Former NATO Commander Goes On CNN To Mock Trump’s Plea To Putin
Retired U.S. Gen. Wesley Clark, a former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, took a swipe at President Donald Trump’s Truth Social message to Vladimir Putin, calling the public plea unlikely to influence Russian military behavior.
Clark’s comments came during a Thursday appearance on CNN’s “Situation Room,” shortly after Trump had posted:
“I am not happy with the Russian strikes on KYIV. Not necessary, and very bad timing. Vladimir, STOP! 5000 soldiers a week are dying. Let’s get the Peace Deal DONE!”
“Do you think a post from President Trump on social media will actually wind up stopping Putin from launching more attacks on civilians, like in Kyiv, for example, where civilian men, women and children were just killed in big numbers?” asked CNN’s Wolf Blitzer.
Clark replied bluntly: “Well, I think it would be very surprising if President Trump’s tweet would have any real impact on President Putin.”
The retired Army officer argued that Putin sees a strategic opening, particularly as the U.S. appears to be retreating from some of its longstanding commitments in Europe.
“So this is a moment for Putin, really. It’s what he’s been waiting for,” he continued. “This gives him a clear field to bring pressure to bear against Ukrainian population like this missile strike, and also to go to his allies, China, North Korea, and Iran, and say, ‘Give me more, give me more. This is the moment we can go.”
“We know there are exercises being prepared for this summer in Belarus. Rumors of brigades being ready to attack from Belarus into Kaliningrad to open that gate. This is a really perilous time for Europe. And it’s the opposite time to be pulling back,” he said.
“What President Trump should be saying is, ‘Since you did this, I’m reinforcing U.S. Military assistance to Kyiv, and you can forget about it. We’re going to stay with it until you realize you’re not going to win militarily,’” Clark advised Trump. That’s what it’s going to take to bring peace to Ukraine.”
Trump had pledged to end the Russian invasion of Ukraine within 24 hours of being elected, but he and his diplomatic team have thus far found it difficult to broker a peace agreement with Russia and Ukraine, going so far as to suggest they will give up any efforts recently.
READ NEXT: Trump Pushes To Revive Sweeping Ban – Supreme Court Now Involved
Trump’s Voter Citizenship Requirement Blocked By Federal Judge
In a controversial decision that critics say undermines basic electoral integrity, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a preliminary injunction Thursday blocking the Trump administration from implementing key provisions of its election reform order — including a requirement that individuals provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections.
The Trump administration’s order, signed in March, sought to address the widespread public concern over election security by aligning U.S. registration standards with those used by many developed nations — where proof of citizenship is a basic requirement to cast a vote. Yet, in her ruling, Judge Kollar-Kotelly sided with Democratic operatives and partisan groups, granting their request to halt implementation of what should be a commonsense safeguard.
It’s already a felony for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. So why oppose a mechanism to verify that voters are, in fact, eligible citizens? The administration’s proposed policy simply sought to enforce existing law, not change it. But for activists and partisan lawyers, that’s apparently too much.
Critics of the ruling argue that it demonstrates a disturbing disconnect between legal theory and electoral reality. While the plaintiffs claimed the executive order infringes on the “Elections Clause” of the Constitution — which delegates much of the authority over elections to the states — the Trump order targeted the federal voter registration form, which is a product of federal law and administered by a federal agency.
Among the more absurd arguments presented during the case was the suggestion that requiring proof of citizenship would complicate voter registration drives at grocery stores and public venues. In other words, ensuring that only citizens vote is too inconvenient for activists looking to register voters en masse.
But this framing reveals the central issue: voter registration is being treated like a political campaign tactic, not a civic responsibility. If accuracy and integrity are seen as barriers to convenience, something is deeply wrong with the system.
If the courts won’t even allow the federal form to be updated to reflect current law, critics argue, how can Americans have confidence that elections are fair and secure?
Ironically, while liberal groups celebrate the decision as a “victory for voters,” many Americans see it as a victory for loopholes and ambiguity. The same people who insist elections are sacred and democracy is under threat are now openly opposing the most basic eligibility checks used around the world.
Meanwhile, Trump’s other proposed reforms — including tighter mail ballot deadlines and review of voter rolls against immigration databases — were allowed to stand. But with the citizenship requirement blocked, many worry that the core vulnerability in the system remains unaddressed.
When noncitizens can easily register to vote — intentionally or accidentally — and the federal government is barred from checking, who exactly benefits?
This article originally appeared on American Liberty News. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It is republished with permission.
READ NEXT: President Trump Signs Executive Order Requiring Proof Of Citizenship To Vote In Federal Elections