Is Trump On A Leash Of Some Sort?

I’ve been pondering this question for a while, wondering how to go about addressing it. I was definitely thinking about recently when I wrote Wars, Puzzles. It seems clear that all Western politicians serve interest groups, so the question for inquiring minds is find out who those interest groups are and to determine the degree of their control—is it total control, is it issue oriented, etc. It’s complicated, right? Politicians—and that includes Trump—have to make deals to get the money to run their campaigns. So the question about Trump and his leash boils down to: How long is his leash, and who’s at the other end of the leash? Or to put it slightly differently, To what degree are Trump’s policies dictated by those who hold his leash, who determines what trees Trump gravitates toward—in a manner of speaking. In other words, how much leeway does Trump get on specific issue before the leash gets yanked by whoever holds it. It’s simple enough in concept, but not necessarily so simple in how it works. Obviously the art of dealing dictates that—Trump being Trump—he has to get something from the deal, as well.

I don’t necessarily have the answers, but just keep this in mind as we proceed. Be patient and I think you’ll start seeing connections.

I believe it was Ilan Pappé, the well known Israeli historian, who said: Most Zionists don’t believe in God, but they do believe God promised them Palestine. Or something very, very close to that. If you don’t believe Pappé, notice that in this brief video clip Chuck Schumer doesn’t mention God, but he does say that Torah gives title to Palestine to the Jews:

Zachary Foster @_ZachFoster

The most senior elected Democrat in the US Congress believes the underlying cause of violence in Israel & Palestine is that the Palestinians don’t believe in the Torah. You cannot make this shit up.

"Of course we say it's our land, the Torah says it. But [the Palestinians] don't believe in the Torah. So, that's the reason there is not peace."

https://x.com/i/status/1903448675914748013

From gato fumador

9:08 AM · Mar 22, 2025

Imagine if that kind of thinking were allowed on a general basis? Schumer isn’t stupid, but he is definitely either totally wacked out or very, very cynical.

By contrast, here’s a 9 minute video by a Jewish woman who’s every bit as Leftist as Schumer, but doesn’t bow to AIPAC. While I would wish to nuance a bit of what she says—what actually is “Christian Zionism”, as opposed to what, I believe, is the more general but much vaguer belief in what the Bible should translate to in practical terms, etc.—most of it speaks powerfully for itself:

You should be able to see how this connects to Trump’s foreign policy. Trump freely talks about creating “hell on earth” for Israel’s designated enemies, or of “annihilating” them. He has lower level people like Rubio, Waltz, or Hegseth who will pretty much support whatever policy they’re told to support. But then he has his own personal envoy to fly around the world, and I think everyone knows that Steve Witkoff carries a lot more weight with Trump—and world leaders—than the second tier guys. I mean, Rubio talks to Lavrov, but Witkoff talks to Putin. There’s a difference. As it happens Witkoff doesn’t talk to Hamas—he talks to Qatar who talks to Hamas. The second tier guys talk to the US media in this case.

This morning I had the following exchange, which brings up the important and revealing Tucker Carlson interview with Witkoff:

Joe

Tucker Carlson Interview:

Steve Witkoff appears to express the Trump Administration thinking - Or is this Witkoff's alone

Are these shocking and outrageous statements or thoughts, viewed by some to Justify a removal, cleansing or genocide?

@ 41:39

"We're going to need stability on Gaza, Stability on Gaza could mean Some People Come Back, it could mean Some People Don't Come Back"

@42:20

"You want better for your kids, I want better for my kids. I want them to have, to go and get an education, to be self-sufficient.

I don't think Gazan people have ever really feel that way about, we have, feel that way."

https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1903207340696014945

Reply (1)

Mark Wauck

I didn't have the heart to watch that, because I've seen other statements. It is an outrage, especially when you consider the Nazi tactics that have been used--targeting universities and hospitals and educated persons in Gaza.

In other words, Witkoff is engaged in the standard dehumanization of Palestinians—they don’t even care about their children. They’re Amalek, they’re beasts, like Esau. Accept our plan or … with no pushback at all from Tucker. Note in the video that Witkoff is wearing Israeli colors—blue and white. So, the questions arise whether Witkoff represents the people who hold Trump’s leash on this degree, and to what degree is Trump really a free agent?

As it happens, Larry Johnson watched the Tucker video, and shares some thoughts:

Tucker Carlson’s Interview with Steve Witkoff Reveals Surprising Ignorance

Well, that’s one way of putting it.

… [Witkoff] revealed a surprising depth of ignorance about the situation in Gaza and the war in Ukraine. ... One of the first bombshells to drop was his confession that he has not met with or talked to anyone from Hamas. All of his “diplomacy” with the Palestinians is via a Qatari cutout. If you are not talking to both sides and trying to establish your credibility, you cannot be an honest broker.

Witkoff also admits that he was shown a Zionist propaganda film about October 7, which he claims shows evidence of multiple rapes of Israeli women by Hamas. We know, thanks to Max Blumenthal and the folks at the GreyZone, that there is no evidence to support this claim. Witkoff makes no effort to hide his disdain for Hamas and accuses them falsely of using children as suicide bombers. Let me remind you of my earlier article, The Hard Facts About Palestinian Terrorism Debunk the Western Narrative. Here are some key highlights:

…

Another bizarre moment in his interview with Tucker comes when Witkoff celebrates the installation of Al Jawlani — a former member of ISIS, Al Nusra, and the head of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham — as the leader of Syria. He dismisses Jawlani’s proven past acts of terror and ignores the current slaughter in Syria, by Jawlani’s crew, of Christians, Shia and Alawites. Witkoff apparently is ignorant of the policies Bashir Al Assad purused to protect those communities against jihadis like Jawlani. Witkoff has a selective moral compass and it oriented totally in favor of Israel.

My two cents. Witkoff is not ignorant of any of this, but toes the Israeli line that no lives matter except Jewish lives. Or, actually, Zionist lives.

The current narrative in the Trump administration, which Witkoff espouses, is that Hamas is an unrepentant band of terrorists and must be disarmed. He expressed outrage, albeit in a calm voice, at Hamas’ rejection of a recent US plan, without identifying the issue that evoked opposition from the Palestinians. Based on what Witkoff said in describing his presentation to the Arab League, I believe that Hamas rejected the US demand that they demilitarize. Hamas ain’t stupid. The Hamas leaders know that the minute they disarm, they will no longer be able to defend themselves against the Zionist genocide.

What LJ is saying mirrors what experts like John Mearsheimer and Alastair Crooke have long maintained—that ethnic cleansing and/or genocide is the Israeli agenda. Period. Only the willfully blind deny that. As Katie Halper says, all you have to do is listen or read the actual words and statements of the Zionists right from the start. Listen to Schumer: The Torah is our title deed to this real estate. This land is ours.

Maybe Trump is stupid. I don’t personally believe that. I think he’s quite smart. But maybe he’s on a leash of some sort. How long is that leash, and who—when push comes to shove—is holding it?

Now, LJ also addresses Witkoff’s high profile role as the guy who flies to Moscow to beard Putin in his Kremlin.

With respect to Russia, Witkoff demonstrated a similar lack of understanding about Russia’s key demands. For example, he was unable to name the four oblasts in Ukraine that have become part of the Russian Federation. He continues to labor under the delusion that Russia can be finagled into accepting a total 30-day ceasefire.

Think about that. Either Steve Witkoff is totally unprofessional as a negotiator representing the POTUS and the people of the United States, or … the whole business of four oblasts and all that jazz is basically peripheral to the main issues. It’s so irrelevant that it’s not even worth bothering to learn a few weird Russian names. Take your pick—I choose the latter. And LJ hints at what’s going on when he says that Witkoff is still trying to con the Russians into a total 30 day ceasefire. In terms of Trump and his leash, I’d put it like this. The people holding Trump’s leash see merit in Trump’s basic idea—make peace with Russia and use Russia as leverage against China. However, the limit on the length of Trump’s leash is that any deal with Russia must leave Russia in a subordinate position to the Anglo-Zionist Empire. Vulnerable, not an equal. A total 30 day ceasefire is the ticket to such an outcome in the long run.

The problem, as LJ diagnoses it, is that the Russians surely know that. How long does Trump’s leash extend in this matter? In the meantime Trump has gone back to saying crazy stuff. Like, maybe the US should join the British Commonwealth. Or, hey, maybe the US should own all the nuclear power plants in Ukraine. I’m not sure how that will make the Russians take him more seriously. Putin’s probably wondering why the guy holding Trump’s leash doesn’t pull Trump back, so maybe that’s the tactic—try to keep Putin guessing.

Now, in the past, I have repeatedly emphasized that the war on Russia is an Anglo-Zionist war on Russia. I won’t repeat myself here, but one of the authorities for that view that I’ve cited is the economist Michael Hudson, who spent a lot of time at Neocon/Zionist central, the non-eponymous institute with which he nevertheless shares a name. Hudson is adamant, based on long experience, that the Jewish Neocons—as opposed to goyishe fellow travelers—are very much motivated by the desire for revenge against Russia for past misdeeds. And those Neocons have been the prime movers—on both sides of the Atlantic—for this jihad against Russia. If that seems weird, I refer you to Katie Halper’s very first words (above):

There's literally nothing that Israel won't do in the name of Vengeance and in the name of continuing Zionism. For some people the takeaway is: as long as they're not literally putting people in ovens, as long as they're not doing exactly what the Nazis did, then somehow that's okay. It's actually not okay.

Never again doesn't mean: Never again in the exact same way that the Nazis did it. If that's your takeaway from the Holocaust you really need to look at yourself and do some soul searching.

It’s still weird, but sometimes that’s just the way things are. People are weird. Which brings us full circle to Trump and his leash. What happens if Trump’s blustering and bullying doesn’t work in some of these key areas of foreign policy? We don’t really know what would happen with Russia, if Putin doesn’t knuckle under. There are no good options, but it’s possible that Trump and the leash holders could see a prospect for success in a longer term process with Russia.

With regard to the Middle East, things aren’t so clear. There, Trump has re-ignited a pair of wars and has threatened Iran with war in two months, so prospects look decidedly not so great. I haven’t cited Will Schryver recently, so:

西方專家 expert on westoids @Yoshe_Sato

Setting a first strike precedent will only diminish their own security. Once this new doctrine is set, both 🇨🇳 & 🇷🇺 will be questioning whether they will be next for a preemptive 'decapitation' strike. They will update their own nuclear policies to something that 🇺🇸 may not like.

11:17 PM · Mar 22, 2025

Will Schryver @imetatronink

Speaking of a US nuclear strike against Iran, and the Russian/Chinese reaction to it.

I agree 100%.

The B-2 is a big, fat, old, slow, not-particularly-stealthy aircraft that the Russians and Iranians will see coming from a LONG way off, and which they can almost certainly target and kill.

A Trident packing a 7kt W-76-2 is not going to make an appreciable dent in Iran's deep underground sites, and they certainly aren't going to eliminate Iran's capability to shoot back afterwards.

There is no doubt the US can kill a few million Iranian civilians with nuclear strikes, but there is no way they are going to be able to disarm Iran with a nuclear first strike.

Furthermore, if the US launches a nuclear strike against Iran, it will mean war against Russia and China, for the simple reason that they (the US) will have revealed themselves to be crazy lunatics that must be confronted and stopped immediately.

Luckily for the rest of us, the Anglo-Zionists aren’t crazy lunatics. Are they?

So it all kinda comes back to Trump and his leash. Feel free to disagree about the leash, but I do recommend taking this seriously.