Caught on camera: Donald Trump cheats at golf in Scotland; netizens say, ‘Of course!'
Trump said upon arrival on Friday evening that his son Eric Trump is 'gonna cut a ribbon' for the new course during his trip.
However, there's one incident reportedly from a Trump course near Turnberry, that has trumped Trump's visit to his homeland and his love for golf this time – allegations of cheating at the game.
A viral video on social media shows the staff at a golf course handling a golf ball near a sand trap, which the US President then putts. This sparked accusations of Trump cheating at his favourite sport.
However, this is not the first time Trump has been accused of manipulating his golf game. Believe it or not, there is an actual book on it titled 'Commander in Cheat: How Golf Explains Trump' by Rick Reilly.
Social media users weren't surprised by the viral video of Donald Trump allegedly cheating in a golf game, and the first of their reactions was a simple, 'Of course!' The netizens also joked about how he'd just blame it on former US President Barack Obama.
'Of course he did,' said an unsurprised user. 'Super on brand,' added another.
A user claimed, 'Con man gonna con,' to which another added, 'Never not cheating – in golf, on wives, in business, on taxes, in elections.'
'That's not even cheating for him anymore… that's his everyday life,' said another.
'Another FLAWLESS game, Mr. President,' quipped a user. 'He can never play fair, not even at the sport he's supposed to excel,' added another.
'The only skill he got is LYING!' exclaimed a user.
Another added, 'The only way he wins anything…CHEATING.'
'I wonder how much the guy gets paid for tossing the ball? Let's pay more to hear how it all went down. I'm sure it's a wonderful story!' a user joked.
'Must be one of those balls they just pops up and wow you hit pretty good, it would've been great if it was a live tournament and it happened on tv,' another added.
A user joked, 'I'm sure he'll say Obama did it.' 'I'm sure he'll just blame Obama. And they'll believe it,' added another.
Donald Trump will be in Scotland until Tuesday, July 29, and plans to talk trade with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
The White House has brushed off questions about potential conflicts of interest, arguing that Trump's business success before he entered politics was a key to his appeal with voters.
White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers called the Scotland swing a 'working trip." But she added Trump 'has built the best and most beautiful world-class golf courses anywhere in the world, which is why they continue to be used for prestigious tournaments and by the most elite players in the sport.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
29 minutes ago
- First Post
Is Harvard training officials from China's Xi Jinping's party?
Harvard University has come under scrutiny for its alleged ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). A US House committee led by Republicans has reportedly shot off a letter to the varsity's president, Alan Garber, accusing Harvard Kennedy School of training high-level Chinese government officials. This comes amid the Trump administration's efforts to bar the Ivy League school from enrolling foreign students read more A view of Harvard campus on John F. Kennedy Street at Harvard University is pictured in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, December 7, 2023. File Photo/Reuters Harvard University, which is in the crosshairs of the Donald Trump administration in the United States, has come under scrutiny for its ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). A report has revealed that Harvard Kennedy School of the prestigious varsity has been accused of partnering with an organisation associated with Xi Jinping's party. The report comes at a time when Harvard University is embroiled in a dispute with the Trump administration, with the US government freezing billions of dollars in federal funds. The US president has also alleged that universities allowed antisemitism during pro-Palestinian protests on campus last year. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD But does Harvard really have ties to China's CCP? We will explain. Harvard's ties to CCP A US House of Representatives committee led by Republicans has alleged that Harvard Kennedy School collaborated with an organisation linked to the Chinese Communist Party, as per The Harvard Crimson report. A House Select Committee on the CCP started investigating Harvard University's alleged links to groups affiliated with China's party in May. In a letter to Harvard University President Alan Garber last week, the panel accused Harvard Kennedy School of training high-level Chinese government officials through a 'formal partnership' with the Chinese Executive Leadership Academy Pudong (CELAP). 'Under that partnership, the rising CCP elite who are being prepared for senior Communist Party leadership positions participate in training at Harvard in the United States,' Committee chair John R Moolenaar wrote in the letter. The committee asked the university to submit any documents linking Harvard to the CCP and furnish details of any money or benefits received from the CCP. According to Moolenaar, whistleblowers revealed the alleged tie-up between the school and CELAP, a training institution in Shanghai's Pudong district managed and funded by the Chinese government. Feng Jun, executive vice president of CELAP, attended the Harvard Kennedy School's now-defunct programme for senior Chinese officials known as 'China's Leaders in Development", calling HKS a 'model' for the Chinese school, according to Harvard University's student newspaper. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Is Harvard CCP's 'party school'? Many US universities, particularly Harvard, have offered programmes to Chinese officials to study governance. A Wall Street Journal (WSJ) report in June found that thousands of mid-career and senior bureaucrats of the CCP have visited the US for executive training and postgraduate studies for decades. Harvard University has been described by some in China as the top 'party school' outside the country. 'If we were to rank the Chinese Communist Party's 'overseas party schools,' the one deserving top spot has to be Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government in the US,' said a 2014 commentary published by Shanghai Observer. Some key Chinese officials to have graduated from Harvard Kennedy School are an ex-vice president of China and a top trade negotiator. Li Yuanchao, China's vice president from 2013 to 2018, took part in a mid-career training programme at Harvard Kennedy School in 2002. Several top Chinese officials have attended Harvard Kennedy School. File Photo/AFP Liu He, a retired vice premier, has a master's degree in public administration from Harvard Kennedy School. He was Chinese President Xi Jinping's top trade negotiator during talks with the first Trump administration. Li Hongzhong, currently a Politburo member and senior legislator, attended a short-term programme at Harvard in 1999. Syracuse, Stanford, the University of Maryland and Rutgers have also offered executive training to Chinese officials, WSJ reported, citing publicity materials and other disclosures. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD China began sending officials for mid-career training at Harvard Kennedy School in the 1990s. One such programme, launched in 1998, provided fellowships and executive training courses to around 20 senior officials each year. Harvard launched another programme, 'China's Leaders in Development,' in the early 2000s, under which Chinese officials attended a training course, with their time split between Harvard and Beijing's Tsinghua University. As per Harvard, the now-defunct programme was to 'help prepare senior local and central Chinese government officials to more effectively address the ongoing challenges of China's national reforms." Trump's attempts to ban foreign students at Harvard Amid the ongoing standoff, the Trump administration has tried to bar Harvard from enrolling international students and prevent foreigners from entering the US to study at the elite varsity. However, both efforts were temporarily blocked by a court. Last month, the US State Department said that it launched an investigation into Harvard University's compliance with the government-run visa programme for international students. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the State Department would analyse Harvard's sponsorship eligibility under the Exchange Visitor Program certification, or J-1 visa programme, reported NBC News. The secretary of state said in a statement that all sponsors of the programme 'must comply with all regulations, including conducting their programmes in a manner that does not undermine the foreign policy objectives or compromise the national security interests of the United States.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'The American people have the right to expect their universities to uphold national security, comply with the law, and provide safe environments for all students. The investigation will ensure that State Department programmes do not run contrary to our nation's interests,' Rubio said. A spokesperson for Harvard said that the Ivy League school 'is committed to continuing to comply with the applicable Exchange Visitor Program regulations.' 'This investigation is yet another retaliatory step taken by the Administration in violation of Harvard's First Amendment right. Harvard continues to enrol and sponsor international scholars, researchers, and students, and will protect its international community and support them as they apply for US visas and travel to campus this fall,' the spokesperson added. With inputs from agencies
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
29 minutes ago
- First Post
‘This happens in a banana republic': Trump's Greece and China-like reaction to job data draws flak
History shows that when political leaders manipulate or interfere with economic statistics, the results are often disastrous. read more US property mogul Donald Trump leads a media event on the sand dunes of the Menie estate, the site for Trump's proposed golf resort, near Aberdeen, north east Scotland, May 27, 2010. File Image/Reuters When President Donald Trump received disappointing jobs numbers on Friday (August 1), his response was swift and alarming: he fired Erika McEntarfer, the Senate-confirmed head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). This unprecedented move has raised concerns among economists and experts, who warn that meddling with government data can have far-reaching consequences. History shows that when political leaders manipulate or interfere with economic statistics, the results are often disastrous. Why is Labor Department's independence critical? The BLS, though officially part of the Labor Department, operates independently to produce nonpartisan data on critical metrics like employment, prices, and wages. This impartiality is vital, as reliable statistics help make sound decisions in both the public and private sectors. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD For instance, the Federal Reserve relies on BLS data on inflation and unemployment to set interest rates, which directly impact the cost of mortgages and car loans for millions of Americans. As Federal Reserve Chair Jerome H. Powell recently stressed at a news conference, 'Good data helps not just the Fed, it helps the government, but it also helps the private sector.' He added, 'The United States has been a leader in that for 100 years, and we really need to continue that in my view.' Trump's decision to dismiss McEntarfer has drawn sharp criticism, with many seeing it as a step toward undermining the integrity of economic data. Former Treasury Secretary and Federal Reserve Chair Janet L. Yellen called the move deeply troubling, stating, 'This is the kind of thing you would only expect to see in a banana republic.' Lessons from history History offers stark warnings about the dangers of manipulating government data. In the early 2000s, Chinese local authorities fudged economic figures to meet Beijing's growth targets, rendering official data unreliable. Analysts and policymakers were forced to turn to alternative measures to understand the true state of China's economy. Similarly, Greece's government falsified deficit numbers for years, a deception that fueled a crippling debt crisis requiring multiple international bailouts. When the head of Greece's statistical agency insisted on reporting accurate figures, he faced criminal prosecution. Perhaps most notoriously, Argentina systematically understated inflation rates during the 2000s and 2010s, leading the international community to dismiss its data entirely. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD These examples show the chaos that ensues when political pressures compromise data integrity. Economists warn that Trump's firing of McEntarfer risks setting the US on a similar path, eroding trust in the numbers that guide critical economic decisions.
Deccan Herald
29 minutes ago
- Deccan Herald
India's energy strategy through the lens of game theory
The Donald Trump administration's recent threat of penalty in response to India's continued oil imports from Russia is a textbook case of trade-offs between returns and risks. The United States has also announced a 25 per cent tariff on imports from India. The US tariff threats target high-value and/or labour-intensive exports, including electronics, pharmaceuticals, and the magnitude of the risk in India's oil procurement strategy has increased: approximately $87 billion in India's export revenue from the US now faces a potential slowdown. In comparison, India saves around $5-7 billion annually in energy costs from Russian strategic move in crude oil procurement — from negligible Russian oil purchases before 2022 to over 2 million barrels daily (about 40 per cent of crude oil imports) has saved the country billions of dollars over the last three how should India mitigate risks from US sanctions while managing its energy needs?.The strategic a game theory perspective, India faces three primary strategic choices, each with distinct payoff structures and risk compliance with the US demands would require the termination of Russian oil imports and the sourcing of oil from alternative suppliers. This is neither feasible nor likely. The specifics, scope, and implementation of any trade deal with the US, if India were to comply with US demands, are unclear. The recent experience of other countries that have entered trade deals with the US serves as a cautionary example of potentially inequitable terms in such compliance would also signal an acceptance of the US pressure, inviting similar coercion across other policy domains, undermining India's strategic autonomy in defence procurement, technology partnerships, and regional contrast, full defiance means continuing current Russian oil import levels, regardless of US threats, while maximising short-term energy cost savings and accepting potential US initial arbitrage opportunity for India in 2022 was compelling, as Russian crude oil was available at a discount of approximately $30 per barrel relative to the Brent benchmark. Even last year, India's oil import bill contracted despite stable volumes, reducing current account deficit pressures and inflation pass-through effects on the domestic ability to offer sustained deep discounts now, however, is structurally limited. Sanctions pressure, higher production costs, and freight insurance premiums, as well as competing demand from China and Turkey, are likely to keep discounts low. Recently, India's State-owned refiners seem to have paused new Russian contracts as margin compression makes procurement uneconomical. With the cost-benefit trade-off once again tapering against benefits, full defiance is neither a wise option for India nor economically middle third strategy would involve strategic diversification, gradually reducing Russian oil share to 15-20 per cent of total imports over the next two years while expanding alternative supplier relationships. The mixed strategy preserves partial cost advantages from Russian discounts while limiting the magnitude of the US experiences also suggest that the Trump administration's threats may represent pressure tactics rather than a policy that is fully implemented. Tariffs on imports from India and other countries are too disruptive to the US economy, resulting in higher costs of intermediate inputs for US firms and higher prices for final goods imports for US citizens, which in turn lowers domestic demand. This will lead to an eventual slowdown in the US economy — a risk that the US administration will have to the probability-weighted expected costs of the tariff and the penalty threats to India and other countries depend critically on the credibility of the threat when the US economic slowdown begins. If threats lack credibility, India will have more time to diversify its oil energy security needs long-term of the US sanctions and penalty threats, diversification reduces single-supplier dependence, and improves energy security. Over-concentration in any single supplier creates systematic vulnerabilities that rational energy procurement policy should energy demand, which is projected to increase rapidly, requires reliable and scalable supply relationships. Diversified procurement is likely to create competitive pressure among suppliers, potentially resulting in better long-term pricing compared to relying on a single supplier. Rather than choosing sides between the US and Russia, India can preserve relationships with multiple partners while avoiding excessive dependence on any single a game theory perspective, therefore, strategic diversification emerges as India's dominant strategy across multiple scenarios. Whether or not the US implements threatened penalties, diversification provides superior risk-adjusted returns compared to binary compliance or defiance for sustained economic growth and competitiveness, India should voluntarily adopt freer trade as part of its development strategy, rather than as a concession to external demands. The Budget 2025 announcements, with a move toward tariff rationalisation and the lowering of trade barriers, are a step toward acknowledging the same. .Vidya Mahambare is Union Bank Chair Professor of Economics and Director, Research, Great Lakes Institute of Management, Chennai.
