Libs?

Now I'm REALLY confused. Based on my careful reading of the NYT yesterday, I thought "crazy" Drumpfth had callously set Zelenskyyy up with a public "ambush" even though Zelenskyyyy was desperate to make a deal to save Ukraine, and of course none of this had anything to do with the Democrats who just stood by in horror watching powerlessly as it all unfolded... but now it sounds like that narrative might not have been 100% accurate and truthful, after all???

***

"A common criticism of Volodymyr Zelensky’s disastrous Friday performance in the Oval Office is that he failed to read the room.

Actually, the Ukrainian president did read a room — but it was the wrong room.

Before meeting Trump, Zelensky met with anti-Trump Democrats who advised him to reject the terms of the mineral deal the president was offering, according to Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)..."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/disaster-in-the-oval-office-dems-lead-zelensky-ukraine-off-a-cliff-with-pressure-to-reject-mineral-deal/ar-AA1A48Zn?ocid=msedgntp&pc=ASTS&cvid=4bcd7460de47445c96d271d1dbbd4ac9&ei=10

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706770)

Opinion by Michael Goodwin • 3h • 5 min read

A common criticism of Volodymyr Zelensky’s disastrous Friday performance in the Oval Office is that he failed to read the room.

Actually, the Ukrainian president did read a room — but it was the wrong room.

Before meeting Trump, Zelensky met with anti-Trump Democrats who advised him to reject the terms of the mineral deal the president was offering, according to Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.).

“Just finished a meeting with President Zelensky here in Washington. 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,” Murphy’s office posted on X at 11:15 a.m. Friday.

He attached a picture of Zelensky at a conference table, with Murphy seated on the opposite side.

Forty minutes later, Zelensky arrived at the White House, where Trump met his car, smiled, shook his hand and walked him into the Oval Office.

Arrogant ingrate

The meeting, as the world now knows, quickly went off the rails and ended with Trump angrily ejecting the arrogant ingrate from the White House.

The earlier meeting with Dems undercuts wild claims that Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance staged an ambush. In fact, it was Zelensky who came with an ulterior motive.

The purpose of the meeting was to sign the mineral agreement he and Trump representatives had negotiated. He had twice refused to sign it after promising to, and thanks to Murphy, we now know he had no intention of signing it Friday.

By listening to the nakedly partisan advice of Dems instead of dealing forthrightly with the current president, Zelensky betrayed his countrymen and, for now at least, leaves them without the military and diplomatic protection that only America can provide.

Good luck counting on Britain, France and the rest of Europe to save Ukraine. Maybe the Germans will send strudel.

In a perverse way, Murphy and other Dems got the outcome they wanted. The fireworks at the White House gave them an excuse to replay their Russia Russia Russia hoax.

Once again, they and their media handmaidens are dishonestly insisting that Trump is in Vladimir Putin’s camp.

Like the original Russia hoax that consumed much of Trump’s first term, Russia 2.0 is born of political desperation. After months of not knowing how to respond to Trump’s fast, populist start to his second term, Dems up and down the food chain decided that the president’s refusal to write a blank check to Zelensky and pledge a military guarantee amounts to a gift to Putin.

Desperate for relevance

The logic is twisted beyond description, but any port in a storm will do. And with Trump off to the fastest start of any president in modern history, Dems are desperate to be relevant.

It’s a mark of their bad judgment that Zelensky is their new hero. He and they have zero chance of persuading tapped-out Americans that an open-ended commitment of their tax dollars and possibly sending troops to Ukraine is sensible.

Certainly Trump supporters didn’t vote for that, and the president himself campaigned on bringing the war to a fast end, not sending our army to fight Russians.

He made it repeatedly clear for three years that he viewed Joe Biden’s strategy of providing just enough support for Ukraine to keep the war going without any plan for victory as a fool’s errand. He has also been consistent about his desire to stop the enormous loss of life on both sides and the destruction of Ukrainian cities and towns.

Despite the fact that the president made foolish comments two weeks ago suggesting Ukraine started the war, I am convinced Trump truly wants peace. He is not afraid to use the military, but he is not a warmonger.

To that end, he and his White House came up with the minerals plan that he called a first step to a cease-fire.

The plan went through several drafts and the latest would have America and Ukraine form a partnership to mine the eastern European nation’s plentiful rare earth deposits, with much of the proceeds going to help rebuild Ukraine.

A gift to Putin

Zelensky, who privately agreed to the terms, has every right to demand a security agreement — up to a point. But he didn’t get one and his decision to respond by insulting the president and vice president, interrupting them and waving off their responses, was madness.

As Trump noted, the heated jabs made for great television, but it was a disaster for Ukraine and a gift to Putin.

Zelensky had an opportunity to apologize to Trump in a later interview with Brett Baier on Fox, but repeatedly refused to do so, saying “I’m not sure we did something bad.”

Add ignorance to his list of flaws.

Unfortunately for him, there is an audience egging him on. Beyond Washington Dems, the European Union’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, wrote on social media that “the free world needs a new leader. It’s up to us, Europeans, to take this challenge. We stand by Ukraine.”

Sure, Europe stands by Ukraine — and will continue to stand by as it gets carved up by Putin’s war machine.

‘Ukraine is our ally’

Murphy and other Dems are no better, celebrating Zelensky’s stupendous failure as if it were a victory. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer wrote that “Trump and Vance are doing Putin’s dirty work” and the always repellent Sen. Adam Schiff called Trump a “coward.”

New York’s daffy governor, Kathy Hochul, who seems to pick a daily fight with Trump, added her two cents, saying “Ukraine is our ally. Putin is not. It’s not complicated . . . This president may not stand with democracy, but we will.”

Oh, please. Hochul can’t even keep the peace on New York’s crime-ridden streets.

Meanwhile, Zelensky’s rejection of the mineral deal means there will be no American interests and businesses in Ukraine, which, as Trump repeatedly said, would help deter Russian attacks.

Moreover, Trump said a final settlement would require Putin to return some of the lands he has taken, and that France, Great Britain and others likely would station peace-keeping troops in Ukraine.

All that should have given Zelensky more than enough confidence to go forward, or at least to raise any concerns in private. Instead, he used a friendly meeting in front of the press to complain that no agreement was sufficient without an American security guarantee, despite being told repeatedly none would be included in the minerals deal.

He’s right that Putin can’t be trusted but he’s a fool for rejecting Trump’s plan and counting on Europe and feckless Dems to help him get a better deal from Trump.

As the president reminded him three times, “you don’t have the cards” to make the demands he was making, but Zelensky ignored the advice and the facts.

What a tragic mistake.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706897)

The article's entire premise is "Dems manipulated Zelensky into goading Trump so Trump would reveal he is a puppet of Russia" but tries to hide the "Trump is a puppet of Russia" part

The goading doesn't work if Trump isn't in Putin's pocket. The fact that it was Dems who encouraged the goading doesn't change that.

Come on, you're smarter than this, bro.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708306)

Wow!

New Plan: Dems should reveal to the world that Blondalf Drumpfth is ackkkkkshually a RUSSIAN ASSET. I have a feeling it would be a huge scandal, it might even be grounds for impeachment... do you think they can compile some sort of "dossier" documenting this?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708452)

Your content has been really disappointing for a few months now. Did you get hit on the head, my friend?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708457)

(Genius who chose to steal the single worst part of my schtick and somehow found a way to make it even dumber and more obnoxious than it already was)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708499)

The Jew-like intellectual dishonesty, the snivelling histrionic faggotry, and the painfully gay simping for elon are worse

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708506)

(Actual unironic intellectually dishonest sniveling histrionic little kike)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708539)

The meeting had both Democrat and Republican senators and the Democrat senators, including Chris Murphy who is mentioned by name in this op-ed, urged him to accept the deal.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/zelenskyy-meets-bipartisan-group-senators-ahead-tense-white/story?id=119305439

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708505)

https://x.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/1896255991634931922

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708511)

Yes, I'm gay.

Since you're apparently spending your weekend right here poasting alongside me... any substantive response here, or naw?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706777)

IDK... admittedly I'm a gay retard who is famously always wrong about everything, so take this with a huge grain of salt, but I have to admit that it kinda seems that way to me after reading this NY Post article.

I'm hoping we can get some libs ITT to clear this up, though. Surely I must be missing something here. Maybe the NY Post is lying? I mean, IDK didn't they lie about that whole fake "Hunter Biden laptop" thing? So I guess maybe they have a history of doing shady stuff like that... :/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706858)

You can look at this and dismiss it as typical Democrat talking points, but you could also view it as almost a confession, one that includes details about the current "Get Trump" effort.

Yes, Trump won the popular vote against unbelievable odds, but if you think Team Obama is being any less involved in quiet insurrections than they were during the first Trump administration (Russia collusion, Ukraine impeachment, etc.), you're clueless. I'll remind you that Susan Rice was in the small Jan. 5, 2017 meeting in the WH with other key Russia collusion hoax perpetrators.

Zelensky repeatedly declined opportunities to sign the deal in Kyiv and Munich, and requested the meeting at the White House. It later came out that Rice and Tony Blinken, Victoria Nuland, and Alexander Vindman may have been personally advising Zelensky to do this meeting in the way he did -- that they recommended him to be hostile and to try to goad Trump into blowing up. Even though he didn't, and even though Zelensky's actions horrified many normal Americans, the Obama team went on the airwaves to falsely characterize what happened.

I think their goal was to have a wonderful performance by Zelensky, an angry Trump appearing to scuttle the deal, and the support of the neocon portion of the GOP to start applying pressure on Trump to have US Troop commitments as part of the "security guarantee." It was a set-up, in Susan Rice's interesting choice of words.

Instead, Zelensky had one of the worst stage performances of his acting career, and Trump was statesmanlike (against all odds) throughout. Zelensky followed Team Obama's advice to be hostile to a tee, but it didn't land how they thought it would. Surprisingly, one of the most important aspects of it not working out might have been Lindsay Graham's reaction. Had he and other neocons thought Zelensky was being reasonable, Trump would be having to fight (even moreso) the neocon portion of the GOP in addition to Team Obama's dirty tricks. Even the "conservative" neocon pundits on TV last night were admitting Zelensky had royally messed up.

As you can see from the hostility of the bureaucracy to any Republican oversight, no matter how reasonable or minor it may be, the entrenched bureaucracy and permanent DC apparatus is quite active. That goes quadruple for the deep state in the Intelligence Community. I'd expect more and more shenanigans and to be prepared so that you don't fall for the next information operation. The post-WWII architecture in Europe and the US needs this war to continue or be settled on "US troops on the ground" type guarantees, even though that's not what Americans want.

Things will heat up here, and it's a very dangerous time.

https://x.com/MZHemingway/status/1895872853930545214

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706859)

Whoa, wtf... is this writeup really suggesting that LIBS were in fact the ones cynically pushing a "set up" here, and then running onto every media outlet they could find in the immediate aftermath in order to hysterically scream about how Trump "totally set up" Zelenskyy?

But I know libs, they're not like that -- they wouldn't act in cold and craven ways and then loudly project their own sins and misdeeds onto their opponents. They're not like that!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706863)

Libs, please response ASAP.

I am getting very upset that you're being slandered like this is in such vile and disgusting ways, and I need to know how best to respond to these sort of unacceptable attacks going forward in order to defend your honor.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706866)

Obama, Biden Oval Office Meeting On January 5 Was Key To Entire Anti-Trump Operation

BY: MOLLIE HEMINGWAY

MAY 08, 2020

Information released in the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the case it brought against Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn confirms the significance of a January 5, 2017, meeting at the Obama White House. It was at this meeting that Obama gave guidance to key officials who would be tasked with protecting his administration’s utilization of secretly funded Clinton campaign research, which alleged Trump was involved in a treasonous plot to collude with Russia, from being discovered or stopped by the incoming administration.

“President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia,” National Security Advisor Susan Rice wrote in an unusual email to herself about the meeting that was also attended by Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, FBI Director James Comey, and Vice President Joe Biden.

A clearer picture is emerging of the drastic steps that were taken to accomplish Obama’s goal in the following weeks and months. Shortly thereafter, high-level operatives began intensely leaking selective information supporting a supposed Russia-Trump conspiracy theory, the incoming National Security Advisor was ambushed, and the incoming Attorney General was forced to recuse himself from oversight of investigations of President Trump. At each major point in the operation, explosive media leaks were a key strategy in the operation to take down Trump.

Not only was information on Russia not fully shared with the incoming Trump team, as Obama directs, the leaks and ambushes made the transition chaotic, scared quality individuals away from working in the administration, made effective governance almost impossible, and materially damaged national security. When Comey was finally fired on May 9, in part for his duplicitousness regarding his handling of the Russia collusion theory, he orchestrated the launch of a Special Counsel probe that continued his efforts for another two years. That probe ended with Mueller finding no evidence of any American colluding with Russia to steal the 2016 election, much less Trump or anyone connected to him.

An analysis of the timeline from early 2017 shows a clear pattern of behavior from the federal officials running the collusion operation against the Trump campaign. It also shows how essential media leaks were to their strategy to sideline key law enforcement and intelligence officials and cripple the ability of the incoming Trump administration to run the country.

Here’s a timeline of the key moments and news articles of the efforts, per Obama’s direction, to prevent the Trump administration from learning about the FBI’s operation against it.

January 4: Following the closure of a pretextually dubious and politically motivated FBI investigation of Flynn at the beginning of January, the leadership of the FBI scrambled to reopen a case against Flynn, the man who in his role as National Security Advisor would have to review their Russia collusion investigation. FBI officials openly discussed their concern about briefing the veteran intelligence official on what they had done to the Trump campaign and transition team and what they were planning to do to the incoming Trump administration. Flynn had to be dealt with. The FBI’s top counterintelligence official would later memorialize discussions about the FBI’s attempts to “get [Flynn] fired.” No reopening was needed, they determined, when they discovered they had failed to close the previous investigation. They found this mistake “amazing” and “serendipitously good” and said “our utter incompetence actually helps us.” Even more noteworthy were texts from FBI’s #2 counterintelligence official Peter Strzok to FBI lawyer Lisa Page noting that the “7th floor,” a reference to Comey and his deputy director Andrew McCabe, was running the show.

January 5: Yates, Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper briefed Obama on Russia-related matters in the Oval Office. Biden and Rice also attended. After the Obama briefing, the intelligence chiefs who would be leaving at the end of the term were dismissed and Yates and Comey, who would continue in the Trump administration, were asked to stay. Not only did Obama give his guidance about how to perpetuate the Russia collusion theory investigations, he also talked about Flynn’s conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, according to both Comey and Yates. Interestingly, Clapper, Comey, and Yates all said that they did not brief Obama about these phone calls. Clapper testified he did not brief Obama on the calls, Yates learned about the calls from Obama himself during that meeting, and Comey also testified he didn’t brief Obama about the calls, even though the intelligence was an FBI product. Rice, who publicly lied but later admitted under oath to her widespread use of unmasked intelligence at the end of the Obama administration, likely briefed Obama on the calls and would have had access to the intelligence. Comey mentions the Logan Act at this meeting.

It was this meeting that Rice memorialized in a bizarre inauguration-day email to herself that claimed Obama told the gathered to do everything “by the book.” But Rice also noted in her email that the key point of discussion in that meeting was whether and how to withhold national security information, likely including details of the investigation into Trump himself, from the incoming Trump national security team.

January 6: An ostensibly similar briefing about Russian interference efforts during the 2016 campaign was given to President-elect Trump. After that briefing, Comey privately briefed Trump on the most salacious and absurd “pee tape” allegation in the Christopher Steele dossier, a document the FBI had already used to obtain a warrant to spy on Trump campaign affiliate Carter Page. Comey told Trump he was telling him because CNN was looking for any reason it could find to publish a story about Russia having compromising information on him, and he wanted to warn Trump about it. He did not mention the dossier was completely unverified or that it was the product of a secretly funded operation by the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee.

January 10: In an amazing coincidence, CNN found the excuse to publish the Russia claims after a high-level Obama intelligence operative leaked that Comey had briefed Trump about the dossier. This selective leak, which was credulously accepted by CNN reporters Evan Perez, Jim Sciutto, Jake Tapper and Carl Bernstein, may have been the most important step in the operation to harm the incoming Trump administration. The leak of the briefing of Trump was used to legitimize a ridiculous dossier full of allegations the FBI knew to be false that multiple news organizations had previously refused to report on for lack of substantiation, and created a cloud of suspicion over Trump’s campaign and administration by insinuating he was being blackmailed by Russia.

January 12: The next part of the strategy was the explosive leak to David Ignatius of the Washington Post to legitimize the use against Flynn of the Logan Act, a likely unconstitutional 1799 law prohibiting private individuals, not public incoming national security advisors, from discussing foreign policy with foreign governments. Ignatius accepted the leak from the Obama official. He wrote that Flynn had called Kislyak. “What did Flynn say, and did it undercut the U.S. sanctions? The Logan Act (though never enforced) bars U.S. citizens from correspondence intending to influence a foreign government about ‘disputes’ with the United States. Was its spirit violated?” Flynn’s routine and appropriate phone call became fodder for a developing grand conspiracy theory of Russia collusion. In discussions with investigators, both DOJ’s Mary McCord and Comey conspicuously cite this Ignatius column as somehow meaningful in the approach they would take with Flynn. “Nothing, to my mind, happens until the 13th of January, when David Ignatius publishes a column that contains a reference to communication Michael Flynn had with the Russians. That was on the 13th of January,” Comey said of the column that ran online on January 12. In fact, quite a bit had happened at the FBI prior to that leak, with much conversation about how to utilize the Logan Act against Flynn. And the leak-fueled Ignatius column would later be used by FBI officials to justify an illegal ambush interview of Flynn in the White House.

January 23: Another important criminal leak was given to Ellen Nakashima and Greg Miller of the Washington Post, also based on criminal leaks. Their article, headlined “FBI reviewed Flynn’s calls with Russian ambassador but found nothing illicit,” was intended to make Flynn feel safe and put him at ease about the FBI stance on those calls the day before they planned to ambush him in an interview. The article was used to publicize false information when it said, “Although Flynn’s contacts with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak were listened to, Flynn himself is not the active target of an investigation, U.S. officials said.” In fact, emails prior to this date confirm Flynn was their prime target. This article was later cited by McCabe as the reason why they were justified in concealing from Flynn the real purpose of their interview. Flynn later asked McCabe if he knew how all the information about his phone calls had been made public and whether it had been leaked. Any potential response from McCabe to Flynn has been redacted from his own notes about the conversation.

January 24: Comey later admitted he broke every protocol to send agents to interview Flynn and try to catch him in a lie. FBI officials strategized how to keep Flynn from knowing he was a target of the investigation or asking for an attorney to represent him in the interview. The January 23 Washington Post article, which falsely stated that Flynn was not an FBI target, was key to that strategy. Though the interviewing agents said they could detect no “tells” indicating he lied, and he carefully phrased everything in the interview, he later was induced to plead guilty to lying in this interview. Ostensibly because White House officials downplayed the Kislyak phone calls, presumably in light of what Flynn had told them about the calls, Yates would go to the White House the next day and insinuate Flynn should probably be fired.

February 9: The strategy to get Flynn fired didn’t immediately work so another leak was deployed to Greg Miller, Adam Entous and Ellen Nakashima of the Washington Post. That article, headline “National security adviser Flynn discussed sanctions with Russian ambassador, despite denials, officials say,” was sourced to people who happened to share senior FBI leadership’s views on the Logan Act. This article was also based on criminal leaks of top secret information of phone call intercepts and laid out the FBI’s case for why Flynn’s contacts with a foreign adversary were a problem. The fact that such phone calls are routine, not to mention Flynn’s case that improved relations with Russia in a world where China, North Korea, and Iran were posing increasing threats, never made it into these articles for context.

February 13: The operation finally succeeded in getting Flynn fired and rendering him unable to review the operations against the Trump campaign, Trump transition team, and Trump administration.

March 1: Flynn was the first obstacle who had to be overcome. Attorney General Jeff Sessions was the next. The Trump loyalist with a strong Department of Justice background would also need to be briefed on the anti-Trump efforts unless he could be sidelined. Comey admitted that early in Sessions’ tenure, he deliberately hid Russia-related information from Sessions because, “it made little sense to report it to Attorney General Sessions, who we expected would likely recuse himself from involvement in Russia-related investigations.” To secure that recusal, yet another leak was deployed to the Washington Post’s Adam Entous, Ellen Nakashima and Greg Miller. The leak was intended to tar Sessions as a secret Russian agent and was dramatically spun as “Sessions Spoke Twice To Russian Envoy: Revelation contradicts his testimony at confirmation hearing.” One meeting was in passing and the other was in his function as a United States Senator, but the hysteria was such that the Post authors could get away with suggesting Sessions was too compromised to oversee the Department of Justice’s counterintelligence operations involving Russia. It is perhaps worth noting that the Special Counsel idea was pushed in this article.

March 2: Sessions recused himself from oversight of the FBI’s anti-Trump operation, providing no meaningful oversight to an operation that would be spun into a Special Counsel by mid-May. With the removal of Trump’s National Security Advisor and his Attorney General, there was no longer any chance of Trump loyalists discovering what Obama holdovers at the FBI were actually doing to get Trump thrown out of office. After Trump fired Comey for managerial incompetence on May 9, deceptively edited and misleading leaks to the New York Times ordered by Comey himself were used to gin up a Special Counsel run exclusively by left-wing anti-Trump partisans who continued the operation without any meaningful oversight for another two years.

This stunning operation was not just a typical battle between political foes, nor merely an example of media bias against political enemies. Instead, this entire operation was a deliberate and direct attack on the foundation of American governance. In light of the newly declassified documents released in recent days, it is clear that understanding what happened in that January 5 Oval Office meeting is essential to understanding the full scope and breadth of the corrupt operation against the Trump administration. It is long past time for lawmakers in Congress who are actually interested in oversight of the federal government and the media to demand answers about what really happened in that meeting from every single participant, including Obama and Biden.

Mollie Ziegler Hemingway is the Editor-in-Chief of The Federalist. She is Senior Journalism Fellow at Hillsdale College and a Fox News contributor. She is the co-author of Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court. She is the author of "Rigged: How the Media, Big Tech, and the Democrats Seized Our Elections." Reach her at mzhemingway@thefederalist.com

https://thefederalist.com/2020/05/08/obama-biden-oval-office-meeting-on-january-5-was-key-to-entire-anti-trump-operation/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706864)

By Philip Wegmann RCP Staff

February 28, 2025 FR159526 AP

For three years in the United States, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was heralded as the second coming of Winston Churchill. He earned standing ovations from Congress, posed for glossy photo shoots, and received regular envoys of politicians, celebrities, and press from the West.

But one moment in the Oval Office may have ended it all.

Zelensky publicly crossed his greatest ally, calling into question before the press whether President Trump and Vice President Vance, now seeking to negotiate a peace deal, really understood both the land war in his country and his enemy, Russian President Vladimir Putin. He was summarily kicked out of the White House.

The Ukrainian leader, who at times rolled his eyes and crossed his arms in defiance during the fiery bilateral meeting, either fundamentally misunderstood, or entirely miscalculated, the current moment in American politics. His alliance with the United States, if not the fate of his country, is imperiled.

“He doesn’t recognize that Nov. 6 was a paradigm shift in American politics, including for our policy toward Ukraine,” a White House official told RealClearPolitics after Zelensky departed the White House with a stone-faced delegation in tow but without a signed deal to facilitate U.S. mining of rare minerals in Ukraine.

Zelensky had failed to understand “the new political landscape,” the official said before adding that the Ukrainian leader had been “living in a pro-Ukrainian American bubble.”

The drama that played out at the White House was unprecedented. It certainly was not scripted. One source familiar with preparations for the dialogue told RCP, “None of us expected [Zelensky] to act like that.” Indeed, the administration had hoped that Friday would mark the beginning of the end of the conflict, and they expected to bask in glowing headlines after leaders from both nations signed the minerals deal on camera in the East Room. Instead, Zelensky was sent packing, and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham was left fuming.

“I busted my ass to help Ukraine,” Graham told Fox News from the White House lawn. Easily the greatest and oldest Republican friend of Kyiv, the senator arrived on campus to celebrate a breakthrough. From the moment Russian tanks rolled across the border, he had pushed for more aid and even led a congressional delegation into the war zone to make his case.

His advice to Zelensky ahead of the Oval Office meeting? “Do not let the media or anybody else get you into an argument with President Trump,” Graham said. And then Zelensky did exactly that over the course of little more than an hour.

Even former President Joe Biden found Zelensky taxing at times. When the Ukrainian leader pressed for more aid immediately after the U.S. greenlit another $1 billion in military assistance in October 2022, Biden reportedly replied that the American people were already being quite generous and that Zelensky ought to show a bit more gratitude.

NBC News reported at the time that Biden even raised his voice in exasperation, a rarity for the former president. Despite the private kerfuffle, the two remained in lockstep publicly. Biden often said, “Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine,” pledging to support the beleaguered nation for “as long as it takes.”

Trump exploded that framework the moment he won the election last November. He has called for an end to the war and advanced what the previous administration thought unconscionable: a peace deal that required both sides to make concessions.

Notably, without weighing in on any final details of an overarching agreement, French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, during their separate state visits to the White House, both thanked Trump for beginning the process of peace talks.

In the Oval Office Friday, Trump made his position explicit by proclaiming that in the conflict, “I’m in the middle” and “I’m for both” Ukraine and Russia. The president had also previously ruled out what Zelensky wants the most – a security guarantee backed by the U.S.

Trump has argued, however, that a minerals deal would be just as good. “We’re going to be working over there. We’ll be on the land, and you know, that way it’s this sort of automatic security,” he said Wednesday, “because nobody’s going to be messing around with our people when we’re there.”

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said publicly that the agreement was as good as done and insisted that all that was required were the signatures. “There is no more negotiation,” he told Fox News Friday morning in an interview that seemed designed to preclude any last-minute changes. “There is nothing else.”

Zelensky may not have received that message. The transcript of his Oval Office meeting now serves as a sort of Rorschach test on both sides of the Atlantic, and within the U.S. Congress, as allies and partisans read in their interpretation of who was to blame for the meeting going off the rails.

It began civilly enough.

Seated before an unlit fireplace and wearing signature blue suit and red tie, Trump called it “an honor” to receive Zelensky, who was at his left sporting a black sweatshirt and matching cargo pants, then proceeded to praise “the unbelievably brave” Ukrainian soldiers. Disagreements simmered under the surface at first and only erupted after the vice president made explicit the new paradigm.

“We tried the pathway of Joe Biden of thumping our chest and pretending that the president of the United States’ words mattered more than the president of the United States’ actions,” Vance said. “What makes America a good country is America engaging in diplomacy.”

This was too much for Zelensky, who has watched Russia repeatedly make diplomatic agreements and break them with ease. The Ukrainian leader laid out the history from the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008 to the invasion of Eastern Crimea in 2014 before demanding to know, “What kind of diplomacy, J.D., you are speaking about?”

When Vance replied that “the kind of diplomacy” was the sort that would end “the destruction of your country,” Zelensky tried to interject. Vance told him it was “disrespectful” to litigate the issue in public before the media, only for Zelensky to again interrupt, protesting, “Have you ever been to Ukraine?” An extended discourse followed, with allegations of ingratitude. Trump only erupted when Zelensky warned that the U.S. would “feel” the threat of Russia “in the future.”

“You’re gambling with World War III,” Trump told Zelensky, warning him, “you’re in no position to dictate what we’re going to feel.” The media was escorted out shortly afterward, and the White House rescinded its invitation to sign a deal. Said the president in a statement posted on social media, Zelensky “disrespected the United States” and “can come back when he is ready for peace.”

Outside observers quickly concluded that the Ukrainian had run afoul of Trump-era diplomatic norms. “Zelensky misread the deeply polarized nature of the Ukraine issue in the U.S. and failed to adjust his approach accordingly,” Zineb Riboua, a scholar at the Hudson Institute’s Center for Peace and Security in the Middle East, told RCP.

“Trump thrives on flattery, control, and, most of all, the illusion of dominance. He expects negotiations to happen on his terms, and any public challenge is not just a disagreement – it’s a personal insult,” Riboua added before noting that Trump holds at least two major grudges against Zelensky for what Republicans see as his perceived preference for Democrats and his unwillingness to bring the war to an end earlier. If the Ukrainian leader does not make an allowance for that skepticism and update his diplomatic approach, the scholar concluded, “he risks losing what little leverage he has left.”

The Ukrainian delegation seemed to acknowledge the error. Zelensky took to the social media website formerly known as Twitter to thank the United States, and no fewer than 25 other world leaders, after Vance admonished him in the Oval Office for not expressing enough gratitude. He also abruptly canceled remarks that were scheduled to take place in downtown Washington, D.C., at the Hudson Institute, a source familiar confirmed to RCP.

But Zelensky did keep his interview with Bret Baier of Fox News. He repeatedly refused, however, to offer what Trump seems to want most now: an apology. All the same, the Ukrainian leader suggested that his relationship with the spurned president could be salvaged. “Yes, of course, because it’s relations more than two presidents,” he told Baier. “It’s the historical relations, strong relations between our people.”

Philip Wegmann is White House correspondent for RealClearPolitics.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2025/02/28/living_in_a_bubble_how_zelensky_miscalculated_trump_152441.html

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706895)

"But Zelensky did keep his interview with Bret Baier of Fox News. He repeatedly refused, however, to offer what Trump seems to want most now: an apology. All the same, the Ukrainian leader suggested that his relationship with the spurned president could be salvaged. “Yes, of course, because it’s relations more than two presidents,” he told Baier. “It’s the historical relations, strong relations between our people.”"

Ahh, yes, Ukraine -- one of America's strongest and oldest, er, historic international allies.

SLAVA!!!!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706907)

CR!

(Until Boomers die off and Zoomers rise up.)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706963)

"Just wait another 20 years! Then you'll see! For real!"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48707029)

*Checks every single 'reputable' public poll that has come out re Israel's popularity among Americans <40 in the last few years*

*Fires up YT/IG/etc and goes straight to comments section on every single "Yay aren't Jews so awesome hehe / Proud Zionist here... / Take a 'Birthright' trip to Israel!" video or post I can find*

Haha yeah haha, you're right man Israel and the Jews are actually doing great with the kids, I was just coping. Thousand year ZOGREICH incoming, l'chaim!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708282)

Sure is interesting. A bit of an "odd case," some might say!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706908)

That depends on whether you believe the account given by sitting U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn), who according to the NY Post's reporting claims that this meeting actually took place and that he was physically present at the meeting, and who also posted photos purportedly documenting the meeting on social media.

But I'm retarded and gullible and wrong about everything always, so I'm gonna need libs to come ITT and confirm whether this "Senator Murphy (D-Conn)" guy is a reliable source for that sort of information or not. IDK, I've been burned too many times before, so now I always err on the side of caution and just let my liberal friends on XO tell me what's real and what's not real!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706928)

Wait, I think we skipped some preliminary questions for one of our resident liberals to clarify:

1. As reported by the NY Post, this meeting did / didn't happen?

2. [Assuming it did happen] In retrospect, this meeting was / wasn't a "good" thing for Democrats to do assuming that they REALLY care about Ukraine (SLAVA!!!)?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706959)

2. The fictional events that didn’t happen were good for both libs and the Ukraine.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706961)

1. Wow!

2. x2

TY for responding.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706962)

lol has there ever been a poast more perfectly teed up for an "OK Boomer" response?

Wow... an "Opinion" column, you say? As opposed to a "News" column? Tell me more about this important and very real dividing line in modern American print journalism, grandpa!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706969)

OK this one gets a "Haha yeah haha"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706972)

Same!

PS: Friendly reminder that your kids are black, deeply mentally ill, completely broken inside, and literally castrated... and it's all because of your incredibly bad life choices compounded by your insanely shitty parenting.

Have a good one brother.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48706977)

1. Zelenskyy does not grasp—or deliberately ignores—the bitter truth: those with whom he feels most affinity (Western globalists, the American Left, the Europeans) have little power in 2025 to help him. And those with whom he obviously does not like or seeks to embarrass (cf. his Scranton, Penn. campaign-like visit in September 2024) alone have the power to save him. For his own sake, I hope he is not being “briefed” by the Obama-Clinton-Biden gang to confront Trump, given their interests are not really Ukraine’s as they feign.

2. Zelenskyy acts as if his agendas and ours are identical. So, he keeps insisting that he is fighting for us despite our two-ocean-distance that he mocks. We do have many shared interests with Ukraine, but not all by any means: Trump wants to “reset” with Russia and triangulate it against China. He seeks to avoid a 1962 DEFCON 2-like crisis over a proxy showdown in proximity to a nuclear rival. And he sincerely wants to end the deadlocked Stalingrad slaughterhouse for everyone’s sake.

3. The Europeans (and Canada) are now talking loudly of a new muscular antithesis, independent of the U.S. Promises, promises—given that would require Europeans to prune back their social welfare state, frack, use nuclear, stop the green obsessions, and spend 3-5 percent of their GDP on defense. The U.S. does not just pay 16 percent of NATO’s budget but also puts up with asymmetrical tariffs that result in a European Union trade surplus of $160 billion, plays the world cop patrolling sea-lanes and deterring terrorists and rogues states that otherwise might interrupt Europe’s commercial networks abroad, as well as de facto including Europe under a nuclear umbrella of 6,500 nukes.

4. Zelenskyy must know that all of the once deal-stopping issues to peace have been de facto settled: Ukraine is now better armed than most NATO nations, but will not be in NATO; and no president has or will ever supply Ukraine with the armed wherewithal to take back the Donbass and Crimea. So, the only two issues are a) how far will Putin be willing to withdraw to his 2022 borders and b) how will he be deterred? The first is answered by a commercial sector/tripwire, joint Ukrainian-US-Europe resource development corridor in Eastern Ukraine, coupled with a Korea-like DMZ; the second by the fact that Putin unlike his 2008 and 2014 invasions has now lost a million dead and wounded to a Ukraine that will remain thusly armed.

5. What are Zelenskyy’s alternatives without much U.S. help—wait for a return of the Democrats to the White House in four years? Hope for a rearmed Europe? Pray for a Democratic House and a 3rd Vindman-like engineered Trump impeachment? Or swallow his pride, return to the White House, sign the rare-earth minerals deal, invite in the Euros (are they seriously willing to patrol a DMZ?), and hope Trump can warn Putin, as he did successfully between 2017-21, not to dare try it again?

6. If there is a cease fire, a commercial deal, a Euro ground presence, and influx of Western companies into Ukraine, would there be elections? And if so, would Zelenskyy and his party win? And if not, would there be a successor transparent government that would reveal exactly where all the Western financial aid money went?

7. Zelenskyy might see a model in Netanyahu. The Biden Administration was far harder on him than Trump is on Ukraine: suspending arms shipments, demanding cease-fires, prodding for a wartime, bipartisan cabinet, hammering Israel on collateral damage—none of which Westerners have demanded of Zelenskyy. Yet Netanyahu managed a hostile Biden, kept Israel close to its patron, and when visiting was gracious to his host. Netanyahu certainly would never before the global media have interrupted, and berated a host and patron president in the White House.

8. If Ukraine has alienated the U.S. what then is its strategic victory plan? Wait around for more Euros? Hold off an increasingly invigorated Russian military? Cede more territory? What, then, exactly are Zelenskyy’s cards he seems to think are a winning hand?

9. If one views carefully all the 50-minute tape, most of it was going quite well—until Zelenskyy started correcting Vance firstly, and Trump secondly. By Ukraine-splaining to his hosts, and by his gestures, tone, and interruptions, he made it clear that he assumed that Trump was just more of the same compliant, clueless moneybags Biden waxen effigy. And that was naïve for such a supposedly worldly leader.

10. March 2025 is not March 2022, after the heroic saving of Kyiv—but three years and 1.5 million dead and wounded later. Zelenskyy is no longer the international heartthrob with the glamorous entourage. He has postponed elections, outlawed opposition media and parties, suspended habeas corpus and walked out of negotiations when he had an even hand in Spring 2022 and apparently even now when he does not in Spring 2025.

Quo vadis, Volodymyr?

https://x.com/VDHanson/status/1895892571664343159

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48707012)

Whoa, settle down, Putin.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708289)

Here is her interview from MSNBC today about President Trump & VP Vance’s meeting with Zelenskyy

It is also being reported Susan Rice, along with Anthony Blinken, Victoria Nuland, & Alexander Vindman advised Zelenskyy to stand tall in his meeting with Trump

If true, they are ALL acting as foreign agents violating the Logan Act

@Kash_Patel @PamBondi @marcorubio @TulsiGabbard @michaelgwaltz @FBIDirectorKash @fbi @SecRubio @DNIGabbard

https://x.com/KylieJaneKremer/status/1895655091777998985

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48707013)

Lol remember when you guys were saying this line unironically like four years ago?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708290)

???

You seem to be pegging me as a guy screaming about THE LOGAN ACT (Jesus!)

In reality, I'm just happy to see you faggots getting served with a good dose of your own faggotry.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708382)

Obama libs 2025: *moves closer to mic*

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48707028)

TBF: a couple of minority senators are the real puppet masters!!!!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708537)

Oh wow Dem Senators didn't force Zelenskyyy at gunpoint to act like a faggot kike, they only met with him in advance and strongly encouraged him to act like a faggot kike... QED they cannot be criticized for anything! Trust me, I'm a Jewish man with a degree in political science who poasts on the internet, I'm what you call an "expert" on these things!

Lol Ari

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708543)

Yeah. And unfortunately, the viewpoints that they pushed instead are not only retarded and impractical and fundamentally anti-American in their orientation, but from a realpolitik perspective they are also going to badly end up fucking over Ukraine (which is ostensibly the "country" they are supposed to be "supporting") at the end of the day and getting more white goys unnecessarily killed in this stupid war as a result.

...hence the criticism of what they did in this meeting.

("Wow, so *that's* how that works!")

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708553)

Zappin you’re a fucking retard

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708577)

(Jewish Pumo who was literally just cackling about how Trump was a "fucking retard" for being prepared to sign a "totally unenforceable mineral rights deal" three days ago... but now suddenly the criticism has magically morphed into "lol what a joke Drumpfth was never going to sign shit it was all just an evil Machiavellian 'gotcha' setup to ambush Zelensky in front of the media, duh you can't see that, what are you retarded or something?")

Wow, this is almost like the time that Dubya was Literally Hitler 2.0(TM), except for when it was more politically expedient to sneer about he was ackkkshually Cheney's Retarded Mindless Puppet(R)!

lol it's amazing that this sort of retarded sophistic faggotry used to work on mindless Boomers back when CNN was a real network that people actually watched and your tribe had an ironclad grip on the media narrative 20 years ago.

Anyway, good luck pushing this stupid "heads I win tails you lose" Jewish horseshit on anyone under 40 through X on 2025, kike! :)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708581)

CR plus I'm gay and broke and dumb as shit.

...and even so, I *still* just intellectually assfucked ur flabby blown-out little mindhole without even trying on a internet messageboard after spending the whole day drinking.

Sorry for ur lots and retardation, kikeboi.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708588)

(Attentive father to a loving family who just happened to spend his entire Sunday bitterly arguing about "politith" with a bunch of strangers on the internet)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708657)

Of course libs support this.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708562)

Libs ITT: "This didn't happen and this whole article is just a nasty lie... but also, if it did happen, that would be awesome and here's why it's ackkkkkshually a great thing for Ukraine/Dems and a terrible thing for Drumpfth:"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708566)

Jewish Shitlib: "Not a lib, but..."

Haha yeah haha ;)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708584)

Not yet, unfortunately, but yes soon enough it will be.

XOXO, HTH!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708591)

Ok well fine if you insist

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708600)

Yes, I vividly recall that time almost a decade ago when I (along with most professional "political pundits" in America) was completely wrong about the 2016 election.

Wow, jeez.

Luckily, I'm willing and able to self-assess and update my beliefs as I become aware of new information... and btw,

you'll never guess what I've discovered about Jews like you since then!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708660)

three of them have Ukrainian ancestry. odd.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708611)

*"(((Ukrainian)))"

Odd, indeed. Very interesting.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5687776&forum_id=2...id.#48708621)