OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

Trump NATO summit: F-35 sales to Turkey face bipartisan opposition

23 sources · updated 2026-07-09
Left 0% Center 0% Right 100%
0 left · 0 center · 1 right

What happened

At the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey, President Donald Trump met Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and said the United States would lift sanctions on Turkey and consider allowing it to acquire 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 Congress later enacted restrictions effectively blocking F-35 transfers to Ankara. Erdoğan said Trump had promised Turkey five F-35s, while Bloomberg reported Turkish officials were seeking an initial delivery of six jets if the U.S. ban is reversed. Several members of Congress from both parties publicly objected to any F-35 sale, citing U.S. law, Turkey’s Russian weapons purchase, and Ankara’s tensions with Israel, Greece, Cyprus and other U.S. partners.
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

The clearest fact gap is the jet count. Bloomberg’s F-35 story says Turkey wants “six F-35 jets” in an initial transaction if Trump reverses the ban. CBS reports Erdoğan said Trump promised “five F-35 fighter jets.” The right-leaning Breitbart and Newsmax pieces discuss the possible sale at length but give no number at all. The right-side coverage is much more specific on opposition. Breitbart names critics across parties and camps: John Fetterman, Benjamin Netanyahu, Nicole Malliotakis, Chris Pappas, Dina Titus, Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn, and Mike Pence. Newsmax centers Mort Klein’s objections. In the left-leaning set, the Bloomberg F-35 items as provided only say Turkey is “in line” to receive jets if Trump unblocks the sale; they do not include that roster of objections. The language diverges sharply. Bloomberg frames the summit as “the Trump-Erdogan Show” and says “Everyone Gets a Gun,” while another Bloomberg headline says “Love Is in the Air at NATO - for Strong Men Donald Trump Likes.” The Guardian says Trump had spent the previous day “spewing bile.” By contrast, Breitbart’s F-35 article uses the harder security frame: “bipartisan opposition,” “Russian intelligence collection platform,” and quotes Pence calling the move a “strategic mistake.” Newsmax quotes Klein calling Turkey “a very dangerous and very bad actor.” The unasked question: none of the articles gives a concrete path for how an F-35 transfer would legally clear the 2020 congressional prohibition and sanctions issues, beyond saying Trump may consider it and opponents say Congress can block it.
Bottom line

Left coverage provided the specific possible transaction size — Bloomberg’s “six F-35 jets” — while right coverage provided the detailed map of opposition and legal/security objections. Neither side explains the exact legal route by which the sale could actually happen.

The Left View
Left-leaning coverage framed the summit as another example of Trump reshaping NATO through personal loyalty, pressure tactics and affinity for strongman leaders. Bloomberg emphasized Trump’s warm public posture toward Erdoğan and reported that Turkey could quickly seek six F-35s if Trump unblocks the sale, presenting the episode as transactional diplomacy tied to alliance politics. The Guardian and New York Times focused more broadly on Trump’s erratic NATO performance: praising unity and “love” after insulting allies, pushing higher defense spending, reviving grievances over Greenland, and elevating personal chemistry over institutional alliance management. This framing generally portrays the Turkey-F-35 opening as part of a wider pattern in which Trump rewards leaders he likes while unsettling traditional allies and established security processes.
The Right View
Right-leaning coverage was split between approval of Trump’s pressure on NATO burden-sharing and alarm over selling F-35s to Turkey. Breitbart highlighted Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin’s acknowledgment that Trump was right to demand more NATO defense spending, while also noting concerns that Trump’s conduct can undercut alliance confidence. But Breitbart and Newsmax strongly emphasized bipartisan opposition to the F-35 proposal, arguing that Turkey’s S-400 purchase, ties with Russia, hostility toward Israel, alleged support for Hamas or Hezbollah, threats toward Greece and Cyprus, and domestic authoritarianism make Ankara an unsafe recipient of advanced U.S. stealth technology. These sources also stressed legal barriers, including congressional restrictions and sanctions law, and warned that Russia or China could gain insight into F-35 capabilities if Turkey receives the jets.
Our Take (balanced)
The strongest pro-Trump argument is that NATO allies have long underinvested in defense, and Turkey remains a strategically important NATO member with major geography, military capacity and regional influence. Reengaging Ankara could have value if it pulls Turkey closer to the alliance and away from Moscow. The strongest counterargument is that the F-35 is not an ordinary arms sale: Turkey’s acquisition of the Russian S-400 created a concrete intelligence risk, and Congress imposed restrictions for reasons that have not clearly been resolved. Any path back should be legal, transparent and conditional on verifiable steps involving the S-400s, technology safeguards, and Turkey’s conduct toward U.S. partners; handling it as a personal summit bargain would risk both national-security exposure and further distrust inside NATO.

23 sources

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

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