Trump’s Dangerous Word Games – Terror Fantasies, Gaza Veto and Old Enemies in a New Disguise

Donald Trump loves the insinuation, the threat without evidence, the play with the unspoken. In an interview with Fox News he left open the possibility that there could be a “vast terrorist movement” in the United States, responsible not only for the murder of Charlie Kirk but perhaps also for previous assassination attempts on himself. “You never know,” said the president - “you never know.” A sentence that pours more poison than clarity into public debate. At the same time he announced that his administration would “do a big think” about Antifa - that broadly defined spectrum of anti-fascist initiatives that Trump summarily described as a “sick group” and wants to designate as a “major terrorist organization.” Legally Antifa is not an organization, but a collective term for anti-fascist initiatives, yet in Trump’s rhetoric this diffuse field becomes a projection surface for his domestic political enemy images.

While Trump invoked the internal threat, Congress tried to set a sign of unity - and failed already in advance because of its own cracks. Speaker Mike Johnson urged members of the House to adopt a resolution commemorating Charlie Kirk unanimously. “I can’t imagine that anyone would vote against it,” Johnson said. The vote is scheduled for Friday, but the past week has shown how polarized even the simplest symbols have become. The attempt to discipline members of Congress such as Ilhan Omar for critical statements after Kirk’s death failed by a narrow majority. What was intended as an undisputed act of mourning threatens to sink into the maelstrom of partisan divisions.

On the international stage the US government meanwhile acted with a harshness that makes its isolation increasingly clear. In the UN Security Council the United States again vetoed a resolution that would have demanded an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza - combined with the release of all hostages. Fourteen members voted in favor, only Washington against. The declaration described the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip as “catastrophic” and called for the lifting of all restrictions on the delivery of aid to the 2.1 million people there. The fact that the US stood alone together with Israel underlines the growing gulf between American policy and the rest of the world. Shortly before the start of the UN General Assembly, where several US allies are expected to recognize a Palestinian state, this veto is a signal - and at the same time a symbol of refusal.

But Trump’s gaze was not only directed at the Middle East. He again railed against European states that continue to import Russian oil. “You can’t have Europe buying oil from Russia and then have me getting upset with China because they’re buying oil from Russia,” he said before departing the United Kingdom. It is striking that it is precisely Hungary under Viktor Orbán that is responsible for the largest share of the remaining Russian pipeline imports in Europe. Orbán presents himself as a strongman and has been blocking stricter sanctions against Moscow for years - an approach that in the EU is seen as a systematic undermining of common decisions. That Trump in turn harshly criticizes Europe for its continued import of Russian oil while at the same time courting Orbán as a political brother in spirit reveals a fundamental contradiction: he brands dependencies that he simultaneously reinforces through his closeness to authoritarian styles of leadership. It is a familiar pattern: Trump positions himself as an uncompromising critic like a political amateur, but leaves out details or strategies. He merely emphasized that he was “unhappy” with those countries that had not ended their dependency.

Even towards Moscow the line remained vague. Asked whether the incursion of Russian drones into NATO airspace might have been a “mistake,” Trump only said: “I can’t comment.” Just a few days earlier he had speculated it could have been an error - an interpretation brusquely rejected by Poland’s leadership. Now he evaded, saying that the drones “shouldn’t have been there,” but avoided any clear classification. Thus a vacuum remains, in which allies are left wondering how reliable the president really is when it comes to NATO obligations and red lines.

Taken together these scenes paint a picture of fragmented politics and deliberately stoked uncertainty. Trump plays with fears, constructs threats, evades facts and at the same time pursues a foreign policy course that isolates the United States. Whether in the terror accusation against Antifa, in the veto on Gaza or in the open questions about Russian provocations - the pattern is the same: insinuation instead of analysis, escalation instead of responsibility. It is a game with fire, in which the world and his own population serve as the stage.

We are currently working on two major investigations. In Mississippi it is about a series of deaths whose background we are uncovering step by step. At the same time we are conducting research into embargo violations by European countries in connection with the Russia sanctions. The focus is not only on formal loopholes but also on deliberately constructed circumvention routes and networks that show how economic interests slow down Europe’s political unity. Therefore at the moment, here as well as in the social media field, there may be slightly delayed article publications..