Trump Reveals Red Carpet Applause for Putin Was Just the Start
Trump left Alaska on Friday with no ceasefire agreement, no concessions, and having gifted priceless PR to an adversary engaged in war with a U.S. ally. Now, sources tell Axios that Trump's path forward is in line with that of the Kremlin.
Trump reportedly told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Friday that he is no longer pushing for a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, which was among his stated goals entering the summit.
Trump is instead calling for a peace agreement without a ceasefire. That puts him in lockstep with Putin and at odds with Zelensky, who has been adamant that a pause in hostilities is necessary before a peace agreement can be reached.
Zelensky and NATO leaders were informed of Trump's change of heart in a 'difficult' phone call the president made from Air Force One on his way back from Alaska, a source told Axios. Trump reportedly spoke for an hour with Zelensky before European leaders joined the call, which went on for an additional 30 minutes.
'Trump said on the call that he thinks a fast peace deal is better than a ceasefire,' the source said.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment regarding the call.
Trump was described as appearing 'defeated' by the end of his meeting with Putin, which began with much enthusiasm from the president. Shortly after the 79-year-old struggled to walk straight, he applauded Putin, shook his hand, and shared laughs with the leader before welcoming him in the 'Beast,' the high-tech presidential limo.
The president's demeanor was noticeably different after he met with Putin. The leaders appeared before cameras for what was billed as a 'press conference,' but no questions were answered—something that even rubbed Fox News the wrong way.
Trump played up the meeting as a 'success' but has not provided details that back up his claim.
'We had an extremely productive meeting, and many points were agreed to. There are just a very few that are left,' Trump said. 'We didn't get there, but we have a very good chance of getting there.'
That—more or less—is how Trump has described the situation between Russia and Ukraine since his first weeks in office. Despite guaranteeing to end the war on day one of his presidency, he has discovered that, not surprisingly, Putin wishes to keep the land in Eastern Ukraine that his troops occupy. Zelensky has said he is not willing to cede Ukrainian land to end the war.
Axios' source summarized Putin's thoughts on the situation, as told by Trump to Zelensky: 'The impression was that in return for territory, Putin is willing to end the war and commit not to try and occupy more areas in Ukraine and to not attack other countries.'
Trump told Fox News on Friday that a deal for peace is not in his hands, but that it is instead 'up to President Zelensky to get it done.'
Zelensky will travel to meet with Trump in the White House on Monday, six months after his last visit, when Trump and Vice President JD Vance chastised him in an Oval Office ambush that famously went off the rails.
At least publicly, Trump remains confident that peace will soon be reached.
'President Zelensky will be coming to D.C., the Oval Office, on Monday afternoon,' Trump posted to Truth Social on Saturday morning. 'If all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin. Potentially, millions of people's lives will be saved.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 minutes ago
- Yahoo
"That Makes Perfect Sense": Fox News Just Got RFK Jr. To Reveal The "Convenient" Reason He Works Out In Jeans
Fox News' Jesse Watters hit Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. with what he described as 'the question that everybody is wondering about' on Tuesday. Namely, 'Why do you wear jeans when you work out?' Related: Kennedy, known for exercising in his literal (denim) sweatpants, answered: 'Well, I just started doing that a long time ago because I would go hiking in the morning and then I'd go straight to the gym and I found it was convenient and now I'm used to it so I just do it.' Related: 'OK,' the Fox News host replied to the vaccine skeptic that President Donald Trump has entrusted with his 'Make America Healthy Again' agenda. Related: 'There were a lot of theories, but that makes perfect sense,' Watters claimed, without offering to explain the sense he claimed there was. Watch here: Fox News/X / Via Related: The question came after Kennedy and Fox News personality-turned-Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth challenged Americans to do 50 pullups and 100 pushups in under five minutes. Watch that clip here: @FoxNews/X / Via This article originally appeared on HuffPost. Also in In the News: Also in In the News: Also in In the News: Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
2 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's D.C. Goon Squads Are Un-American
When President Donald Trump first declared a crime emergency in the nation's capital and sent hundreds of federal law enforcement agents to patrol its streets, this district resident had a hard time taking it too seriously. The initial images of bored Drug Enforcement Administration agents strolling past perplexed joggers on the National Mall were more clownish than carceral. Local street resistance to the occupation was limited to a drunk guy throwing a sandwich at a federal agent. But inevitably, as this operation has dragged on, things have taken a darker turn. The sandwich-thrower was overcharged and rearrested in a needless, publicized show of force. Masked federal agents have set up an unconstitutional checkpoint, violently arrested at least one delivery driver, and filmed themselves tearing down a banner protesting their presence in the city. Each day, more and more National Guard members pour into the capital. The conversation about Trump's declared crime emergency has understandably, albeit unhelpfully, provoked a lot of discourse about how safe D.C. is, whether a federalized local police department will make it safer, whether federal agents are being deployed in the right places and going after the right crimes, and on and on. This incessant crime conversation has distracted from just how un-American Trump's show of force in the nation's capital is. Uniformed troops and masked federal agents doing routine law enforcement at the command of the president is just not how we do things in the United States. The entire point of the U.S. Constitution is to prevent the federal government from becoming a despotism, and one of the primary ways it does this is by limiting how many men with guns it has at its disposal. This is why the Constitution places strict constraints on maintaining a standing army. It's why there are only three crimes mentioned in the Constitution, none of which would plausibly require federal agents to patrol U Street. It's why questions of what to criminalize and who to prosecute were largely left up to the states. The Third Amendment is mostly treated as an anachronistic joke today. In fact, it is a load-bearing part of the Constitution that makes clear that the military and the police are different things and that Americans should not have to tolerate the presence of armed agents of the states as a routine part of daily life. Obviously we've deviated considerably from this ideal since the founding generation. The federal criminal code is now extensive. The feds' wars on drugs, terror, and immigration have grown the number of militarized federal agents doing law enforcement activities. Federal money has subsidized a similar trend of militarization of state and local police forces. Reason has been decrying this trend for decades. In his book Rise of the Warrior Cop, Radley Balko writes about how the trend of increased police militarization has eroded the "Symbolic Third Amendment" and the free society it protects. It's darkly ironic then that, after decades of politicians of both parties in D.C. gifting the federal government vast powers to police the rest of the country, a militarized federal police force is now being deployed on the streets of America's capital against its residents. This is why arguments about whether federal agents could be more effectively deployed in less visible, higher crime areas of the city are completely beside the point. The federal government acting as a beat cop is inimical to our constitutional design, regardless of how effective its efforts are. That D.C. is a federal district might seem to complicate this point. In fact, it reinforces it. Despite being a constitutionally peculiar special district, a lot of effort has been put into giving D.C. a local police force that does not practically function as an arm of the federal government. Even in the seat of federal power, it's understood that a force of federal agents policing everyday life is not something ordinary citizens should have to put up with. That Trump has the power to federalize the D.C. police or deploy the D.C. National Guard doesn't stop his actions from being authoritarian and offensive to the spirit of the Constitution, even if it doesn't violate the letter of it. It's also cold comfort that Trump's declared crime emergency is clearly mostly a performative act to rile up the libs and not a serious effort at combating crime. While the president is staging the performance, it's disconcerting that he's opted to cast himself as the villain in the play. Moreover, the longer federal agents are deployed on D.C. streets, the greater the odds that more serious abuses do happen. It's true that D.C. today is not as locked down as it has been in recent years. The police-enforced curfews during the George Floyd protests or the security cordons that sprang up after the January 6 riots were a lot more visible and heavy-handed. Excessive as those police actions were (particularly the latter), they were at least being done as an emergency response to widespread breakdowns in public order. Trump is rolling out the feds in D.C. to do routine law enforcement. That's un-American. The post Trump's D.C. Goon Squads Are Un-American appeared first on Solve the daily Crossword
The Hill
4 minutes ago
- The Hill
Democrats press DHS for ‘Alligator Alcatraz' information
Democratic lawmakers are pressing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for more information about how the Trump administration teamed up with the state of Florida to create a controversial detention facility for migrants in the middle of the Everglades. 'Brushing aside concerns from human rights watchdogs, environmentalist groups, and Tribal nations, [DHS] has greenlit the construction of this expansive detention facility that may violate detained individuals' human rights, jeopardize public and environmental health and violate federal law,' House and Senate Democrats wrote in a letter to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem dated Wednesday. The detention facility, dubbed 'Alligator Alcatraz,' opened in early July to house arrested migrants awaiting deportation. It was created through a state and federal partnership, with Florida officials leading oversight and construction, with DHS footing the bill. President Trump toured the facility when it opened, along with Noem. A federal judge last week temporarily halted expansion of the site after tribal and environmental groups filed a lawsuit over potential damage to wetlands. Located just south of Miami, Alligator Alcatraz quickly raised alarms about conditions for detainees in the hot, humid climate. Some whistleblowers have described worm-infested food, plumbing problems and other issues since its opening. 'The Everglades site was selected precisely because of its remote location and harsh surroundings, which Florida officials reportedly view as 'an ideal location to house and transport migrants,'' the Democrats wrote in their letter Wednesday. 'We ask that DHS promptly provide critical information for the American public to better understand this detention plan.' The letter was signed by more than five dozen members of Congress, led by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.). It requested that DHS respond to several questions by September 3.
