Donald Trump ‘Resonates With Average People’ With Criticism of NATO, Ukraine Funding

Trump’s outlandish statements make him a pariah in Washington but a hero for some blue collar voters.

Mainstream media Russophobia reached new heights this week as stories of alleged Russian “space nukes” dominated headlines.

The claims, fueled by revelations from Ohio Representative Mike Turner (R-OH), center around an alleged Russian capability to detonate a nuclear device in space, generating an electromagnetic pulse that could disable US satellite communications.

Turner’s warning rekindled anti-Russian sentiment on Capitol Hill just as Republicans seemed poised to sideline the latest aid package for Ukraine. Geopolitical consultant David Oualaalou claimed that’s not a coincidence during a Thursday appearance on Sputnik’s The Critical Hour program.

“The timing of the release of this story seems interesting and I would say is – no pun intended – targeted like a laser to damaging Donald Trump,” said the international security analyst and founder of Global Perspective Consulting.

Trump critics have lambasted the former president in recent days after comments he made urging European countries to contribute more funding towards NATO. Trump has angered establishment figures by questioning the modern-day relevance of the Cold War military alliance.

“One of the things that I think would be humorous if it weren't so pathetic, over the last couple of days in response to Donald Trump's comments about the funding of NATO and all of that kind of thing is all of this outrage that we've been hearing from analysts and government officials – 'how dare Donald Trump encourage Russia to attack NATO' – which is not at all what he was doing,” said host Wilmer Leon.

“But they don't talk about the fact that the United States attacked a NATO member when it blew up the Nord Stream pipeline,” he noted. “That was an act of war against Germany, and Article Five [of the NATO charter] would then require the other NATO countries to come to Germany's assistance in any manner that they saw fit.”

“So the United States, just like violating the peace treaty about war in space by creating the Space Force, they have already violated Article Five, but none of the analysts want to point that out.”

Oualaalou expressed pessimism over the prospect of accountability for the massive act of terrorism and environmental destruction, noting that Sweden has officially closed their investigation into the matter.

Host Garland Nixon speculated that Trump’s criticism of the US foreign policy establishment actually endears him to average voters, who care little about Washington officials’ sacred cows.

“Donald Trump says things that upset the machine, the foreign policy blob,” noted Nixon. “They put it on all of the front pages… something about NATO thinking that it's going to hurt him. And most American people look at it and they're like, 'NATO is kind of a pain in the neck, and we're sending them a lot of money. Why should we do this anyway?'”

“They don't understand that in a way, they're helping Donald Trump because the American people, the average working-class people, don’t see NATO as something that we got to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on. They’re like, 'man, I'm trying to handle my own business and I can't afford it.'”

“They don't hear the applause that he receives at his rallies when he makes these outrageous statements, they don't hear that,” added Leon.

“You're absolutely correct,” agreed Oualaalou. “It's spot on. It's because the establishment does not want the American people to sort of absorb what is Donald Trump.”

“When it comes down to the issue of NATO, why are we carrying the burden at the expense of an average American person?” Oualaalou asked.

“[Trump] resonates with the average people because he speaks the language that the average Joe, average Jane will understand,” he added, claiming Americans are more likely to be concerned about recent inflation statistics than Washington military priorities. “And frankly, yeah, many of us are asking, what is NATO for? What the heck is going to over 31 members? What for? And yes, we are funding the bill for that.”

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov weighed in on Turner’s claims of a “serious threat to national security” Thursday, calling the accusation an attempt “to encourage the Congress to vote for a bill allocating money to Ukraine.”

“I cannot comment on that at all,” said Peskov. “Let's wait for the briefing to see if there will be any information. But it is obvious that the White House is trying... to get Congress to vote on a bill to give money [to Ukraine].”

“What kind of tricks the White House will resort to, so to speak, well, we will see,” the spokesman said.