Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a professor of history at New York University and a specialist in autocracy.
She wrote recently on her blog Lucid about some of the ways that Trump is helping Putin achieved his goal of reassembling the whole USSR. Many years ago, Putin said that the collapse of the USSR was “the greatest geopolitical disaster of the 20th century.” some might have said it was World War I or Wotkd War II. Not Putin, veteran KGB agent.
Ben-Ghiat wrote:
To understand the nature and scope of this momentous shift, it helps to think like an autocrat. For this kind of leader, democratic America, with its robust economy, far-reaching infrastructure of foreign aid, immensely powerful military, and checks on foreign malign influence and corruption initiatives, is a huge problem.
Trump’s path back to power so he could take care of this distressing situation was eased by Chinese, Iranian, and Russian disinformation campaigns, which, together with U.S. Republican propaganda, helped to discredit and weaken American democracy in the eyes of the American public. Trump’s ceaseless efforts to praise foreign strongmen and his delegitimization of democratic institutions, from elections to the free press to the judiciary, also had this aim.
Trump had long ago internalized a view of geopolitics that sees democracies, and American democracy in particular, as hostile actors who deny the rights of autocracies to expand their influence in the world. When Trump suggests that President Joe Biden’s support of Ukraine’s bid to join NATO provoked Russia’s invasion, he justifies the Kremlin’s aggressions as a legitimate response to democratic meddling.
Now that Trump is back in the White House, focused on the destruction of American democracy, we can expect public collaboration with Russia to take several forms. Trump and his enablers in and outside of the GOP will produce a steady stream of performances and propaganda meant for two audiences: autocrats, especially Putin, and the millions of Americans who still need to be indoctrinated to see the world in ways that benefit Trump and his Kremlin ally.
The novel co-presidency of Trump and Elon Musk has provided a one-two punch approach to quickly launch the other two ways the U.S. will collaborate with Russia. First, by erasing or dialing back America’s global soft and hard power footprint in the world. This could mean reducing military spaces abroad that are now deterrents to autocratic aggression, or using such spaces as launching pads for pro-autocratic military engagements that the US may one day participate in.
It also means ending or scaling back humanitarian assistance programs that have created goodwill for America among global populations. Musk has jump-started this latter action by destroying USAID. The goal is to create a vacuum of American power and influence in the world that China, Russia, Turkey and other autocracies can fill.
The second form of collaboration entails the removal of barriers to the free flow of Russian influence inside America. This was supposed to be a priority of Trump’s first administration. Just months after his inauguration, Trump hosted Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergei Kislyak in the Oval Office, with only a Russian state photographer from TASS present. This told the world that the White House would be a Russian-friendly space with Trump in power, with Kremlin views of politics and the world amplified by Washington.
President Trump with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak in the Oval Office, May 10, 2017. Alexander Shcherbak/TASS/via Getty Images.
Then came the Russia investigation —a supreme annoyance made possible by the existence of democracy in America. During the recent meeting with Zelensky, Trump evoked the difficulties this investigation created for Russian capture of the United States, tellingly mentioning the toll it took on Putin–and just as tellingly, alluding to the pressures this obstruction of Putin’s plans placed on him as an ally with responsibilities to fulfill. His statement resembles the “self-criticism” Communist operatives were required to engage in when they displeased the regime.
“Let me tell you. Putin went through a hell of a lot with me,” Trump said. “He had to suffer through the Russia hoax…He went through a hell of a lot with me. He went through a phony witch hunt…It was a phony Democrat scam. He had to go through it. And he did go through it.”
This false start, and the heightened expectations for Trump to perform this time, are likely why Trump & Co. have acted so aggressively. In his first weeks in power, Trump signed orders to disband TaskForce KleptoCapture, which targeted Russian oligarchs, disband the FBI’s Foreign Influence Taskforce, and relax enforcement of the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Meanwhile, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered U.S. Cyber Command to stand down from all planning against Russia, including digital actions.
The appointment of Tulsi Gabbard, who has a history of taking positions that defend Russian interests, as Director of National Intelligence, is another indication of the will to dismantle obstructions to Russian influence inside America. The walls of the national security fortress are coming down.
In 2018, before the Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki, Trump said that he saw Russia as more of a “competitor” than an “enemy.” Seven years later, that competitor has become an ally. Whatever forms Russia-U.S. collaboration will take, more Americans will come to understand that the man they elected to “save the country” is far more interested in solving Putin’s problems than in governing America. That means wrecking American democracy at home and dismantling American power abroad.
Mona Charen was a bona fide rightwing conservative and a syndicated columnist until Trump was elected in 2016. She then became an outspoken Never-Trumper and joined her fellow disillusioned Republicans–which some no longer are–at The Bulwark. The Bulwark is consistently most interesting blog that I read, offering the views of sadder-but-wiser smart people, disillusioned by Trump. Maybe I enjoy because I was in the same place 17 years ago.
In this column, Charen takes Trump’s defenders over the coals. This is not her full column. She also took aim at Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen, who was one a staunch defender of Ukraine, but turned on a dime when he saw Trump’s disdain for Zelensky. Open the link and read it all.
She writes:
IN 2022, AFTER RUSSIAN TANKS ROLLED across an international border into Ukraine and missiles pierced the quiet of cities like Kharkiv and Kyiv, Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky earned worldwide acclaim for his courage and heroism. Famously, in response to an American offer of a safe exit, he replied “I don’t need a ride. I need ammunition.” Former President George W. Bush expressed what many were thinking when he declared that Zelensky was the “Winston Churchill of our time.”
But perhaps no one was more pro-Ukrainian than Sen. Lindsey Graham, who exulted in an arrest warrant the Russians had issued against him:
I will wear the arrest warrant issued by Putin’s corrupt and immoral government as a Badge of Honor. To know that my commitment to Ukraine has drawn the ire of Putin’s regime brings me immense joy. I will continue to stand with and for Ukraine’s freedom until every Russian soldier is expelled from Ukrainian territory.
Last Friday, after mad king Donald and his scheming viceroy, JD Vance, performed a tag-team ambush on Zelensky in the Oval Office, Graham sounded a different note. “A complete, utter disaster,” he told reporters, which is okay as far as it goes. But then it became clear that he had inverted victim and aggressor. He continued, “Somebody asked me if I was embarrassed about President Trump. I have never been more proud of the president. I was very proud of JD Vance for standing up for our country.”
Disgusting. A politician whose identity was forged as a hawk and staunch defender of liberty and democracy now praises the most powerful man in the world for sandbagging the beleaguered leader of a bleeding ally, a victim of aggression? That’s standing up for America?
There are still millions of Americans who value loyalty to the country and its values over loyalty to a party that lost all its values. Join us.Join
Ditto Marco Rubio, that gelding who has likewise transformed himself from a champion of freedom into an obedient toady to the man whose project is to destroy the Western alliance.
We live in an upside-down world where the far greater man, Zelensky, is being hounded to apologize to the gangster who behaved abominably.
Consider that even before the Oval Office debacle, Trump and his team had been grossly disrespectful and abusive toward Zelensky and Ukraine. Trump called him a “dictator” (though he declined to say as much about Putin) and lambasted him for failing to hold elections. (It is not permitted under Ukrainian law to hold elections during wartime.) He did not mention Putin’s failure to hold free elections for 25 years. Trump then repeated Putin’s propaganda that Ukraine, not Russia, had started the war. Secretary of Defense (God help us) Pete Hegseth pronounced that it would be unrealistic for Ukraine to win back its own territory. Vance told a European audience that he feared “the threat from within” far more than Russia or China. And then Trump proposed a “deal” that amounted to extortion, demanding the right to mine rare earth elements (which Trump called “raw earths”) on Ukrainian soil in return for . . . nothing. At first, Trump claimed that it was to compensate the United States for aid already donated, and though there were later iterations of the deal—all of which were blown up when Zelensky was ejected from the White House—the essential nature of the proposed agreement was clear. It was a shakedown. As Trump unguardedly admittedwhen he lost his temper, he regards Ukraine as a target for extortion because they “don’t have any cards.” Without the United States, Trump thundered, “you have nothing.”
It was the most shameful moment in American presidential history in at least a century. And while the focus of opprobrium should be on Trump and his smarmy understudy, a special shame also attaches to the explainer class of analysts who, without even the excuse of fearing voters, perform pirouettes on their principles.
AS RECENTLY AS JUNE 2023, Marc Thiessen had seen his role differently—that of guide to help MAGA types remain on side with Ukraine. He outlined an “America First Case for Supporting Ukraine,” arguing that “a Ukrainian victory would help deter China”; that a “Russian victory would further popularize the ‘decline of the West’ narrative, eroding U.S. alliances in Europe and Asia”; and that a Russian victory would “mean more nuclear states and more wars of aggression.”
But now, when the leader has pivoted, so has Thiessen.
ProPublica estimated the number of children who will die–of starvation or lack of medical care–because DOGE closed down USAID. The deaths of hundreds of thousands of children, in addition to their families, are the direct result of the shuttering foreign aid. These lives don’t matter to Trump and Musk; they are not white. Musk is a well-known pro-catalyst; he thinks women must have more babies. He himself now has 14 children, by different mothers. But he seems to care only about white babies.
Here is a portion of their report:
For weeks, some of the federal government’s foremost authorities on global health have repeatedly warned Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other leaders about the coming death toll if they carried out the Trump administration’s plan to end nearly all U.S. foreign aid around the world.
In their clearest accounting yet, top officials have estimated the casualties: One million children will not be treated for severe acute malnutrition. Up to 166,000 people will die from malaria. New cases of tuberculosis will go up by 30%. Two hundred thousand more children will be paralyzed by polio over the next decade.
Instead of acting on the repeated warnings, top administration officials, including the State Department’s director of foreign assistance, Peter Marocco, thwarted their own experts’ efforts to keep the U.S. Agency for International Development’s most vital programs up and running, according to internal memos and estimates compiled by global health leaders at the agency and obtained by ProPublica.
President Donald Trump’s political appointees, along with billionaire Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, pressed ahead with their plan to dismantle USAID by ignoring and impeding staff who tried to protect lifesaving operations — even as the administration publicly insisted that those programs remained online — according to the memos and interviews with government officials.
During exchanges outlined in one of the memos, a DOGE engineer emailed staff and said they were not allowed to review the programs they were canceling. At another point, USAID’s then-deputy chief of staff, Joel Borkert, told agency personnel to take a “draconian” approach to approving waivers.
The explosive memos — which include summaries of email exchanges and top-level meetings inside USAID, as well as internal agency research — were sent by Nicholas Enrich, acting assistant administrator for global health. ProPublica also obtained detailed breakdowns of lifesaving programs managed by the bureau and the projected impact of cutting them. Enrich was placed on leave Sunday.
Enrich told The New York Times he released the memos, which multiple other officials contributed to, after learning he was being placed on leave, as thousands of others at the agency have been. The memos were circulated to the staff and obtained by ProPublica.
The documents identify several key senior policymakers behind the scenes while also puncturing the administration’s claims of a careful, deliberative review of USAID programming. The records also represent the government’s most explicit concerns to date memorialized by a senior official from inside Trump’s administration.
The State Department, USAID and Elon Musk did not respond to questions about this story. Rubio and Marocco did not respond to a request for an interview.
Since the inauguration, Rubio, Musk and Marocco have taken dramatic steps to incapacitate USAID, the largest foreign aid donor in the world, by firing its employees and halting operations. The global health bureau was one of the first parts of the agency targeted for mass layoffs.
Then, last week, they abruptly cancelled 10,000 foreign aid projects, which account for 90% of USAID’s humanitarian operations and about half of the State Department’s. Lifesaving programs that were still operating around the world were forced to close down immediately.
How do you sleep at night, when you know that your actions were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children? And their parents?
The New York Times story that was linked in the story gave more details:
The Trump administration’s decision to withdraw foreign aid and dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development is likely to cause enormous human suffering, according to estimates by the agency itself. Among them:
up to 18 million additional cases of malaria per year, and as many as 166,000 additional deaths;
200,000 children paralyzed with polio annually, and hundreds of millions of infections;
one million children not treated for severe acute malnutrition, which is often fatal, each year;
more than 28,000 new cases of such infectious diseases as Ebola and Marburg every year.
Those stark projections were laid out in a series of memos by Nicholas Enrich, acting assistant administrator for global health at U.S.A.I.D., which were obtained by The New York Times. Mr. Enrich was placed on administrative leave on Sunday.
This was the opening of Enrich’s bold memo, as reprinted in the New York Times:
Takeaway: The temporary pause on foreign aid and delays in approving lifesaving humanitarian assistance (LHA) for global health will lead to increased death and disability, accelerate global disease spread, contribute to destabilizing fragile regions, and heightened security risks-directly endangering American national security, economic stability, and public health. If the pause leads to permanent contract terminations, the $7.7B in resources appropriated by Congress are no longer be used to support these lifesaving global health programs, which could potentially result in wasted resources. The impacts on mortality and morbidity are summarized in the tables below. While the Foreign Assistance Review is set to take place in the coming weeks, it is important to recognize that a mechanism-by-mechanism approach may overlook the broader impact of these programs across global health program areas. This includes missed opportunities to enhance efficiency and cost-effectiveness within LHA program areas.
Marco Rubio, how do you feel about the deaths of so many people? Does it trouble you? Can you look in the mirror in the morning without seeing a murderer reflected back to you?
We know that Trump and Musk don’t care. What about you, Mr. Rubio?
Julian Vasquez Heilig is a scholar of diversity, equity and inclusion. His blog is called Cloaking Inequity. He was Provost at Western Michigan State University. He recently stepped down to further his scholarship and advocacy as a professor. Julian is a founding member of the board of the Network for Public Education.
In yet another attempt to weaponize the federal government against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts in education, the U.S. Department of Education—at the urging of Moms for Liberty and other far-right extremist groups—has launched the “Stop DEI Portal” (https://enddei.ed.gov).
This taxpayer-funded snitch line is designed to invite anonymous complaints against public schools, colleges, and universities that are actively working to create inclusive and equitable environments for all students. Their goal? To stoke fear, intimidate educators, and dismantle efforts to address racial, gender, and socioeconomic inequities in education.
Let’s be clear: this is not about stopping discrimination—it’s about silencing efforts to eliminate it.
But here’s the thing: if this portal is truly meant to address discrimination, then let’s make sure it serves that purpose.
Let’s Turn the Tables: Report REAL Discrimination
If the Department of Education wants reports of discrimination, let’s give them exactly that. But let’s report real, documented cases of discrimination—the kind that actually harms students and families every single day, especially in underregulated charter and voucher-funded schools.
Here’s what they don’t want reported, but what we should be flooding their portal with:
1. Discrimination Against Students with Disabilities
• Many charter and voucher schools systematically exclude students with disabilities, either by refusing to provide necessary accommodations or pushing them out with discriminatory discipline policies.
• Special education students in voucher programs often lose their federal protections under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) when they transfer to private schools.
• Some schools refuse to admit students who require additional supports, effectively segregating students with disabilities from their peers.
📌 If you or someone you know has experienced this, report it here: https://enddei.ed.gov
2. Discrimination Against LGBTQ+ Students
• In some states, charter and private schools receiving taxpayer-funded vouchers have explicit policies that allow them to deny admission to LGBTQ+ students or expel them for their identity.
• LGBTQ+ students often face harassment, deadnaming, misgendering, and bullying—sometimes by school officials—without intervention.
• Books and curriculum that acknowledge LGBTQ+ history and experiences are being banned, erasing the existence of LGBTQ+ students and families from the classroom.
📌 If you’ve seen LGBTQ+ students being targeted or erased, report it here: https://enddei.ed.gov
3. Racial Discrimination and Segregation in Schools
• Many charter and private schools resegregate students by race and income, creating de facto segregation that mirrors the Jim Crow era.
• Black and Brown students face harsher disciplinary actions than their white peers for the same behaviors.
• AP African American Studies, ethnic studies courses, and other curriculum that acknowledges systemic racism are being banned or watered down, denying students an accurate understanding of history.
📌 If you have evidence of racial discrimination in schools, report it here: https://enddei.ed.gov
4. Discrimination Against Low-Income Students
• Voucher programs siphon public dollars away from neighborhood schools, making it harder for low-income students to access well-funded, high-quality education.
• Private voucher schools are not required to provide free or reduced-price lunch programs, effectively shutting out students who rely on school meals.
• School choice programs increase economic segregation, allowing affluent families to access better resources while leaving lower-income students in underfunded public schools.
📌 If you know of schools pushing out or underfunding low-income students, report it here: https://enddei.ed.gov
Weaponizing the Portal Against Its Own Purpose
The Stop DEI Portal is not about protecting students—it’s about political theater and furthering a radical agenda to dismantle public education.
Conservative groups like Moms for Liberty, the Heritage Foundation, and other well-funded organizations have pushed for Project 2025, a policy plan designed to eliminate federal civil rights protections, dismantle DEI initiatives, and privatize public education.
They want to create a parallel education system where only privileged, wealthy families benefit—while marginalized students are left behind.
What You Can Do Right Now
✅ Step 1: Submit REAL complaints to the Stop DEI Portal
Visit https://enddei.ed.gov and report discrimination against students with disabilities, LGBTQ+ students, students of color, and low-income students.
✅ Step 2: Share this far and wide
Encourage educators, parents, and students to flood the portal with real discrimination complaints.
✅ Step 3: Support organizations fighting back
Groups like Our Schools Our Democracy (OSOD) and the Network for Public Education (NPE) are exposing the harms of privatization and the discriminatory practices of charter and voucher schools.
✅ Step 4: Stay engaged in the fight to protect public education
The NPE/NPE Action Conference on April 5-6 in Columbus, Ohio is bringing together educators, advocates, and policymakers to discuss how to defend public schools and stop the Project 2025 playbook. I’ll be there.
There’s no time to sit on the sidelines. The Stop DEI Portal is just the beginning of a much larger battle. If we don’t fight back now, the next generation will inherit an education system built on exclusion, discrimination, and privatization.
Let’s make sure the truth is louder than deception.
Tonight, at 9 pm Eastern Time—which is to say, 5 am Wednesday Moscow Time—Co-President Trump will deliver the first State of the Union Address of the Redux. Congressional Democrats must protest this speech like the fate of the nation depends on it—because it does.
The time for traditional party politics has passed. No more “norms.” No more butter knives to gunfights. No more tone-deaf tweets. No more pathetic capitulation. No more infuriating appeals for donations from what’s left of Kamala Harris’s team. We cannot allow Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, the anonymous new DNC chair, and the husk of Joe Biden to Merrick Garland our democracy into oblivion.
The Dems must become a true opposition party. Now. Today. A true opposition party recognizes that the real enemy of the people is sitting in the Oval Office, watching a little kid wipe boogers on the Resolute Desk. Since January 20th, Trump and Co-President Elon Musk have quickly consolidated power, causing all sorts of chaos and pain. This will continue until they have transformed this country into the Russian-style oligarchy of their despotic dreams.
They. Want. To. Hurt. Us. And we must stop them. All of us.
The nation is in urgent need of Washington generals—and not the kind who get beat up every night by the Harlem Globetrotters. Kamala Harris must snap out of her post-election funk and reboot the Joyous Warrior. Barack Obama must step away from his Hollywood party circuit and get his manicured hands dirty; Michelle Obama hates this crap, and I don’t blame her, but we need her help now. George W. Bush needs to put down the paintbrush and take up the mantle. Bill and Hillary need to come to the front. Mitt Romney? This ain’t the moment for dressage. Step away from your Dutch warmblood, mount the Warhorse, and ride in with the cavalry.
Since Election Day, the Democrats as a party have been rudderless, weak, and frustratingly out of touch. Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, and the party leadership have been slow to recognize the threat. Hint: look at what Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Jasmine Crockett have been doing, and do that! Or better yet, step down and put them in charge! If the Dems can’t sort this out, and fast, to hell with them. If we have to galvanize behind Liz Cheney, fine, great, let’s do it. We can bicker about policy positions and party planks after the dragon is slain. Right now, we need a leader who isn’t a pusillanimous piece of shit.
On Monday, AOC asked:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez @aoc.bsky.social
If you were in Congress, what would you do for the State of the Union? What do you think Dems should do?
All members of Congress who oppose Trump—Democrats, Independents, and whatever Republicans haven’t capitulated—should come to the Capitol at the appointed time. They should have with them a laminated print of that infamous photo from Helsinki, where Trump follows behind Putin subserviently. They should tape the photo to the back of the chair. And as soon as Trump begins to speak, they should all walk noisily out, so that the cameras pan to empty chairs and scores of copies of that embarrassing photo. I wouldn’t object to a crisp “Pu-tin sucks!” chant.
Then, every member of Congress who opposes Trump should repair to his or her office and do a livestream, giving the same speech: a real State of the Union (or State of the Oblast, as it were). This way, every single opposition leader is doing must-see counter-programming simultaneously, to drown out Donald’s hateful lies.
This is what I think they should say:
My fellow Americans, good evening.
What is the state of the Union? Co-President Donald Trump will tell you the state of the Union is strong, but he’s lying, as usual.
Unlike Trump, I’m not going to lie to you. The state of the Union is precarious. It’s precarious and it’s perilous. We are hanging on by a thread. Our democracy is on life support—and Co-President Elon Musk wants to pull the plug and call it “efficiency.”
The Trump/Musk agenda represents a clear and present danger to the people of this country. This threat transcends party politics—like 9/11, like the JFK assassination, like Pearl Harbor. I am speaking to you now not as a Democrat, but as a member of the opposition.
I oppose cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.
I oppose the suicidal tariff war Donald has begun with our neighbors, Canada and Mexico.
I oppose the country descending into dictatorship.
I oppose an unelected, unconfirmed South African weirdo—who can’t be bothered to take off his baseball cap while presiding at their first Cabinet meeting—being granted godlike powers to cut funding, kill programs, and fire hardworking Americans—all at the whim of some half-ass algorithm slapped together by the teenage boys who comprise the workforce at the illegal shadow operation he calls DOGE.
I oppose rudeness, cruelty, and lack of respect.
Above all, I oppose the new world order Donald and Elon have created, where they do whatever they can to help that butcher and war criminal, Vladimir Putin.
My fellow Americans, this is the greatest country on earth—the greatest country that ever existed. And I refuse to allow the United States of America to turn into a vassal state of the Russian Empire. The occupant of the White House should be the Leader of the Free World, not some third-rate tyrant’s sidekick.
Donald has consistently denied his long ties to the Kremlin. “Russia Russia Russia,” he says mockingly, whenever some new revelation comes out about something involving him and Moscow. He has ridiculed anyone who suggests he is Putin’s puppet—as Hillary Clinton did, you may recall, in that debate back in 2016, right around the time the U.S. Intelligence Community warned that the Kremlin was attempting to interfere in the election on Trump’s behalf. Later, in Helsinki, Trump would side with Putin over our intelligence professionals!
He claims the Mueller investigation was a “witch hunt.” Same with Volume 5 of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s Report on Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election. Even Marco Rubio, Trump’s groveling Secretary of State, signed off on that, admitting the Trump/Russia relationship. It wasn’t a witch hunt, you see. Donald doeshave lots of ties to the Kremlin. And, as he made abundantly clear in Friday’s Oval Office debacle, he is indeed Putin’s puppet.
Putin’s puppet: That sounds like the sort of insult Donald likes to hurl as his opponents, but I don’t mean it as an insult. I mean it as a statement of fact. Trump has thrown in with Putin. He has taken up Moscow’s position regarding the invasion of Ukraine. He has parroted Kremlin talking points about President Zelenskyy.
You don’t have to believe me; you can look it up yourself. This is why so many people were so upset about the abhorrent way Donald and JD behaved at that meeting. People know: that’s not how American leaders are supposed to act!
On Friday, Donald told President Zelenskyy that he didn’t have the cards to play. When he said that, he put his own cards on the table. And now, incredibly, the United States of America is overtly, eagerly sucking up to Moscow. Why? So Co-President Elon Musk and the other new American oligarchs can make even more money—by stealing it from you and me.
Putin regards the United States as an enemy of Russia—as he should. Because he’s certainly our enemy—even if a lot of Americans haven’t quite realized it.
We are now finding out what it means when the President and Co-President are Putin’s puppets. Donald and Elon are charting the course the Kremlin wants for America. They want us broke. They want us sick. They want us stupid. They want us fighting each other. And they want us to leave the rest of the world alone.
Over the first two months of his second term, Donald and Co-President Musk have worked hard to give their whoremaster Vladimir Putin what he wants. So has Speaker Johnson, most of the Republicans in Congress, and the entire Trump Cabinet.
Let me explain what that means, in real terms.
They want us broke. That means they want a recession, a depression, economic tumult. They want mass unemployment. They want the stock market to collapse. They want us to go broke struggling to pay our bills. Have you read the contents of the austerity budget Speaker Johnson wants to pass? Trump and Musk will cut $2 trillion from things like Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, and other social welfare programs that Americans of allpolitical persuasions depend on. This will be to pay for tax cuts—which aren’t really tax cuts, because the American oligarch class doesn’t pay taxes like you and me. This is going to be mass theft on the grandest possible scale. This is stealing. You’ve heard of robbing Peter to pay Paul? This is robbing Grandma to pay Elon. The result of this will be financial hardship for most Americans—just what Putin wants.
They want us sick. There is a measles epidemic now in Texas. It’s spreading. This is the result of a massive, decades-old Kremlin disinformation campaign around vaccines. RFK, Jr., who has done more to push this Kremlin lie than any other person on earth, is now in charge of our national health systems. He’s antivax. You know who isn’t antivax? Putin. Putin and Rupert Murdoch, who owns Fox News and the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal, love their vaccines. Rupert was one of the first people on earth to get the covid vaccine. They know vaccines work—but they want you to think they don’t. RFK also wants to cut funding for cancer research and pandemic preparedness. He wants to get rid of SSRIs, which are incredible drugs that help millions of Americans who struggle with their mental health. Why? Because RFK’s job is to make us all sick—which is what Putin wants.
They want us stupid. Donald put the Department of Education in the hands of the head of a professional wrestling organization. Let me say that again: Donald put the Department of Education in the hands of the head of a professional wrestling organization. And she’s going to cut funding, if not kill the department entirely. They say they want to empower the states to decide how our children are being educated, but that’s just the cover story. All this will do is make our schools exponentially worse. Which is what Putin wants—it doesn’t help Russia if Americans are inventing things, and bringing new technology to the world.
They want us fighting each other, and they want us isolated from the rest of the world. Pete Hegseth, the drunken Fox News host who is somehow our Secretary of Defense, ordered Cyber Command to stand down its defenses against Russia. Why would he do that, if not to please Putin? Tulsi Gabbard ordered mass firings at the NSA, our largest and most important intelligence gathering agency. Why would she do that, if not to please Putin? JD Vance, the pompous imbecile who is a heartbeat away from the presidency, is on an anti-diplomacy tour, insulting all of our longtime allies—the leaders of Western democracies. Why would he do that, if not to please Putin?
This is what it looks like when a Kremlin puppet dictator is in the White House. This is why Hillary Clinton, and James Comey, and James Clapper, and Christopher Steele, and Pete Strzok, and Adam Schiff, and Nancy Pelosi, and Bob Mueller, and Jack Smith worked so hard to expose Donald Trump for what he is.
The message failed. The warning was ignored. And what is happening now, right now, is the result. The chaos, the cruelty, the ignorance, the rudeness, the lack of fundamental human decency, the fear and dread—that is the result.
We have Putin puppets in charge of our country. We are being led by full-on traitors: Donald Trump and Elon Musk, JD Vance and Mike Johnson.
None of those people care about you or your family; if they did, they would occasionally do something to help you. None of them care about what’s good for the United States; if they did, they wouldn’t be trying to burn it down. And none of them care about democracy; if they did, they would not be establishing a Trump/Musk dictatorship, modeled on the philosophy of the Unabomber. I’m not kidding—read the Unabomber Manifesto!
Maybe you think I’m crazy. Maybe you don’t believe me. Maybe you think I’m just trying to score cheap political points. Sooner or later—sooner, probably—it will become obvious to even the most zealous Trump supporter: Change is coming, my friends, and unless you’re one of the new oligarchs, you’re not going to like it.
Ignore me at your peril. Peril. Peril.
The state of the Union is perilous. And we must recognize the threat, and oppose it with every fiber of our beings, and with every means at our disposal. If we don’t, we will dishonor the memory of Abraham Lincoln. If we don’t, a government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall indeed perish from the earth.
God bless you, and God save America.
…or something to that effect. These motherfuckers have all but announced their plans to steal our Social Security. If you can’t message on that, hang up the spikes.
Or, if the Dems can’t manage something so sophisticated, offer an alternate broadcast—Manning Cam, but for the State of the Union. Have AOC and Jasmine live-stream themselves watching the SOTU, so they can fact-check and mock Donald while he’s speaking. I would certainly watch that.
And as for the rest of us? The course is clear: DON’T WATCH THE SOTU. Deny Donald the ratings he desperately craves.
If the Dems don’t offer suitable counter-programming, I’ve set my State of the Oblast speech to run tonight at 9 pm ET:
Or, if you prefer to ignore the whole shit-show—I don’t blame you!—turn on the telly and flip to TNT, where there’s an NBA doubleheader beginning at 7:30: First, Steph Curry and the Golden State Warriors are at Madison Square Garden to take on Jalen Brunson and the New York Knicks. (Go, New York, go, New York, go!) And then, the L.A. Clippers are in Phoenix to play Kevin Durant and the Suns. Remember: keeping the television tuned to a different station hurts Donald’s precious ratings.
There it is. Those are my proposals.
And if we see clips of Jeffries and Schumer and the others just sitting there as Trump rants and raves, looking solemn, clapping softly, normalizing the fascist takeover, we know damned well what that means: craven, cowardly, poltroonish surrender, of the most shameful kind, before the fight has even really begun.
Then we’ll know for sure the Democrats, like the Republicans, are dead as a political party.
Ukrainian President Zelensky offered a path to peace, trying to mend the rupture with the U.S. He rejected the previous deal presented by Trump because it was negotiated by the U.S. and Russia, without the participation of Ukraine, and it contained no security guarantees, no protection for Ukraine if Putin decided to renew the war.
President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine on Tuesday offered a course of action that he said could end the war, while trying to assure the Trump administration that his government was dedicated to peace.
“Our meeting in Washington, at the White House on Friday, did not go the way it was supposed to be,” Mr. Zelensky wrote on X. “It is regrettable that it happened this way. It is time to make things right.”
The Ukrainian leader said he was ready to release Russian prisoners of war, stop long-range drone and missile strikes aimed at Russian targets, and declare a truce at sea immediately — moves that he said would help establish a pathway to peace.
Only, however, “if Russia will do the same,” he added.
Mr. Zelensky’s proposal seemed clearly designed to shift the burden for ending the war onto Russia, which launched its invasion three years ago. The White House has claimed that the Ukrainian leader is the main obstacle to peace.
In his post, Mr. Zelensky offered effusive praise for American support, noting specifically “the moment when things changed when President Trump provided Ukraine with Javelins.”
“We are grateful for this,” he wrote. “Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer,” he added. “My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts.”
There was no immediate reaction from the Kremlin to Mr. Zelensky’s proposal. Despite the ferocity of the fighting, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia has shown a willingness to do side deals with Ukraine. The two countries have conducted numerous prisoner-of-war exchanges, and Russia and Ukraine had been set to participate in talks in Qatar last August about halting strikes on each other’s energy infrastructure. Moscow pulled out of the meeting after Ukraine’s incursion into Russia’s Kursk region.
In recent weeks, however, Mr. Putin has offered no hint of being willing to de-escalate the war before winning major concessions from the West and Ukraine — like ruling out Ukrainian NATO membership, reducing the alliance’s footprint in Europe, limiting the size of Ukraine’s military, and giving Russia influence over Ukraine’s domestic politics.
“There is no evidence that Russia would be prepared to accept a deal, and what that would be,” said Malcolm Chalmers, deputy director general of the Royal United Services Institute, a research group in London. He said the decision by the United States to pause military aid would only encourage Putin to ask for more — including Ukrainian demilitarization and neutrality.”
Mr. Zelensky sought to strike a careful balance in his statement. Aware of Mr. Trump’s stated desire to get a quick deal, he said Ukraine was “ready to work fast to end the war.”
At the same time, he suggested a staged process, similar to an idea raised by the French government, that could start immediately.
“We are ready to work fast to end the war, and the first stages could be the release of prisoners and truce in the sky — ban on missiles, long-ranged drones, bombs on energy and other civilian infrastructure — and truce in the sea immediately, if Russia will do the same,” he wrote. “Then we want to move very fast through all next stages and to work with the US to agree a strong final deal.”
The article goes on to expressions of dismay by Ukrainians who are disappointed that it was their strongest ally, the U.S., that betrayed them.
During his Senate confirmation hearings, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. tried to downplay his decades-long reputation as an opponent of vaccines. He even persuaded a Republican physician, Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, that he would be guided by science, not his ideology. Why Senators believe nominees who try to disown their past is a mystery.
Dr. Paul Offit is a pediatrician who specializes in communicable diseases, vaccine research, and immunology. He teaches at the University of Pennsylvania. In this piece, he chastises RFK Jr. for his indifference to the death of a child because of his failure to get vaccinated.
On February 26, 2025, a school-aged child in West Texas died from measles. This marked the first child death in the US from the disease since 2003. The death was part of a larger outbreak in this Mennonite community that included 146 people, 20 of whom were hospitalized. The outbreak wasn’t an isolated event. Additional cases of measles had been reported in Alaska, California, Georgia, Kentucky, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York City, and Rhode Island. Measles is a winter-spring disease. We still have at least three months to go before the end of a typical measles season.
At a White House meeting on February 27th, the newly installed Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., responded to the events in Texas. Failing to immediately acknowledge the tragedy of a preventable death, he said that “measles outbreaks are not unusual” and that they happen every year. In truth, measles had been eliminated from the United States by 2000. At that time, due to a high level of population immunity, the virus wasn’t transmitted from one American child to another even after people with measles from other countries entered the United States. Unfortunately, owing to unfounded fears about measles vaccine safety, a critical percentage of parents have now chosen not to vaccinate their children, dropping immunization rates below the level required for herd immunity.
RFK Jr. also tried to dismiss the nearly two dozen hospitalizations in West Texas by claiming that they were “mainly for quarantine,” when in fact children were hospitalized for severe measles pneumonia. RFK Jr. apparently doesn’t understand that children exposed to measles are quarantined at home, not in the hospital. Indeed, the last place you would want to quarantine a child would be in a hospital filled with a vulnerable population of children, many of whom are particularly susceptible to the disease.
RFK Jr.’s dismissal of the Texas outbreak as “nothing to see here” was even more disheartening in that perhaps no one has contributed more to the perception that the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine is dangerous than him. For 20 years, he and his organization, Children’s Health Defense, has claimed that the MMR vaccine causes autismdespite studies showing that it doesn’t.
The West Texas measles outbreak wasn’t RFK Jr.’s first experience with a Mennonite community. On July 31, 2021, in the middle of the Covid pandemic, RFK Jr. stood in front of 1,500 people in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, home to one of the largest Mennonite communities in the United States, and talked about his experiences with measles as a child. The transcript from his talk later surfaced:
He said that “the cure for measles is chicken soup and vitamin A.” In other words, measles is no big deal. Two years earlier, RFK Jr. had traveled to Samoa before an outbreak of measles that had caused 5,600 cases and 83 deaths, mostly in children less than four years old. Despite this experience, he was still capable of dismissing the disease as a trivial, harmless infection of children.
RFK Jr.’s comments at the White House the day after the measles death were most remarkable for what he didn’t say. He didn’t say that the death was especially tragic because it was entirely preventable. And he didn’t say loudly and clearly that under-vaccinated communities in the United States needed to get vaccinated to avoid a similar tragedy. And that they needed to do it soon. This wasn’t surprising. For RFK Jr. to have spoken forcefully about the importance of vaccines in the face of a growing epidemic would have gone against everything that he had said and done for the last 20 years.
Anti-vaccine activists don’t change their stripes. Even when they’re given the enormous responsibility of protecting the nation’s children.
Elon Musk’s hatchet kids have been at work at the Social Security Administration, firing people, terminating leases. Democrats are worried that service will deteriorate, which will encourage Republicans to call for privatization. As we well know, privatization means some huge corporation must make a profit, so workers will be paid less and services will deteriorate.
The Social Security Administration in recent days has initiated a flurry of actions aimed at decimating its workforce and that Democrats warn are an effort to sabotage the agency and prepare to privatize its functions.
After a rash of abrupt retirements of senior leadersacross the agency last week, the agency on Friday confirmed that it is seeking to shed 7,000 employees, which would bring its workforce down to 50,000 people. Last fall, the agency hit a 50-year staffing low after congressional Republicans refused to agree to append the agency’s funding to account for fixed cost increases as part of a continuing resolution to keep agencies open.
With that came an announcement that the agency will consolidate its current 10 regional offices down to four, as well as reorganize headquarters. And Elon Musk’s DOGE operatives have cancelled the leases for 45 field offices across the country, as well as the Office of Hearings Operations in White Plains, N.Y.
Story Continues Below Sponsor Message
null
And though the agency’s frontline workforce had previously been spared from most of the Trump administration’s early workforce initiatives, including the deferred resignation program, early retirement offers and the purge of recently hired, promoted or transferred federal workers, on Friday leadership said all agency employees are eligible for Voluntary Early Retirement Authority or Voluntary Separation Incentive Payments, provided they have served long enough to qualify.
Further adding to the confusion was an agency-wide announcement Monday that all non-bargaining unit employees must cease teleworking and commute five days per week beginning Wednesday.
“We understand that this transition will require an adjustment to employee work/life arrangements,” the agency wrote. “Supervisors should be liberal with the approval of leave over the next four weeks to accommodate the changes.”
In a rambling message to employees obtained by Government Executive, Acting Commissioner Leland Dudek suggested the rapid changes were actually the fault of the previous administration….
At a press conference Monday, Senate Democrats accused the administration and Musk of sabotaging the agency as the first step in an effort to strip Americans of their earned benefits and sell off the agency’s functions to private industry.
“If you take the system today, with these superb statistics that 99.7% of retirement benefits are paid accurately and on-time, and you start hollowing it out, which is essentially what they’re doing, and then they’ll say, ‘Oh my goodness, we need the private sector here, or we won’t have a program,’” said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. “This is kind of the history of these kinds of efforts. It’s a prelude to privatization.”
Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., called Trump and Musk’s actions at SSA as akin to “taking a wrecking ball” to the agency and its services.
The Americans claim that their attempt to humiliate the Ukrainian president in the White House yesterday was about peace. On that premise, nothing they said makes any sense.
The attempted mugging of a visiting president was about the world war that Elon Musk, Donald Trump, and JD Vance have chosen. If we attend to what Vance and Trump said yesterday, we can work our way to the unreason of American policy, and to the chaos that will follow.
JD Vance opened hostilities against Volodymr Zelens’kyi with a claim about negotiations with Russia, treating them as a formula that will magically end the war. Zelens’kyi had said, calmly and correctly, that negotiations with Russia have been tried before and have not worked. The Russians have betrayed every truce and every ceasefire since their first invasion in 2014. And that first invasion of course violated a number of treaties between Ukraine and Russia, as well as the basic principles of international law. Zelens’kyi ran for president in 2019 as the peace candidate, promising to negotiate with Putin to end what was then a war that had been ongoing for five years. Russia did not respond to these overtures, except with contempt, and then with the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
During and after the Oval Office meeting yesterday, Americans suggested that all that had happen was a unilateral Ukrainian ceasefire, and that then the end of the war would automatically follow. Americans indicated that Zelens’kyi was too stupid to understand this. Zelens’kyi’s quite reasonable point was that a ceasefire would have to be followed by efforts to strengthen Ukraine, or the war would simply start again. The evidence is on his side. Even during Trump’s ostensible peace campaign these last six weeks, Russian authorities have never said that they would end the war. The Russians keep committing war crimes every day. Yesterday Russia was attacking hospitals in Kharkiv. The Russians have only said that they would talk to Americans, which is not the same thing as agreeing to take part in a peace process. From the Russian perspective, a ceasefire is an opportunity to halt external support for Ukraine and demobilize the Ukrainian army, preparatory to the next attack. Even were this not obvious from Russian statements and actions, no responsible Ukrainian leader could simply accept the American premise that a ceasefire itself is all that is necessary, or simply take Americans at their word that all would be well afterwards.
After yesterday’s confrontation in the Oval Office, Trump made clear just how unstrategic the American approach had been. He claimed that the real problem had been that Zelens’kyi had wanted to speak about Putin. Russia, of course, is the aggressor. It does not make sense to demand that the country under attack cease to defend itself, and to pretend that this in itself will bring peace. Had the United States under Trump been interested in peace in Ukraine, American power would have been engaged to deter Russia from continuing the war. There was never any meaningful sign of a willingness to do this, and certainly no new American policy, under Trump, to do this. On the contrary, the United States lifted Russia from its international isolation and accepted in advance most Russian demands. But even had that not been the case, the American position would have been illogical. During an ongoing war of aggression, the aggressor cannot simply be humored, as Trump proposes, during a process that aims at peace.
In the emotion of the White House, however, it was evident that the situation was psychological rather than strategic. In Zelens’kyi’s presence, Trump confessed his fundamental sympathy for Putin. In Trump’s view, he and Putin “had gone through a lot together.” The grievance on display here was so capacious that not everyone could grasp what Trump meant. Trump said that he had been the victim of a “hoax,” because people thought that Putin assisted Trump’s presidential campaigns. But Putin, Trump claimed, rather extraordinarily, was also the victim of the “hoax.” And indeed, according to Trump, this had been a very meaningful bonding experience between the two men. This casts some light on the one of the regular conversations between Putin and Trump these last few years. It reflects, though, an emotional commitment based upon a carefully curated unreality. There was, of course, no hoax. Putin supported Trump in all three of his presidential campaigns, right down to Russian bomb threats against predominantly Democratic districts last election day. But the emotional connection between the two men, as Trump revealed, real. For Trump, the imagined wound of ego to his friend Putin was the pertinent reality. The real wounds that real Russians have inflicted on real Ukrainians are not.
In the White House, Zelens’kyi asked Vance whether he had ever been to Ukraine, which is a reasonable question. Vance had issued one of his typically ex cathedra pronouncements. He speaks with great confidence about the war, telling security experts and Ukrainians alike that he is “right” and they are “wrong.” Indeed, one of the most striking moments yesterday was Vance yelling at Zelens’kyi that Zelens’kyi is “wrong.” Vance makes judgements on the basis of numbers, without any knowledge of how the battlefield looks or works. He also ignores the human factor, treating war as a math problem in which big numbers always win — which, as a historical matter, is mistaken. Did the numerically stronger side win the Revolutionary War? Since 1945, it has been normal for the smaller, colonized country to defeat the larger, colonizing power. Vance’s analysis also evades responsibility, as though it does not matter which side the United States took. Where his arrogance leads is the path he has in fact taken: the country that he personally thinks is stronger should win the war because that is what he thinks; if this is not happening, American power should be added to the side that he believes should be winning: Russia. His actions yesterday certainly furthered such a goal.
Also telling was the way Vance responded to Zelens’kyi’s question. Vance took the position that it was better to look at the internet than to learn things in person. He started with the weird idea that Zelens’kyi was to blame for Vance’s failure to visit Ukraine, because Zelens’kyi just took people on “propaganda tours.” This is very illogical. It is true that Ukrainian governments accompany foreign visitors to killing sites, especially Bucha. No doubt those visits have an effect on people. But the mass killing at Bucha did in fact take place. When Vance attaches “propaganda” to the custom of visiting it, he falls painfully close to the Russian claim that the mass killing did not happen at all, and that the signs of it were staged. Because Bucha is a Kyiv suburb, and so relatively accessible for foreign delegations, it serves as a representative example of what are, sadly, many similar cases of the mass shootings of civilians. And that war crime, the mass killing of civilians, has in its turn to stand for many others, including torture, rape, and the kidnaping of children. Had Vance decided to go to Ukraine, he could have visited Bucha with or without Ukrainians, as he preferred. He could also have talked to people in Kyiv, or indeed ventured beyond, to other cities. He could have spoken to soldiers and officers in the Ukrainian armed forces. Nothing stopped him from doing so. He was, after all, a United States Senator, and then the Vice-President of the United States. He could have planned the journey as he liked, and others would have made the arrangements for him.
There is a reason that Vance will not go to Ukraine. He is an online person. Last year at the Munich Security Conference, he refused to meet Zelens’kyi, on the justification that he knew everything he needed to know already. Then he spent time on the internet in his hotel room and posted about certain adolescent concerns. This year at the Munich Security Conference it was made known that Vance would only see Zelens’kyi if the Ukrainians first signed a deed ceding much of the Ukrainian economy to the United States in exchange for nothing. When did meet Zelens’kyi, he did so surrounded by others. In the White House, yesterday, he broadcast the same fear of confronting something real. Yelling across the room to a visiting guest that “you’re wrong, you’re wrong” is not a sign of confidence or wisdom. Vance takes the safe course of dismissing other people rather than admitting that he might have something to learn. More important than visiting Ukraine, said Vance in the White House, was “seeing stories.” It is better to take in information, as he has said, from his own “sources,” those that confirm what he already thinks, than actually engaging with another country or with its people. Vance’s “sources” have led him to repeat claims that originated very specifically as Russian propaganda and have been documented as such, for example the an entirely untrue claim that American aid goes to pay for yachts. Vance helped to spread this lie.
Kharkiv under Russian bombing, March 2022.
Perhaps sensing the awkwardness of his position, Vance then shifted to yelling at Zelens’kyi that he needed to thank President Trump. Zelens’kyi obsessively thanks American and other foreign leaders for their support of Ukraine. He did so during this visit to the United States as well. What Vance seemed to mean is that Zelens’kyi needed to express his thanks then and there, whenever Vance wanted, indeed right at the moment when Vance was yelling at him, and because Vance was yelling at him. Vance was demanding that Zelens’kyi thank Trump for aid that the Biden administration gave to Ukraine, and which the Trump people were threatening to take away — and indeed at that point had almost certainly already decided to take away. The Trump policy to Ukraine, as of yesterday, was something like the following: meet with Russia without Ukraine; concede to every significant Russian demand in advance of any Russian concession and without asking Ukrainians; claim that Russia and Ukraine were jointly responsible for the war; refer to Zelens’kyi as a dictator without condemning Putin; vastly overstate the extend of previous American aid; claim Ukrainian resources as compensation for that aid. In this setting, the compulsive demand for ceaseless gratitude on demand is not only unreasonable: it shifts into the abuser’s need to be portrayed by the victim as the great benefactor.
Even the press mockery of Zelens’kyi’s clothing, perhaps the depths of yesterday’s grotesquerie, reveals a similar disconnect from what is actually happening in the world. The implicit notion is that the people who wear suits and ties are the real heroes, because heroism consists, somehow, in always knowing how to adapt to the larger power structure and to blend it. But in history there do arrive moments when unexpected things happen and behaviors, including symbolic ones, must be adjusted. Zelens’kyi decided three years ago not to wear suits not, as was insultingly suggested yesterday, because he does not own one; and not, as was ridiculously suggested, because he does not understand protocol. Three years ago he decided that he would dress as appropriate to register solidarity with a people at war, his own people at war. This is, frankly, something that Americans should already know, rather than an appropriate subject for a question at the White House, let alone a mocking one. But it is the mockery itself that reveals an American illogic, or worse. Some Americans want to think that the most important thing is conformity, that sneering at human difference shows our own courage. Once we knew better. When Ben Franklin went to the French to ask for support during the Revolutionary War, he wore a coonskin cap, which was not comme il fallait. When Winston Churchill visited the White House during the Second World War, he wore a wartime outfit that not unlike the one that Zelens’kyi wore yesterday.
Trump similarly derided human courage when he demanded that Zelens’kyi accept that Ukraine would have immediately collapsed without American arms. That makes the Americans the heroes and Ukrainians the ones who must thank Americans on demand. It is true, of course, that American weapons have been very important, and that Ukrainians will now suffer from Trump’s decision to shift American power to the Russian side of the war. But all the weapons that had been delivered by February 2022, by both the first Trump and then the Biden administrations, were obviously insufficient for the kind of full-scale land invasion that Russia mounted. The Ukrainians got weapons after February 2022 precisely because they resisted anyway.
Almost all Americans believed when the full-scale invasion began that Ukraine would immediately collapse under Russian might, and that Zelens’kyi would flee the country. But he did not. His physical courage in remaining in Kyiv, an echo of the physical courage shown by millions of Ukrainians, changed the overall situation. Because Ukrainians resisted, western arms began to flow. The courage of Ukrainians made possible an American and European policy to hold back Russian aggression. That same Zelens’kyi, the man who was brave enough to stay and lead his country when the Russians were approaching the capital and the assassination squads were already there, was yesterday made the subject of a public attempt at humiliation by Americans. No doubt Ukrainians should express their thanks to Americans. As they do. But it is illogical, to say the least, for Americans not to thank Ukrainians, or to treat their courageous president as an object of contempt. The coercive ritual of gratitude hides from Americans the basic reality of what has happened these last three years.
During this war, Ukraine has delivered to the United States strategic gains that the United States could not have achieved on its own. Ukrainian resistance gave hope to people defending democracies around the world. Ukrainian soldiers were defending the basic principle of international law, which is that states are sovereign and that borders should not be changed by aggression. Ukraine in effect fulfilled the entire NATO mission, absorbing a full-scale Russian attack essentially on its own. It has deterred Chinese aggression over Taiwan, by showing how difficult offensive operations can be. It has slowed the spread of nuclear weapons, by proving that a conventional power can resist a nuclear power in a conventional war. Throughout the war, Russia has threatened to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine, and the Ukrainians have resisted the nuclear bluff. Should they be allowed to be defeated, nuclear weapons will spread around the world, both to those who wish to bluff with them, and those who will need them to resist the bluff.
Yesterday Vance and Trump repeated familiar Russian propaganda. One example was Trump’s claim that it was the Ukrainians who, by resisting Russia, were risking “World War Three.” The truth is exactly the opposite. By abandoning Ukraine, Trump is risking a terrible escalation and, indeed, a world war. Everything that Ukraine has done these last three years can be reversed. Now that the Trump administration has chosen to throw American power to Russia’s side, Russia could indeed win the war. (This was always Russia’s only chance, as the Russians themselves well knew, and openly said.) In this scenario of an American-backed Russian victory, opened yesterday by American choices in the American capital, the horrible losses extend far beyond Ukraine. Zelens’kyi quite sensibly made the point that the consequences of the war could extend to Americans. This was, in a sense, overly modest: Ukrainian resistance has thus far spared Americans such consequences. He said so very gently, and was yelled at for it — which is itself quite telling. The Americans have a sense of what they are unleashing upon the world by allying with Russia, and they made noise to disguise that.
The expansion of Russian power in Ukraine would mean more killing, more rape, more torture, more kidnaping of children inside Ukraine. But it would also mean that all of the strategic gains become strategic losses. Russia, rather than being prevented by Ukraine from fighting other wars, is encouraged to start new ones. China, rather than seeing an effective coalition to halt aggression, is emboldened to start wars. American endorsement of wars of aggression leads to global chaos. And everyone who can builds nuclear weapons. That is an actual scenario for a third world war, authored by the people who scripted yesterday’s attempted mugging in the White House.
If one starts from the premise that the United States was engaged in a peace process, then what we saw Americans do yesterday makes no sense. The same goes if we begin from the assumption that present American leadership is concerned about peace generally, or cares about American interests as such. But it is not hard to see another logic in which yesterday’s outrages do come into focus.
It would go like this: It has been the policy of Musk-Trump from the beginning to build an alliance with Russia. The notion that there should be a peace process regarding Ukraine was simply a pretext to begin relations with Russia. That would be consistent with all of the publicly available facts. Blaming Ukraine for the failure of a process that never existed then becomes the pretext to extend the American relationship with Russia. The Trump administration, in other words, ukrainewashed a rapprochement with Russia that was always its main goal. It climbed over the backs of a bloodied but hopeful people to reach the man that ordered their suffering. Yelling at the Ukrainian president was most likely the theatrical climax to a Putinist maneuver that was in the works all along.
This, of course, might also seem illogical, and at an even higher level. The current American alliance system is based upon eighty years of trust and a network of reliable relationships, including friendships. Supporting Russia against Ukraine is an element of trading those alliances for an alliance with Russia. The main way that Russia engages the United States is through constant attempts to destabilize American society, for example through unceasing cyberwar. (It is telling that yesterday the news also broke that the United States has lowered its guard against Russian cyber attacks.) Russian television is full of fantasies of the destruction of the United States. Why would one turn friends into rivals and pretend that a rival is a friend? The economies of American’s present allies are at least twenty times larger than the Russian economy. And Russian trade was never very important to the United States. Why would one fight trade wars with the prosperous friends in exchange for access to an essentially irrelevant market? The answer might be that the alliance with Russia is preferred for reasons that have nothing to do with American interests.
In the White House yesterday, those who wished to be seen as strong tried to intimidate those they regarded as weak. Human courage in defense of freedom was demeaned in the service of a Russian fascist regime. American state power was shifted from the defense of the victim to the support of the aggressor. All of this took place in a climate of unreason, in which actual people and their experiences were cast aside, in favor of a world in which he who attacks is always right. Knowledge of war was replaced by internet tropes, internalized to the point that they feel like knowledge, a feeling that has to be reinforced by yelling at those who have actually lived a life beyond social media. A friendship between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, a masculine bond of insecurity arising from things that never happened, became more important than the lives of Ukrainians or the stature of America.
There was a logic to what happened yesterday, but it was the logic of throwing away all reason, yielding to all impulse, betraying all decency, and embracing the worst in oneself on order to bring out the worst in the world. Perhaps Musk, Trump, and Vance will personally feel better amidst American decline, Russian violence, and global chaos. Perhaps they will find it profitable. This is not much consolation for the rest of us.
Thinking about… is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
If you are thinking today about how to help Ukrainians, here are some possibilities: Come Back Alive, a Ukrainian NGO that supports soldiers on the battlefield and veterans; United 24, the Ukrainian state platform for donations, with many excellent projects); RAZOM, an American NGO, tax-deductible for US citizens, which cooperates with Ukrainian NGOS to support civilians; and BlueCheck Ukraine, which aims for efficient cooperation with Ukrainian groups and is also tax-deductible.
Today, Trump met at the White House with President Zelensky of Ukraine to try to hammer out a ceasefire and peace deal. Trump has demanded 50% of all of Ukraine’s mineral wealth to pay for America’s past support. The agreement was prepared for signing, but the meeting collapsed because Trump said Zelensky was “disrespectful.”
This request for “payment” is a curious demand. After World War 2, the U.S. did not ask our European allies to pay us for helping them. Instead, we created the Marshall Plan and sent them billions of dollars to rebuild their societies. They recovered and became our staunchest allies, until Trump, who seems determined to ally us with Russia and break with Europe.
The White House meeting went badly. Both Trump and Vance berated Zelensky. Trump became outraged at Zelensky for his lack of gratitude. Trump repeated the lie that Ukraine started the war.
Before any deal was reached, Trump denounced Zelensky and said Zelensky wasn’t ready to make a deal. Zelensky left the White House. Apparently, he wasn’t willing to accept Trump’s insistence that Ukraine started the war or that Ukraine should give Putin whatever he wanted, while signing away half of Ukraine’s natural resources without any future security guarantees against another Russian invasion.
This is the angriest I’ve seen Trump publicly in a long time. Trump is angry that he isn’t getting thanked and is being challenged.
Trump is bellowing as loudly as he ever does in public.
“You’ve allowed yourself to be in a very bad position,” Trump says, again suggesting Russia’s invasion is Ukraine’s fault. Vance demands to know whether Zelensky has said “thank you” once, noting that Zelensky campaigned in Pennsylvania for Kamala Harris.
Zelensky was hoping for a moment with Trump that could be seen as some form of support from the United States. Instead, it became a two-on-one fight because Zelensky didn’t agree with Trump’s view.
Peter Baker of the New York Times posted:
Never has an American president lectured the leader of an ally in public like this, much less the leader of a country that is fighting off invaders.
I have covered the White House since 1996. There has never been an Oval Office meeting in front of cameras like this in all that time.
With raised voices, President Trump and Vice President JD Vance berated President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine on Friday in a remarkably fractious White House meeting, accusing Zelensky of not being grateful enough for U.S. support and trying to strong-arm him into making a peace deal with Russia
Vance told Zelensky that it was “disrespectful” for him to come to the Oval Office and make his case in front of the news media, while Trump told the Ukrainian leader, “You’re not really in a good position right now.”
At one point, Trump said, “You either make a deal or we are out.”
President Trump and Vice President JD Vance berated President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine on Friday in a remarkably fractious White House meeting, accusing the leader of the besieged country of not being grateful enough for U.S. support and strong-arming him into making a peace deal with Russia.
With voices raised, Mr. Vance told Mr. Zelensky that it was “disrespectful” for him to come to the Oval Office and make his case in front of the news media, while Mr. Trump told the Ukrainian leader, “You’re not really in a good position right now.” Mr. Trump added, “You’re gambling with World War III.” At one point, Mr. Trump said, “You either make a deal or we are out.”
The exchange in front of television cameras was one of the most dramatic moments ever to play out in public in the Oval Office and underscored the radical break between the United States and Ukraine since Mr. Trump took office. Mr. Trump has effectively sided with Russia while falsely blaming Ukraine for starting the war and not giving in to his demands for how to end it.
Despite Mr. Trump’s claim last week, it was Russia that first attacked Ukraine in 2014 and then mounted a full-scale invasion in 2022. Although Ukrainian elections have been suspended for the past three years under martial law, Mr. Zelensky became president on the back of a landslide election victory in 2019. President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, by contrast, is an actual dictator whose elections have been widely dismissed as frauds and who faces an international arrest warrant for war crimes.
Mr. Trump had seemed to be trying to put his rift with Mr. Zelensky to the side on Thursday before their meeting at the White House, brushing off a question about whether he still considers the Ukrainian leader a dictator.
“Did I say that?” Mr. Trump asked. “I can’t believe I said that. Next question.”
At a later news conference with Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain, Mr. Trump did not respond to a question about whether he owed Mr. Zelensky an apology for calling him a dictator. “We’re going to have a very good meeting,” he said. “I have a lot of respect for him.”
His sharp language last week about Mr. Zelensky contrasted with his assessment of Mr. Putin, whom he has only praised since winning a second term. Just this week, the president called Mr. Putin “a very smart guy” and “a very cunning person.” He said that he believes that Mr. Putin really wants peace and added on Thursday that “he’ll keep his word” if a deal is reached, despite multiple Russian violations of agreements in the past.
While he has spoken with Mr. Putin by telephone, Mr. Trump has given little sense of how he expects to negotiate either a cease-fire or an enduring peace agreement. During last year’s campaign, he promised to end the war within 24 hours and to do so even before his inauguration, neither of which he actually did.
During Thursday’s news conference with Mr. Starmer, Mr. Trump expressed a mix of optimism and fatalism about his chances of making peace. “I think it’s going to happen, hopefully quickly,” he said. “If it doesn’t happen quickly, it may not happen at all.”
Mr. Starmer and other European leaders have offered to contribute troops to a multinational peacekeeping force on the ground in Ukraine after the fighting halts. But Mr. Trump resisted pressure to commit U.S. forces to help, even without ground troops, or to offer security guarantees to Ukraine against renewed Russian aggression.
Since taking office, Mr. Trump has demanded that Ukraine turn over some of its natural resources as payback for military aid provided under President Joseph R. Biden Jr. to defend itself against Russia. While Mr. Trump has falsely claimed that the United States has contributed $350 billion and Europe only $100 billion, in fact, according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, Europe has allocated $138 billion compared with $119 billion from the United States.
Under a draft of the rare minerals agreement reviewed by The New York Times, Ukraine would contribute half of its revenues from the future monetization of natural resources, including critical minerals, oil and gas. Mr. Trump characterized the deal on Thursday as an economic development boon. “It’ll be good for both countries,” he said.
Diane Ravitch's blog 