'You'll be seeing things happen': President Trump teases 'major statement' on Russia
"You'll be seeing things happen," Trump told reporters on July 11 when asked about Russia's overnight drone attacks on Ukraine's second largest city, Kharkiv, that damaged a maternity hospital.
Trump on Thursday told NBC News that he's "disappointed in Russia" as he addressed the status of the Russia-Ukraine war, which has raged for more than three years. He added, "But we'll see what happens over the next couple of weeks.'
'I think I'll have a major statement to make on Russia on Monday,' Trump said, declining to elaborate.
More: Trump escalates criticism of Putin, rearms Ukraine, as Russia's war plows on
Trump on Wednesday gave his bluntest assessment yet of Putin. "We get a lot of bulls--t thrown at us from Putin, if you want to know the truth," Trump said at a Cabinet meeting. "He's very nice all the time but it turns out to be meaningless.'
"We're not happy with Putin, I'm not happy with Putin, I can tell you that much right now. Because he's killing a lot of people. And a lot of them are his soldiers," Trump said.
Unmoved by Trump's criticism, Russia on Thursday launched a new wave of attacks that targeted Kyiv with some 400 drones and missiles.
Earlier in the week, Trump overturned a Pentagon decision to withhold some weapons shipments to Ukraine.
More: Trump rips Putin, says Russian leader 'killing a lot of people' in Ukraine
Trump discussed details of the weapons arrangement with NBC. 'We're sending weapons to NATO, and NATO is paying for those weapons, 100%. So what we're doing is the weapons that are going out are going to NATO, and then NATO is going to be giving those weapons [to Ukraine], and NATO is paying for those weapons."
More: 'We have to': Trump sending weapons to Ukraine after expressing disappointment with Putin
Trump has long said he is considering imposing new sanctions on Russia but has held off on taking action. U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, a Trump ally, is pushing legislation that would target Russia with substantial new sanctions.
Since returning to the White House in January for his second term, Trump has pinned equal blame on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for prolonging a war started by Russia. But in recent weeks, Trump has expressed impatience with Putin as U.S. efforts to secure a Russia-Ukraine peace deal haven't gained traction.
Trump said in late May that Putin was "playing with fire" and had gone "absolutely crazy," as he speculated that Russia wants to lay claim to all of Ukraine. The next month he said the war had been "more difficult" to resolve than other conflicts and called Putin "misguided."
Contributing: Francesca Chambers of USA TODAY
Reach Joey Garrison on X @joeygarrison.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump teases 'major statement' on Russia amid new attacks on Ukraine
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's $100B AI Shockwave: Nvidia Back in China, Coal Back on the Grid
The Trump administration is preparing a full-court press on artificial intelligence, with a major policy address scheduled for July 23 titled Winning the AI Race. It's expected to be Trump's most detailed take on the technology to date. The event is backed by White House AI and crypto advisor David Sacks and his All-In podcast co-hosts. Behind the scenes, a sweeping AI action plan is nearing completionbuilt with heavy industry inputand could soon be cemented by executive order. The blueprint focuses on cutting red tape, expanding energy access for data centers, and getting federal buy-in on a more streamlined, pro-growth regulatory regime. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 4 Warning Signs with NVDA. One of the headline shifts: the U.S. now plans to allow AI chipmakers to resume some exports to China. That includes Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA)'s H20 chips, a move seen as a significant win for CEO Jensen Huang, who has been openly critical of prior export bans. Huang met privately with Trump in Washington last week, where discussions reportedly focused on boosting U.S. AI competitiveness. For Nvidia and AMD, this could reopen a multi-billion-dollar channel that had been shut off earlier this year. The reversal comes amid growing concern over China's rapid AI developmenthighlighted by DeepSeek's surprisingly cheap R1 model that raised eyebrows across Wall Street in January. Energy is also taking center stage. With AI data centers projected to more than double their share of U.S. electricity demand by 2035from 3.5% to 8.6%the Trump team is calling for expanded use of coal, gas, and nuclear power. Earlier this year, Trump helped broker a $100 billion data center investment involving SoftBank, Oracle, and OpenAI. Meanwhile, a controversial bid to preempt state AI laws for a decade was ultimately stripped from the recent tax package, but not before it gained vocal support from tech investors like Marc Andreessen and Joe Lonsdale. Taken together, Trump's AI agenda is shaping up to be aggressive, industry-led, and laser-focused on outpacing China. This article first appeared on GuruFocus.
New York Times
29 minutes ago
- New York Times
How Much Military Aid Has the U.S. Given to Ukraine? Here's What to Know.
When President Trump returned to office, he declined to announce new aid to Ukraine, and showed outright hostility to the country's president in a televised appearance at the White House. But Mr. Trump signaled a major shift this week when he announced a plan to sell weapons to NATO countries, which would then pass them along to Ukraine in its war against Russian forces. After Russia launched the war in 2022, the Biden administration sent Ukraine $33.8 billion worth of weapons from the Pentagon's stockpile, and another $33.2 billion in funds to help the country buy additional arms and hardware from the American defense industry. But the United States began sending military support to Ukraine even before that. What are the different types of military aid? To get U.S. arms to Ukraine quickly, the Pentagon has taken them out of its own stockpile and transported them to the country's border under a program called the presidential drawdown authority. Congress funds that effort by giving the Pentagon money to purchase replacements. On a slightly longer timeline, the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative sends U.S. taxpayer money to Kyiv so that it can purchase goods directly from American defense firms. Those orders can take months or even years to be delivered, and are intended to offer a reliable supply of certain munitions into the future. Mr. Trump announced a third way this week: The United States would sell arms to European nations, which would ship them to Ukraine or use them to replace weapons they send to the country from their existing stocks. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Politico
33 minutes ago
- Politico
When one vote costs everything
Presented by Welcome to POLITICO's West Wing Playbook: Remaking Government, your guide to Donald Trump's unprecedented overhaul of the federal government — the key decisions, the critical characters and the power dynamics that are upending Washington and beyond. Send tips | Subscribe | Email Sophia | Email Irie | Email Ben When all but five Republicans voted earlier this month for DONALD TRUMP's 'big, beautiful bill,' the president once again flaunted his ability to strongarm his party into submission — even if it costs them their jobs. Democrats, enraged by stinging defeats in November, plan to focus their midterm messaging on the legislation's cuts to Medicaid and tax breaks for the richest Americans as they fight to retake a majority in one or both chambers. And ELON MUSK, infuriated that the law will add trillions to the national debt, has promised to use his vast wealth to start his own 'America Party' and primary conservative Republicans who voted for the bill. To be successful, Democrats would need to recreate the 1994, 2010 or 2018 midterms, in which the minority party successfully crafted a political message around a major piece of legislation. In 1994, the GOP took back control of Congress for the first time in 40 years on a message against former President BILL CLINTON's agenda. In 2010, Republicans seized on outrage over the Affordable Care Act to flip 63 House seats and six Senate seats, and in 2018, Democrats used the GOP's unsuccessful ACA repeal effort to net 40 seats in the House. (They weren't as successful in the Senate, where Republicans maintained control.) Former Democratic Rep. CHRIS CARNEY credits his vote for the ACA in 2010 for his ouster from the Pennsylvania district he'd represented for two terms — and cautioned that Republicans may have cause for concern next year. 'I took that vote knowing I was going to lose,' Carney said in an interview with West Wing Playbook. 'But to be a good member of Congress, you have to be willing to lose your seat for things that are important. And the Republicans who voted for the BBB probably understood that they run the risk of losing their seat by voting for it.' This interview has been edited for length and clarity. What similarities and differences do you see between the ACA and the BBB in terms of the degree of electoral liability they pose to the lawmakers who voted for them? Do you think the megabill will be the defining piece of legislation for the midterms? Both the ACA and the BBB were organizing principles for the opposition party. The Tea Party movement used Obamacare as a way to rally forces against Democrats who voted for it, and, in fact, against Democrats who didn't vote for it. Democrats this time will use the BBB probably in the same way. The real question is: How well can Democrats message against it, and how well can Republicans defend it? Back in 2010, I don't think we were given exactly the tools we needed to defend decisions to vote for it. How worried should House Republicans be as they approach 2026? As a member, you have to decide what you're willing to lose your seat over. I took the vote in 2010 knowing full well that I was going to lose in November. But for me, a bill that created that much health care was important, and as it turned out, 33,000 families and individuals in my district got health care who never had it before. As a member of Congress, you are exquisitely aware of the electoral impact your votes have. I'm sure that Republicans in Kamala Harris and Joe Biden districts are making that same calculation: Is it more important that I appease Donald Trump and take the vote for him, or do I take a vote that may preserve my reelection in the next cycle? How should Democrats seize on this moment? It's important that Democrats message in an effective way: Talk about how the BBB reduces health care while providing tax cuts to the very rich — those bread-and-butter issues resonate. As the BBB is gone through with a fine-tooth comb, there are going to be a lot of things in there that the Democrats can take advantage of in terms of messaging. The question is, can they be effective in the messaging, and can they be consistent in the messaging, and can they sustain the messaging? If they can do all those things, I think 2026 might be a tough year for Republicans, certainly in the House. If you talk about it in terms of Medicaid, a specific program, that's a little bit harder to sell than if you talk about it generally as health care, which it is. There are quite a few similarities between the situation in Washington in 2010 and today — but one new variable is Musk. What do you make of his threats to primary conservative Republicans? Who, in your opinion, are the winners and losers if the America Party comes to fruition? If the America Party actually becomes a thing, the Republican Party will lose more of its votes, and certainly lose the votes it gained in 2024. I don't think that there are many Democrats that would be supportive of Elon Musk's party, but I think that there are a number of libertarian and Trump-curious voters that might be turned off by how he's governed since he's been in office in his second term, and what the Republicans in Congress have done. If the America Party does end up forming, I think it hurts Republicans far more than it hurts Democrats. MESSAGE US — West Wing Playbook is obsessively covering the Trump administration's reshaping of the federal government. Are you a federal worker? A DOGE staffer? Have you picked up on any upcoming DOGE moves? We want to hear from you on how this is playing out. Email us at westwingtips@ Did someone forward this email to you? Subscribe! POTUS PUZZLER Who was the first president to have his Cabinet appointee rejected? (Answer at bottom.) Agenda Setting YOU CAN STAY: Senate Republicans will scale back the White House's request for $9.4 billion in spending cuts as they look to shore up their votes, our JORDAIN CARNEY and CASSANDRA DUMAY report. Sen. ERIC SCHMITT (R-Mo.), who is leading the recissions effort with the White House, said Republicans will restore a $400 million cut to the global AIDS program known as PEPFAR, bringing the total amount of cuts to $9 billion. Senate Majority Leader JOHN THUNE said he expects the PEPFAR switch to be the only change made to the package, adding that there was a 'lot of interest' among his caucus in funding the GEORGE W. BUSH-era program, which has been credited with saving tens of millions of lives. RURAL FOOD ACCESS HIT: The Department of Agriculture has cut nearly all funding for a dozen rural centers that support farms and food businesses across the country, our MARCIA BROWN reports. Funding for Regional Food Business Centers, established under the Biden administration, has been frozen since January. The department has not provided the centers with a reason aside from saying that the funding was under review for its alignment with Trump administration priorities. USDA confirmed the end of the program later today, saying that the centers 'should not have been established in this manner in the first place.' TWIDDLING OUR THUMBS: Despite employees at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau still getting paid, the bureau has in practice been mostly inoperable for nearly six months, AP's KEN SWEET reports. CFPB employees say they essentially spend the workday not doing anything, forbidden from doing any work by directive from the White House. One current employee told AP that outsiders would be amazed at how little work gets done. Conversations between colleagues are seldom out of fear that they would be possibly violating the directive. The agency's press office doesn't respond to emails. WHO'S IN, WHO'S OUT ETHICS CHANGES AT DOJ: The Justice Department is ramping up its efforts to strip law enforcement officials with civil service protections intended to insulate their work from political interference, NYT's DEVLIN BARRETT reports. On Friday, a new batch of more than 20 career employees at the department and its component agencies were fired, including the attorney general's own ethics adviser, JOSEPH W. TIRRELL. The rest included senior officials at the U.S. Marshals Service, as well as prosecutors and support staff who once worked for JACK SMITH when he was a special counsel prosecuting the president. Some DOJ veterans say the move represents a pattern of the administration ignoring and eventually demolishing longstanding civil service legal precedents meant to keep politics out of law enforcement work, and to give more leeway to Trump's loyalists. A DOJ spokesperson declined to comment. Knives Out LIKE HE NEVER LEFT: Former national security adviser MIKE WALTZ pledged today to push for reform at the United Nations, following in the administration's footsteps in slashing the size of the federal government, our AMY MACKINNON reports. Waltz, who Trump nominated as his ambassador to the organization, said that the administration was conducting a number of reviews of the UN to examine how it is spending its funds, calling for the body to refocus on its founding principles. What We're Reading 'We're not buying it': Trump ties Ukraine aid to America First (POLITICO's Eli Stokols and Dasha Burns) Federal Workers' 'Emotional Roller Coaster': Fired, Rehired, Fired Again (NYT's Eileen Sullivan) The government wants AI to fight wars and review your taxes (WaPo's Douglas MacMillan, Faiz Siddiqui, Hannah Natanson and Elizabeth Dwoskin) Event Planners Are Cancelling on Trump-Era Washington. Is This a Sign of Things to Come? (POLITICO's Michael Schaffer) POTUS PUZZLER ANSWER That would be former President ANDREW JACKSON, who had his nominee for Treasury secretary, ROGER TANEY, rejected in 1834 as part of inter-party disagreements over the National Bank.
