Demetrius Williams

Of the Jewish senators, 7 out of 10 voted to block a sale of bulldozers to Israel. Michael Bennet Jon Ossoff Bernie Sanders Brian Schatz Adam Schiff Elissa Slotkin Ron Wyden NO: Blumenthal, Rosen, Schumer Says a lot about the political shift happening

Seven sentences. Five audiences. Every word is a weapon aimed at a different target. This is the most compressed piece of strategic signaling in the history of social media diplomacy. On April 15, Trump posted: “China is very happy that I am permanently opening the Strait of Hormuz. I am doing it for them, also - And the World. This situation will never happen again. They have agreed not to send weapons to Iran. President Xi will give me a big, fat, hug when I get there in a few weeks. We are working together smartly, and very well! Doesn’t that beat fighting??? BUT REMEMBER, we are very good at fighting, if we have to - far better than anyone else!!!” Decode every sentence. “I am permanently opening the Strait of Hormuz.” The blockade is not a blockade. It is a service. Trump reframes the entire operation from aggression to provision. The navy enforcing interdiction is now the navy “opening” the strait. And “permanently” signals to oil markets, Asian importers, and Iran that the US intends to remain the guarantor of Hormuz transit indefinitely. Not as leverage. As architecture. “I am doing it for them, also - And the World.” China imports over 50 percent of its energy through Hormuz. Trump positions the blockade as a gift to Beijing. The country whose Iranian oil he just cut off is now the beneficiary. Bessent said hours earlier: “They can get oil. Not Iranian oil.” Trump completes the sentence: and I am the one making sure they can. “This situation will never happen again.” A doctrine in five words. The Hormuz crisis, Iran’s closure, the tolls, the mines, the 46 days of disruption will not recur because the United States is establishing permanent enforcement. No treaty. No negotiation. A unilateral declaration of perpetual chokepoint control posted on Truth Social. “They have agreed not to send weapons to Iran.” Unverified. China’s MFA called the arms reports “entirely fabricated” hours earlier. But the sentence forces Beijing into a trap. If China confirms, it concedes publicly. If China denies, it implies the weapons were under consideration. Silence reads as confirmation. Every response validates the claim. The rhetorical structure is designed to be unfalsifiable in real time. “President Xi will give me a big, fat, hug when I get there in a few weeks.” The May 14 to 15 summit confirmed in the most disarming language possible. “Big, fat, hug” humanizes the relationship for domestic audiences while signaling to Beijing that Trump views the summit as a victory lap. The framing shapes expectations before a single agenda item is discussed. “Doesn’t that beat fighting???” The carrot. Three audiences: To China, cooperation beats confrontation. To Americans, this president ended a war with a deal. To Iran, fighting is the alternative and you are losing. “BUT REMEMBER, we are very good at fighting, if we have to - far better than anyone else!!!” The stick. The hug is conditional. The cooperation is optional. The carrier strike group is not. The same paragraph offers peace and threatens war, and both are credible because the blockade proves both simultaneously. One post. Seven sentences. Five audiences: China, Iran, domestic voters, oil markets, and the May summit negotiating table. Every word measured. Every ambiguity deliberate. Every claim unfalsifiable in the window that matters. Trump did not write a tweet. He wrote a treaty draft disguised as a social media post.

Bruce Pearl says he will now boycott Spain. I wonder how he would like it if we passed laws saying he was not allowed to boycott Spain and that doing so was bigoted toward Spanish people.

Sen. Fetterman calls out critics pushing the “TACO, TACO” narrative, saying you can’t demand de-escalation then mock a ceasefire