Trump has been full of strange ideas lately, and people are starting to wonder if something has short-circuited upstairs. The latest example: the White House posted a video on social media of Trump repeating the word "winning" for a full, unbroken hour, captioned "President Trump saying 'WINNING' for one hour. Can't stop, won't stop." Friends laugh every time they watch it. They see it for exactly what it is — another tired roll-out of the old trick: repeat a lie often enough until it sounds like truth.
Trump is heading to China — and trotting out the Jimmy Lai line again. He has said it N times. It is a broken record, no different from his recent hour-long loop of "winning".
That stunt maps almost perfectly onto his latest round of Jimmy Lai talk. In an interview with a right-wing outlet yesterday, Trump said he would raise the Jimmy Lai case again when he meets President Xi. Anyone paying attention will recall he has given virtually the same answer N times over. It is no different from his hour-long loop of "winning" — hollow repetition to tick a box. Only a fool would believe he genuinely intends to save Lai.
Trump has been tied up in knots over the Iran war situation lately. When he meets President Xi, there will likely be no good news from the front to offer. He and his aides are almost certainly preoccupied with that headache. A trivial matter like the "Jimmy Lai case" is naturally the last thing on his mind. Yet having pledged multiple times to raise it — whether sincerely or not — he needs some kind of cover.
So yesterday he told a right-wing influencer from The Salem News that he had already raised the Jimmy Lai case before and would bring it up again with President Xi. He immediately followed that with a caveat: "Hong Kong was not as easy." Translation — it is too complicated, there is not much that can be done. Raise it? Sure. Expect action? Do not bother asking.
This is nearly 90% identical to his response last October when a Fox News host asked him about it. Back then, he similarly said he would raise the Jimmy Lai case with President Xi at the G20 summit in Busan. Then he pivoted immediately, saying he "understood that President Xi would not be willing to release Jimmy Lai." The script was identical: a fleeting mention, a box ticked, and then a quiet retreat.
And that is exactly what happened at the meeting with President Xi. Trump raised the "Jimmy Lai case" for just a few minutes. There was no discussion. There was no follow-up request. American officials went silent afterwards, neither confirming anything nor issuing any statement. Only days later did a vague, informal tip-off reach Reuters. The whole affair was handled with extreme discretion from start to finish — signalling that Trump had no intention of letting this “mosquito-sized matter” get in the way of a bigger deal with Beijing.
Jimmy Lai once believed Trump would ultimately come to his rescue — like a victim of an online romance scam, he is surely beginning to understand that what he received was never genuine affection, only scripted performance.
Then, at the end of last year, when Jimmy Lai was convicted, Trump went through the motions once more. He said he had asked President Xi to release Lai. He put on a show of sympathy, declaring "I feel so badly" by the verdict. Then he promptly moved on.
A pattern emerges from Trump's "linguistic artistry": when he keeps repeating something over and over, he simply wants it lodged in the listener's head. Take it seriously at your peril. Recently, Jimmy Lai's children — seizing on Trump's imminent China visit — ran a heartstring-pulling piece in The Times of London, painting a picture of their father's bleak existence behind bars. That script has also been recited N times already. Readers are numb to it, and its impact on Trump is precisely zero. Their father has, after all, reportedly transferred wealth running into the hundreds of millions to his wife and children — they have their own reasons to put on a good performance for the cameras.
While everyone plays their part, the one who may be hurting most is Jimmy Lai himself. He once firmly believed Trump would eventually ride to his rescue. So even after the National Security Law came into force, he pressed ahead bravely as America's point man — going so far as to smear Biden in a last-ditch effort to help Trump win. The dream has now shattered completely. By the time Trump returned to power in 2025, the international landscape had shifted entirely. Jimmy Lai, that small pawn, has no further value on the board. Whether he lives or dies is of no consequence to Trump.
A friend who looked through the court records of the Lai case came across a passage that is almost darkly funny. The judge asked: "What promises did Trump make to you?" Jimmy Lai replied: "I can't quite remember! But my impression is that he promised to take the Hong Kong issue seriously." Trump's promises are worth less than a lettuce leaf — and even Jimmy Lai himself can barely recall what was said. Yet he gave everything for the man. Like a romance scam victim who has finally understood that the sweet words were never real.
Lai Ting-yiu
What Say You?
** 博客文章文責自負,不代表本公司立場 **
In the classic wuxia novel The Heaven Sword and Dragon Saber, the Golden-Haired Lion King's signature move is the "Seven Injury Fist" – devastating in power, yet self-wounding by design: for every seven points of damage dealt to the enemy, the user suffers three.
Trump unleashes the "Seven Injury Fist" against Iran, blockading its ports. Iran strikes back decisively, tightening its grip on the Strait of Hormuz. The result: America harms itself, and the global economy bleeds from within.
Trump is now trapped in a three-way deadlock with no good options left. He is unleashing this very fist against Iran – wielding economic strangulation through blockade. But the consequences may well invert the ratio entirely, injuring himself seven points for every three inflicted on Tehran, while the global economy hemorrhages from within. This is a textbook case of mutually assured destruction.
Blinded by arrogance, Trump presses on to save face. Nobel Prize-winning economist Krugman has already named the likely outcome: Iran will emerge stronger than before the war, and America will be left weaker.
By 1 May, the US-Iran war will have lasted 60 days. Trump boasted at the outset that the conflict would be over in two to three weeks. Instead, he has sunk into a quagmire of "no fighting, no talking, no withdrawing." His cards are few, yet he cannot admit defeat.
His only move is the "blockade play" – squeezing Iran's economic lifeline in hopes of forcing submission. The Wall Street Journal reports that at recent meetings – including a Monday session in the White House Situation Room to assess the war's progress – Trump settled on one course of action from several options: maintaining the interdiction of oil tankers and cargo vessels entering and leaving Iranian ports, striking at the country's jugular. He believes Iran's economy is on the verge of collapse, and that this move can force its "surrender" at lower risk than either resuming bombing or withdrawing entirely.
Trump genuinely believes this gambit will work. A White House spokesperson, responding to the Wall Street Journal, stated: "Thanks to the successful blockade of Iranian ports, the United States has maximum leverage over the regime." The strategic logic is clear: sustain the blockade long enough, and Iran will crack under pressure and be compelled to accept all of Washington's demands.
Comparatively speaking, this is indeed Trump's best choice within an impossible trilemma. A unilateral withdrawal now would be tantamount to surrender – he would have no face left to show his own people, and the Republican Party would suffer even heavier losses in the midterm elections. Resuming military operations, on the other hand, would invite Iranian retaliation, dragging the conflict into an endless spiral. The blockade carries fewer immediate downsides.
The real question is whether Iran will buckle under the pressure – or hit back hard. Judging by the tone of Iranian officials in recent days, the latter seems far more likely.
Iran's fundamental position is non-negotiable: control over the Strait of Hormuz must be maintained at all costs. The Strait is Tehran's trump card against the United States – the decisive factor in this war. Supreme Leader Mojtaba has already issued his directive: the blockade of the Strait must continue. The harder America tightens its grip on Iranian ports, the more fiercely Iran clings to the Strait. With both sides dug in, the prospect of full navigation being restored grows ever more remote.
Trump's "Seven Injury Fist" has wounded more than just Iran – the global economy is hemorrhaging from within. Since the Strait was blockaded, roughly 20 million barrels of oil per day have been cut off from world markets. With no end to the closure in sight, oil prices have surged again in recent days. Brent crude rose 7% today to US$119.50 per barrel – its highest level since June 2022 – completely erasing the earlier declines that followed a temporary ceasefire.
Soaring oil prices are battering every sector of the economy, fueling inflation and driving up interest rates. The International Monetary Fund has already revised its global growth forecast down to 3.1%. Should oil prices remain elevated, that figure could fall further to 2.5%. The World Bank has also warned that energy prices could rise 24% this year, significantly heightening the risk of recession.
Nobel Prize-winning economist Krugman predicts that after Trump's assault, he will have no more cards left to play , and Iran will emerge stronger than before the war, while America is left weakened.
Trump's recklessness has cost the world dearly, and Nobel Prize-winning economist Krugman is growing increasingly furious. In an article titled "The Oil Crisis Deepens, the World Economy in Peril", Krugman argues that if Persian Gulf oil supplies continue to fall, sufficient "demand destruction" must occur to bring consumption in line with supply. That process, he warns, will inflict enormous economic damage. The outlook, he states, is genuinely alarming.
Krugman attributes this catastrophe squarely to Trump's overweening arrogance. "His fragile sense of self-worth depends on constantly believing that he’s a winner while others are losers," Krugman writes. "Now he’s faced with the reality that he, more or less single-handedly, led America to humiliating strategic defeat."
As for how things might unfold, Krugman poses a pointed question: "How long will it take before Trump accepts the reality that he doesn’t have the cards, that in the end his Iran venture will be resolved in a way that leaves Iran stronger and America weaker than before the war?" At this stage of the US-Iran war, many would argue that Krugman's prediction is no longer a question mark. It looks like an outcome all but certain to come true.
Lai Ting-yiu
