Opinion | Trump infuriates far-right influencers by touting Chinese land ownership
Trump infuriates far-right influencers by touting Chinese land ownership
Prominent conservatives were apoplectic after the president contradicted himself by vocally supporting Chinese ownership of American farmland.
Over the past few years, Republicans, including President Donald Trump, have circled the wagons in an effort to thwart what the party framed as an existential crisis: Chinese land ownership in the United States.
Laws passed in Texas and Florida explicitly banning the sale of some lands, particularly farmland, to Chinese investors have underscored the xenophobic tinge to the MAGA movement’s efforts to parlay its espoused national security concerns into a major political issue.
And with that in mind, Trump made things quite awkward for the MAGA faithful on Thursday when, during his excursion to China, which seems to have netted next-to-nothing in concessions, he defended Chinese farm ownership in the U.S. Trump made his comments to Fox News host Sean Hannity, and even repeated his previous claim that Chinese students should be allowed to study in the U.S. As my colleague Steve Benen explained last August when Trump made the claim, this assertion flies in the face of the Trump administration’s move to strip visas from Chinese students, as well as MAGA rhetoric from folks like Vice President JD Vance condemning foreign students studying at American universities.
The post below shows a clip of Trump condemning Chinese land ownership during the 2024 campaign and vowing to thwart it, followed by a clip of Trump telling Hannity this ownership is essential to U.S. farming.
Trump’s comments even fly in the face of an announcement the Agriculture Department made just last year, vowing to crack down on Chinese farm ownership in the U.S. The important context here is that the the president’s tariffs and war with Iran have devastated the U.S. farm industry, fueling backlash from that community toward his administration.
Prominent conservatives, now being forced to eat crow after supporting Trump when he was vowing to end Chinese farm ownership, sound disheartened, if not downright incensed, by the president’s comments.
Here are a few samples:
Trump says it’s insulting to tell China their students can’t go to our universities, imagine being an American student and receiving a rejection letter while 500,000 Chinese students get in!
And NO it is not ok for China to buy our farmland!!!
And no that’s not common sense!!! https://t.co/9qep1TUz8P— Former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@FmrRepMTG) May 15, 2026
Again, for the umpteenth time, if you're going to make the argument that we must do stuff to "beat China" like tariffs and infinity data centers, people are going to doubt your sincerity when you turn around and promote selling them farmland, AI chips, and educating their elite. https://t.co/sq4jsxjf6q
— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) May 15, 2026
Has China defeated our country? https://t.co/dD592DaPo5
— Cernovich (@Cernovich) May 15, 2026
Big mistake https://t.co/tcV1g4aIyP
— Winston Marshall (@MrWinMarshall) May 15, 2026
Trump ran for president vowing to “drain the swamp” of corruption, lower prices, abstain from launching new wars and, in a clear nod to his base, prevent China from buying up American farmland.
Each passing day seems to come with fresh evidence of his failures on these fronts. Failures that his rabid base of followers are forced to cope with.
Why Trump’s flip-flop on Iran’s uranium stockpile is a big deal
Trump says that Iran giving up its highly enriched uranium isn’t “necessary.” Wait, what?President Donald Trump has long presented himself as a genius negotiator who has mastered the “art of the deal.” But his latest comments about what he hopes to achieve in talks with Iran show how the most basic principles of deal-making elude him.
Fox News anchor Sean Hannity asked the president on Thursday about whether the U.S. was considering the options of seizing Iran’s estimated stockpile of 970 pounds of highly enriched uranium, which can be enriched slightly further to make nuclear bombs, by force or whether the U.S. would try to “entomb it” and make it impossible for Iran to access.
Trump first said that if the U.S. tried to seize the stockpile, it would take “a week and a half” to extract using a ground operation. That is likely an underestimate; nuclear experts say such an operation would take weeks, and that’s assuming it goes smoothly.
But what Trump said next was a surprise.
“I don’t think it’s necessary [to get the uranium], except from a public relations standpoint,” the president said. “I think it’s important for the fake news that we get it.”
He added, “I’m the one that said we’re going to get it, and we’re going to get it. We have our eye on it.”
In just a handful of words — “I don’t think it’s necessary” — Trump appeared to abandon a position that has been central to his entire premise for this disastrous war. And he instantly undermined his insistence on it as a key term of a peace deal with Iran.
That insistence — that Iran cannot secure nuclear weapons — was the overarching rationale for his war of aggression. Iran’s nearly 1,000 pound stockpile is enriched to 60% — just shy of the enrichment levels required to make nuclear weapons. Experts estimate that if Iran were to try to use the stockpile to make weapons, it could create some 10 to 12 nuclear bombs. (And Iran has a lot more uranium enriched at lower levels that could also potentially be used to make a weapon in the future.)
Play
Trump-Xi summit in China ends with no major breakthroughs, little progress on Taiwan and war in IranMay 15, 2026 / 11:24
Notably, U.S. intelligence assessments have estimated that the joint U.S.-Israeli bombardment campaign has failed to set back Iran’s nuclear capabilities. After Iran took control of the Strait of Hormuz and caused a global oil shock, Trump was forced to try to dismantle Iran’s nuclear capabilities at the negotiating table instead. In his negotiations and in conversations with the press about the negotiations, Trump has consistently identified the handover of Iran’s uranium stockpile as a core demand for a resolution to the war.
But now it appears that isn’t a prerequisite to end the war. When Trump told Hannity that “I don’t think it’s necessary” to get the enriched uranium, he suggested he has a soft commitment to it. And then, bafflingly, he attempted to pass it off as a “public relations” maneuver to satisfy the media. The takeaway is that Trump appears to be repackaging a key plank of his negotiation position as window dressing.
Trump’s surprise admission is exactly the kind of statement that Iranian negotiators will take note of, and use to bolster their confidence in negotiations. If they know Trump is ambivalent about — and could perhaps eventually become indifferent to — removal of Iran’s stockpile, that gives Iran more of an incentive to refuse to budge on that element of the deal, or demand a compromise more favorable to Tehran.
Of course Trump would never be in this mess if he had never torn up former President Barack Obama’s 2015 nuclear deal in the first place. As The New York Times noted, when Iran was cooperating with the uranium restrictions in the 2015 deal, “Iran’s weapon designers were left with too little nuclear fuel to build a single bomb.” Only after Trump pulled out of the deal in 2018 did Iran embark“on an enrichment spree” that moved them far closer to a bomb than before.
Trump exhibits a tendency to get bored by or change his mind about protracted international conflicts, and this time appears to be no different. As my colleague Hayes Brown has pointed out, at this point Trump would be lucky to get a deal even close to as strong as Obama’s was. Iran likely has a growing confidence in this as well — and wouldn’t be unreasonable to assume that they’re negotiating with someone whom they can wait out until he caves.
THE STRIKE THAT SHOOK TEHRAN: INSIDE THE ESCALATING FEARS OF A WIDER MIDDLE EAST CONFLICT
The skies above Tehran erupted into flames as reports of a devastating aerial assault sent shockwaves across the Middle East and triggered a wave of global alarm. What initially appeared to be another night of rising regional tension quickly transformed into a scenario that analysts say could mark one of the most dangerous escalations involving Iran in recent years.
Images and dramatic footage circulating online appeared to show massive explosions tearing through sections of the Iranian capital while military aircraft roared overhead. Thick black smoke climbed into the skyline as panic spread rapidly across social media platforms, fueling fears of a direct confrontation capable of reshaping the region overnight.
Although many of the circulating visuals and videos are linked to military simulation content and remain unverified, the reaction surrounding the reports highlights just how fragile the geopolitical climate around Iran has become.
A NIGHT OF FIRE AND CONFUSION OVER TEHRAN
According to rapidly spreading online claims, heavily armed attack aircraft allegedly launched coordinated strikes against strategic targets inside or near Tehran, igniting widespread speculation about a potential military escalation involving the United States and Iran.
Witnesses quoted across social platforms described hearing multiple explosions followed by air raid sirens and heavy anti-aircraft activity. Several videos appearing online showed fiery blasts lighting up urban areas while crowds scrambled through smoke-filled streets.
As the footage spread globally, confusion intensified over what was real, what was simulated, and what may have been intentionally amplified through online disinformation networks.
Military analysts quickly noted that some viral clips resembled highly realistic combat simulations often created using advanced military gaming platforms such as ARMA 3, a technology increasingly used online to produce cinematic war content capable of misleading audiences during real-world crises.
Still, the intensity of the reaction exposed deep anxieties surrounding the possibility of a direct military confrontation involving Tehran.
WHY THE A-10 WARTHOG REMAINS A SYMBOL OF FEAR
Central to many of the circulating narratives was the A-10 Thunderbolt II, better known globally as the “Warthog,” one of the most iconic close-air-support aircraft ever developed by the United States military.
Known for its devastating firepower, low-altitude attack capability, and massive GAU-8 Avenger rotary cannon, the A-10 has long been associated with overwhelming battlefield destruction. Its unmistakable reputation has made it a powerful symbol in military media, simulations, and online war narratives.
In recent years, realistic military simulations featuring the aircraft have gained enormous popularity online, often blurring the line between fictional combat scenarios and actual geopolitical events.
The latest viral claims involving Tehran demonstrate how quickly highly cinematic military content can trigger international speculation, especially during periods of heightened tension involving Iran and Western powers.
THE REGION REMAINS ON EDGE
Even though no verified evidence currently confirms a direct American airstrike on Tehran, the rapid spread of such reports reflects the dangerous atmosphere dominating the Middle East today.
Iran remains deeply entangled in multiple regional flashpoints involving proxy conflicts, maritime tensions, missile development, cyber operations, and disputes with Israel and Western governments. Military analysts warn that even false reports or misinterpreted footage can increase instability by influencing public perception, political rhetoric, and military readiness.
In the hours following the viral claims, observers reported increased online activity connected to Iranian state media, regional military monitoring channels, and international intelligence communities attempting to assess the authenticity of the circulating footage.
Security experts caution that information warfare has become a major component of modern geopolitical conflict, where perception can often escalate tensions nearly as rapidly as actual military action.
INFORMATION WARFARE IS NOW PART OF THE BATTLEFIELD
The incident surrounding the viral Tehran strike narrative demonstrates a growing global challenge: distinguishing reality from sophisticated digital warfare content.
Modern simulation platforms now produce visuals so realistic that millions of viewers struggle to separate fictional military scenarios from actual combat footage. During periods of geopolitical instability, these videos can spread across social media at extraordinary speed, amplifying fear and confusion before official verification becomes available.
Experts warn that viral military misinformation can influence markets, trigger diplomatic reactions, and even impact military calculations in real time.
The Tehran strike narrative spread rapidly because it tapped directly into existing global fears surrounding Iran, regional instability, and the possibility of large-scale escalation in the Middle East.
GLOBAL MARKETS AND GOVERNMENTS WATCH CLOSELY
As the claims gained traction online, energy markets and geopolitical analysts closely monitored developments for signs of possible escalation.
Any genuine military confrontation involving Tehran could have enormous consequences for global oil supply routes, shipping corridors, and regional security alliances. The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the world’s most strategically critical maritime chokepoints, and instability involving Iran often causes immediate volatility in energy markets.
International governments responded cautiously, emphasizing the importance of verification before drawing conclusions about the circulating reports.
Still, intelligence agencies around the world continued reviewing available footage and monitoring regional communications channels amid concern that even fabricated narratives could inflame tensions.
A DIGITAL ERA WHERE FICTION CAN TRIGGER REAL FEAR
The viral reaction to the alleged strike on Tehran highlights how modern conflict now unfolds across both physical and digital battlefields simultaneously.
In previous decades, military escalation depended largely on confirmed troop movements, official announcements, or verified battlefield activity. Today, a single realistic video clip or dramatic headline can dominate global attention within minutes.
For audiences worldwide, distinguishing between verified reporting, simulation content, propaganda, and misinformation has become increasingly difficult.
The Tehran strike story serves as another reminder that in the age of hyper-realistic digital media, perception itself can become a geopolitical force.
THE WORLD REMAINS FIXED ON IRAN
Whether the circulating reports prove entirely fictional, partially accurate, or connected to broader regional tensions, one reality remains undeniable: the Middle East continues operating under extraordinary pressure.
Iran’s strategic importance, combined with ongoing proxy conflicts and fragile international relationships, means that even rumors of military escalation immediately attract global scrutiny.
For now, officials continue urging caution while analysts attempt to separate fact from speculation.
But the explosive reaction surrounding the Tehran strike narrative has already demonstrated how quickly fear, uncertainty, and geopolitical tension can spread in a world where information moves faster than verification.
And in today’s Middle East, sometimes the perception of war can become almost as dangerous as war itself.
