Ukraine Got a Major Battle Victory. Trump Is Not Happy.
Ukraine's drone strikes deep into Russia delivered a humiliating blow to Moscow last weekend. Kyiv's defenders celebrated the attack as a triumph of modern warfare and a warning to Russian President Vladimir Putin. But the extraordinary operation got a different response inside the White House: anger.
Donald Trump has openly vented in recent weeks about Putin's unwillingness to end the war. But since Sunday's attack, which hit a series of Russian military airfields, the president has privately expressed frustration that the strike could escalate the conflict, according to three administration officials and an outside adviser to the White House. (They spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.)
These sources told me that the drone strike has reignited the president's long-held displeasure with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and prompted a new debate in the White House about whether the United States should abandon Ukraine. Throughout the war, Trump has deemed Zelensky a 'bad guy' and a 'hothead,' the outside adviser said—someone who could be pushing the globe toward World War III. Trump privately echoed a right-wing talking point this week by criticizing Zelensky for supposedly showboating after the drone attacks; according to the adviser, Trump was impressed with the audacity of the strikes but believes that Zelensky's focus should have been on Ukraine-Russia negotiations in Istanbul.
Trump spoke with Putin yesterday, and, in a readout of the call on Truth Social, the U.S. president relayed the Kremlin's plans to strike back against Ukraine. 'We discussed the attack on Russia's docked airplanes, by Ukraine, and also various other attacks that have been taking place by both sides,' Trump wrote. 'It was a good conversation, but not a conversation that will lead to immediate Peace. President Putin did say, and very strongly, that he will have to respond to the recent attack on the airfields.'
[Read: Trump's basic misunderstanding about the war in Ukraine]
Trump did not say whether he had warned Putin against retaliating, and two of the administration officials told me that he has not decided on his next steps. Officials have presented him with options that include sanctioning Russia and reducing American aid to Ukraine. Meanwhile, Trump told aides this week that he does not believe a summit with him, Zelensky, and Putin—which he once hoped would be a way to bring the war to a close—will happen any time soon, one of the administration officials told me.
Trump, who on the campaign trail last year vowed to end the war within his first 24 hours in office, made a renewed push for a peace deal last month. Although Zelensky agreed to an immediate cease-fire, Putin rejected the offer and ratcheted up his bombing of Ukrainian cities. That led Trump to threaten to walk away from peace talks, and to flash some rare ire at Putin. The president had hoped that some progress would be made in this week's talks in Turkey, but the meeting was overshadowed by the drone strikes and went nowhere. The White House has said that the U.S. was not told in advance about the surprise attack, which was carried out by drones hidden across five of Russia's time zones that hit nuclear-capable bombers and inflicted billions of dollars in damage, according to a preliminary estimate from the White House.
Steve Bannon and other influential MAGA voices have berated Ukraine for the attack and are attempting to push Washington further from Kyiv. On his podcast this week, Bannon blamed Ukraine for, in his view, sabotaging peace talks while potentially provoking a massive response from Russia. 'Zelensky didn't give the president of the United States a heads-up to say he's going to do a deep strike into strategic forces of Russia, which is going up the escalatory ladder as quickly as you can, on the day before your meeting in Turkey?' Bannon said. 'On the eve of peace talks or cease-fire talks, he takes the Japanese role in Pearl Harbor—the sneak attack.' Bannon has conveyed similar messages to senior West Wing advisers, a fourth administration official told me.
Keith Kellogg, Trump's Ukraine envoy, warned on Fox News that 'the risk levels are going way up' because the drones struck part of Russia's 'national survival system'—its nuclear program—potentially pushing Moscow to retaliate in significant ways.
Trump has not increased aid to Ukraine since taking office again in January, and he has yet to endorse a bipartisan Senate push, led by his ally Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, to impose harsh economic penalties against Russia and countries that do business with it.
[Read: Trump hands Putin another victory]
There have been other recent signs that the White House is distancing itself from Ukraine too. Yesterday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth did not attend a meeting of 50 defense ministers at NATO headquarters in Brussels. In the past, the meeting has been an important venue for coordinating military aid for Ukraine. Hegseth was the first U.S. defense secretary to skip the event in three years. The Pentagon cited scheduling issues for his absence.
When I asked a White House spokesperson for comment about the drone strikes, she pointed me to Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt's briefing-room remarks on Tuesday, when Leavitt said that Trump 'wants this war to end at the negotiating table, and he has made that clear to both leaders, both publicly and privately.'
In public remarks about the strikes, Putin downplayed the chances of a cease-fire, asking, 'Who has negotiations with terrorists?' But Zelensky told reporters that the operation over the weekend, code-named Spider's Web, would not have been carried out if Putin had agreed to a U.S.-proposed truce. 'If there had been a cease-fire, would the operation have taken place?' Zelensky asked. 'No.'
Exasperated with the conflict, Trump continues to muse about walking away from any sort of diplomatic solution. In his Truth Social post about his call with Putin, the president seemed eager to change the subject to focus on ending a different international crisis. 'We also discussed Iran,' Trump wrote about ongoing talks regarding Tehran's nuclear ambitions. 'President Putin suggested that he will participate in the discussions with Iran and that he could, perhaps, be helpful in getting this brought to a rapid conclusion.'
Article originally published at The Atlantic

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Return to your country' Kabul tells Afghans rebuffed by Washington
The Taliban government on Saturday urged Afghans hoping to emigrate to the United States to instead return to Afghanistan, after Washington tightened entry conditions. US President Donald Trump this week announced a travel ban targeting 12 countries, including Afghanistan, which his proclamation said lacked "competent" central authorities for processing passports and vetting. Commenting on the ban on Saturday, Prime Minister Hassan Akhund urged Afghans to return to their country, saying they would be protected even if they worked with US-led forces in the two-decade fight against the Taliban insurgency. "For those who are worried that America has closed its doors to Afghans... I want to tell them, 'Return to your country, even if you have served the Americans for 20 or 30 years for their ends, and ruined the Islamic system'," he said in a speech marking the Eid al-Adha holiday, broadcast by state media. "You will not face abuse or trouble," he said, making reassurances that the Taliban Supreme Leader Hibatullah Akhundzada had "granted amnesty for all". After surging to power in 2021, Taliban authorities announced a general amnesty for Afghans who worked with the Western-backed forces and government. However, the United Nations has recorded reports of extrajudicial killings, detentions and abuses. In the past four years, the Taliban government has imposed a strict view of Islamic law and restrictions on women which the UN says amount to "gender apartheid". Afghans fled in droves to neighbouring countries during decades of conflict, but the chaotic withdrawal of US-led troops saw a new wave clamouring to escape Taliban government curbs and fears of reprisal for working with Washington. The United States has not had a working embassy in Afghanistan since 2021 and Afghans must apply for visas in third countries, principally Pakistan which has recently ramped up campaigns to expel Afghans. Since Trump returned to the White House in January, Afghans have gradually seen their chances of migrating to the United States or staying there shrink. Trump administration orders have disrupted refugee pathways and revoked legal protections temporarily shielding Afghans from deportation starting in July. qb-sw/rsc
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
TikTok influencer targeted with criticism after viral video about 'unchic' fashion choices sparks backlash
Lifestyle influencer Tara Langdale talked to Fox News Digital about how she received hurtful messages from critics after a not-so-serious fashion post describing what she views as "unchic" went viral, spawning a cascade of events that made her apolitical post a victim of attacks. The self-described stay-at-home working mom amassed some 250,000 views and found herself on the receiving end of some hate after an April 7 TikTok of her seated, drinking from a wine glass with nicely done hair, gold jewelry and manicured nails as she skimmed through a list of "unchic" fashion sins. Tattoos, Lululemon, baggy denim, camouflage and visible panty lines were just a few that made part one of Langdale's controversial "unchic" list, which drew backlash from seething critics who called her out with a political twist. "Voting for Trump is unchic," one said. Vogue Attacks Melania Trump's Official White House Portrait, Compares Her To 'Freelance Magician' "To her, privilege = chic. Hope this helps!" said another. Read On The Fox News App A third said, "just say you're a republican and go lmao," while a slew of commenters took exception to her tattoo stance and ranted about classism. The video even caught The Guardian's attention, prompting an article that coined "chic" as "a shorthand for a type of conservative-coded aesthetic" and spoke of the "rigid and airbrushed" looks of Trump allies, sch as Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. Though Langdale diddles cribe herself as conservative when speaking to Fox News Digital, she insists not everything is about politics. "When I get dressed in the morning, I'm not thinking about my political party and how I should dress to showcase that," Langdale said. "I think conservativism is more of culture, religion – all of those things go into your conservativist mindset. Now, if you're talking about conservative style of dress… that's also going to be more like religion and culture," she went on. "Of course, if I'm going to church on Sunday, I'm dressing very conservative. I'm going to keep it classy, but if you see me in the street in my regular day-to-day, I am not at all conservative. I would never consider my style to be conservative. But am I conservative? Absolutely, so I can differentiate the two. I know that the internet has a hard time doing that." Mom Living With Alopecia Reacts To Liberal Women Shaving Heads To Be 'Unattractive' After Donald Trump's Win Langdale addressed the politicized dogma, saying she doesn't understand why TikTok users jumped to conclusions about "conservative" or "Republican makeup" as they did. "Because I'm blonde, because I have more of a natural look about me, I'm not fully glammed all the time… I'm really not sure how that makes me appear conservative, but, again, I just think when people don't agree with what you say, they have to find a way to discredit you, and that's just an easy tactic," she continued. At the same time, Langdale pushed back against the idea of her video implying that people too poor to afford expensive items are automatically "unchic," and pointed to brand-name items like athletic apparel brand Lululemon, Apple Watches and Golden Goose sneakers – all of which can be pricey – as evidence pointing to the contrary. "Just keep in mind that money talks and wealth whispers, and I don't know any wealthy people that are wearing Gucci across their chest," she said in her original post. Langdale explained that the TikTok trend of users showcasing "things I find incredibly chic" grabbed her attention as they began circulating on the app. She found them "pretentious and off-putting," so she felt compelled to take her own stab at the video. New York Times Guest Essay Suggests Fashion Industry Has 'Given Up' On 'Woke' Values "Of course, my video came off as pretentious and off-putting as well, but it felt like a certain level of cringe for me, and I don't like to personally attack anybody on social media, so I wouldn't go after a specific creator. I just kind of wanted to hop on the trend… so that was my initial, 'Why I created the video.'" Langdale shared that her direct messages on the platform have been "insane" with threats and comments about her family since the video went viral. "It does make you step back and take a pause," she shared. "Like, is this really worth it for how crazy people react? And I would never want to put my family in danger, but I think a lot of it is just the keyboard pirates that are just back there behind their computer typing whatever they can to try to get more likes in the comments," Langdale article source: TikTok influencer targeted with criticism after viral video about 'unchic' fashion choices sparks backlash
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
FLASHBACK: Musk accused Trump, GOP leaders of not wanting to cut spending — here's where they said they would
Elon Musk's fiery feud with President Donald Trump spilled onto the top Republicans in Congress, where the tech billionaire questioned if their zeal to cut spending had disappeared. Musk launched into a social media assault this week against Trump's "big, beautiful bill," and accused Republicans of crafting a "disgusting abomination" full of wasteful spending. What started as a rant against the bill turned into pointed attacks against Trump, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. 'He's Not A Big Factor': Trump's Senate Allies Dismiss Elon Musk's Calls To 'Kill The Bill' The tech billionaire and former head of Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) lamented the bill as not cutting deep enough into Washington's spending addiction. The House GOP's offering, which is now being modified in the Senate, set a goal of $1.5 trillion in spending cuts. Musk set a benchmark of finding $2 trillion in waste, fraud and abuse to slash with his DOGE initiative, but fell far short, hitting only $160 billion in his four-month stint as a special government employee. Read On The Fox News App Elon Musk Warpath Against Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Rattles House Gop Still, he came with receipts, questioning whether Trump, Thune and Johnson were actually committed to making deep cuts. Below are moments from the campaign trail and recent months compiled by Fox News Digital where the trio affirmed their commitment to putting a dent in the nation's nearly $37 trillion debt. A common theme for Trump during his 2024 presidential campaign was to go after the Biden administration, and his opponent, former Vice President Kamala Harris, for "throwing billions of dollars out the window." The then-presidential candidate vowed that should he win a second term, his incoming administration would halt wasteful spending. "We will stop wasteful spending and big government special interest giveaways, and finally stand up for the American taxpayer, which hasn't happened since I was president," he said. "We stood up. Our current massive deficits will be reduced to practically nothing. Our country will be powered by growth. Our country, will be powered by growth, will pay off our debt, will have all this income coming in." Gop Senators Express 'Concerns,' 'Skepticism' Over Trump's Spending Bill After Musk Rant Thune has agreed with his colleagues in the House GOP that the tax cut package needs to achieve steep savings, and believes that the Senate GOP could take those cuts a step further. After the bill advanced from the House last month, the top Senate Republican re-upped his vow to slash federal funding. "It does everything that we set out to do. It modernizes our military, secures our border, extends tax relief and makes permanent tax relief that will lead to economic growth and better jobs in this country, and makes America energy dominant, coupled with the biggest spending reduction in American history," he said. "So those are our agenda items, and that's what we campaigned on. That's what we're going to do." Johnson had to strike a balancing act in the House to cobble together enough support behind the legislation, and struck deals and satisfied concerned lawmakers across the spectrum of the House GOP while still setting a goal of $1.5 trillion in spending cuts. Rooting out waste, fraud and abuse has been a continued mantra of the speaker and his allies. "I said this is the beginning of a process, and what you're going to see is a continuing theme of us identifying waste, fraud and abuse in government, which is our pledge of common sense, restoring common sense and fiscal sanity," Johnson said. Original article source: FLASHBACK: Musk accused Trump, GOP leaders of not wanting to cut spending — here's where they said they would