'Hugely successful': Trump triumphs at NATO summit, winning over allies after years of resistance



President Donald Trump's participation in this week's NATO summit was well-received and represented a significant victory for him, contrasting with similar meetings during his previous administration.

'This has been a hugely successful summit for President Trump.'

In 2018, when Trump was pushing NATO allies to meet their then-target of 2% of GDP for defense spending, he got into a spat with German officials after he scolded the country for cutting an oil and gas deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin. He accused Germany of being "totally controlled by Russia," calling it a "very bad thing for NATO."

The following year, several allies — then-Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau, then-Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Boris Johnson, and President of France Emmanuel Macron — were caught on camera mocking Trump.

In contrast, this year's NATO summit in the Netherlands was notably successful for Trump.

RELATED: Trump to take on NATO summit: Will allies step up or stall?

G7 summit on June 9, 2018, in Charlevoix, Canada. Photo by Jesco Denzel /Bundesregierung via Getty Images

Dr. Nile Gardiner, director of the Heritage Foundation's Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom and Bernard and Barbara Lomas fellow, told Blaze News, "This has been a hugely successful summit for President Trump and a demonstration of real U.S. leadership on the world stage — a dramatic difference to the weak-kneed Biden presidency."

At one point, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte even praised Trump for striking Iran's nuclear enrichment sites.

"I just want to recognize your decisive action in Iran. You are a man of strength, but you are also a man of peace. The fact that you are now also successful in getting this ceasefire done between Israel and Iran, I really want to commend you for it. And I think this is important for the whole world," Rutte told Trump on Wednesday.

Rutte also credited Trump for securing substantial defense-spending increases to 5% of GDP.

"Without President Trump, this would not have happened," he remarked.

RELATED: Canada's solution to reliance on US? Increasing commitments in Europe

U.S. President Donald Trump and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

During a Wednesday afternoon press conference in the Netherlands, Trump reported that his NATO allies were "so respectful" toward him. He celebrated the increased defense-spending commitments from the ally countries.

"I left here saying that these people really love their countries. It's not a rip-off, and we're here to help them protect their countries," Trump said.

The only conflict Trump expressed was with Spain, the only country that refused to commit to the defense-spending targets. He vowed to negotiate "directly with Spain" on a trade deal, adding that it would have to "pay twice as much" to make up the "unfair" difference in defense spending.

Trump also confirmed that he met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who he stated "couldn't have been nicer" to him.

Trump mentioned that he and Zelenskyy had previously experienced some "rough times," likely referring to the tense exchange he and Vice President JD Vance had with the Ukrainian president earlier this year at the White House.

Trump remarked that he had a "good meeting with Zelenskyy" at this week's NATO summit, adding that Zelenskyy and Putin would like to see an end to the ongoing war.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump to take on NATO summit: Will allies step up or stall?



President Donald Trump is scheduled to attend the NATO summit in the Hague, Netherlands, held on June 24 and 25, where world leaders are anticipated to cover a wide range of pressing topics.

The annual meeting provides Trump with an opportunity to promote American interests over globalist ideals while reducing the United States' defense burdens, potentially reshaping the alliance.

'President Trump will be calling on NATO allies to step up to the plate and invest in the defense of Europe.'

This will be the first NATO summit hosted in the Netherlands since the alliance's founding in 1949. Approximately 9,000 attendees are expected, including 6,000 officials representing various countries.

Defense spending

A top concern for the Trump administration is ensuring that American taxpayers do not carry an unfair defense burden compared to their NATO counterparts.

Trump has maintained a firm stance with NATO allies, pressuring the countries to substantially increase defense spending from 2% of their GDP to 5% as part of the president's efforts to push for burden-sharing among the nations.

Nile Gardiner, the director of the Heritage Foundation's Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom and Bernard and Barbara Lomas Fellow, told Blaze News that defense spending is expected to "dominate" most of the summit.

"This is the top priority for the U.S. administration. President Trump will be calling on NATO allies to step up to the plate and invest in the defense of Europe. I think you'll be looking for all of the alliance members to pledge to spend 5% of GDP on defense," Gardiner stated.

NATO's 32 allies previously agreed to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

With ongoing concerns of escalation from Russia, NATO's latest plan aims for 5% of GDP for defense budgets, including 3.5% for military spending and 1.5% for security-related infrastructure.

RELATED: Trump touches down in Canada for G7 summit. Here's what's on the menu.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. Photo by SIMON WOHLFAHRT/AFP via Getty Images

Last month, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said he expects the ally countries to agree to the new goal during the upcoming annual summit.

"Let's say that this 5% — but I will not say what is the individual breakup, but it will be considerably north of 3% when it comes to the hard spend, and it will be also a target on defense-related spending," Rutte remarked.

‘The reality right now is Europe is not in a position to defend itself.’

The Financial Times reported in late May that Spain was the last major holdout on NATO's plan to increase defense spending.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated last month that when he met with José Manuel Albares, Spain's foreign minister, he "urged Spain to join Allies in committing 5% of GDP to defense."

Albares responded, "There was an exchange [with Rubio], and both of us expressed our views very clearly. I insisted that it was a huge effort to reach 2% and that the debate right now needs to focus on capabilities."

Spain currently commits only 1.28% of its GDP to defense spending. In April, Pedro Sánchez, Spain's prime minister, announced a plan to meet NATO's existing 2% requirement for the first time in 2025.

A White House official confirmed to Blaze News that Trump "intends to secure a historic 5% defense spending pledge from NATO allies that will advance stability in Europe and around the world."

NATO members reached an agreement on Sunday to increase their defense spending target to 5% of GDP. Yet Spain opted out.

Sánchez declared, “We fully respect the legitimate desire of other countries to increase their defense investment, but we are not going to do so.”

On Monday morning, Rutte held a press conference before the summit, confirming that NATO members had agreed to the new defense spending goals.

Peace through strength

The Trump administration has prioritized facilitating peace talks between Ukraine and Russia to end the war and reduce the United States' aid commitments. Meanwhile, tensions between Israel and Iran also remain ongoing. The U.S. launched airstrikes against three of Iran's nuclear enrichment sites over the weekend.

Resolving these conflicts is certain to be another key topic at the upcoming summit. U.S. Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker previously stated that the Trump administration will begin talks with allies later this year about withdrawing American troops from Europe.

While Whitaker previously stated that "nothing has been determined," he noted that the administration would converse with NATO allies after the summit.

"It's more than 30 years of U.S. desire [to reduce troops in Europe], President Trump just said enough, this is going to happen and it's going to happen now. This is going to be orderly, but we are not going to have any more patience for foot-dragging in this situation. ... We just need to work through the practical consequences," Whitaker remarked.

RELATED: Lindsey Graham champions sending troops to Iran despite Americans' weariness of endless war

US ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker. Photographer: Kent Nishimura/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Earlier this month, Sergei Ryabkov, Russia's deputy foreign minister, stated that Russia would not end the war with Ukraine until NATO withdraws its military forces from Eastern Europe, citing it as a central cause of the war.

Ryabkov stated that America must take actionable steps to address "the root causes" behind Russia's security disputes.

"Among these causes, NATO expansion is in the foreground. Without resolving this fundamental and most acute problem for us, it is simply impossible to resolve the current conflict in the Euro-Atlantic region," he said. "Given the nature and genesis of the Ukrainian crisis, provoked by the previous U.S. authorities and the West as a whole, this conflict naturally acts, well, if you like, as a test, a trial, which checks the seriousness of Washington's intentions to straighten out our relations."

Trump stated that he spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin on June 14, mainly about the Iran conflict. He noted, "Much less time was spent talking about Russia/Ukraine," but he indicated that there will be future discussions regarding that war.

"He is doing the planned prisoner swaps — large numbers of prisoners are being exchanged, immediately, from both sides. The call lasted approximately 1 hour. He feels, as do I, this war in Israel-Iran should end, to which I explained, his war should also end," Trump wrote in a post on social media.

‘Trump will be urging strong support from NATO members for Israel unity, calling for an end to Iran's nuclear program.’

Trump attended the Group of Seven summit in Canada, which was held from June 15 through 17, but left before the event's final day when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Rutte joined a breakfast discussion about the ongoing conflict. Several Cabinet members, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, remained at the event to represent the U.S.

Zelenskyy, who will also be attending the NATO summit, has been pushing for allies to implement stricter sanctions against Russia.

Gardiner stated that he anticipated the Trump administration would press European allies to increase military production to ensure that they have the industrial capacity necessary to "produce large amounts of tanks, weapons, aircraft, [and] ammunition to use for the defense of Europe against Russia."

"The reality right now is Europe is not in a position to defend itself," Gardiner continued. "I think, also, President Trump will be urging European NATO allies to stop buying Russian energy."

He noted that European NATO members purchased roughly €7 billion worth of liquefied natural gas from Moscow.

"They are directly helping to fund the Russian war machine," Gardiner said. "In fact, European NATO allies spend more money buying Russian gas than they do in terms of military assistance in Ukraine."

RELATED: A treacherous week for America First (and Israel, too)

NATO 75th anniversary celebratory event on July 9, 2024, in Washington, D.C. Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

Gardiner added that recent conflict in the Middle East would also likely be front and center during the summit.

"Trump will be urging strong support from NATO members for Israel unity," Gardiner stated.

Trump has repeatedly stated that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons.

"For 40 years, they've been saying 'death to America,' 'death to Israel,' 'death' to anybody else that they didn't like," Trump told reporters on Wednesday. "If you go back 15 years, I was saying, 'We cannot let Iran get a nuclear weapon.'"

After bombing Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities, Trump warned that Iran would face further strikes if its leaders fail to reach a peace agreement with Israel.

During the Monday press conference, Rutte addressed the United States' recent strikes against Iran.

"When it comes to NATO's stance on Iran's nuclear program, allies have long agreed that Iran must not develop a nuclear weapon. Allies have repeatedly urged Iran to meet its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty," Rutte stated.

A reporter asked Rutte whether he has concerns that the U.S. strike on Iran would result in the Trump administration deprioritizing NATO.

"I don't think so," he replied. "The news about Iran is, at this moment, grabbing all the headlines, and it is, of course, important news, but this summit is really about making sure that the whole of NATO, 1 billion people, will be safe, not only today but also three, five, seven years from now."

"Let's not forget, Iran is heavily involved in the fight of Russia against Ukraine," Rutte continued. "No doubt it will emerge in the discussions."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Japan considers support for Trump's Golden Dome project as tariffs weigh heavily on nation



Following two phone calls between U.S. President Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, Nikkei Asia has reported that Japan is “exploring support” for the United States’ proposed “Golden Dome” project in the coming years. This potential cooperation comes in light of the global tariffs imposed by President Trump as well as a mutual ongoing commitment to promote a U.S.-Japan “golden age,” according to a White House press briefing.

The White House briefing reported that Japan and the U.S. have been in talks since February in an effort to reaffirm “bilateral security and defense” commitments between the two countries. At the end of last month, Trump and Ishiba discussed their views on the tariffs, “economic security cooperation,” and “diplomatic and security challenges,” per a report from Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Some, including the original Nikkei report, have speculated that Japan may use its involvement in the project as a “bargaining chip” in economic negotiations. Prime Minister Ishiba has since noted in a press conference that Japan has “consistently advocated for an ‘investment rather than tariffs’” approach in cooperation.

RELATED: Trump says Canada is considering his offer to become the 51st US state after he made one key concession

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The Golden Dome, modeled after Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system, is set to cost an estimated $175 billion, with some long-term estimates, according to the Congressional Budget Office, reaching as high as $831 billion.

Trump has tapped U.S. Space Force General Michael Guetlein to oversee this project, which he hopes to complete by the end of his term in 2029. The state-of-the-art Golden Dome will be a “network of satellites, sensors, and interceptors to prevent aerial attacks on the U.S. mainland,” Time magazine reports. Proponents have insisted that the system is intended only as a deterrent.

Critics have expressed concerns that this project may push adversaries and even aligned nations into what Carnegie Politika called a “new arms race” against the U.S. in the space and defense industries. The building of the Golden Dome system may be taken as a threat by nations like China, Russia, and North Korea. Japan’s involvement in the project may raise concerns in the region.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The real threat to US security? Defense industry grift



The Department of Government Efficiency is expected to save between $1 trillion and $2 trillion, a pledge made by Elon Musk himself. Now, Musk has turned his attention to the Pentagon, an institution notorious for government waste.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently partnered with the DOGE to cut 8% from the Pentagon’s budget — roughly $50 billion annually — over the next five years.

Reducing military spending will require more than just cutting obvious waste, fraud, and abuse.

The Department of Defense is overdue for a DOGE-style overhaul. Defense contractors profit from no-bid contracts and inflate costs by “gold-plating” weapons systems with unnecessary features. The procurement system remains so outdated that it still relies on fax machines.

Reducing military spending will require more than just cutting obvious waste, fraud, and abuse. Hegseth should work with the DOGE to eliminate inefficiencies wherever possible, but he must also be prepared to take on more controversial reforms.

One major step would be canceling the Constellation-class frigate. The Pentagon placed its first order for these warships in 2020, aiming for a quick and cost-effective solution to fill a gap in the Navy’s capabilities. The ships were supposed to be lightly modified versions of the European Fregata Europea Multi-Missione, with the first expected to enter service in 2026.

Excessive modifications to the European design have drastically increased the Constellation’s weight and cost, however, erasing the efficiency gains that justified the project. The Wisconsin shipyard responsible for production now estimates that the first frigate won’t be ready until at least 2029.

The Navy plans to purchase at least 20 Constellation frigates, each costing over $1 billion. Canceling the order and relying on the Navy’s existing fleet of capable destroyers could save more than $20 billion immediately.

The F-35 is another prime target for budget cuts. Lockheed Martin’s $1.7 trillion fighter jet is the most expensive defense program in world history, yet barely half of all F-35s are combat ready or mission capable. After two decades of development, the aircraft remains riddled with issues, forcing Lockheed to halt deliveries to the Air Force for a year in 2023.

The design itself is flawed. The F-35 cannot “supercruise” (sustain supersonic speeds without afterburners), has limited range, carries a small payload, and lacks the maneuverability of many peer aircraft in dogfights. Just this month, the U.S. canceled an F-35 demonstration at the Aero India airshow after Russia’s Su-57 impressed the crowd. Scrapping the demonstration at the last minute sent an embarrassing message: No matter how much money is poured into the F-35, it still falls short.

If the U.S. military is serious about maintaining air superiority, it should abandon the F-35 and focus on the Next-Generation Air Dominance and Collaborative Combat Aircraft programs.

President Trump has criticized the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier, making it a prime target for the DOGE budget hawks. At the swearing-in of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Trump noted that the carrier, initially projected to cost $3 billion, has now ballooned to $17 billion. Technical failures — including unreliable electromagnetic catapults and malfunctioning weapon elevators — delayed full deployment for years.

Some defense analysts argue that these carriers, while powerful, are outdated for modern warfare. Emerging threats like drones and hypersonic missiles raise questions about whether these funds would be better spent on more relevant defense capabilities. In an era dominated by unmanned systems, satellite-guided ballistic missiles, and hypersonic weapons, continuing to pour money into this project is difficult to justify — even if it had remained on budget.

Cutting wasteful programs like the USS Gerald R. Ford won’t weaken America’s military strength or global presence. As Hegseth said when announcing the DOGE partnership, “The only thing I’ve cared about is doing right by our service members — soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen, and guardians.” The best way to ensure the U.S. maintains, in Hegseth’s words, “the biggest, most badass military on the planet” is to eliminate wasteful spending.

As he put it, “With DOGE, we are focusing as much as we can on headquarters and fat and top-line stuff that allows us to reinvest elsewhere.” There’s nothing controversial about that.

Senate advances border budget despite lone GOP holdout



The Senate passed Republican South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham's budget resolution early Friday morning after an all-night voting session.

The bill passed the Senate 52-48 in a near-party-line vote. Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky was the only GOP senator to join all 47 Democrats in voting against the bill, citing fiscal concerns about the budget outline.

"If you follow the news, you've been seeing reports of Elon Musk and DOGE and getting rid of waste and fraud and abuse by the billions, if not trillions, of dollars," Paul said in a floor speech Thursday. "And yet, we are meeting here today because Congress, namely the Senate, wants to increase federal spending."

Graham's $340 billion budget outline is the first of the Senate's two-pronged approach to rolling out reconciliation. The proposal includes funds for defense and border enforcement, as the Senate aims to address tax policy later in a separate bill.

Graham admitted that the one-bill approach would be ideal but argued that his two-bill approach is a more immediate remedy to address the border crisis.

"This budget resolution is a complete game-changer when it comes to securing our border and making our military more lethal," Graham said in a statement Friday. "It will allow President Trump to fulfill the promises he made to the American people — a very big deal."

Although the Senate has held the lead in advancing the reconciliation process, President Donald Trump formally backed Louisiana Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson's "big beautiful bill" earlier in the week. Trump noted that although both chambers of Congress had made progress in implementing his MAGA agenda, he preferred a bill that addressed all his policy priorities in one fell swoop.

"The House and Senate are doing a SPECTACULAR job of working together as one unified, and unbeatable, TEAM, however, unlike the Lindsey Graham version of the very important Legislation currently being discussed, the House Resolution implements my FULL America First Agenda, EVERYTHING, not just parts of it!" Trump said.

Even with Trump's endorsement, members of the House won't be back in Washington, D.C., to vote on their reconciliation bill until next week.

Graham admitted that the one-bill approach would be ideal but argued that his two-bill approach is a more immediate remedy to address the border crisis.

"I hope the House can pass one big bill that meets President Trump’s priorities," Graham said. "But this approach provides money that we needed yesterday to continue the momentum on securing our border, enforcing our immigration laws, and rebuilding our military. Time is of the essence."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

House passes major military funding despite trans controversy



The House passed the National Defense Authorization Act on Wednesday night with bipartisan support despite pushback from both sides of the aisle.

The NDAA passed the House in a 281-140 vote authorizing over $895 billion in defense spending. Although both parties had problems with the bill, more Democrats voted against the NDAA due to Republican Speaker Mike Johnson's last-minute provision that prohibits the military's health care system from providing taxpayer-funded transgender surgeries for minors.

'We also believe it’s important to refocus the Pentagon on military lethality, not radical woke ideology.'

"Our men and women in uniform should know their first obligation is protecting our nation, not woke ideology," Johnson said in a Thursday post on X. "It’s disappointing to see 124 of my Democrat colleagues vote against our brave men and women in uniform over policies that have nothing to do with their intended mission."

Over the course of months of negotiations, the NDAA was stripped of other controversial provisions.

"We also believe it’s important to refocus the Pentagon on military lethality, not radical woke ideology," Johnson continued. "This legislation permanently bans transgender treatment for minors, prohibits critical race theory in military academies, ends the DEI bureaucracy, and combats antisemitism."

Many of the 124 Democrats who opposed this restriction accused Republicans of "restricting health care access," a euphemism for severe and irreversible treatments that, as Johnson pointed out, often result in the sterilization of the child, in addition to other permanent side effects.

"We should be supporting our service members and military families who sacrifice so much for us — not restricting health care access and undermining our military readiness, retention, and recruitment," Democratic Rep. Sarah Jacobs of California said in a Wednesday post on X. "That’s why I voted against this year’s NDAA."

Other Democrats like Rep. Adam Smith of Washington called the provision "bigoted against the trans community" and called the transgender treatments "crucial to the health and well-being of our children."

Of the 16 Republicans who voted against the NDAA, several cited concerns over the exorbitant price tag, while others said the bill simply did not go far enough to combat the "woke ideology."

"I voted no on the NDAA," Republican Rep. Chip Roy (Texas) said in a Wednesday post on X. "It was better because of our hard work and I thank [Speaker Johnson] for holding spending power lower than the Senate & fighting child mutilation. But it is not good enough yet. More to do."

Although Johnson was able to amend some of the woke language in the legislation, the NDAA still allows transgender treatments for adults and upholds a Pentagon policy that reimburses troops who traveled to obtain abortions.

"This NDAA fails to terminate the current military abortion travel policy, continued biased diversity, equity, and inclusion practices and positions at the Pentagon, and does nothing to prohibit taxpayer-funded transgender surgeries for those serving," Republican Rep. Matt Rosendale of Montana said in a press release Wednesday. "On top of that, it continued to fund the heinous practice of indefinite detainment of American citizens. This legislation is not only unserious but also unconstitutional."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

SCARY: Economics expert explains what will happen to Americans if our national debt continues to grow



Joe Biden says a lot of crazy things, but perhaps the craziest is his claim that he’s lowered the U.S. deficit, which Stu Burguiere says “couldn’t be farther from the truth.”

Brian Riedl, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and an expert in budgeting, taxes, and economic policy, confirms that Biden is indeed lying.

“Last year, the deficit doubled from $1 trillion to $2 trillion – the largest share of the economy in American history, outside of wars and recession,” he tells Stu, adding that despite what Biden says, “the deficit is growing enormously.”

“The president has already added $5 trillion to 10-year deficits if you add up all the legislation he's signed. The fact that he claims he's reducing deficits is completely and mathematically absurd,” he continues.

“I assume what [Biden] is trying to do here is just compare it to peak COVID spending,” says Stu, “which of course is spending that he wholeheartedly approved and actually wanted more of.”

“The proper way to measure deficits is how they're doing compared to the baseline that was already expected by budget estimators,” Riedl says. “When the president took office, the Congressional Budget Office said the deficit will automatically fall to $ trillion and stay there for the next couple of years with the pandemic ending. Instead, [Biden] ran a $2 trillion deficit, so he's growing the deficit above the baseline, not reducing it.”

So just how bad is the situation?

According to Stu, “long-term, this gets incredibly ugly, really, really fast” and is “completely unsustainable.”

Riedl confirms this: “Yes, long-term, the numbers are totally unsustainable. If you assume current policies are extended, the budget deficit is going to go to 14% of GDP per year in a couple of decades. Historically, it's been 3% of GDP. The debt could grow to 200%-300% of the economy, depending on interest rates.”

Those are scary numbers. So what does that mean for the average American when the debt gets that big?

“It means that as much as half to two-thirds of your taxes will go into paying interest on the debt within the next couple of decades,” says Riedl, “and in fact, if interest rates keep rising, there's a scenario in which 100% of your taxes will just go into paying interest on the debt, as it becomes the biggest program in the entire budget.”

Further, granted “the path we're on, middle-class taxes will eventually double.”

“That's the danger of having debt go to 200%-300% of GDP. And that's the situation that the president is doing nothing about and in fact is pouring gasoline on the fire,” Riedl warns.


Want more from Stu?

To enjoy more of Stu's lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Speaker Johnson Folds Like A Cheap Suit To Democrats’ Spending Increases

Republicans had significant leverage to demand spending concessions from Democrats but let them increase spending in the latest deal anyway.

18 House Republicans Help Democrats Kill Amendment Defunding Pentagon ‘Pride Month’ Parties

Nearly 20 House Republicans helped Democrats kill an amendment seeking to bar taxpayer dollars from funding Pentagon 'pride' events.

House passes anti-woke amendments to defense bill that would end payments for abortion excursions, defund sex-change programs



The Republican-controlled House of Representatives passed a host of amendments to the $886 billion National Defense Authorization Act Thursday that will kneecap wokeness in the Pentagon and spare the military from subsidizing leftist initiatives.

Democrats have indicated that they cannot support the resultant version of the defense bill and will hold America's defense ransom unless Republicans capitulate, allowing the military to continue footing the bill for abortion excursions and sex-change mutilation while promoting woke propaganda on its bases.

The amendments

Republicans managed to successfully pass numerous anti-woke amendments, which one senior House Democrat told Axios "will poison America's national defense capabilities by stalling the NDAA."

No more sex-change money

Republican Rep. Matt Rosendale of Montana saw his amendment to end the military's sex-change mutilation program pass in a 221-211 vote.

Should the NDAA pass with Rosendale's amendment intact, the Department of Defense and its health program TRICARE would be barred from covering and "furnishing sex reassignment surgeries and gender hormone treatments for transgender individuals."

Rep. Ralph Norman's amendment prohibiting the provision of gender transition procedures, including surgery or medication, through the Exceptional Family Member Program also passed in a 222-210 vote.

Members of the House Freedom Caucus explained to reporters why the expenditure on sex-change mutilations and hormone treatments is detrimental to the U.S. armed forces as well as how it detracts from "readiness and lethality":

— (@)

No more abortion travel money

Republican Rep. Ronny Jackson (Texas) saw his amendment, which had over 70 cosponsors, pass in a 221-213 vote. Two Republicans voted against the amendment, and one Democrat, Rep. Henry Cuellar (Texas), voted in favor.

The amendment would prohibit the payment and reimbursement by the Pentagon of expenses relating to abortion services.

Jackson noted in a statement that following an Oct. 22, 2022, memo from Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, the DOD "can and will reimburse travel expense for servicemembers and their dependents who travel, specifically, to obtain an abortion in another state. DOD will also reimburse any associated feeds for healthcare professionals seeking to be licensed in another state for purposes of performing abortions - all on the taxpayer's dime!"

"Taxpayer funding of travel for an abortion is in fact taxpayer-funded abortion," said Jackson, adding that the DOD is therefore "carrying out an illegal policy that is divisive, immoral, and does nothing to provide for our national security."

No more DEI, no DEI czars

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) successfully advanced in a 217-212 vote an amendment that would prohibit federal funds from being "obligated or expended" to establish a chief diversity officer position or a senior adviser for diversity and inclusion position within the DOD.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) tried to go one step farther and ban federal funds for training on diversity, equity, and inclusion, but that amendment failed.

Republican Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska told Axios that "to say we should defund ALL diversity training isn't smart."

No woke agitprop in military schools

Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert's amendment barring DOD Education Activity Schools from buying and having "pornographic and radical gender ideology books in the library" passed.

Roy also successfully passed an amendment barring the DOD Education Activity from promoting various identitarian ideas often associated with critical race theory, including the notions that:

  • "Any race is inherently superior or inferior to any other race, color, or national origin";
  • The "US is a fundamentally racist country";
  • The Declaration of Independence or the US Constitution are racist documents";
  • "An individual's moral character or worth is determined by the individual's race, color, or national origin"; and
  • "An individual, by virtue of the individual's race, is inherently racist or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously."

Leftist apoplexy

Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), ranking member of the House Rules Committee, called the Republican amendments "radical," adding "the clowns have taken over the circus."

Rep. Pat Ryan (D-N.Y.), on the House Armed Services Committee, suggested that the amendments, including those scrapping payouts for abortion excursions and genital mutilations, amounted to a hijacking of national security by the "far right."

"This makes our country less secure, less safe, and it's an insult to all of our women in uniform," said Ryan. "So I'm a no, and I think almost all my Democratic colleagues will be a no."

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y), Democratic Whip Katherine Clark, and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar released a joint statement Thursday, saying, "Extreme MAGA Republicans have chosen to hijack the historically bipartisan National Defense Authorization Act to continue attacking reproductive freedom and jamming their right-wing ideology down the throats of the American people."

Further calling House Freedom Caucus efforts to depoliticize the military "an extreme and reckless legislative joyride," the Democrats suggested the NDAA now "undermines a woman’s freedom to seek abortion care, targets the rights of LGBTQ+ servicemembers and bans books that should otherwise be available to military families."

The Democrats vowed to vote no on the final passage of the bill.

Aguilar suggested that this would set a personal precedent, noting, "I don't think I've not voted for an NDAA."

Republican Thomas Massie of Kentucky, on the other hand, noted that while never before voting in favor of the NDAA, he may reconsider this time, saying, "Everything up here is a crap sandwich. And this one's got some bread on it," reported The Hill.

Rep. Roy dismissed his Democratic colleague's fuss over the amendments, saying, "It’s always funny to listen to my Democrat colleagues say that we’re politicizing this somehow by injecting cultural issues, as if they’re not driving the train on cultural issues over at [the Department of Defense] as we speak."

House Leader Kevin McCarthy suggested that the Democrats were the ones "becoming so extreme."

Concerning the amendments tossing DEI initiatives, McCarthy asked, "Do they want Disneyland to train our military, or do they want a military that can defend the nation?"

As for Democrats' promise to hold up the bill, McCarthy said, "It’ll really show America that the Democrats are so extreme that they won’t defend the military."

Even if House Democrats prove unable to prevent the bill's ultimate passage, the Democrat-controlled Senate and President Biden will likely jump in to preserve the woke initiatives.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!