Tag Archives: Donald Trump

Trump and Greenland: The Deal That Changed the Arctic

For decades, the United States has viewed Greenland as a strategically vital territory. Since World War II, American military planners and policymakers have understood its importance for Arctic security, global defense systems, and access to critical resources. What previous administrations discussed quietly behind closed doors, Donald Trump chose to say openly.

Trump said he wanted Greenland.

The reaction from legacy media was immediate and furious. Denmark was outraged. European leaders, including Emmanuel Macron, criticized the idea. Headlines mocked Trump, calling the proposal absurd, imperialistic, even dangerous. Once again, the familiar narrative returned: Trump the dictator, Trump the destabilizer, Trump the man destroying NATO and threatening the world order.

But while the media screamed, Trump stayed calm. Smiling. Stoic.

Behind the scenes, something very different was happening.

This week, President Donald Trump arrived in Davos, Switzerland, to attend the World Economic Forum (WEF). Surrounded by the world’s global elites—the very same figures who openly despise him—Trump showed up with a large delegation and a clear agenda: make deals.

And one of the biggest deals was Greenland.

After a high-level meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, Trump announced that a framework agreement concerning Greenland—and the wider Arctic region—had been reached. An outcome many in the legacy media had declared impossible.

In a statement released earlier today, Trump wrote:

“Based upon a very productive meeting that I have had with the Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, we have formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic Region.

This solution, if consummated, will be a great one for the United States of America, and all NATO Nations. Based upon this understanding, I will not be imposing the tariffs that were scheduled to go into effect on February 1st.

Additional discussions are being held concerning the Golden Dome as it pertains to Greenland. Further information will be made available as discussions progress. Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, and others will lead the negotiations and report directly to me.”

In simple terms: Trump made a deal.

Greenland matters because it is one of the most strategic territories on Earth. As Arctic ice melts, new shipping routes open and access to vast mineral reserves becomes possible. China and Russia have both aggressively positioned themselves in the Arctic, seeking influence, infrastructure, and control over rare-earth minerals critical to modern technology, defense systems, and energy.

China already holds a near-monopoly on many of these minerals.

Greenland changes that.

According to Trump, the framework agreement includes mineral rights, defense cooperation, and integration into a broader NATO security architecture—including the proposed “Golden Dome” defense system. With American capital, technology, and expertise, Greenland’s resources can be developed responsibly, reducing Western dependence on China and strengthening collective security across Europe and North America.

This is not just a win for the United States. It is a win for the West.

For years, Europe has depended on American security while criticizing American leadership. Trump reversed that dynamic. He forced allies to negotiate seriously, share responsibility, and think strategically about the future of the Arctic.

The backlash from globalists is predictable. Trump does not speak their language. He does not respect their rituals. He does not submit to unelected institutions or consensus-driven politics. Instead, he negotiates power, territory, resources, and security—openly.

What we are witnessing is not chaos. It is a transition.

The old world order is fading. Globalism as an ideology is losing credibility. In its place, a new era is emerging—what some describe as civilizationism: a worldview that recognizes distinct civilizations, national sovereignty, cultural identity, and strategic self-interest.

Trump’s Greenland deal is not just about land or minerals. It is about redefining power in a multipolar world.

And despite what the legacy media claims, Trump didn’t lose control.

He won Greenland.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Trump vs. the Global Elite at WEF

Every year, the world’s economic elite gather in Davos, Switzerland, for the World Economic Forum (WEF). Billionaires, CEOs, political leaders, and powerful institutions meet behind closed doors to discuss the future of the global economy and international business. These are the richest and most influential people on the planet.

WEF’s slogan is “Committed to improving the state of the World” and its mission is to “move the world forward together.” However, critics argue that this vision represents a globalist mindset—one where decisions are made by unelected elites, often far removed from ordinary people and national interests.

Picture: America is the locomotive.

Donald Trump stands in sharp contrast to this worldview. Trump is a populist. He speaks directly to voters, not global institutions. While the WEF elite promote globalization, open borders, and centralized decision-making, Trump represents national sovereignty, economic protection, and what he famously calls “America First.”

These are two opposing camps—and they are not on the same team. This is why Trump is deeply disliked in Davos. He challenges the system that benefits the global elite, and he refuses to speak their language or follow their script.

“America First” does not mean America alone. It means that a government’s first responsibility is to protect its own citizens. If Americans are safe, prosperous, and confident in their future, the country thrives. And when America thrives, the rest of the world benefits.

If America falls into chaos—economically, socially, or politically—the consequences are felt globally. The reason is simple: America is the engine of the world economy. It is the driver. The locomotive.

When America shines, the world shines.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Truth, Power, and the Fear of Free Speech

More than two thousand years after Jesus from Israel warned humanity about moral blindness and abused authority, the same struggle continues. Across the world, authoritarian and theocratic regimes still silence their people in the name of righteousness, while democracies wrestle with the price of freedom. From Tehran to Gaza, from social media censorship to satellite internet, the battle over truth, speech, and human dignity remains the defining conflict of our time.

More than two thousand years ago, Jesus from Israel confronted the leaders of his time with a striking observation: “You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky and the earth, but you cannot interpret the present moment.” His warning was not about astronomy or weather—it was about moral clarity. About the danger of power that loses humility, and authority that speaks of God while denying justice, truth, and human dignity.

That tension remains painfully relevant today.

Authoritarian Power and Moral Inversion

Iran presents one of the clearest modern examples of moral inversion. The country is ruled not by its people, but by a theocratic power structure dominated by clerics loyal to the Supreme Leader. This is not a faith community acting in good conscience, but a closed ruling elite that uses religious language to legitimize repression.

Institutions such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) function as both internal enforcers and external operators, crushing dissent at home while exporting violence abroad. The regime openly funds and arms groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza—organizations that operate outside democratic norms and deliberately target civilians.

The stated goal of this alliance is ideological confrontation, particularly the destruction of Israel. Yet the human cost of this agenda is borne by ordinary people: Israeli civilians living normal lives under constant threat, Palestinians trapped between militant groups and humanitarian collapse, and above all, the Iranian population itself.

Inside Iran, protests are met with internet shutdowns, mass arrests, torture, and executions. Women are beaten or killed for defying dress codes. Journalists disappear. Students are imprisoned. Minorities are silenced. The regime that claims moral authority has shown none toward its own people.

Israel, Self-Defense, and the Collapse of the Narrative

Iran’s clerical leadership routinely labels Israel “the Great Satan.” But when words are weighed against actions, the accusation collapses. Israel, a democratic state, acts primarily in self-defense against groups that openly call for its destruction and have launched decades of rocket attacks, suicide bombings, and kidnappings.

Crucially, Israel is not targeting ordinary Palestinian civilians in Gaza. Its operations are aimed at Hamas and other militant groups responsible for terror attacks. Innocent civilians, while tragically caught in the conflict, are not the objective.

The same principle applies to Iran. If outside powers, such as the United States or Israel, intervene in Iran, their focus would be on the criminal theocratic rulers and their armed networks—the same groups that finance and coordinate terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah—not the Iranian people themselves, who suffer under the oppressive regime.

Meanwhile, the Iranian regime projects accusations of evil outward while systematically repressing its own citizens, silencing women, journalists, and students, and sponsoring violence abroad. Moral hypocrisy is evident: evil is claimed elsewhere, but practiced at home and through proxies.

Democracy vs. Theocracy

At its core, this is not merely a geopolitical struggle—it is a philosophical one.

Democracy rests on the principle that power flows from the people, that leaders are accountable, and that truth can be debated openly. A theocracy, by contrast, claims divine authority, places rulers beyond question, and treats dissent as heresy. Where democracy depends on free speech and transparency, authoritarian systems survive through censorship, fear, and isolation.

This is why free information is the greatest enemy of such regimes.

Why the Internet Terrifies Tyranny

When the Iranian regime shuts down the internet, it is not a technical decision—it is a political act of survival. Open communication exposes corruption, abuse, and lies. Free speech breaks the illusion of absolute power.

That is why the smuggling of Starlink satellite terminals into Iran matters. Backed by Elon Musk’s satellite network, this technology bypasses state-controlled infrastructure and restores a basic human freedom: connection to the outside world. Information becomes resistance.

Musk’s role here is consistent with his stated philosophy. He bought Twitter to restore what he called a digital public square, reversing bans—including that of a sitting U.S. president—on the grounds that democracy cannot function if political speech is arbitrarily silenced. While social media debates moderation, the Iranian regime cuts off an entire nation from the internet. The contrast could not be clearer. Elon Musk is a freedom champion. So is Trump.

A Timeless Warning

Jesus was not executed for promoting kindness alone. He was killed for challenging power structures that cloaked themselves in divine authority while denying truth and justice. His message threatened those who ruled through fear, hypocrisy, and control.

History keeps repeating the same lesson: regimes that silence truth in the name of righteousness ultimately condemn themselves. Power without humility corrupts. Authority without accountability collapses. And those who fear open speech reveal their own illegitimacy.

Two thousand years later, the struggle continues—but so does the truth.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Freedom of Speech or Freedom to Offend? — The Kimmel Controversy

Jimmy Kimmel’s mocking remarks about Donald Trump’s grief after Charlie Kirk’s assassination have ignited a firestorm.
But this is about more than one comedian — it’s about how freedom of speech has turned into a demand for emotional performance, and how public debate is losing sight of responsibility.

When Jimmy Kimmel joked that Donald Trump’s grief “is not how an adult grieves the murder of someone he calls a friend. This is how a four-year-old mourns a goldfish,” the audience laughed, but the backlash came fast and hard. Kimmel was swiftly pulled off the air, and for many, this marked a turning point.

Critics argued that his remarks were cruel, mocking genuine human grief over the murder of a public figure. Supporters defended him, claiming it was just a joke and was protected under freedom of speech.

But this controversy goes deeper than a single comment. It highlights how the concept of freedom of speech is being stretched, sometimes misused, as a shield for abuse, ridicule, and dehumanization.

Freedom of speech is not a license to abuse

I wrote an article about Freedom of speech seven years ago, and I feel that I have a responsibility to repeat myself because this is so important. This is what I wrote:
“Freedom of speech is NOT a license to abuse — it is a responsibility.”

Concepts of freedom of speech can be found in early human rights documents. England’s Bill of Rights (1680) legally established the constitutional right of freedom of speech in Parliament, which is still in effect.

The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, adopted during the French Revolution in 1789, specifically affirmed freedom of speech as an inalienable right. Article 11 states:

“The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law.

This principle is crucial. Freedom of speech was never meant to protect cruelty, slander, or targeted emotional harm. It was meant to protect debate, dissent, and the free exchange of ideas. Rights come with duties. Speech comes with consequences.

A pattern of public shaming

This is not the first time the media have been accused of demanding emotional performances and punishing anyone who doesn’t meet the script.

When Princess Diana died in 1997, Queen Elizabeth was heavily criticized by the press for not showing enough visible grief. Headlines branded her as cold and emotionless, forcing her to make a public display of mourning just to silence the criticism.

The same pattern can be seen now:
If you don’t grieve the “right way,” or if someone mocks how you grieve, it becomes a public scandal. Public emotions are staged, judged, and weaponized. And comedians, who once pushed boundaries, now risk being used as tools in that system. (Is this part of the Matrix system I wrote about in my previous article?).

The line between humor and harm

Comedy has always been about testing limits. But there’s a difference between punching up and punching down, between provoking thought and ridiculing someone’s suffering.

Mocking grief is not clever social commentary. It’s cruelty. And when it becomes normalized, it contributes to a culture where empathy is seen as weakness and cruelty is seen as courage.

Freedom of speech should protect the right to speak the truth, not the right to hurt for entertainment.

A responsibility, not a weapon

This is the lesson the Kimmel controversy should teach us.
Speech is powerful. It shapes societies, moves crowds, inspires revolutions, or sparks hatred.

We must remember: Freedom of speech is not just a right. It is a responsibility.
Because if freedom becomes a weapon, it will eventually destroy the very societies built to protect it.

We’re not just standing at a crossroad. We’re standing on the threshold of a new era. Those who dare to seize the future will shape it. Those who hesitate will live in the shadow of those who didn’t.”

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Donald J. Trump and Capitalism won BIG

Donald J. Trump is the next U.S. President. However, the election has significant historical elements, given the polarization and the unique political landscape surrounding both candidates. This election marks the first time a former U.S. President has won a non-consecutive second term since Grover Cleveland in 1892.

This is also the first time since 2004 that a Republican has won the popular vote. The GOP nominee`s stunning political comeback came with a high margin of victory. Not only that. At 78, Trump will also become the oldest person elected to the country`s highest office.

The intense division and high voter turnout are also notable, showing a heightened level of public engagement. 63 million voted for Trump in 2016, but this time, as of writing, more than 70 million voted for him.

Trump won more votes in nearly all of the country, and he got support from Hispanic voters, black voters, working-class heroes, and a lot of young people. This is in line with what we also see in Europe. Young voters reject the leftist policy.

Picture: Fighter Donald Trump won big over Kamala Harris, Fight, fight, fight!

On Wednesday, Kamala Harris gave a speech, and she said that many people in the U.S. feel like the U.S. is entering a dark time. I hope that is not the case, Harris said. The media is also telling us that everything is dark now. Young people want to move to another country, legacy media is telling us.

But, wait a minute. What in the world is going on here? People on the left side, including legacy media are negative and live in darkness. It seems like they don`t believe in the future. But what about the next president? He cannot be in the same camp. Can he? No way.

Trump claimed victory at around 2.30 a.m., pledging to usher in a «golden age» for the United States of America, and «Make America Great Again.» (keep in mind that the stock market and the crypto market went straight up on Wednesday. Investors love Trump! A big win for capitalism).

Not only that. Furthermore, Trump said: «This is a movement like nobody`s ever seen before and, frankly, this was, I believe, the greatest political movement of all time. There`s never been anything like this in the history.»

We must remember that millions of people have rejected the leftists, and there must be a reason for that. This is not only happening in the U.S. but also in Europe. Elon Musk is one of them. He used to be on the left side politically, but now, he is a Republican. And he is not alone.

What makes me so angry is all the BS we hear from the leftists and the legacy media. Let`s take a look at Kamala`s speech today. For example, she said:

«A fundamental principle of American democracy is that when we lose an election, we accept the results. That principle, as much as any other, distinguishes democracy from monarchy or tyranny. And anyone who seeks the public trust must honor it.»

Let me remind you all of something nobody is talking about anymore. The Russia collusion. When Donald J. Trump won the election in 2016, the leftists, and the legacy media, claimed Trump and his campaign might have coordinated with Russian efforts to interfere in the U.S. election.

While several individuals associated with Trump`s campaign were investigated for potential ties to Russian operatives, Mueller`s final report did NOT establish sufficient evidence that the Trump campaign knowingly coordinated with Russian interference efforts.

The report did, however, detail numerous contacts between Trump campaign officials and Russian nationals, which raised ethical and legal concerns.

The investigation remains a significant and divisive topic, as its findings impacted U.S. political dynamics, the public’s trust in institutions, and discussions around election security.

We can all see how the leftists and the legacy media are hiding this. They started it all in 2016, and it has had a huge impact on voters. People on the left side are destroying their own party. And this is exactly what we all face now. The Democrats have lost credibility, and need to work hard to come back on track again. Voters can see it, and they are NOT stupid.

On top of that. Many people on the left and certain political figures claimed that Donald J. Trump`s victory in the 2016 election was illegitimate. Can you believe that?

These claims were based primarily on the interference of Russia in the 2016 election, as detailed in the Mueller Report, and the fact that Trump won the Electoral College while losing the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes.

But it doesn`t stop here. We can all see how many people on the left side always attack people on the right side. Right after the U.S. election in 2016, the leftists started a campaign called

#NotMyPresident.

Following the election, many of Trump`s opponents used the hashtag #NotMyPresident, especially among liberal and left-wing groups, to express their rejection of his presidency, arguing that he did not win the election fairly.

But this, time Donald J. Trump won BIG! And that makes it difficult to deny the results. Therefore, Kamala Harris said in the speech on Wednesday: «Now, I know folks are feeling and experiencing a range of emotions right now. I get it. But we must accept the results of this election».

Yes, Kamala Harris. That`s right. More than 70 million voted for Trump and they aren`t stupid.

Let me finish this article by telling you what a democracy is:

Democracy is a system of government in which power is vested in the people, who rule either directly or through freely elected representatives. The core principle is that citizens have the right to participate in decision-making, typically through voting in elections, ensuring that the government reflects the will of the people.

The U.S. is often categorized as a democracy, but the United States is more often accurately defined as a constitutional federal republic. So, the United States is often described as both a democracy and a constitutional federal republic.

The U.S. is a federal republic, which means that it is made up of states that share sovereignty with a central government. The Constitution serves as the foundational legal framework that defines the structure of the government and the rights of the people.

The «Constitutional» part signifies the importance of these legal documents in limiting governmental power and protecting individual rights.

In essence, while the U.S. is a democracy in the sense that people vote and have a role in governance, it is also a constitutional federal republic because of the distribution of power between federal and state governments, and the rule of law established by the Constitution.

Finally, Abraham Lincoln said a democracy is «of the people, by the people, for the people.» The word democracy comes from the Greek words «demos,» meaning people, and «Kratos,» meaning power. So, democracy can be thought of as «the power of the people.»

It is a way of governing that depends on the will of the people. More than 70 million voted for Trump, and this is how a democracy works—it is the will of the people. Congratulations!

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics