The Trump Zelensky, Trump Putin, & Trump NATO Meetings Exposed a lot that we have to break down
PDS Published 08/18/2025
-
Today might be one of the most important days in Russia's war against Ukraine as NATO and Ukraine are meeting Trump at the White House to discuss the war.
Right, this fairly impromptu gathering was hastily thrown together following Trump’s controversial meeting with Putin in Alaska on Friday.
Initially, today’s meeting was supposed to be just Trump and Zelensky.
However, European leaders didn’t want to risk a repeat of what happened the last time, when Vice President Vance decided Zelensky wasn’t “grateful” enough and threw the whole thing off the rails.
But this was such a big deal that the leaders of Germany, France, the UK, Italy, and Finland all decided they needed to be there.
As well as the general secretary of NATO and the European Commission president.
And interestingly, the leaders in attendance have a wide range of political views.
Right, on one end of the spectrum, you have U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who is from the left-leaning Labour Party.
And on the other end, there’s Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who is ideologically similar to Trump on many issues.
And there is a lot at stake here — as Russia kindly reminded everyone by launching strikes on Ukraine this morning and killing at least 10.
With Zelensky responding in a tweet, writing:
“This was a demonstrative and cynical Russian strike. They are aware that a meeting is taking place today in Washington that will address the end of the war.” []
Though, to be fair, Ukraine launched their own strikes into Russia when Putin was in Alaska.
But, with all this, the big question is: what exactly is on the bargaining table?
Well, based on Trump’s meeting with Putin on Friday… a lot.
Right, very notably here, Trump and Putin emerged from the meeting earlier than expected and without a formal deal.
With the two holding a super awkward press conference where Trump seemed intensely mopey and defeated.
But, shortly after the summit, Trump made the surprise announcement that he was dropping his demand that Russia and Ukraine reach a ceasefire.
Saying the two countries should start negotiating a peace deal instead, and telling Zelensky that Russia had demanded that the remainder of Ukraine’s Donbas region be handed over as a condition for ending the war.
With Trump also indicating that he intends to pressure Zelensky into agreeing to Putin’s terms, writing in a post on Truth Social late last night:
“President Zelenskyy of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight.”
And then adding this absolutely incomprehensible sentence: “Remember how it started. No getting back Obama given Crimea (12 years ago, without a shot being fired!), and NO GOING INTO NATO BY UKRAINE. Some things never change!!!”
But Trump’s wishes will likely be a tall order.
Right, in Putin’s version of a peace plan, Russia would get not only all of the Donbas, but also the Ukrainian land it currently holds: meaning Ukraine would need to give up even MORE land.
But many think that’s a non-starter for today’s talks, because Zelensky has long claimed that Ukraine would not give up land to Russia and reward it for its aggression.
Not to mention there’s the rather massive problem that Zelensky can’t even legally agree to a deal that gives up land.
That’s because Ukraine’s constitution flat out bans territorial concessions unless there’s a nationwide referendum.
And according to local pollsters, 78% of Ukrainians are against it.
Either way, the world is hoping for some answers coming out of this meeting, and even before things got underway we had a teaser.
That’s because before meeting with the European delegation, he met with Zelensky for a quick talk with the press which had a sense of deja vu… with some exceptions.
Ukrainian lawmakers joked that at least there wasn’t a yelling match this time.
Zelensky also made his own jokes to lighten the mood, such as when the reporter who called him out for not wearing a suit last time complimented Zelensky's outfit today, he said:
“But you are in the same suit. You see I have changed, you have not.” 10:24 - 10:30
Then things got more serious with questions like whether Ukraine would hold elections after a peace deal.
And Zelensky assured it would happen as long as there were good security guarantees.
Right, and that was a central theme to these questions: what exactly does Ukraine want as guarantees, and what would Trump be willing to give?
And Trump, for his part, was vague on the matter when asked multiple times.
For example, when directly asked if these guarantees could involve US troops, Trump just said:
“We’ll let you know that maybe later today. We’re meeting with seven great leaders of great countries, also. They’ll be involved. When it comes to security, there will be a lot of help.” 5:42 - 5:53
He went on to say that Europe would be the first line of defense since they’re local, but that the US would “be involved.”
And when Zelensky was asked what type of guarantees would be needed to form a peace deal, his response was “everything.”
Now, notably here, one thing that’s been discussed a lot since Putin met with Trump in Alaska is the possibility of an “Article 5-like” pact for Ukraine.
Right, NATO’s Article 5 is the meat of the alliance and states that an attack on one nation is treated as an attack on all of them.
Ukraine obviously wants those protections, but Russia has made it adamant that it won’t accept Ukraine joining NATO.
Except maybe not…
Because yesterday, White House special envoy Steve Witkoff claimed that Russia was open to the US and its allies offering “Article 5-like protections” to Ukraine.
So… essentially joining NATO?
It’s unclear as of recording what exactly this means, and both Zelensky and Trump largely dodged responding to questions about it.
Instead, they said they’d talk about it behind closed doors with the other European leaders.
But the meeting did reveal something: Trump is really is pushing for a trilateral meeting with Russia and Ukraine, saying:
“If everything works out well today, we’ll have a trilat — and I think there will be a reasonable chance of ending the war if we do that.” 2:40 - 2:45
And Zelensky was excited for that, which makes sense as his country has said that there cannot be a peace deal without Ukraine at the table.
Of course it’s one of those days, because just as we were getting ready for the show to wrap Trump, Zelensky, and the European leaders all came out to quickly speak to the press.
It was a bit of a circle jerk with everyone thanking everyone else for being there, but there was also some consistent messaging.
One honorable mention was the push to have Ukrainian children returned to their homes.any []
Right, thousands have been displaced and some forcibly removed to Russia, and they weren’t the only ones worried about the kids.
Multiple times today Zelensky praised First Lady Melania Trump for a letter she sent to Putin asking him to end the war in order to protect the children. [broll]
Something that President of the European Commissions Ursula von der Leyen echoed when she spoke.
Other than that though here are the three big demands almost everyone made.
First off: security guarantees.
At least in broad strokes, it seems like just about every European leader and maybe even Trump are open to Article 5-like protections for Ukraine.
Although I’m sure the devil will be in the details there.
The next major thing was a ceasefire during any peace talks.
For example, when the German Chancellor was speaking, he mentioned that there will be a lot of complicated negotiations coming up, but that:
“To be honest, we’d all like to see a ceasefire at the latest from the next meeting on. I can’t imagine what will take place without a ceasefire. So let’s work on that because the credibility of these efforts we are undertaking are dependent on a ceasefire from the start of these serious negotiations.” 00:25 - 00:53
Similar sentiments were echoed by others, although this was something Trump has pushed back against after his Alaska-rendevous with Putin.
Right, we mentioned that after the meeting he understood that for strategic reasons, either side may not want a ceasefire as it gives the other time to rearm and build without any guarantees of a peace.
But Trump thinks that’s a minor speedbump and claimed:
“In the six wars that I've settled, I haven't had a ceasefire. We just got into negotiations and -- one of the wars as you know was in the Congo and was 30 years long. Another one we settled last week was 35 years going on and we had no ceasefires.” 14:37 - 14:56
So pretty much giving himself a backdoor to continue peace talks IF a ceasefire never materializes.
The last major thing that everyone brought up was the need for trilateral talks.
And really, the entire conference was possibly a win for Trump because he was widely praised by those at the table for jumpstarting negotiations with Russia. (even if it was extremely controversial to do so in such a manner).
Either way, that’s probably all we’ll know today because these leaders are now behind closed doors for their own frank discussions about things.
Once that’s done, Trump said everyone will go home and he’ll be having a phone call with Putin.
In general he hopes that the ball will get rolling pretty fast here and said:
“In a certain period of time not very far from now, a week or two weeks we’re gonna know whether or not we’re going to solve this or if this horrible fighting is going to continue.” @3:23:26
So we’ll just have to wait and see.
Considering the starting points for both sides seem to be at the complete opposite of the spectrum, it’s hard to imagine how a peace deal can be made if the territorial disputes aren’t resolved.
And so far none of the rhetoric today has really even mentioned that.
-
(FEEDING IN FROM BRIAN’S WRITEUP): But there was also another very important topic that reportedly was discussed during Trump and Putin’s meeting: U.S. elections.
And I say “reportedly” because, afterwards, you had Trump doing an exclusive interview on Fox with Sean Hannity, where he said this:
“Vladimir Putin said something — one of the most interesting things. He said 'your election was rigged because you have mail-in voting.' He said, 'mail-in voting, every election’ he said ‘no country has mail-in voting. It's impossible to have mail-in voting and have honest elections.' And he said that to me, it was very — because we talked about 2020. He said, 'you won that election by so much.’ And that's how he got it — he said, ‘And if you would have won, we wouldn't have had a war. You'd have all these millions of people alive now instead of dead.’ And he said, ‘and you lost it because of mail-in voting. It was a rigged election.’” 00:01 - 00:33
With Trump going on to claim, with no evidence, that some people get between five and seven ballots, and adding:
“But Vladimir Putin, smart guy, said ‘you can't have an honest election with mail-in voting.’ And he said ‘there's not a country in the world that uses it now.’” 00:19 - 00:29
Okay, so a lot to unpack there.
First of all, at this point, it should go without saying that Trump has still provided zero evidence for his claims of fraud in the 2020 elections.
And studies have shown that mail-in voting fraud is rare because there are indeed safeguards in place.
Hell, Trump himself literally embraced it during the 2024 election, encouraging his voters to cast their ballots by mail.
And that likely helped him win!
Right, an official government report by U.S. Election Assistance Commission found that mail-in ballots accounted for a third of ALL ballots cast in the 2024 election.
And while that was certainly less than the 43% of votes they made up in 2020, it’s still WELL above pre-pandemic levels.
So if Putin really did say, as Trump claimed, that the 2020 election was rigged because it had mail-in voting and that “it's impossible to have mail-in voting and have honest elections” — then by that logic, Trump’s 2024 election would also be illegitimate.
But, to that point, its just absolutely wild to be taking advice on Democratic elections from Vladimir Putin.
A man who has collectively served as the president of his country for around 20 of the last 25 years. []
A man who himself has won multiple elections that observers have said were marred by fraud, coercion, intimidation, supression, and plenty of other non-Democratic actions.
I mean, even the U.S. State Department under Biden found that Putin’s 2024 election “was neither free nor fair.”
Saying that it “occurred in an environment of intense political repression that has marginalized or completely silenced all independent voices.”
But, even beyond all that, it’s impossible right now to verify what exactly Putin said to Trump here because we don’t have any footage or transcripts from that part of the meeting.
Right, this is all stuff Trump is claiming Putin said, and there’s no way to know if he actually said these things or if Trump is… let’s call it “embellishing.”
And experts note that it would be kind of nuts if Putin really did say some of the things Trump attributed to him — right, as Fiona Hill, a former top Trump advisor, explains:
“And President Trump asserted in his Fox News interview that there are no countries in the world that allow mail-in voting. Well, Russia allows mail-in voting, and if everybody wants to go out and look, they can look for themselves. In 2020, President Vladimir Putin signed into law Russians being able to vote by mail and also on the internet. And more than 30 other countries also allow some forms of mail-in voting. So, it's just not true that other countries, including Russia, don't use this.” 00:52 - 1:21
But she also indicated that she does believe that Putin and Trump did have some kind of conversation about mail-in ballots:
“Well, look, this is Vladimir Putin, as usual, trying to manipulate U.S. domestic politics. I've seen him do this over and over again.” 00:02 - 00:10
“And Putin wants to sow chaos in the American electoral system ahead of the midterms. So, of course, he's led into this whole issue of mail-in voting.” 00:43 - 00:52
But, if that is Putin’s true goal, it seems like he’s already achieving it.
Because just this morning, you had Trump making a lengthy post on Truth Social where he announced that he was, quote:
“going to lead a movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS.”
And adding that, “while we’re at it,” he would also get rid of voting machines that he described as “Highly ‘Inaccurate,’ Very Expensive, and Seriously Controversial.”
With Trump going on to falsely claim again that the U.S. is the only country in the world that still uses mail-in ballots, incorrectly asserting that “All others gave it up because of the MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD ENCOUNTERED.”
And alleging, with no evidence, that Democrats “CHEAT AT LEVELS NEVER SEEN BEFORE,” arguing that they are “virtually Unelectable without using this completely disproven Mail-In SCAM.”
Now, as far as how Trump hopes to achieve this “movement,” he said in the post that he will sign an executive order ahead of the 2026 midterms.
But he didn’t provide any more information about exactly what that order would do, saying only:
“Remember, the States are merely an ‘agent’ for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes. They must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President of the United States, tells them, FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY, to do.”
But experts argue that that is not what the Constitution actually says.
Instead, it gives states the power to set their own election policies unless Congress passes a law preempting them.
And, even beyond that, the Constitution doesn’t just give the president the authority to unilaterally tell states what to do regarding the administration of their elections.
So, as a result, you have experts claiming that this is “just another part of his strategy to sow distrust in our elections and prevent voters from holding him accountable.”
(LEAD-OUT TO CHRIS’ STORY ON TEXAS): With Reuters echoing that, saying that this is all part of Trump’s “latest effort to reshape the midterm election battlefield to his party's advantage.”
Specifically noting his campaign to push Republican-led states like Texas “to redraw congressional districts to increase the likelihood of a Republican candidate being elected.”
-
And then speaking of the erosion of your voting rights, we’ve got some important updates in the national gerrymandering war of 2025.
Starting with the news that the Texas Democrats have finally returned from exile to their home state. [Image]
With them announcing this morning that they’d arrived back in Austin, giving Republicans the quorum they need to pass their new Congressional map. [Headline]
Right, because you’ll remember that the state’s GOP answered Trump’s call for five more seats in the House with an openly partisan mid-decade redistricting plan that would deliver him exactly that. [B roll, then show charts]
But over 50 Democrats fled the state, preventing them from voting on the map, and in the two weeks since then, Republicans have applied pressure every way they can to force the lawmakers back. [B roll, 00:15]
With the legislature getting civil arrest warrants for them and threatening nearly 400,000 dollars in fines, Attorney General Ken Paxton suing to remove them from office, Senator John Cornyn having the FBI help track them down, and Governor Greg Abbott accusing them of holding up a vote on aid for flood victims. [Headline, then headline, then headline/image, then Headline/image, then headline]
But through all that, the Democrats persisted, saying they would return home if (1) the special session in Texas ended and (2) California proposed its own Congressional map to counter Texas. [Quote, find “conditions”]
And both of those things happened on Friday, so despite the reality that they’re effectively buckling, the Democrats spun this as a victory.
With their state House Caucus Chair Gene Wu [Woo] saying: [B roll, 00:18]
“We killed the corrupt special session, withstood unprecedented surveillance and intimidation, and rallied Democrats nationwide to join this existential fight for fair representation — reshaping the entire 2026 landscape. We’re returning to Texas more dangerous to Republicans’ plans than when we left. Our return allows us to build the legal record necessary to defeat this racist map in court, take our message to communities across the state and country, and inspire how to fight these undemocratic redistricting schemes in their own statehouses.” [Quote and same B roll]
But the fact remains that Abbott simply called another special session right after the first one ended, and he had promised to keep calling them one after another until the Democrats gave up.
So as The New York Times put it:
“The walkout did not change the raw political dynamics in Republican-dominated Texas, and Democrats remained in the situation they were in before they left: powerless to permanently stop the new map from being adopted.” [Quote]
But they are correct that they put a glaring spotlight on Texas and provoked a national response from blue states, particularly California.
Speaking of which, Democrats there have unveiled their proposed map, which would give them five more seats, effectively cancelling out the GOP’s gains in Texas. [Map]
And accomplishing this by turning the currently red seats held by Kevin Kiley [Kye-lee], Doug LaMalfa and Ken Calvert into safe blue seats, and making those held by Darrell Issa and David Valadao [Pronounce 00:44] left-leaning ones.
So if all five flip, Republicans would only have four seats left, leaving Democrats with 48. [Quote, find “48”]
But first, the state’s legislature has to actually get this map passed, and they’re set to consider it this week.
Then, if two-thirds of lawmakers approve, the voters themselves will have to approve it as well in a ballot measure on November 4.
And only if the map passes that will it be effective for 2026, 2028 and 2030.
After which point California would go back to letting its independent redistricting commission draw its maps.
But even if California’s plan works, that still might not be enough to stop Republicans.
Because more states including Florida, Indiana, Missouri and Ohio are reportedly considering their own redistricting plans as well.
So New York and Illinois have suggested they might follow California’s lead, though it’s doubtful whether Illinois can squeeze out any more seats and New York won’t be able to in time for 2026.
Meanwhile, both sides claim they’re merely reacting to the other.
With Democrats, of course, responding to what was started in Texas, and Republicans countering that Texas was itself a response to already jerrymandered blue states.
Right, and their argument is that if you look at the gap between how many voters each party has and how many representatives they have, California’s way more gerrymandered than Texas.
I mean, the blue state has a 20-point gap, while the red one’s is only eight points. [Quote, find “20 percent”]
But as many have pointed out, there are a few problems with this line of argument.
First of all, just comparing those two numbers doesn’t tell you whether there was actually gerrymandering, because other factors could explain the disparity.
Like, for example, Republican voters being more spread out across California, living in disconnected rural areas or tiny red pockets within blue bubbles. [Quote, find “pockets”]
So when a nonpartisan commission, which California has but Texas doesn’t, sets out to draw a fair map, it’s much harder to do.
And for this decade’s map in particular, there were many tight races, but Democrats happened to win most of them.
With for example seven candidates winning just 51% of the combined vote in their districts, but grabbing 100% of the seats because we have a winner-takes-all system. [Quote, find “51 percent”]
Also, if you use other shorthand metrics of gerrymandering, Texas actually ranks above California.
So for example, if you look at the gap between the average vote shares across all districts and the vote share in the median district, Texas is one of the worst states in the country. [Quote same link, find “skewed”]
Or the Princeton Gerrymandering Project, which simulates thousands of potential maps and grades each state based on several criteria, gave California a B and Texas an F. [Quote, find “Princeton Gerrymandering”]
Plus if you zoom out to the country as a whole, it’s generally recognized that over the past 15 years, Republicans have gerrymandered more successfully than Democrats.
With the Brennan Center concluding that the GOP enjoyed a 16-seat advantage this decade purely thanks to gerrymandering. [Quote, find “16-seat”]
In fact, the movement to create many of these nonpartisan redistricting commissions came in response to the GOP’s aggressive gerrymandering after the 2010 census.
But now, with those very commissions backfiring on Democrats by tying their hands in the fight against Trump, attitudes are changing.
Hell, even groups that have long opposed gerrymandering like Common Cause said it wouldn’t “automatically condemn” Democrats for attempting to even the playing field. [Quote]
So what we’re seeing, especially as voters demand bolder action from their representatives, is that certain Democrats are strategically posturing themselves as the anti-Trump.
A dynamic that advantages governors in solidly blue states who can afford to be aggressively partisan, like Illinois’ JB Pritzker, California’s Gavin Newsom and New York’s Kathy Hochul. [Image]
While disadvantaging Democratic governors who preside over divided or even Republican state legislatures, and can’t afford to stick their necks out too much.
People like Pennsylvania’s Josh Shapiro, Minnesota’s Tim Wals and Kentucky’s Andy Beshear [Ba-sheer].
So assuming that some of these folks have presidential ambitions — I’m looking at you, Gavin — this is shaping up to be an opportunity for reputation-building.
You’re 30 seconds away from being debt free with PDS Debt. Get your free assessment and find the best option for you at PDSDebt.
-
The Trump administration will no longer allow injured children from Gaza to receive medical treatment in the US.
Or, to be precise, the White House is halting visas for all people from Gaza, but seemingly in direct response to far-right outrage over hurt kids getting the help they need here.
This as we also have to talk about how the number of kids Israel is killing just keeps going up;
a leaked recording serving as new evidence of the government’s alleged “genocidal intent”;
and finally, the mass protests calling for the war to end.
But starting with the US, what you need to know is that various charities have been organizing medical flights here for children from Gaza for well over a year.
Right, it’s not clear exactly how many have come, but we know according to the State Department’s own statistics, for example, that almost 4,000 B1 and B2 visas have been issued this year alone for individuals with Palestinian Authority travel documents. []
With those both being nonimmigrant visitor visas and the B2 being the one that covers medical treatment.
And a few weeks ago, an Ohio-based nonprofit by the name of HEAL Palestine began organizing what it called the “The largest single medical evacuation of injured children from Gaza to the US.” []
A campaign, which, unfortunately, drew the attention of Laura Loomer – a hateful far-right extremist and hardcore Islamophobe who seems to have a shocking amount of influence over the Trump administration.
WIth her playing off her “discovery” of this completely unconcealed information as an “exclusive” scoop;
And with that, she also alleged that someone at the State Department must be working with these “Hamas aligned NGOs” – saying: []
And so you actually had Republican lawmakers tagged in her posts responding and promising to take action.
WIth Loomer saying she spoke to Secretary of State Marco Rubio Rubio herself Friday night to alert him to the flights and what she called the threat of an Islamic invasion. []
And not long after, you had the State Department announcing that “All visitor visas for individuals from Gaza are being stopped while [it conducts] a full and thorough review.” []
WIth Loomer responding by saying:
“God only knows how many lives I personally saved today by blowing the whistle on rogue actors at State Department giving visas to Gazan families.
On the flip side, you had HEAL Palestine responding with a statement saying it’s “distressed” by the state department’s decision, and explaining that it’s “an American humanitarian nonprofit organization delivering urgent aid and medical care to children in Palestine –
including sponsoring and bringing severely injured children to the U.S. on temporary visas for essential medical treatment not available at home.”
And adding: “After their treatment is complete, the children and any accompanying family members return to the Middle East. This is a medical treatment program, not a refugee resettlement program.”
But with that, the grim reality is that the number of children in need of medical attention – if they’re not being killed – is rising every day.
And it may soon get even worse.
Right, earlier this month, Israel approved a plan to launch a new offensive to seize control of Gaza city – the largest population center in the territory.
And while it’s not clear exactly when the assault will begin, this weekend, you had Israeli authorities signalling this weekend that it will forcibly evacuate the city’s roughly 1 million inhabitants from combat zones to southern Gaza “for their protection.”
This as at least 1.9 million people in Gaza – or about 90% of the population – have already been displaced at least.
And the idea that it’s for their protection? Well, notably, designated “safe zones” have repeatedly been bombed during the war.
In fact, on Saturday, an Israeli airstrike in Gaza killed a baby girl and her parents in their tent – in an area of southern Gaza previously designated a humanitarian zone by Israel. []
And similarly, aid distribution sites? They haven’t exactly been safe either.
In fact, Israeli forces killed at least 17 aid-seekers just yesterday – adding to the at least 1,760 people who have been killed while seeking aid between the end of May and last Wednesday, according to the UN. [] []
This as the overall number reported killed has recently climbed above 60,000 and the actual Gaza death is believed by many to be much higher – even before factoring in starvation, disease, or other so-called “indirect” causes.
Although, of course, Israel has played a direct role in creating these conditions – with today, for example, Amnesty International today accusing the government of enacting a "deliberate policy" of starvation in Gaza.
And adding to that, Israeli leaders continue to talk openly about the mass relocation of people from Gaza –
Which much of the international community say would amount to ethnic cleansing or the forcible transfer of a population in violation of international law.
Right, because there’s nothing voluntary about leaving your home with no idea if you’ll be able to return after an occupying power has made most of it uninhabitable.
And of course going even further, Israeli officials and other public figures have also in several cases made statements that have been described as evidence of the Israeli government’s “genocidal intent.”
Which actually brings us to that leaked recording I mentioned at the beginning.
Right, Israel’s Channel 12 TV station has released shocking audio of the guy who served as IDF’s Military Intelligence Directorate for the first six months of Israel’s assault on Gaza.
With him specifically saying that he believed 50 Palestinians must die for every person killed that day and “it does not matter now if they are children.” []
He also said the death toll in Gaza – which he put at more than 50,000 – was “necessary” as a “message to future generations” of Palestinians – finally adding:
“They need a Nakba (Nak-buh) every now and then to feel the price.” []
With him referring there to the brutal and violent mass expulsion of more than 700,000 Palestinians from their homes and lands after the creation of Israel in 1948.
But notably, even with all that, this guy's comments?
They reportedly didn’t make headlines in most mainstream Israeli outlets, which instead focused on comments he made criticizing Netanyahu or the government.[]
And that highlights just how different the war is perceived and talked about inside Israel compared to a lot of other places.
Right, in a poll conducted late last month by the Israel Democracy Institute, 79% of Jewish Israelis said they were either “not very troubled” or “not troubled at all” by reports of famine and suffering among Gaza’s Palestinian population. []
And you have experts arguing that at least part of the reason for that is they’ve never actually seen reports of famine and suffering in Gaza.
With head of freedom of the press at the Union of Journalists in Israel saying:
“Until a couple of weeks ago, you could count only a handful of reports from Gaza not filtered by the IDF.”
“...all the other mainstream media completely ignored what’s going on on the Palestinian side – the human casualties there, the numbers of children killed in this war. The Israeli audience simply did not see that at all.” []
And now, there’s some signs that it’s changing, but mass opposition to the war still seems to be driven almost entirely by the belief that it’s endangering the lives of the remaining hostages.
And with that, you had hundreds of thousands of protesters showing up in Tel Aviv over the weekend to call for a ceasefire (BROLL: 0:11-0:22)
It was one of the biggest days of demonstrations in Israel since October 7th, 2023.
With protesters gathering at dozens of places including outside politicians’ homes, military facilities, and on major highways (BROLL: 0:33-0:36)
And Israeli police blasted crowds with water cannons and making dozens of arrests.
But we’ve only seen Netanyahu criticizing the protests and showing no sign fo letting up.
With a former Israeli diplomat in New York telling Al Jazeera:
“Most prime ministers would have resigned after October 7th … He is not just another prime minister. He cares only about his survival. He is driven by some Messianic delusions of redrawing the Middle East.” []
And he seems well on his way to doing that, so we’ll have to see whether these protests grow, if the international pressure keeps growing, and whether any of it can make a difference.
-
Turns out, massive companies aren’t usually fans of governments stealing their branding for concentration camp merch.
ALT INTRO: The Florida GOP tried turning a prison into a brand again - this time, though, Home Depot wasn’t having it.
Right, Home Depot just put a hard stop to the Florida GOP’s merch line for their new migrant detention center. []
But before we get to the merch side of this story, we gotta give some context.
Starting with late last week, when Florida governor Ron DeSantis announced his plans to turn an underused state prison into a migrant detention center with the capacity to hold up to 1,300 detainees. []
Dubbing the new facility “Deportation Depot” - which may or may not be inspired by the recent ICE raids on Home Depot parking lots.
The plan is reportedly to spend $6 million to convert the Baker Correctional Institution in north Florida - a state prison that was partially closed in 2021 due to staffing shortages and numerous reports of excessive violence and guards abusing inmates. []
With DeSantis saying the state needs additional capacity to hold migrants and Baker is, quote, “ready-made infrastructure.” []
Adding,
“The reason for this is not to just house people indefinitely. We want to process, stage and then return illegal aliens to their home country. That is the name of the game.” []
And while he didn’t give a timeline for when it would open, DeSantis did say that it would be operational soon.
Adding,
“We’re not rushing to do it right this day, but they’re doing what they need to do to get it done with all deliberate speed.” []
And according to the director of the Florida Division of Emergency Management, the Deportation Depot could be operational in as little as 2 to 3 weeks. []
As for staffing, the plan is reportedly to bring in Florida’s National Guard - which was called on to help run the regular prisons throughout the state for more than 2 years because of chronic staffing shortages. []
Before they were then called to help with immigration enforcement.
Now, DeSantis has said that he expects this new detention center to be utilized to its capacity - calling it a priority for the people of Florida and of the country.
And to give the people a chance to demonstrate that prioritization, Florida’s GOP made merch for the Deport Depot.
Reportedly sharing a photo on X showing shirts, hats, mugs, and water bottles with a logo in the classic Home Depot style - including their bright orange lettering.
And saying in the since-deleted tweet,
"DEPORT DEPOT - Where Florida gets more done! We won't back down to the radical left. Stand with @realDonaldTrump [and] @GovRonDeSantis and take a stand!"
But within days, Home Depot pushed back - with a spokesperson saying in a statement,
“We don’t allow any organization to use our branding or logo for their commercial purposes, and we did not approve this use.” []
With that, the merch line quickly disappeared - scrubbed from X and the Florida GOP’s website.
And the Washington Post reports that it was Democratic state legislator Anna Eskamani (Ess-kah-mah-nee) who contacted Home Depot about the GOP’s use of their branding - prompting their response and the merch line’s abrupt end.
With Ess-kah-mah-nee saying,
“I’m happy to see the merchandise be removed but at the end of the day it doesn’t address the offensive and arrogant behavior of the anti-immigrant agenda.”
And she’s right - this isn’t even the first time we’ve seen something like this in Florida.
The idea of merch like this first appeared in connection with Florida’s other migrant detention facility Alligator Alcatraz - the future of which is uncertain at the moment.
With district court judge Kathleen Williams last week hearing the final arguments in a lawsuit filed by an alliance of environmental groups trying to shut the facility down. []
So that’s a ruling we’ll have to keep an eye out for.
It’s also worth noting that in the less than 2 months the facility has been open, it’s been inundated with allegations of “inhumane” conditions including detainees held in cages in excessive heat, broken toilets and air conditioning, and inadequate food.
And there are some saying that this move by DeSantis to create another detention center may be a response to the distinct possibility that Alligator Alcatraz could be shut down.
But while these detention facilities have dominated the conversation in Florida, other states have been locked in a bureaucratic battle over redistricting…
