No. of Recommendations: 7
Having listened to the RW media response to Trump's humiliation over the Greenland fiasco, it is easy to see why the likes of Dope, LM and Marco are so detached from reality.
The RW media is framing it all as a brilliant victory by Trump. Seriously, that's how detached from reality you can become if you live in the RW bubble.
No. of Recommendations: 2
The RW media is framing it all as a brilliant victory by Trump.
Really? They think this was a victory?
No. of Recommendations: 2
Really? They think this was a victory?
This is from a Gemini search for Hannity's reaction, but I've heard others on the right saying pretty much the same thing. I doubt the 'news' portion of FOX would see it in the same light, but I have not seen how they reported on the outcome. Hannity said that Trump had really showed up the 'doubters' with this big win.
In January 2026, Sean Hannity has emerged as one of the most vocal defenders of President Trump’s "framework" agreement on Greenland, characterizing the outcome of the Davos summit as a significant strategic win rather than a backdown.
Hannity’s Core Arguments
On his Fox News program, Hannity has framed the negotiations through the lens of "America First" strength and tactical brilliance:
A "Breath of Fresh Air" at Davos: Hannity described Trump’s presence at the World Economic Forum as a breath of fresh air for a global elite that had grown complacent. He argued that Trump's willingness to challenge the status quo forced allies to finally take American security concerns in the Arctic seriously.
Criticism of European Resistance: He labeled the initial "show of force" and pushback from European countries regarding Greenland as embarrassing and pathetic. In his view, these nations are dependent on U.S. security while simultaneously obstructing U.S. strategic interests.
The "Framework" as a Win: Rather than seeing the pause in tariffs as a "capitulation," Hannity argues that Trump successfully moved the needle from a flat "no" from Denmark to a formal negotiation framework that includes Arctic security and resource access.
National Security Priority: Hannity has consistently echoed Trump’s claim that only the United States has the power and resources to properly secure Greenland from Russian and Chinese encroachment.
No. of Recommendations: 2
National Security Priority: Hannity has consistently echoed Trump’s claim that only the United States has the power and resources to properly secure Greenland from Russian and Chinese encroachment.
For the halibut, I looked up the number of active duty military for each NATO member.
United States: 1,300,000
Türkiye: 481,000
Poland: 216,000
France: 205,000
Germany: 186,000
Italy: 171,00
United Kingdom: 138,000
Spain: 117,000
Greece: 111,000
Canada: 77,000
Romania: 67,000
Netherlands: 42,000
Finland: 31,000
Czech Republic: 30,000
Portugal: 28,000
Of that 1.3M USians, only about 100,000 are based in Europe. The bulk of the other members, except Canada, have the bulk of their forces in Europe. So, the US is providing a minor part of the defense of Europe, in spite of Trump's whining to the contrary. Wouldn't it be reasonable for the US and Canada to take on defending Greenland, while the European NATO powers provide the bulk of the forces defensing Europe, as they do now? Adding up the European based powers only, I get 1.8M military, larger than the entire US force, in all the world.
A former PM of Denmark was on Amanpour a couple nights ago. She noted that the US used to have 10,000 military in Greenland. The US decided to draw that down to the roughly 200 stationed there now.
But the God King Trump loves to whine about what a victim the US is.
Steve
