Daily Caller
Here’s How Leaders From Around The World Responded To Trump’s Victory

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Jake Smith
Following President-elect Donald Trump’s sweeping victory in the U.S. presidential elections on Tuesday, several leaders from countries around the world offered their responses — some more congratulatory in nature than others.
Trump made a historical comeback from his loss in 2020 and swept the electoral vote by at least a 277-224 margin, while also taking the popular vote by nearly five million votes, according to multiple reports. World leaders were closely watching the election — as Harris’ and Trump’s approach to foreign policy varies widely — and offered compliments on his victory, while other nations typically considered American adversaries seemed to take a more muted and cautionary tone.
“Italy and the United States are ‘sister’ nations, linked by an unshakable alliance, common values, and a historic friendship,” Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said in a statement on Wednesday. “It is a strategic bond, which I am sure we will now strengthen even further.”
“Congratulations on history’s greatest comeback!” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Wednesday.
“The future of the [South Korea]-U.S. alliance and America will shine brighter. Look forward to working closely with you,” South Korean Prime Minister Toon Suk Yeol said on Wednesday.
Other world leaders that Trump differs from vastly on politics — including Canada and the U.K. — also offered compliments to Trump on his win, even as Trump has publicly criticized their left-wing policies.
“I know President Trump and I will work together to create more opportunity, prosperity, and security for both of our nations,” Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Wednesday.
Most European Union (EU) nations applauded Trump’s victory, though some countries signaled that Europe needs to be ready to rely more closely on itself. Trump’s “America First” approach has been popular among swaths of the American electorate but has left some European countries nervous that Trump may take a different approach than President Joe Biden’s seemingly no-holds-barred relationship with Europe in recent years.
During his first term, Trump had a sometimes tense relationship with some European countries, as he felt that they contributed to the U.S.’ global trade imbalance and weren’t paying enough to be part of the NATO alliance. Trump on multiple occasions has threatened to pull the U.S. out of NATO unless European countries pay their agreed share.
Trump’s threat was successful — a higher number of NATO allies met their defense spending goals at the end of his term than at the beginning.
“The European Union must stand close together and act in a united manner,” Scholz told reporters on Wednesday, noting that he and Macron were working closely with other European partners.
China offered few remarks on Trump’s win, while other adversaries such as Iran and North Korea have yet to publicly comment on the matter, although Tehran has made it clear it does not want another Trump term. Chinese officials have reportedly feared the policies of another Trump term compared to a Harris presidency and actively interfered in this year’s elections.
“We respect the choice of the American people and congratulate Mr. Trump on being elected as president of the United States,” a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman said on Wednesday.
Russia’s message on the election appeared more veiled and hostile. Russian President Vladimir Putin does apparently not plan to offer any congratulations to Trump, Kremlin spokesman Dmitri Peskov told reporters on Wednesday, arguing that the U.S. is “an unfriendly country that is both directly and indirectly involved in the war against our state.”
“We have repeatedly said that the U.S. is able to contribute to the end of this conflict. This cannot be done overnight, but… the U.S. is capable of changing the trajectory of its foreign policy. Will this happen, and if so, how … we will see after (the U.S. president’s inauguration in) January,” Peskov said.
Russia has waged war against Ukraine since 2022 and has dragged the U.S. and Europe deeper and deeper into the conflict. Biden has failed to significantly alter the course of the war; Trump has vowed that he could strike a peace settlement between Russia and Ukraine by the time he reaches office in January.
Similarly, Trump has promised that the ongoing conflict in the Middle East — which was borne out of Hamas’ invasion on Oct. 7, 2023 — by the time he takes office in January, warning that he will treat Iran far more harshly than Biden has and will impose sanctions to ensure Tehran cannot build its funding reserves. Trump spoke to Netanyahu in July and reportedly told him that the war in Gaza needs to end by January, potentially in a bid to reestablish some norms between the Israelis and the Palestinians.
On China, Trump has promised fair competition but warned that he will impose stricter tariffs in a bid to balance the trade deficit, encourage Americans to buy more domestic goods and compel China to import more American products.
Crime
‘We’re Going To Lose’: Steve Bannon Warns Withholding Epstein Files Would Doom GOP

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Jason Cohen
Former White House adviser Steve Bannon warned on Friday that Republicans would suffer major losses if President Donald Trump’s administration does not move to release documents related to deceased pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes and associations.
Axios reported on Sunday that a two-page memo showed the Department Of Justice (DOJ) and FBI found no evidence Epstein kept a “client list” or was murdered, but public doubts have continued. Bannon said on “Bannon’s War Room” that failure to release information would lead to the dissipation of one-tenth of the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement and significant losses for the Republican Party in the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential election.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
“It’s not about just a pedophile ring and all that, it’s about who governs us, right? And that’s why it’s not going to go away … For this to go away, you’re going to lose 10% of the MAGA movement,” Bannon said. “If we lose 10% of the MAGA movement right now, we’re going to lose 40 seats in ’26, we’re going to lose the [presidency]. They don’t even have to steal it, which they’re going to try to do in ’28, because they’re going to sit there and they go, ‘They’ve disheartened the hardest-core populist nationalists’ — that’s always been who governs us.”
Bannon also demanded the publication of all the Epstein documents on “Bannon’s War Room” Thursday. He called on the DOJ to go to court and push for the release of the documents or for Trump to appoint a special counsel to manage the publication.
Epstein was arrested in 2019 and charged with sex trafficking. Shortly after, he was found dead in his New York Metropolitan Correctional Center cell shortly after. Officials asserted that he hanged himself in his cell.
However, Epstein’s death has sparked years of theories because of the malfunctioning of prison cameras, along with guards admitting to falsifying documents about checking on the then-inmate. The DOJ inspector general later confirmed that multiple surveillance cameras outside of his cell were inoperable, while others captured the common area outside his door.
Both Bannon and Daily Caller News Foundation co-founder Tucker Carlson have speculated that Epstein had connections to intelligence agencies.
Former Labor Secretary Alex Acosta allegedly indicated that Epstein was tied to intelligence, according to Vicky Ward in The Daily Beast.
Business
UN’s ‘Plastics Treaty’ Sports A Junk Science Wrapper

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Craig Rucker
According to a study in Science Advances, over 90% of ocean plastic comes from just 10 rivers, eight of which are in Asia. The United States, by contrast, contributes less than 1%. Yet Pew treats all nations as equally responsible, promoting one-size-fits-all policies that fail to address the real source of the issue.
Just as people were beginning to breathe a sigh of relief thanks to the Trump administration’s rollback of onerous climate policies, the United Nations is set to finalize a legally binding Global Plastics Treaty by the end of the year that will impose new regulations, and, ultimately higher costs, on one of the world’s most widely used products.
Plastics – derived from petroleum – are found in everything from water bottles, tea bags, and food packaging to syringes, IV tubes, prosthetics, and underground water pipes. In justifying the goal of its treaty to regulate “the entire life cycle of plastic – from upstream production to downstream waste,” the U.N. has put a bull’s eye on plastic waste. “An estimated 18 to 20 percent of global plastic waste ends up in the ocean,” the UN says.
As delegates from over 170 countries prepare for the final round of negotiations in Geneva next month, debate is intensifying over the future of plastic production, regulation, and innovation. With proposals ranging from sweeping bans on single-use plastics to caps on virgin plastic output, policymakers are increasingly citing the 2020 Pew Charitable Trusts report, Breaking the Plastic Wave, as one of the primary justifications.
But many of the dire warnings made in this report, if scrutinized, ring as hollow as an empty PET soda bottle. Indeed, a closer look reveals Pew’s report is less a roadmap to progress than a glossy piece of junk science propaganda—built on false assumptions and misguided solutions.
Pew’s core claim is dire: without urgent global action, plastic entering the oceans will triple by 2040. But this alarmist forecast glosses over a fundamental fact—plastic pollution is not a global problem in equal measure. According to a study in Science Advances, over 90% of ocean plastic comes from just 10 rivers, eight of which are in Asia. The United States, by contrast, contributes less than 1%. Yet Pew treats all nations as equally responsible, promoting one-size-fits-all policies that fail to address the real source of the issue.
This blind spot has serious consequences. Pew’s solutions—cutting plastic production, phasing out single-use items, and implementing rigid global regulations—miss the mark entirely. Banning straws in the U.S. or taxing packaging in Europe won’t stop waste from being dumped into rivers in countries with little or no waste infrastructure. Policies targeting Western consumption don’t solve the problem—they simply shift it or, worse, stifle useful innovation.
The real tragedy isn’t plastic itself, but the mismanagement of plastic waste—and the regulatory stranglehold that blocks better solutions. In many countries, recycling is a government-run monopoly with little incentive to innovate. Meanwhile, private-sector entrepreneurs working on advanced recycling, biodegradable materials, and AI-powered sorting systems face burdensome red tape and market distortion.
Pew pays lip service to innovation but ultimately favors centralized planning and control. That’s a mistake. Time and again, it’s been technology—not top-down mandates—that has delivered environmental breakthroughs.
What the world needs is not another top-down, bureaucratic report like Pew’s, but an open dialogue among experts, entrepreneurs, and the public where new ideas can flourish. Imagine small-scale pyrolysis units that convert waste into fuel in remote villages, or decentralized recycling centers that empower informal waste collectors. These ideas are already in development—but they’re being sidelined by policymakers fixated on bans and quotas.
Worse still, efforts to demonize plastic often ignore its benefits. Plastic is lightweight, durable, and often more environmentally efficient than alternatives like glass or aluminum. The problem isn’t the material—it’s how it has been managed after its use. That’s a “systems” failure, not a material flaw.
Breaking the Plastic Wave champions a top-down, bureaucratic vision that limits choice, discourages private innovation, and rewards entrenched interests under the guise of environmentalism. Many of the groups calling for bans are also lobbying for subsidies and regulatory frameworks that benefit their own agendas—while pushing out disruptive newcomers.
With the UN expected to finalize the treaty by early 2026, nations will have to face the question of ratification. Even if the Trump White House refuses to sign the treaty – which is likely – ordinary Americans could still feel the sting of this ill-advised scheme. Manufacturers of life-saving plastic medical devices, for example, are part of a network of global suppliers. Companies located in countries that ratify the treaty will have no choice but to pass the higher costs along, and Americans will not be spared.
Ultimately, the marketplace of ideas—not the offices of policy NGOs—will deliver the solutions we need. It’s time to break the wave of junk science—not ride it.
Craig Rucker is president of the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org).
-
International2 days ago
Support for the Ukraine war continues because no one elected is actually in charge.
-
Business2 days ago
Trump slaps Brazil with tariffs over social media censorship
-
National2 days ago
How Long Will Mark Carney’s Post-Election Honeymoon Last? – Michelle Rempel Garner
-
espionage1 day ago
FBI’s Dan Bongino may resign after dispute about Epstein files with Pam Bondi
-
Business2 days ago
CBC six-figure salaries soar
-
Addictions2 days ago
Can addiction be predicted—and prevented?
-
Addictions2 days ago
More young men want to restrict pornography: survey
-
Brownstone Institute2 days ago
Net Zero: The Mystery of the Falling Fertility