'Playing with fire': Trump trades barbs with Kremlin after Russia fires missiles through negotiation prospects



President Donald Trump indicated last week that Russia and Ukraine would "immediately" begin negotiation talks. Trump appeared optimistic, noting that his two-hour call on May 19 with Vladimir Putin went "very well," even though the Russian president would not immediately agree to an unconditional ceasefire with Ukraine.

While the road to peace still appeared rocky and uncertain, Trump indicated days later that there were signs of promise as Russia and Ukraine had started their largest prisoner-of-war swap. Trump wrote, "This could lead to something big?"

Trump's optimism turned out to be premature.

Russia has pelted Ukrainian cities in recent days with drones and missiles, while Russian forces continue to advance in the east of the beleaguered country.

"The U.S. condemns Russia's attacks and all resulting civilian casualties in Ukraine. As the President has said many times, the killing must end. Our thoughts are with the victims and their families," a State Department spokesman told Blaze News. "We call for restraint and urge all parties to avoid further escalation that risks civilian harm."

Devolution

On the evening of May 24, Russia fired 14 ballistic missiles into Ukraine, six of which were apparently shot down, according to the Ukrainian Air Force. Russia also dispatched 355 drones, 128 of which were also reportedly shot down.

'This cannot be ignored.'

At least 12 people were killed in what has been recognized as Moscow's largest aerial attack in the war so far.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on X, "Russia is dragging out this war and continues to kill every day. The world may go on a weekend break, but the war continues, regardless of weekends and weekdays. This cannot be ignored. Silence of America, silence of others around the world only encourage Putin."

— (@)

Russia, which accused Kyiv of attempting to assassinate Putin earlier this month with two drones, has characterized the drone and missile offensive as retaliatory.

Sergey Lavrov, the Russian minister of foreign affairs, claimed prior to Russia's May 24 attacks that the "Ukrainian side launched a record number of combat drones" and suggested the alleged attacks were "a clear attempt to derail peace talks and disrupt the process that began in Istanbul."

'I don't like it, and it better stop.'

Ukrainian officials recently boasted that their large-scale drone attacks on Russian targets have in recent days damaged Russian military facilities, reported the Wall Street Journal.

RELATED: Dictator, thief, puppet: Volodymyr Zelenskyy's 3 strikes revealed

Photo by Office of the President of Ukraine via Getty Images

In a message on May 23, the Russian foreign ministry noted that "Russia will deliver a matching response to barrages of terrorist attacks carried out by the Kiev regime."

On the evening of May 25, Russia "carried out a combined strike on Ukraine" involving nine ballistic missiles, 55 winged missiles, one Soviet Kh-22 missile, four controlled aviation missiles, and hundreds of suicide drones, according to the Ukrainian Air Force.

Trump responds, attacks continue

Trump noted on the night of the second consecutive aerial bombardment, "I've always had a very good relationship with Vladimir Putin of Russia, but something has happened to him. He has gone absolutely CRAZY!"

"He is needlessly killing a lot of people, and I'm not just talking about soldiers," continued Trump. "Missiles and drones are being shot into Cities in Ukraine, for no reason whatsoever. I've always said that he wants ALL of Ukraine, not just a piece of it, and maybe that's proving to be right, but if he does, it will lead to the downfall of Russia!"

Trump assigned some blame to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, suggesting that "everything out of his mouth causes problems."

"I don't like it, and it better stop," added Trump.

Trump's threat of "downfall" evidently fell on deaf ears, as Moscow launched yet another missile and drone attack on Monday, this time deploying nine winged missiles and 355 drones, most of them Shahed suicide drones.

Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov reportedly referred to the Monday attack as a "retaliatory strike."

When asked about Trump's remarks regarding Putin, Peskov said, "We are really grateful to the Americans and to President Trump personally for their assistance in organizing and launching this negotiation process," according to Reuters.

'There are no longer any range restrictions for weapons.'

"Of course, at the same time, this is a very crucial moment, which is associated, of course, with the emotional overload of everyone absolutely and with emotional reactions," added Peskov.

Trump did not respond well to Monday's attacks, stating, "What Vladimir Putin doesn’t realize is that if it weren't for me, lots of really bad things would have already happened to Russia, and I mean REALLY BAD. He's playing with fire!"

Escalation

While Trump is now contemplating hitting Moscow with new sanctions, Russia could soon be hit with something far more devastating.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz signaled on Monday that Germany, the U.K., the U.S., and other nations have removed all remaining range restrictions on weapons provided to Ukraine.

"We will do everything in our power to continue supporting Ukraine," wrote Merz. "This also means no longer having any range restrictions on the weapons we supply. Ukraine can now also defend itself by attacking military positions in Russia."

Merz clarified who was onboard with this move, telling a crowd, "There are no longer any range restrictions for weapons that have been delivered to Ukraine — neither by the British, nor by the French, nor by us, and not by the Americans either," reported the Associated Press.

Former President Joe Biden secretly signed off on the transfer of the Army Tactical Missile System to Ukraine in February 2024. The American-made supersonic missiles have a range of up to 190 miles. Ukraine also has British-made Storm Shadow missiles, which have a range of 155 miles.

Around the time of the American presidential election, Biden eased some of the restrictions on American long-range missile use against Russia. It's unclear what additional limits on use still remained.

RELATED: Trump reveals Ukraine ceasefire challenges and who he blames most

MAXIM SHIPENKOV/POOL/AFP via Getty Images / Andrew Kravchenko/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The use of long-range weapons against targets deep within Russia is a move long urged by Ukrainian officials, resisted by U.S. officials concerned about escalation, and identified by Putin as a trigger for a direct conflict between NATO and Russia.

Peskov said of Merz's statement that the elimination of range restrictions would be "quite dangerous" and "run contrary to our efforts to reach a political settlement."

'All options remain on the table.'

Although Peskov suggested that such a counterpunch could jeopardize negotiations, Russia is doing its part to delay meaningful peace in the region. After all, Russian forces are presently on the move and advancing through eastern Ukraine. They reportedly captured two settlements in the Donetsk region and a third settlement in the northern region of Sumy over the weekend.

The Institute for the Study of War noted in its Sunday assessment of the Russian campaign that

Russian President Vladimir Putin is leveraging long-range strikes against Ukrainian cities, aggressive rhetorical campaigns, and excessive pessimism in the West about the battlefield situation in Ukraine in a multi-pronged effort to degrade Ukrainian morale and convince the West that a Russian victory in Ukraine is inevitable and that supporting Ukraine is futile.

"We continue to support direct talks between Russia and Ukraine. There is no military solution to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. A diplomatic solution is necessary to end the war and save lives," a State Department spokesperson told Blaze News.

Responding to question about whether the U.S. might now adopt a different approach to Russia, the spokesperson said, "All options remain on the table. President Trump has said clearly that he has a range of measures available to encourage Russia to participate constructively in negotiations."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Russia, Ukraine resume talks for first time in years — all thanks to Trump



Negotiators from Russia and Ukraine met in Istanbul, Turkey, on Friday, marking the first meeting between the two countries since 2022 due to mounting pressure from President Donald Trump.

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan addressed the negotiators at Dolmabahce Palace on Friday, urging the two countries to reach a ceasefire agreement as soon as possible.

"There are two paths ahead of us: One road will take us on a process that will lead to peace, while the other will lead to more destruction and death," Fidan said. "The sides will decide on their own, with their own will, which path they choose."

'Although tensions ran high, progress has been made.'

RELATED: Trump earns unlikely praise from House Democrat: 'I got to give him some kudos there'

(Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The war officially began under former President Joe Biden, but there was little movement throughout his term. Now, Trump has taken the lead to resolve the conflict.

Up until Trump's inauguration in January, Ukraine was essentially bankrolled by the United States. That all changed during the infamous Oval Office meeting with Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Although tensions ran high, progress has been made with various proposed peace deals, though none have yet been agreed to by all parties involved.

RELATED: Trump pledges to lift 'brutal and crippling' sanctions on Syria, pushes for Middle East peace talks

Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images

The Russia-Ukraine War is not the only conflict Trump is trying to resolve. The president spent the week touring the Middle East and meeting with various leaders, like President Ahmed al-Sharaa of Syria, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, and President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey.

During these meetings, Trump encouraged the leaders to sign onto the Abraham Accords alongside Israel in order to restore peace in the Middle East. Trump also urged the leaders to expel foreign terrorists from Syria, to deport Palestinian terrorists, to aid the United States and prevent the resurgence of ISIS, and to take responsibility for the ISIS detention centers in Syria.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump reveals Ukraine ceasefire challenges and who he blames most



Last week, Glenn Beck sat down for an exclusive interview with President Trump to review his first 100 days in office. It should come as no surprise that they discussed a wide range of topics, as the Trump administration has operated at a pace that is both shocking and awe-inspiring.

Among the list of subjects Glenn brought up — which included executive orders, congressional action, border security, judicial insurrection, and AI development, among others — was the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine.

President Trump provided valuable insight into the challenges of securing a ceasefire deal in Ukraine, what he believes sparked this war, and why he’s so set on ending it.

Trump told Glenn that had he won in 2020, the war between Russia and Ukraine “would have never happened.”

It was Biden’s energy policies that doubled prices and enabled Putin’s invasion, he explained.

However, falling energy prices, thanks to Trump’s green light on energy production, is now hindering Russia’s efforts. Even still, negotiations to end the war are far from complete.

“Is [Zelenskyy] the problem? Is Putin the problem? Or is Europe the problem?” Glenn asked.

Trump’s answer? It’s complicated, but the majority of the blame falls on Biden.

“This is Biden’s war,” he said, noting the “$350 billion” the former president funneled into Ukraine.

Even though Trump inherited this problem from Biden’s deeply incompetent and corrupt administration, he’s still going to “end it” — not just for the sake of stopping the bleeding of cash, but also because the war is killing “5,000 people a week.”

Unfortunately, Zelenskyy’s demands for security and aid aren’t making negotiations easy.

“He's asking for more, just more and more and more, and he doesn't have the cards,” Trump told Glenn, adding that Putin has actually been the easier of the two to work with.

“I don't believe that Vladimir Putin would be doing this for anybody else but me. ... I think he's willing to make a deal,” he added.

To hear more of the interview, watch the episode above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

'Where's the Money?': Zelenskyy faces demand for U.S. aid audit



Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is facing criticism from President Trump, who posted on Truth Social that Zelenskyy’s recent boasting that Ukraine “will not legally recognize the occupation of Crimea” is “harmful to the Peace Negotiations with Russia.”

“Crimea was lost years ago under the auspices of President Barack Hussein Obama and is not even a point of discussion. Nobody is asking Zelenskyy to recognize Crimea as Russian territory but, if he wants Crimea, why didn’t they fight for it 11 years ago when it was handed over to Russia without a shot being fired?” Trump continued in his post.

“It’s inflammatory statements like Zelenskyy’s that makes it so difficult to settle this War. He has nothing to boast about. The situation for Ukraine is dire — he can have Peace or, he can fight for another three years before losing the whole Country,” he added.


Pat Gray of “Pat Gray Unleashed” notes that President Trump has repeated this sentiment several times, and it “just doesn’t seem to be registering with Zelenskyy.”

However, Zelenskyy isn’t just facing criticism from President Trump.

The Ukrainian president also sat down with the Daily Wire’s Ben Shapiro, who asked him some hard-hitting questions — including where the money he’s received from the United States is going.

“I want to start by asking you about the meeting that you had in the Oval Office. How do you feel that you could have handled things better with the president and the vice president?” Shapiro asked the Ukrainian president.

“The meeting in the Oval Office — it did not help Ukraine,” he replied.

Shapiro then dug a little deeper, pointing out to Zelenskyy that the United States has spent nearly $200 billion on the defense of Ukraine. “Would an audit be possible by the United States of where those dollars are going?” Shapiro pressed.

“We are ready to have any inspections from the very beginning of the war. The inspectors coming from the United States, Europe, and our own inspectors — they’re working. We have complete reporting counting, absolutely transparent within the Ministry of Defense,” Zelenskyy responded.

“There is access to all the figures starting from the very first year of the war,” he continued, adding that “most of those money were in the form of weapons.”

Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

'Making us sound cool': MAGA America gladly adopts rabid Trump critic's 'brutal American' epithet



One of the more rabid Trump critics at the Atlantic came up with a new branding for the president, Vice President JD Vance, and similarly constituted Americans earlier this month: "the brutal American."

Rather than ignore or laugh off the liberal's latest attempt at relevancy, the MAGAverse embraced the epithet. It appears that some of the very qualities that most enrage Anne Applebaum and her European comrades are those that distinguish Americans from lesser nationalities.

Anne Applebaum is a historian turned sensationalist at the Atlantic with something of a credibility issue.

The 60-year-old writer smeared as propagandists early proponents of the pandemic lab-leak theory; criticized skeptics of the experimental COVID-19 vaccines; downplayed the revelations on the Hunter Biden laptop and framed the damning emails as a potential "psyop"; argued that to prevent nuclear war with Russia, the U.S. needs to send more and greater weapons to Ukraine; and spent a great deal of time in recent years screeching about imagined parallels between Trump and various 20th-century dictators. She continues, however, to confidently spill ink for the liberal publication.

Applebaum noted in a March 5 piece that her liberal publication decided to push again over the weekend that while hobnobbing around Europe — where she also is a citizen of Poland — she was immersed in foreign nationals' displeasure with the American president over his Feb. 28 meeting with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

"In just a few minutes, the behavior of Donald Trump and J. D. Vance created a brand-new stereotype for America: not the quiet American, not the ugly American, but the brutal American," wrote Applebaum, a former member of the Council on Foreign Relations and former board member of the National Endowment for Democracy.

Applebaum suggested that her fellows on the continent no longer can cling to positive postwar stereotypes of Americans. Instead, they are now processing this alternative — the "rude" and "cruel" type of American who would dare halt transfers of military equipment to Ukraine, castigate a man for risking nuclear holocaust, hint at ending sanctions on Russia, impose tariffs on allies, and "get" Greenland.

'The American is the European who Europe was too tame for their spirit.'

"These are the actions not of the good guys in old Hollywood movies, but of the bad guys," wrote Applebaum. "If Reagan was a white-hatted cowboy, Trump and Vance are Mafia dons. The chorus of Republican political leaders defending them seems both sinister and surprising to Europeans too."

After portraying Zelenskyy as the victim of deluded hosts, Applebaum suggested that Trump's assertions that failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and former President Barack Obama "founded ISIS" and that "the Google search engine is suppressing the bad news about Hillary Clinton" were somehow evidence of a Russian worldview.

Having tried her best once again to paint Trump as a ruthless Russophile, Applebaum concluded, "Europeans know, everyone knows, that if Trump and Vance can talk that way to the president of Ukraine, then they might eventually talk that way to their country's leader next."

While there was nothing novel about her complaints about Zelenskyy's treatment in the Oval Office, Trump supporters and others outside Applebaum's target demographic seized upon the term "brutal American" online, adopting it as a positive epithet.

BlazeTV host Auron MacIntyre wrote, "Why bother coming up with good branding when your enemies will do it for you?"

The Heritage Foundation tweeted Emanuel Leutze's 1851 painting of Washington Crossing the Delaware with the caption, "Brutal Americans."

William Wolfe, the executive director of the Center for Baptist Leadership, shared an image captioned, "Brutal American," that shows Theodore Roosevelt in his cavalry uniform waving an American flag along with a banner stating, "Europe take notice. Keep off American soil."

Various other commenters shared images of American soldiers from various conflicts engaging in conduct that Atlantic staff writers and continentals might find objectionable, albeit indirectly liberating.

The account Aristophanes noted, "I'm almost convinced that we somehow secretly purchased legacy media and they are just subverting themselves on purpose."

One user on X wrote, "'The brutal American.' Stop making us sound cool."

@Instantundit tweeted, "B***h please. This is a country that crossed a river at night to kill foreign invaders in their beds on Christmas. And we'll do it again."

"The American is the European who Europe was too tame for their spirit. And the European needs for the American to remain that way," said Andrew Beck, vice president of communications at the Claremont Institute.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

How Trump’s fiery Zelenskyy meeting could lead to 5 MASSIVE victories



Last Friday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy found himself in an icy Oval Office when his insistence that the U.S. continue to support Ukraine in its ongoing war with Russia didn’t land well with President Trump and Vice President JD Vance.

The exchange between the three leaders culminated in a heated argument that ended with no mineral deal signed, Trump threatening to pull “out” if a deal between Russia and Ukraine isn’t made, Zelenskyy being asked to leave the White House, and uncertainty regarding Ukraine's relationship with the U.S.

“Zelenskyy was just playing a game, and you don’t play a game against Trump,” especially when “you don't have any cards” left, says Glenn Beck.

What President Trump is doing, he says, is “playing 5D chess” with both Ukraine and the world.

And his strategy is brilliant. It’s one that could end in five massive victories.

Potential victory #1: Ends the killing and waste of US dollars

Forcing Ukraine to make a deal with Russia would first and foremost stop the killing, which thus far has been relatively mild when you consider death counts in prior wars.

There have been “250,000 people lost in this war. Could be much, much higher. Let's end it ... because I don't even think anybody even knows what this [war] is about anymore,” Glenn says.

Further, “It ends the spending of the United States in Ukraine where we don't have any idea where any of it is going,” he adds. “It is a corrupt country. I don't want to be helping their sock industry.”

Under the corrupt Biden regime, our tax dollars were “paying for all of the Social Security benefits for everybody who has worked in the Ukrainian government,” along with other non-war-related causes.

But this “bleeding of money” will stop if Ukraine can be pushed into a deal with Russia.

Potential victory #2: The illusion of Russian victory

A deal between Ukraine and Russia "lets Putin go home while declaring a win.” However, “Everyone else knows he actually lost,” says Glenn.

After all, his original goal was “to go in there and in two weeks take Ukraine.” Three years later, “He still only has 20%” of the country.

Striking a deal now would mean Putin "can go home and declare he won because he's got some land,” but the truth the rest of us will know is “he lost” because “the idea that Russia can just plow into Europe has now been proven to be false.”

Potential victory #3: The acquisition of rare-earth minerals

“Russia and Ukraine are sitting on a gigantic pile of rare-earth minerals,” says Glenn. “If you don't know what that is, that's the thing that makes your computer work. If we don't have rare-earth minerals, we cannot compete in the world of tomorrow.”

He then explains that the U.S. currently relies heavily on China, which dominates the global supply, for rare-earth minerals. Striking a deal with Ukraine or Russia would allow us to distance ourselves from China while saving money.

On one hand, “giving money to Russia,” which has its own wealth of mineral resources and currently occupies a significant amount of mineral-rich Ukrainian territory, could be “a win for us because we're getting [rare-earth minerals] at a discount,” Glenn explains, noting that a money-motivated Putin would go "away not happy but not vengeful.”

On the other hand, if a deal between the U.S. and Ukraine is signed, then the U.S. will have access to Ukraine’s rare-earth mineral resources, while Ukraine has money for reconstruction. If such a deal is struck, “America's interests are now in Ukraine” — something that ought to tempt Zelenskyy.

Potential Victory #4: A NATO out?

While President Trump has floated the idea of exiting NATO and would likely do it if all the necessary factors aligned, what he really wants above all is “to stop paying 70% for the defense of Europe,” says Glenn.

“Because of the WEF strategy over in Europe, you have them coming together on Zelenskyy’s side. That's not going to make NATO stronger because America is not going to go and get involved,” he explains, noting that America sending troops into NATO is just “not going to happen.”

“That weakens NATO, but it also does what? It forces NATO to spend more money on their own defense — a win for America,” he continues.

Further, “The World War II model for the world takes a major hit,” which is a “goal of anybody who wants to get out of NATO,” including Donald Trump.

Potential victory #5: China loses Russia

“China loses the rare-earth minerals that Russia just captured; China loses its grip not just on Russia but also on us,” says Glenn, reminding us that rare-earth minerals are “what this whole thing is all about.”

“Anybody who says that Trump is stupid [or] Trump is causing a war” is misled, says Glenn.

“No, he's not, but the world is changing, and for once, finally, we have a president that knows how to negotiate ... on so many levels,” he adds, calling Trump’s abilities “mind-boggling.”

To hear more of Glenn’s commentary, watch the clip above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Zelenskyy attempts to undo damage from his meeting with Trump following US pause on military aid



President Volodymyr Zelenskyy appears keen to mend his relationship with President Donald Trump and smooth things over following his disastrous meeting at the White House on Friday.

The Ukrainian president indicated in a lengthy post on social media Tuesday that he is — contrary to Trump's repeated characterization — ready for peace and appreciative of America's long-standing support.

"Our meeting in Washington, at the White House on Friday, did not go the way it was supposed to be," wrote Zelenskyy. "It is regrettable that it happened this way. It is time to make things right. We would like future cooperation and communication to be constructive."

Zelenskyy traveled to Washington, D.C., last week to finalize a general economic agreement concerning mineral extraction. Ahead of the planned signing of the deal, Zelenskyy joined Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and multiple Cabinet officials for a press conference in the Oval Office, which did not go well.

Toward the end of the nearly 50-minute meeting, Zelenskyy — who previously suggested that without security guarantees, which were not included in the deal, "nothing will work, nothing" — cast doubt on the value of diplomacy and the possibility of a ceasefire with the Russians. Trump and Vance castigated the Ukrainian president over his perceived attempt to "relitigate" the deal and spike future peace negotiations.

Following the shouting match that ensued, Zelenskyy was reportedly told to leave the White House before the agreement could be signed.

"It's amazing what comes out through emotion, and I have determined that President Zelenskyy is not ready for Peace if America is involved," Trump said in a Friday statement. "He disrespected the United States of America in its cherished Oval Office. He can come back when he is ready for Peace."

'Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible.'

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, present for the heated exchange, indicated over the weekend that the economic agreement, which the Ukrainians had multiple opportunities to close, was effectively dead in the water, stressing that "it is impossible to have an economic deal without a peace deal."

Zelenskyy made matters worse on Sunday by suggesting that a deal to end the war between Kyiv and Moscow was "still very, very far away" and that continued aid from the U.S. was a certainty.

Trump proved Zelenskyy's certainty unfounded the next day, ordering a pause on all military aid being sent to Ukraine, writing, "This is the worst statement that could have been made by Zelenskyy, and America will not put up with it for much longer!"

The prospect of losing military aid appears to have prompted a change in heart on Zelenskyy's part.

"I would like to reiterate Ukraine's commitment to peace," Zelenskyy wrote Tuesday. "None of us wants an endless war. Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer. Nobody wants peace more than Ukrainians. My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump's strong leadership to get a peace that lasts."

The Ukrainian president floated possible "first stages" in the peace process, namely the release of prisoners as well as a naval and aerial ceasefire with Russia. He also emphasized his gratitude for "how much America has done to help Ukraine maintain its sovereignty and independence," singling out the first Trump administration's 2019 approval of anti-tank weapons to Kyiv as a critical moment.

Zelenskyy further noted that "Ukraine is ready to sign it in any time and in any convenient format."

Responding to the Ukrainian president's apparent about-face, Utah Sen. Mike Lee (R) tweeted, "That was fast."

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a longtime advocate for Zelenskyy but whose support slipped following Friday's exchange, wrote, "Better days are ahead."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Democrats flip-flop on 'fake peace agreement' following Zelenskyy's Oval Office meltdown



Democratic lawmakers are struggling to keep their story straight in the aftermath of the now infamous Oval Office spat between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President Donald Trump, and Vice President JD Vance on Friday.

Zelenskyy's combative meeting with Trump and Vance sent politicos into a tailspin, prompting some of his longtime supporters like Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina to denounce the Ukrainian president. At the same time, Democrats like Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut were left scrambling to defend Zelenskyy, causing a slew of mixed messages in the media.

While Democrats try to sort out their own narrative, Trump has consistently upheld his own position.

Murphy at first insisted that the minerals deal was a "fake peace agreement" that would force Ukraine to submit to President Vladimir Putin's will. At the same time, Murphy said that he encouraged Zelenskyy to sign the very deal he criticized just days before.

"Just finished a meeting with President Zelensky here in Washington," Murphy said moments before the Oval Office spat. "He confirmed that the Ukrainian people will not support a fake peace agreement where Putin gets everything he wants and there are no security arrangements for Ukraine."

"This is the latest MAGA conspiracy," Murphy later said in response to a headline claiming Democrats pressured Zelenskyy to reject the peace deal. "Total lie. The meeting with [Zelenskyy] was bipartisan - led by a Senate Republican. We all encouraged him to sign the minerals deal. But yes - he did make clear he wouldn’t accept a bad 'ceasefire' deal that sold out his country."

Murphy's bizarre messaging continued during an appearance on CNN, where he claimed that Zelenskyy was somehow both "ready to sign the agreement" but also "had an obligation" to have a conversation with Trump about the "disaster that would be wrought for Ukraine" if the agreement was signed.

Murphy is not the only Democrat who has had difficulty messaging on the fallout from Zelenskyy's Oval Office appearance. Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut originally categorized the minerals deal as a "step toward strengthening American support for Ukraine" but later said the deal was just "Trump's appeasement to Putin."

"An inspiring, heartening conversation with President Zelenskyy this morning," Blumenthal said Friday. "The agreement today is a step toward strengthening American support for Ukraine, but real, reliable security guarantees are needed. We must be consistent in our steadfast commitment to Ukraine."

"Trump’s appeasement to Putin—Peace at Any Price—makes him Moscow’s perfect mouthpiece," Blumenthal said of the peace deal. "Zelenskyy wants peace but not at the price of Ukraine’s freedom & independence. Europe is supporting him. So should we. Kremlin propaganda is applauding & lauding Trump—a disgrace for America."

While Democrats try to sort out their own narrative, Trump has consistently upheld his own position.

"The only President who gave none of Ukraine’s land to Putin’s Russia is President Donald J. Trump," Trump said in a Monday Truth Social post. "Remember that when the weak and ineffective [Democrats] criticize, and the Fake News gladly puts out anything they say!"

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Treasury Secretary Bessent: US-Ukrainian economic deal is dead in the water



President Volodymyr Zelenskyy traveled to Washington, D.C., on Friday to finalize a deal that would afford America access to some of his country's natural wealth in exchange for investments in a reconstruction fund and a U.S. economic presence that could serve as a deterrent to future aggression from without.

Following his heated exchange with President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance in the Oval Office, Zelenskyy was reportedly told to leave the White House before the agreement could be signed. Trump noted on Truth Social, "He can come back when he is ready for Peace."

According to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, the so-called minerals deal — which he referred to as a "general economic agreement" — is off the table in the interim.

Bessent, who was present for the ill-fated meeting with the Ukrainian president as well as for previous attempts at closing the deal, told CBS News' Margaret Brennan on Sunday that "it is impossible to have an economic deal without a peace deal. The sine qua non for an economic deal is that Ukrainian leadership wants a peace deal."

Zelenskyy confirmed Wednesday that he was unsuccessful in pushing for an explicit security guarantee in the deal from the United States, reported the BBC.

'This is one of the biggest own goals in diplomatic history.'

"I wanted to have a sentence on security guarantees for Ukraine, and it's important that it's there," said Zelenskyy.

"I want to find a NATO path or something similar," he continued, adding, "If we don't get security guarantees, we won't have a ceasefire, nothing will work, nothing."

Although Bessent, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and others in the administration figured they had made clear to the Ukrainian leadership that peace was a prerequisite for greater American involvement and that the deal was itself a de facto security guarantee, Zelenskyy cast doubt on the value of diplomacy during the Friday meeting, citing the possibility that Russian President Vladimir Putin might violate a ceasefire.

The treasury secretary told Brennan that the initial plan was for Zelenskyy to join around 16 individuals for lunch where the deal would be signed after the press conference in the Oval Office.

"We were already set up to sign the deal," said Bessent. "President Zelenskyy has thrown off the sequencing."

"Let me tell you the most tragic part of this," continued the treasury secretary. "President Trump's idea for this economic arrangement was to further intertwine the American people and Ukrainian people and show no daylight — to show the Russian leadership that there was no daylight. And President Zelenskyy came into the Oval Office and tried to relitigate in front of the world the deal."

Bessent suggested that absent a desire on Zelenskyy's part to strike a peace deal, the economic deal is dead in the water.

"I think we have to see if President Zelenskyy wants to proceed," said Bessent. "What's the use in having an economic agreement that's going to be rendered moot if he wants the fighting to continue?"

Bessent told Fox News' Laura Ingraham hours after the foiled deal closing, "This is one of the biggest own goals in diplomatic history."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Dem senators express regret over confirmation votes after Rubio backs Trump in Zelenskyy spat



The U.S. Senate voted unanimously on Jan. 20 to confirm Marco Rubio as secretary of state.

Some Democratic senators who apparently mistook Rubio for someone they could count on to defy and subvert the president are now experiencing regret over their votes in light of their former peer's sustained support for President Donald Trump, particularly for his approach to Ukraine and its president.

Trump and Vice President JD Vance had a heated exchange in the Oval Office Friday with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, which resulted in the cancellation of the presidents' planned joint press conference as well as the signing of the proposed minerals deal.

Trump's admonishment of Zelenskyy in person and later on social media — over his perceived lack of gratitude, displays of disrespect for the U.S., and jeopardization of possible peace talks — found widespread resonance, and the incident made some of Zelenskyy's staunchest advocates, including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), question their support.

There were, however, numerous critics who took umbrage with Trump's remarks regarding Zelenskyy.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and a handful of other Republican lawmakers joined Democrats, establishment media pundits, and foreign dignitaries in suggesting that Trump's remarks to and about Zelenskyy evidenced a desire to both abandon Ukraine and embrace Russia.

In the face of such critiques, Secretary of State Rubio defended the approach taken by the president Friday as well as Trump's suggestion that Zelenskyy was openly undermining efforts to bring about peace.

'It's unfortunate.'

Rubio told CNN's Kaitlan Collins just hours after the fracas that there was an understanding established in the days preceding the Friday meeting that the proposed minerals deal — which Zelenskyy could have signed several days earlier — amounts to a de facto security guarantee and that it was critical to get Russian President Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table. However, the Ukrainian president ambushed Trump and Vance with a lecture "about how diplomacy isn't going to work."

"President Zelenskyy took it in that direction, and it ended in a predictable outcome as a result," said Rubio. "It's unfortunate. That wasn't supposed to be this way, but that's the path he chose and I think, frankly, sends his country backwards in regards to achieving peace, which is what President Trump wants at the end of the day — is for this war to end."

Rubio, who in the previous week defended Trump's "dictator" critique of Zelenskyy, suggested further to Collins that the Ukrainian president should apologize "for turning this thing into the fiasco for him that it became," adding that "there was no need for him to go in there and become antagonistic."

Rubio later reiterated to ABC News talking head George Stephanopoulos that Zelenskyy understood ahead of the Friday meeting that peace is a prerequisite for security guarantees and that discussions of deterrents were pointless before negotiations.

"The question now is, 'Can we get them to a table to negotiate?' That's our goal. Don't do anything to disrupt that, and that's what Zelenskyy did, unfortunately — is he found every opportunity to try to Ukraine-splain on every issue. Then he confronts the vice president," said Rubio. "When the vice president says the goal here is diplomacy, [Zelenskyy] immediately jumps in and challenges the vice president. Well, what kind of diplomacy?"

"I really am puzzled why anyone thinks that trying to be a peacemaker is a bad thing. It's only a bad thing when it's Donald Trump trying to do it, when it's President Trump. It's absurd to me," added Rubio.

'It's very different from what Senator Rubio used to talk about.'

When asked by CNN talking head Dana Bash whether he made the right choice in voting to confirm Rubio, Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy (Conn.) said, "Nope. It was a mistake. It was a mistake."

"I think a lot of us thought that Marco Rubio was going to stand up to Donald Trump on an issue like this," continued Murphy. "I thought that when Donald Trump decided to do that, when Donald Trump would come to him and say, 'Help me move America closer to Russia and to Russian values,' Marco Rubio would stand up to him. Marco Rubio has not, and that's been a great disappointment to many of his former colleagues in the Senate."

Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who has been publicly expressing remorse over his Rubio vote for weeks, told "Fox News Sunday," "I regret that vote because as a member of the Senate, Secretary Rubio was somebody who stood up for American values, for American principles."

"He acknowledged that Russia was the aggressor against Ukraine. He realized it wasn't Zelenskyy who was the dictator," said Van Hollen. "And now he's simply taking his directions at the State Department from Elon Musk and essentially parodying the president's position, which I understand, but it's very different from what Senator Rubio used to talk about."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!