Zelenskyy to sign minerals deal at White House Friday — without security guarantees



President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is expected to travel to the White House Friday — a week after President Donald Trump called him a "dictator" — to sign a deal that would afford America access to some of Ukraine's buried natural wealth in exchange for investments in a reconstruction fund.

Trump noted Wednesday that it would be "a very big agreement."

While there was no mention in a draft of the deal of Ukraine paying the U.S. back for the hundreds of billions of dollars in aid that Kyiv has received in recent years, there are similarly no concrete security guarantees on America's part.

According to a draft of the deal obtained by CNN, the two countries plan to create a jointly managed "Reconstruction Investment Fund" that would collect and reinvest revenues resulting from the monetization of relevant Ukrainian-owned "deposits of minerals, hydrocarbons, oil, natural gas, and other extractable minerals."

Mineral resources already making money for Kyiv, such as the activities of Naftogaz, will not be not part of the deal.

As of Wednesday morning, the proposed deal specified that the Ukrainian government would contribute 50% of all revenues earned from such state-owned natural resource assets to the fund. Contributions will be routinely reinvested in Ukraine in the interest of promoting the nation's "safety, security, and prosperity."

Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed in an interview last week that when he, Vice President JD Vance, and Zelenskyy previously discussed a version of the deal that would see the U.S. "paid back some of the money taxpayers have given," Zelenskyy said he was on board and would run it through his "legislative process." However, Zelenskyy instead went public, telling reporters that he rejected the deal.

'I want to find a NATO path or something similar.'

Ukrainian officials told the Financial Times (U.K.) that Kyiv proved ready to sign the agreement after the U.S. dropped demands for a right to $500 billion in mineral wealth.

Although the draft noted that the U.S. supports Ukraine's efforts to obtain security guarantees and would maintain a long-term financial commitment to the country's development, it makes no mention of America providing such guarantees.

Trump said during his Wednesday Cabinet meeting, "I'm not going to make security guarantees beyond very much. We're going to have Europe do that."

According to the BBC, Zelenskyy confirmed Wednesday he had pushed for a security guarantee from the U.S. but came up empty-handed.

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

When asked whether he'd abandon the deal if he did not get what he wanted, Zelenskyy told reporters, "I want to find a NATO path or something similar," adding, "If we don't get security guarantees, we won't have a ceasefire, nothing will work, nothing."

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

Exclusive: Speaker Johnson says Congress has 'no appetite' for future Ukraine funding



House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told Blaze News in an exclusive interview Monday that Ukraine funding is off the table in the future as President Donald Trump continues peace talks this week.

Johnson told Blaze News that there is "no appetite" for additional Ukraine funding in the future now that Trump is at the head of the negotiations, noting that the president is the "change agent" needed to bring the conflict to an end.

'They need to resolve this. That’s one of the pressure points I think it's important for them to recognize, and I think that’s what President Trump is communicating.'

"We're in a totally different posture now," Johnson told Blaze News. "Everybody wants to bring it into this war, this conflict. We desperately need peace to be restored there, and that’s good, not just for Europe and the West but for us in the United States as well."

"The investment that was made thus far was to allow Ukraine to be in a posture, ultimately, where they are right now, to be in a position to be able to deliver peace," Johnson added. "But I think what President Trump is doing is he’s the change agent that’s necessary for this, and we knew that. We campaigned on it all last year."

To Johnson's point, Trump has been nothing short of a "change agent." Last week, the president delivered scathing remarks about Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, calling him a "dictator" and criticizing the overseas abuse of American tax dollars.

But now with Trump back at the White House, Congress is no longer keen on bankrolling Zelenskyy's war effort.

'President Trump is that transformative figure.'

"There’s no appetite for it in Congress," Johnson told Blaze News. "We had made that clear with them. They need to resolve this. That’s one of the pressure points I think it's important for them to recognize, and I think that’s what President Trump is communicating."

"You've got to have a change in leadership, because to restore peace through strength, you have to have a strong commander in chief of the U.S. that our adversaries respect and fear, in some respects, and someone that our allies trust and believe in," Johnson told Blaze News. "President Trump is that transformative figure."

Trump has been spearheading peace talks with Russia, much to Zelenskyy's frustration. When Trump first held a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin and excluded Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian president lashed out at the administration, insisting that any future peace deal must be reached with him in the room.

"I think of it very much like an arbitration," Johnson told Blaze News. "I used to be a lawyer, and we would do those. When you have an arbitration where you're trying to get two parties to resolve something, the first meeting is never with them in the same room. It's by design and necessity that you meet with them individually and separately first. You get the issue set agreed upon, and then you bring the parties together to finalize it."

"President Trump is in that process, and I think everyone needs to allow it time to happen," Johnson added.

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

How YOUR tax dollars are being WASTED in Ukraine — will Trump END this?



Unlike Joe Biden, President Donald Trump is not going easy on Ukraine.

At a press conference in Mar-a-Lago, Trump suggested that Ukraine provoked the war in Russia and that the country, run by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, should hold another election. Later, in a Truth Social post, he called Zelenskyy a “dictator” and pointed out the billions of dollars sent his way under the Biden administration.

“Think of it, a modestly successful comedian, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, talked the United States of America into spending $350 Billion Dollars, to go into a War that couldn’t be won, that never had to start, but a War that he, without the U.S. and ‘TRUMP,’ will never be able to settle,” Trump wrote in his post.

Trump also pointed out in the same post that President Zelenskyy “admits that half the money we sent him is ‘MISSING.’”


However, not everyone feels the same as Trump.

Senator Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) budget reconciliation package includes guaranteed aid to Ukraine until 2030.

“They’re sitting on 10 to 12 trillion dollars of critical minerals in Ukraine. They could be the richest country in all of Europe. I don’t want to give that money, and those assets, to Putin to share with China. If we help Ukraine now, they can become the best business partner we ever dreamed of,” Graham said while promoting his bill.

Jill Savage and Matthew Peterson of “Blaze News Tonight” are not of the mind that sending more money to Ukraine is the answer.

“President Trump has been clear the entire time what he wants to do,” Peterson says. “He wants peace, he wants to end the conflict. And I think that everything you see going on in Washington, D.C., now is indicative of the desire of the MAGA, MAHA movement to cease the money-laundering in Ukraine.”

“We’ve sent billions and billions there now, and don’t even get me started on where that money has gone,” he adds.

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Zelenskyy lashes out at Trump over suggestion Ukraine started war, should hold elections again



American and Russian diplomats met in Saudi Arabia Tuesday to get the ball rolling on ending the war in Ukraine. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy made widely known his displeasure at not being invited to the discussions, canceling his trip to Riyadh and telling reporters, "Decisions on how to end the war in Ukraine cannot be made without Ukraine, nor can any conditions be imposed."

Hours after U.S. and Russian dignitaries agreed to appoint high-level teams to "begin working on a path to ending the conflict in Ukraine as soon as possible," President Donald Trump addressed Zelenskyy's complaint.

In addition to insinuating that Zelenskyy has proven himself incapable of doing what is needed in such talks and lacks the support of his people, Trump suggested that Ukraine started the war and should resume the practice of holding elections.

After suggesting that there has been little transparency about the hundreds of billions of dollars the U.S. has poured into Europe in recent years, Trump told reporters during a press conference at Mar-a-Lago Tuesday, "I want to see peace. Look, you know why I want it? Because I don't want all these people killed any more. I'm looking at people that are being killed, and they're Russian and Ukrainian people — but they're people. It doesn't matter where they're from."

"I think I have the power to end this war, and I think it's going very well," continued Trump. "But today I heard, 'Oh well, we weren't invited.' Well, you've been there for three years. You should have ended it three years [ago]."

The 47th president added that Ukraine provoked Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022, stating, "You should have never started it."

According to Trump, Ukraine fumbled an opportunity to end the war — a possible allusion to the warring nations' peace talks in 2022 in Turkey, where negotiators reportedly produced multiple drafts of a treaty that would apparently have seen Ukraine's security guaranteed while also satisfying a number of Putin's demands, such as Ukraine's indefinite neutrality and inability to join NATO.

'That's not a Russia thing. That's something coming from me.'

Trump further suggested that while Zelenskyy is upset over his lack of representation at the discussions in Saudi Arabia, the Ukrainian people might similarly be upset over their lack of representation in Kyiv.

"We have a situation where we haven't had elections in Ukraine, where we have martial law, where the leader in Ukraine, I mean, I hate to say it, but he's down at 4% approval rating," said Trump, citing a figure the Ukrainian press quickly claimed was likely Russian propaganda.

A recent Kyiv International Institute of Sociology survey of 1,000 residents in Ukrainian-controlled territory indicated that 57% of respondents trusted Zelenskyy and 37% did not trust him.

"Wouldn't the people of Ukraine have to say, like, 'You know, it's been a long time since we've had an election,'" continued Trump. "That's not a Russia thing. That's something coming from me and coming from many other countries."

Martial law has been in effect since Feb. 24, 2022, barring elections from taking place. Members of the Ukrainian Parliament, who have been spared political challenges for years, voted earlier this month to extend martial law again until May 9.

'He lives in this disinformation space.'

Zelenskyy's term was supposed to end in May 2024. An end to the war would likely mean he would have to fight for re-election, although he has not confirmed that he will run again.

The Ukrainian president was evidently prickled by Trump's remarks, stating in an interview, "Unfortunately, President Trump, who we respect a lot as a leader of the nation that we really respect — the American nation who supported us all the time — unfortunately, he lives in this disinformation space."

Zelenskyy, who credited Russia with the 4% figure cited by Trump, also said that he "would like Trump's team to be more truthful," reported the Associated Press.

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

‘Curious timing’: Chernobyl BOMBED just before JD Vance meets with Zelenskyy



Shortly before Vice President JD Vance met up with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, a mysterious drone bombed a Chernobyl nuclear facility.

Sara Gonzales of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered” finds it all more than a little suspicious.

“You have President Trump canceling all of Zelenskyy’s gravy train, and then, all of a sudden, you have Zelenskyy saying that there was a Russian drone that bombed Chernobyl,” Gonzales comments.

“So you’re left wondering, is this the deep state working against Trump and his administration, is Zelenskyy just saying this because he wants everyone to say, ‘Oh no, Donald Trump’s in bed with Vladimir Putin'?” she continues.

However, Russia is claiming it was not behind the attack.


“They’re like, ‘There’s no talk about strikes on nuclear infrastructure, nuclear energy facilities, any such claim isn’t true, our military doesn't do that,’” Gonzales says. “And this is all happening at the same time that JD Vance was scheduled to meet Zelenskyy at the Munich Security Conference in Germany.”

“So it’s just very curious timing,” she adds, noting that many of the Trump administration’s detractors have been dead set on proving that he’s a “Putin puppet.”

“I mean, they’ve been doing it since day one,” she continues. “You could probably still catch Rachel Maddow saying that Donald Trump colluded with Russia, like today, even though they spent two years investigating it and ended up saying, ‘Actually, that didn’t happen.’”

“But you’ve got to believe that at least the globalists and the deep state very much don’t like the fact that Trump is trying to end the war, because they got so close multiple times, and it was the Biden administration who convinced Zelenskyy not to negotiate a peace deal,” she says, adding, “Which is insane to me.”

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

WSJ distorts Vance's comments on Ukraine, Russia — but social media users quickly correct the record



Social media users quickly corrected the record after the Wall Street Journal appeared to grossly distort comments Vice President JD Vance made regarding Ukraine and Russia during a recent interview.

On Friday, Bojan Pancevski and Alexander Ward of the WSJ published an article based on an exclusive interview with Vance. The headline for the article — "Vance Wields Threat of Sanctions, Military Action to Push Putin Into Ukraine Deal" — has drawn severe criticism online.

'As we've always said, American troops should never be put into harm's way where it doesn’t advance American interests and security.'

William Martin, the communications director for the vice president, immediately tweeted out screenshots of a transcript of the interview, revealing that the headline did not accurately reflect Vance's statements.

According to the screenshots, Vance admitted that President Donald Trump has an array of "instruments of pressure" he can use to convince President Vladimir Putin to abide by any agreement reached with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Among them are "economic" and "military tools of leverage."

Vance also reiterated that whenever President Donald Trump walks into a negotiation, "everything is on the table."

However, the vice president did not threaten sanctions or military action. Instead, he simply declined to eliminate any possible leverage Trump could use as he works to bring peace to the region.

There is also little chance that the interviewer misunderstood Vance's point. A screenshot of the transcript showed that the interviewer asked a follow-up question to "make sure": "So just want to make sure I understand you correctly. You're saying that even though the possibility of a Ukraine NATO accession at the end of this process, or even the presence of U.S. troops in Ukraine is not officially off the table?"

Trump "wants to have a productive negotiation, both with Putin and with [Zelenskyy]," Vance told the WSJ, even as he "doesn't like the idea of moving Ukraine into NATO."

Martin claimed that the framing from the WSJ was "fake news."

"This is pure fake news. Compare the transcript of @JDVance's conversation with WSJ to the headline being run here. The Vice President didn’t make any threats. He simply stated the fact that no one is going to take options away from President Trump as these negotiations begin," he wrote.

According to a post from Libs of TikTok, the WSJ article was even slapped with a community note denying the accuracy of the headline, but as of early Friday afternoon, no such community note is currently attached to the WSJ post.

'Such liars. That’s not at all what VP Vance said.'

Vance reacted to the WSJ headline by quote-tweeting Republican strategist Andrew Surabian, who called the headline "one of the most intentionally dishonest things I've seen in a long time" and likened the WSJ to the Huffington Post.

Vance did not mention anything about the headline or the WSJ in his message. Rather, he reiterated the administration's stance on the Ukraine-Russia war:

President Trump is the ultimate deal maker and will bring peace to the region by ending the war in Ukraine. As we've always said, American troops should never be put into harm's way where it doesn’t advance American interests and security. This war is between Russia and Ukraine.

Other social media users have also excoriated the WSJ for the misleading headline:

  • "Who wrote this headline?Whoever it was didn't read the article because J.D. said nothing like that," said Brick Suit, an eccentric figure frequently spotted wearing a brick-patterned ensemble at Trump campaign rallies.
  • "Such liars. That’s not at all what VP Vance said," said a user called Queen Isabel.
  • "No one takes you seriously anymore. You’ve lied, yet again. You are just a bunch of partisan hacks, and the people who buy your bs are just as bad. Keep it up, you’re sending yourselves into an irrelevant oblivion," came another popular response.

In an era in which news is regularly aggregated by other outlets, such a specious headline can have far-reaching implications. For instance, the New York Post similarly adopted the WSJ framing, writing up an article entitled "JD Vance threatens Russia with sanctions, possible military action if Putin doesn’t agree to end Ukraine war."

Pancevski, Ward, and Victor Nava, author of the Post article, did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

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

Ukrainian military selling 'up to half' of US arms it receives, with CIA profiting off it, Tucker Carlson claims



Tucker Carlson said he knows for a fact the Ukrainian military is selling upwards of half of the armaments it receives from the United States.

Carlson made several big claims during an episode of "The Tucker Carlson Show," including that the CIA is profiting off the sale of arms that are meant to go to Ukraine.

Carlson was speaking with Lt. Col. Daniel Davis, a retired United States Army officer who was awarded a Bronze Star, his second, during the war in Afghanistan. About halfway through their conversation, Carlson stated that Ukraine has been selling U.S. weapons to Mexican cartels.

'Our intel agencies are fully aware of this.'

The host said it was a "fact," not a "guess," that the "Ukrainian military is selling a huge percentage, up to half, of the arms" the United States sends it.

"And I'm not guessing about this," he continued. "I know that for a fact. A fact, OK? Not speculation."

"They're selling it, and a lot of it winds up with the drug cartels on our border," Carlson went on. "So this is a crime, what's happening. Our intel agencies are fully aware of this. You tell me they're not profiting from this? Of course, you think [the] CIA is not profiting from this? Yes, they are. I can't prove that, but I believe that. What, they don't know this? I know this, but they don't know this? They know this. And no one is saying it."

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had recently stated in an interview that he hadn't received more than $100 billion in U.S. aid.

"As the president of a warring country, I tell you, we received just over $75 [billion]. That is, $100 billion of these 177, or 200, some people even say, we have never received," Zelenskyy said, according to a translation of the video on X.

However, multiple reports have denied that this was evidence of any nefarious use of the money. Outlet Voice of America painted the claim as Russian propaganda, while PolitiFact claimed any accusations were based on a misunderstanding of how the aid has been distributed.

At the same time, a June 2024 study by Harvard said it was "highly likely that some weapons will go missing over the course of the conflict" but admitted it would be hard to prove the extent of which illicit weapons were being sold.

Harvard, too, stated that sales of arms to sources like "Finnish gangsters, French rioters, Nigerian fighters, and Mexican cartels" were debunked as "Russian propaganda" and cited a report from the Global Initiatives Against Transnational Organized Crime as evidence.

'The richest people are the Ukrainians. That money is ours.'

Carlson also said during the same episode that while attending a meeting at a ski resort in the Alps, he noticed that the "whole town" was filled with Ukrainians. He said the Ukrainian nationals were spending upwards of a million dollars at a time on luxury items. The money they were using, Carlson claimed, belonged to the U.S. taxpayer.

"It's all through Europe you see this. The richest people are the Ukrainians. That money is ours. It belongs to me and you and every other American taxpayer. That's where it's going."

Carlson remained flabbergasted throughout his remarks, stating plainly that "everything about this [war] is a lie."

"They're selling weapons to drug cartels? Are you kidding? This is a nightmare."

He added that he didn't understand how he could have these facts but American news outlets didn't.

Carlson went on to state that the New York Times possessed the capability to go online and buy weapons from Ukraine but didn't elaborate on how that was possible.

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

Putin signals opening for Trump to make good on major campaign promise about Ukraine



President-elect Donald Trump repeatedly suggested on the campaign trail that if elected, he would resolve the war between Russia and Ukraine. Critics, including so-called fact-checkers, suggested that it couldn't be done or that doing so would require unthinkable concessions on Kyiv's part.

Notwithstanding the nay-saying from the so-called experts, it appears that Trump might be able to make good on this major campaign promise after all. Putin, whose economy is apparently "overheating," told reporters Thursday that he was "ready to meet [Trump] if he wants it" and that he was open to making compromises at the negotiating table.

After meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Trump told reporters in September, "I think I haven't changed from the standpoint that we both want to see it end and a fair deal made. It's gonna be fair. I think it will happen at the right time. I think it is going to happen."

"This is a war that should have never happened. It should have never happened, and it wouldn't have happened. It's a shame," said Trump. "We'll get it solved. It's a very complicated puzzle, very complicated puzzle, but we'll get it solved, and people [will] get on with their lives. Too many people dead."

Reuters indicated in late November — around the time President Joe Biden authorized Ukraine's use of American-made long-range missile systems against targets in Russia — that Putin was keen to discuss a ceasefire in Ukraine with Trump, especially since he would be negotiating from a place of strength, having made significant advances in Ukraine at a pace unparalleled since the early days of his invasion.

'Too many lives are being so needlessly wasted.'

Five current and former Russian officials with "knowledge of Kremlin thinking" specifically told Reuters that Putin was open to freezing the conflict along the front lines. Three insiders speaking on the condition of anonymity suggested there was room for negotiation over what to do with the eastern regions of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson, where occupying Russian forces are largely in control, and that Moscow would consider withdrawing from territorial footholds in the Kharkiv and Mykolaiv regions.

Following the toppling of President Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria by a U.S.-designated terrorist organization and Turkish-backed Islamic militants, Trump noted in a Dec. 8 Truth Social post,

Assad is gone. He has fled his country. His protector, Russia, Russia, Russia, led by Vladimir Putin, was not interested in protecting him any longer. There was no reason for Russia to be there in the first place. They lost all interest in Syria because of Ukraine, where close to 600,000 Russian soldiers lay wounded or dead, in a war that should never have started, and could go on forever. Russia and Iran are in a weakened state right now, one because of Ukraine and a bad economy, the other because of Israel and its fighting success. Likewise, Zelenskyy and Ukraine would like to make a deal and stop the madness. They have ridiculously lost 400,000 soldiers, and many more civilians. There should be an immediate ceasefire and negotiations should begin. Too many lives are being so needlessly wasted, too many families destroyed, and if it keeps going, it can turn into something much bigger, and far worse. I know Vladimir well. This is his time to act. China can help. The World is waiting!

"If a meeting takes place at some point with the newly elected president, Mr. Trump, I am sure we will have plenty to talk about," Putin said Thursday at his over four-hour long press briefing.

"Politics is the art of compromise. And we have always said that we are ready for both negotiations and compromises," said Putin. "It is just that the opposite side, in the literal and figurative sense of the word, refused to negotiate. And we are always ready for this. The result of these negotiations is always compromise."

Putin previously suggested in October that Russia was willing to make "reasonable compromises" but stressed "the outcome should be in favor of Russia."

"After all, we reached an agreement, essentially, in Istanbul at the end of 2022. And, I repeat for the 100th time, the Ukrainian side initialed this document, which means they generally agreed with it, and then for some reason they refused," Putin continued in his remarks Thursday. "It is clear why."

The New York Times reported in June that documents from the negotiating sessions held from February to April 2022 in Turkey show negotiators produced multiple drafts of a treaty that would have apparently seen Ukraine's security guaranteed while also satisfying a number of Putin's demands.

'Mr. Johnson, a man with a nice haircut, came and said that they need to fight to the last Ukrainian.'

Russia initially wanted Ukraine to recognize Crimea as part of Russia, but by April 15, both sides reportedly agreed to exclude Crimea from the treaty such that Ukraine would not formally cede the territory though Crimea would nevertheless remain under Russian occupation.

Negotiators also apparently agreed that Ukraine would declare itself permanently neutral, forgoing ever joining NATO but keeping open the possibility of membership in the European Union. They disagreed, however, over proposed limits on the firing range of Ukraine's missiles and on withdrawal of Ukrainian troops on their own territory. There was similarly pushback over Russia's demand for a removal of restrictions on the use of the Russian language in Ukraine.

While there appeared to be some agreement about numerous points in the drafts or at the very least the possibility for compromise, the Times indicated Russians effectively killed the talks with a toxic clause.

The Times indicated that in Istanbul, Ukrainian negotiators proposed a requirement that guarantor states, namely the U.S., Britain, France, China, and Russia, would have to defend Ukraine in the event of a subsequent armed attack. Moscow, however, allegedly pushed in a subsequent draft for all guarantor states to have a veto, meaning Russia could invade then block a military intervention on Ukraine's behalf.

A member of the Ukrainian negotiating team suggested that following this change, "We had no interest in continuing the talks."

Putin instead suggested in his remarks this week that former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson was responsible for killing the talks.

"Mr. Johnson, a man with a nice haircut, came and said that they need to fight to the last Ukrainian. So they are fighting. Soon, these Ukrainians who want to fight will run out," said Putin. "In my opinion, soon there will be no one left who wants to fight. And we are ready [to negotiate] but the other side needs to be ready for both negotiations and compromises."

Zelenskyy appeared more interested in a different comment from Putin's press conference, namely the Russian president's suggestion that he was prepared to continue testing the Oreshnik hypersonic missile on Ukrainian targets, calling it an "interesting" experiment.

"People are dying, and he thinks it's 'interesting,'" wrote Zelenskyy. "Dumb***."

Zelenskyy also suggested that bringing Ukraine into NATO, "clear progress on Ukraine's EU membership," and more weapon deliveries would help make Russia recognize the need for peace.

Putin's remarks about compromises came a day after NATO chief Mark Rutte indicated that Ukraine's Western backers would continue furnishing Ukraine with weapons following a meeting with Zelenskyy in Brussels, reported Politico.

Rutte suggested that the objective is to ensure that Ukraine is in the "best possible position one day, when they decide so, to start the peace talks" with Moscow.

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

'Suicidal recklessness': Biden's missile authorization against Russia prompts talk of WWIII, impeachment



Before relinquishing power in January, President Joe Biden may turn America's proxy war with Russia into a direct nuclear conflict.

Elements of the Biden administration, various lawmakers from both major parties, Ukrainian officials, and others appear convinced that attacks on Russia using American long-range missiles might put Kyiv in a better bargaining position should the Eastern nations ever sit down to negotiate an end to the war, which has lasted over 1,000 days and claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people.

Critics have suggested not only that the move might protract the war, which the majority of Ukrainians now want to end with immediate negotiations, but that it might trigger a nuclear holocaust or at the very least prevent — by design — President-elect Donald Trump from brokering peace upon taking office.

Missiles fired

After authorizing Ukraine's use of long-range missile systems against targets in Russia — a move long resisted by U.S. officials concerned about escalation and identified by Russian President Vladimir Putin as a trigger for war between Washington and Moscow — Kyiv launched six U.S.-made Army Tactical Missile System missiles Tuesday morning at a weapons depot in Karachev, a Russian city 70 miles inside the country, in the Bryansk region.

'We must not fear doing more now.'

According to CNN, Russian air defenses allegedly shot down five of the ATACMS supersonic missiles, and the sixth was damaged. Pieces of the damaged missile rained down near a military facility, causing a fire but resulting in neither death nor damage.

The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed the attempted missile strikes and suggested that these and subsequent long-range missile strikes would be interpreted as U.S. military actions.

Sergei Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister, said in a statement, "The [Russian] president mentioned this several times. If long-range missiles are going to be applied from Ukraine into Russian territory, it will also mean that they are operated by American experts, military experts, and we will be taking this as a qualitatively new phase of the Western war against Russia and will react accordingly."

In his Tuesday address to the European Parliament, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said, "We must not fear doing more now."

"While some European leaders think about, you know, some elections or something like this at Ukraine's expense, Putin is focused on winning this war. He will not stop on his own. The more time he has, the worse the conditions become," said Zelenskyy.

The Institute for the Study of War indicated that as of June, Putin had captured roughly one-fifth of Ukraine, with Russian forces occupying 75% of the total area of the Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts.

"Today is the best moment to push Russia harder, and it's clear without certain key factors Russia will lack real motivation to engage in meaningful negotiation," added Zelenskyy.

Hours later, Russia reportedly conducted missile strikes on Kharkiv, Dnipro, Chernihiv, and Sumy, as well as drone attacks inside Ukraine.

The U.S. embassy in Kyiv announced Wednesday morning that it was shutting its doors, citing the potential of a "significant air attack."

Nuclear, mine policies updated

Russian state media indicated that Moscow revised its nuclear doctrine this week in hopes of "making conventional warfare unachievable," qualifying attacks by a non-nuclear state in conjunction with the support of a nuclear state as a joint attack, satisfying the need for for nuclear deterrence.

Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chair of the Russian Federation's security council, noted on X, "Russia's new nuclear doctrine means NATO missiles fired against our country could be deemed an attack by the bloc on Russia. Russia could retaliate with WMD against Kiev and key NATO facilities, wherever they're located. That means World War III."

Russian President Vladimir Putin signaled that he would also respond with nukes to conventional attacks on Russia or Belarus. Russia has over 5,000 nuclear warheads and boasts a supersonic missile with a range of 625 miles.

Sergey Naryshkin, director of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, claimed that the West realizes "the revisions Putin outlined have largely undermined the attempts by the United States and NATO to achieve a strategic defeat of our nation. Furthermore, the expanded criteria for using nuclear weapons essentially rule out the possibility of defeating the Russian Armed Forces on the battlefield."

U.S. State Department spokesman Matthew Miller told the Associated Press, "I'm unfortunately not surprised by the comments the Kremlin has made around the publication of this new, revised document," adding that Russia has routinely sought to "coerce and intimidate both Ukraine and other countries around the world through irresponsible nuclear rhetoric and behavior."

The U.K. and other NATO members condemned the "irresponsible rhetoric" and reiterated their support for Ukraine.

The Biden administration had a policy update of its own.

Citing unnamed U.S. officials, the Washington Post reported that Biden authorized the provision of antipersonnel land mines to Ukraine.

"When they're used in concert with the other munitions that we already are providing Ukraine, the intent is that they will contribute to a more effective defense," said one of the officials.

While the U.S. is not one of the 164 parties to the Ottawa Convention, also known as the Mine Ban Treaty, Biden reportedly resurrected an Obama-era policy in 2022 banning the transfer and use of American antipersonnel land minds outside Korea.

Reactions

Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck suggested that the Biden administration is painting Russian President Vladimir Putin "into a corner."

"A man who is a bloodthirsty killer — you don't keep backing him into a corner, or what happens? Eventually he says, 'I'll have absolutely no credibility' [with] his people who have just been bombed with U.S. missiles, which he just said two days ago will be an act of war," said Beck. "We have entered a moment of madness. What Joe Biden did is impeachable."

'Americans do not want World War III.'

A day prior to the ATACMS strikes, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) insisted that Biden had committed "an unconstitutional Act of War" that qualified as an impeachable offense.

— (@)

Texas Rep. Keith Self (R) penned a letter to Biden Tuesday, challenging his decision to authorize Ukraine's use of ATACMS against Russia.

While Self suggested the missile systems might have proved strategically useful earlier in the conflict, at this stage in the war, their use is "counter-productive to President-elect Donald J. Trump's stated goal towards a negotiated peace."

'This is the faceless power of failing experts in action.'

"If this desperate move by your administration represents an attempt by deep-state operatives to hamstring the incoming Trump presidency, it's a dangerous miscalculation," wrote Self. "I am very concerned that this miscalculation could have catastrophic results. Americans do not want World War III."

"January 20 can't get here fast enough," Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) told Fox News' Laura Ingraham. "It looks like a green light for escalation on the part of Ukraine. ... What would happen if Russia would launch and retaliate missiles into the territory of a NATO member? Then our treaty obligations would be triggered. Then we're talking about a full-scale war."

Hawley noted further that the man who authorized the use of the long-range missiles against a nuclear power was considered too decrepit by his own party to stay in the presidential race earlier this year.

Blaze News editor in chief Matthew Peterson stressed that "what is happening in regard to Russia and Ukraine while we have no functional President is one of the last, most reckless and outrageous acts from the supposed 'adults in the room' who have consistently driven our nation towards the cliff the last four disastrous years."

"This is not 'democracy,'" continued Peterson. "This is the faceless power of failing experts in action: thwarting the will of the people in the midst of the final 'lame duck' period of an aging dementia patient of a President. This is a form of masochistic, suicidal recklessness enacted by weak men."

Peterson added on "Blaze News Tonight," "There is really something that I think that is despicable about the self-assured foreign policy expert in this country. Of all the different sectors of government experts who get degrees, foreign policy people dress themselves up in the suits and in the trappings of -isms and -istics, and, 'We know all this stuff and we have domain knowledge that you don't have.' They're consistently the most evil, dangerous, and really foolish sector of the entire government complex."

— (@)

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

Will Russia declare WAR on America after Biden greenlights ATACMS missiles for Ukraine?



Putin has been clear: If Ukraine fires long-range missiles into Russia, the country will consider the missile-supplier, as well as other NATO countries, its enemies in its war against Ukraine.

“If this decision is made, it will mean nothing less than the direct participation of NATO countries, the United States, and European countries, in the war in Ukraine," he said back in September.

And now America finds herself on that precarious edge of what many are saying will be the next world war, as President Biden has authorized Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to launch ATACMS missiles deeper into Russian territory following a major shift in policy that occurred over the weekend.

The Ukrainian government has been persistent in urging Washington to approve ATACMS for a while now, but Biden has remained reluctant to greenlight the initiative to avoid more U.S. involvement in the war.

But now that that’s changed, there are two burning questions we’re all asking: What does it look like for Russia to consider the United States its enemy in the war? And why would President Biden do this?

Glenn Beck and his head writer and researcher Jason Buttrill explore the possibilities.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

World War III?

“Biden has put us at the brink of World War III,” says Glenn.

“The threat of that is obviously a lot higher,” agrees Jason, who’s a former Department of Defense intelligence analyst.

However, “I think Putin's response will probably be to take out those missiles as quickly as possible.” Even though “the threat of a nuclear weapon is there,” the chances are, “Putin is not going to nuke a city.”

“The biggest threat will be a tactical nuclear weapon,” which is “a low yield weapon made specifically for the battlefield,” Jason predicts.

“Let's say there's some ATACMS surrounded by several battalions of Ukrainian troops. Well, the only way to be sure that they take it out is to use a tactical low yield nuclear weapon that will take out that entire battle space, including the ATACMS,” he explains, adding that is “the more likely scenario.”

Even though this wouldn’t be the kind of nuclear warfare everyone fears, it “would still be a big international faux pas if [Russia] did something like that,” and it would certainly “be escalatory.”

Undoubtedly, it would put the United States in a precarious position.

“Do we allow them to press the button on it and fire that missile, or do we send actual U.S. assets in to take out the areas inside Russia so they don't even have time to press the button?” asks Jason.

If the latter happens, “Then it escalates to a completely different level.”

Why now?

“Why would we do this?” asks Glenn.

Jason’s theory is “regime survival.”

When it comes to “the DOD-security-military complex ... I think that they are terrified of any change in the status quo with the Trump administration,” he says. “I think that they would love to see us push to a point of no return, where we can't do the things that Trump said that he was going to do.”

“I think they are driving us to a point of no return, where Trump and his Cabinet have no choice but to continue,” he adds. “That's the only reason that makes sense two months before they take power.”

To hear more of the conversation, including whether or not Russia wants the U.S. more involved in the war, what’s going on with the undersea communications cables in the Baltic Sea that were suddenly cut on Monday, and British Airways losing communications with its aircraft following a major IT outage, 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.