funds from the Department of Justice) or the FISA extension or the housing bill that’s been pingponging between chambers because you can read in sources like Politico about these marquee issue.

We will note that the Iran War resolution postponed in the House before the recess may be up for a vote this week, along with a resolution to remove US troops from Lebanon and a discharge petition (number 8) to put forward a bill authorizing support for Ukraine. Three privileged resolutions, of which one is a discharge petition (meaning it has 218 co-sponsors meaning at least a few House Republican co-sponsors), is a lot for one week. Especially when all three are expressing opposition to various administration stances and might get some House Republican votes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Can Governing Survive Without Continuity?
white and black quote board
Photo by Brendan Beale on Unsplash

Can Governing Survive Without Continuity?

Modern societies depend on continuity.

Electric grids are built over decades. Infrastructure systems require long investment cycles. Defense planning depends on sustained procurement and strategic consistency. Climate adaptation, energy systems, artificial intelligence governance, public health preparedness, and fiscal stability all require institutions capable of maintaining long-term priorities across multiple administrations.

Keep ReadingShow less
Can Coalitions Built on Opposition Still Govern?

Supporters of President Donald Trump, February 09, 2024 in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Can Coalitions Built on Opposition Still Govern?

Political parties are supposed to do two things at once: win elections and govern. Those are not the same skill.

Winning elections requires assembling coalitions large enough to secure power. Governing requires maintaining enough internal agreement to make decisions, negotiate trade-offs, allocate resources, and sustain policy direction once power is achieved.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Fragile Promise of the Ballot
black and white love print crew neck shirt
Photo by Cyrus Crossan on Unsplash

The Fragile Promise of the Ballot

Recent Supreme Court decisions such as Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee were not just redefinitions of election law; they marked a critical shift away from the federal government’s duty to ensure equal ballot access—a duty fundamental to democracy.

The consequences were swift and broad. Within hours, Shelby County, Texas, imposed strict voter ID rules that federal officials had previously blocked under the Voting Rights Act’s pre-clearance provisions. Soon after, North Carolina reduced early voting and eliminated same-day registration. Across parts of Alabama, Georgia, and other Southern states, polling places closed or moved, often in communities with large Black populations. What once required federal review could now proceed quickly.

Keep ReadingShow less