OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

Trump meets Turkey’s Erdoğan at NATO summit amid F-35 sale and alliance bargaining (including whether to reverse F-35 purchase)

42 sources · updated 2026-07-09
Left 67% Center 10% Right 24%
28 left · 4 center · 10 right

What happened

On July 7, 2026, at the NATO summit in Ankara, President Donald Trump met Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and said the United States would consider allowing Turkey to buy F-35 fighter jets again. Turkey was removed from the F-35 program in 2019 after buying Russia’s S-400 air defense system, and U.S. law passed in 2020 restricts transferring F-35s to Turkey while it possesses that system. Trump also said he planned to lift U.S. sanctions on Turkey and praised Erdoğan as a strong leader and friend, while Erdoğan said Turkey expected earlier F-35 commitments to be addressed positively. No F-35 sale was finalized at the summit, and congressional approval or certification issues remain unresolved.
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

One left-side fact that does not appear in the right-side articles is Axios’ claim that “Iran fired several missiles that hit Turkish territory during the war,” used to frame Trump’s praise of Turkey for staying out of the Iran conflict. The right-side pieces discuss Turkey staying neutral, closing airspace, or being unreliable, but none includes missiles hitting Turkish territory. In the other direction, Daily Wire says Erdoğan agreed to “huge liquefied natural gas (LNG) procurement contracts” in 2025 and pushed NATO allies to buy LNG; that bargaining detail is absent from the left-side articles provided. The language around Trump’s NATO posture diverges sharply: Axios calls it an “Iran grudge,” says Trump is “still furious,” and describes “open contempt,” while Daily Caller says Trump came “to make his expectations clear,” and Daily Wire frames it as “frustration with allies.” On the F-35 question, the right-side coverage is more detailed about opposition: Breitbart names Fetterman, Malliotakis, Pappas, Titus, Graham, Cornyn, and Pence, while Newsmax gives Mort Klein’s case against the sale. Left-side Axios mentions Netanyahu’s objection and an 18-lawmaker letter, but does not provide the same roster of congressional pushback. The unasked question across the set: what exact S-400 remedy would legally satisfy Congress before any F-35 transfer, and has Turkey agreed to it?
Bottom line

The clearest gap is that left-side coverage stresses Trump’s NATO loyalty fight and regional-balance concerns, while right-side coverage supplies more named opposition to the F-35 sale and more detail on why Turkey’s S-400 purchase remains a legal obstacle.

The Left View
Left-leaning coverage framed the meeting as part of Trump’s broader transactional approach to NATO and alliance politics. NBC, BBC, Axios, Bloomberg and CBS emphasized Trump’s frustration with European allies over Iran, defense spending, Greenland and perceived lack of loyalty, while presenting Erdoğan as one of the few NATO leaders still in Trump’s favor. These sources highlighted the policy reversal involved in potentially readmitting Turkey to the F-35 program, the legal obstacle created by Turkey’s Russian S-400 purchase, and concerns that the sale could compromise U.S. technology or upset Israel’s qualitative military edge. They also stressed that Trump’s praise for Erdoğan and willingness to lift sanctions came amid broader doubts among NATO allies about U.S. reliability and Trump’s commitment to traditional alliance structures.
The Right View
Right-leaning coverage split between pro-Trump framing and security-focused opposition to the F-35 sale. The Daily Wire and Daily Caller emphasized Trump’s view that Erdoğan has been a useful partner, that Turkey showed loyalty by staying out of the Iran conflict, and that Trump is using the NATO summit to pressure European allies to spend more and stop relying on the United States. Fox News similarly focused on NATO burden-sharing, Ukraine, and Trump’s push for allies to meet higher defense-spending targets, while noting that sanctions relief and F-35 sales would mark a major shift. Breitbart, Newsmax and some quoted Republicans framed the proposed F-35 sale as dangerous, citing Turkey’s S-400s, ties with Russia, hostility toward Israel, tensions with Greece and Cyprus, and legal limits imposed by Congress. Many right-leaning accounts therefore supported Trump’s broader NATO pressure campaign while warning that giving Turkey advanced stealth fighters could undermine U.S. and allied security.
Our Take (balanced)
The strongest argument for Trump’s approach is that Turkey is strategically important: it is a NATO member, controls key geography between Europe, the Middle East and the Black Sea, has influence in Syria and regional energy politics, and can help the U.S. manage conflicts involving Russia, Iran and Ukraine. Reopening talks on F-35s and sanctions could give Washington leverage to extract concessions from Ankara, especially on the S-400 system, Russian energy purchases, NATO cooperation and regional stability. The strongest argument against the move is that the original reason Turkey was removed from the F-35 program has not clearly been solved: Russian S-400 systems create real counterintelligence concerns, and Congress has imposed legal barriers that a presidential handshake cannot simply erase. A prudent path would treat F-35 access as conditional rather than as a personal favor to Erdoğan: Turkey would need to verifiably remove, dismantle or otherwise neutralize the S-400 problem, satisfy U.S. law, and address allied concerns before any transfer proceeds. Trump’s pressure on NATO spending has a defensible burden-sharing logic, but tying major weapons decisions to personal loyalty risks weakening the rules-based security framework the alliance depends on.

42 sources

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.