Russia on Monday accused Ukraine of trying to attack President Vladimir Putin’s residence in northern Russia, which President Trump said he was “very angry” about, even as Kyiv has denied it happened.
The Kremlin’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Moscow’s negotiating position to end its war in Ukraine was under review after it claimed Kyiv tried to attack the presidential residence in the Novgorod region overnight with 91 long-range drones. Lavrov said all drones were destroyed by Russian air defenses, with no injuries or damage.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, meanwhile, said Russia’s claims were “a complete fabrication intended to justify additional attacks against Ukraine” and undermine peace talks, according to a post to the social platform X.
But Trump later on Monday appeared to take Russia’s side.
“I don’t like it, it’s not good. I heard about it this morning. You know who told me about it? President Putin told me about it. Early in the morning he said he was attacked. That’s no good, it’s no good,” Trump told reporters at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla., of the claimed strike.
“It’s a delicate period of time. This is not the right time,” Trump added, likely referring to ongoing peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. “It’s one thing to be offensive, because [Russia is] offensive, it’s another thing to attack [Putin’s] house. It’s not the right time to do any of that. … I was very angry about it.”
Asked if there’s evidence of the attack, Trump replied: “Well, we’ll find out. You’re saying maybe the attack didn’t take place? That’s possible, I guess, but President Putin told me this morning.”
Asked if there’s evidence of the attack, Trump replied: “Well, we’ll find out. You’re saying maybe the attack didn’t take place? That’s possible, I guess, but President Putin told me this morning.”
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed Trump’s call with Putin, saying in a post on X that the president had “concluded a positive call with President Putin concerning Ukraine.”
Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) later criticized Trump for appearing to side with Russia, accusing Putin of frequently lying.
“President Trump and his team should get the facts first before assuming blame. Putin is a well known boldface liar,” Bacon wrote on X.
Russia has already promised to retaliate against Ukraine and said targets had already been selected for such strikes.
“Such reckless actions will not go unanswered. The targets for retaliatory strikes and the timing of their implementation by the Russian armed forces have been determined,” Lavrov said.
Zelensky in his post warned that Russia would use the alleged attack to justify strikes against Ukraine, including government buildings in Kyiv.
“Russia is at it again, using dangerous statements to undermine all achievements of our shared diplomatic efforts with President Trump’s team. We keep working together to bring peace closer,” he wrote.
Imagine being such an immense pussy that you start a full blown war and complain that your opps attacked one of your houses…
That picture of him blowing Bubba is Putin’s most prized possession.
The residence of the opposite teams leader is a legitimate millitary target
Gotta side with the side you’ve been compromised by.
Dance with the one who brung ya
And why the fuck wouldn’t they do it? Of course they would. Does anybody believe Russia wouldn’t target Zelensky? It’s not the 18th century anymore, it’s no longer “dishonourable” to shoot officers and of fucking course you try to cut off the head of the snake if you can. What the fuck?!
They did target Zelensky, right at the start. The special forces were surrounding the compound he was in.
Wow guys, seriously, let’s be civil here, attacking the aggressor leader during a war? That’s just not polite, clearly.
Why. The. Fuck. Would attacking the person who is directly leading the invasion of his country be considered off-limits? There should be no reason the person at the head of a country should be considered off limits when the two countries are at war.
The only reason that Trump wants Putin to be off limits is that it means if Trump starts a war, he doesn’t want to be considered a valid military target.
They want this to be a debate about whether it happened or not. I think it may be wise to turn it into a debate on whether it should matter, as you’ve pointed out. Let this be a fuckup that normalizes more danger for Putin.
Fucksake, why wouldn’t they attack Putin persona lly? The bastard invaded their homeland.
Oh noooo. How many assassination attempts have been made against Zelensky? I remember at least 3.
This is the bully screaming for the teacher because the bullied dared to swing back.
So…Donald is just default going with Putin on most of this? How is he even still in office??? Dumb question, I know
That’s who he last talked to, so of course. Next time he talks to Zelensky it will be about what Ukraine wants.
Seriously, even if they had done it, Trump should have responded well no shit, you invaded their country and tried to take it. Don’t be a little wuss about the consequences. If they slit your throat in your sleep, that’s your fault. Want them to not; and us to care, remove all your troops from Ukraine and pay reperations.
So what?
If Trump said it happened, that’s strong evidence that it didn’t.
Trump taking Putin’s side? No way!
If people were normal they’d throw Putin, Kim, Winny Poo, Trump, Merz, … basicall all politicians in a random arena and just add in a few tigers.
Does anyone actually even like their own “leaders”? I’m not even talking about Democrats at this point, throw them in the arena too.
Throw em all in, no matter party. They all corrupt. Throw the rich people in the arena too that dont give anything to charity at all and just bs stuff with the money.
Yes, actually. If you look at the research, Russian and Chinese people are quite happy with their leaders, even accounting for chilling effects.
By that metric, the DPRK is better than any other country. Yeah?
Wow, do you just hallucinate words while you read or are you so insecure about your shithole country that you imagine anyone saying anything positive about anyone other than your country is somehow putting your country down?
The comment I replied to asked “Does anyone actually like their leaders?” And I said that, yes, they do, and there is independent research that bears this out. Although I don’t know that there’s independent research about DPRK, which is why I didn’t mention them.
Nowhere did I say this makes a country better or worse.
Spicy. I was just seeing if you were a full blown “DPRK is a democracy” tankie or not.
To better craft my user tag, what happened in Ukraine in 2014?
A lot. Operation Rapid Trident happened in Ukraine in 2014. That was a military exercise between the US and Ukraine that was focused on interoperability of NATO with Ukraine.
Far-right Ukrainian militias attacked the Trade Union building in Odesa, burning 48 people alive in the building as part of a broader conflict between far-right militias and the pro-Russian populations in the Eastern part of Ukraine.
Russia invaded and annexed Crimea in 2014.
Yanukovich, the democratically elected leader of Ukraine was forced to flee Parliament by the armed right-wing militia known as Right Sector, and then Parliament resolved to remove him from office the next day. Yanukovich calls this an illegal coup.
About 80 people died during the protest in 2014, and there is significant contention as to how exactly that happened. The Mises Institute is a liberal anti-communist bastion with deep German roots, and even they reviewed Katchonvsky’s book credulously.
One of the book’s most damning findings is that the official Ukrainian and Western government narrative that Yanukovych ordered security forces to massacre protesters was contradicted by the 2023 court verdict, which found no evidence of any such order.
In January of 2014, Victoria Nuland had a phone call with the US ambassador to Ukraine discussing who they believed should lead Ukraine after Yanukovich gets pushed out. This is about 3 weeks before Yanukovich flees, indicating significant foreknowledge and planning on the part of the US regarding how Ukraine’s government would be composed.
Also in 2014 Azov was founded, in May, and 6 months later was formally integrated into Ukraine’s National Guard for special ops. Azov has been described by researchers as “an obscure lunatic fringe group of racist activists”, which sounds lot like the US’s Proud Boys or Bugaloo.
Needless to say, a lot happened in Ukraine in 2014, more than I am aware of, likely a lot more than you are aware of, since you seem to navigate the world by constructing reality by filtering everything out that doesn’t agree with your preconceived notions and the propaganda you’re surrounded by instead of actually engaging things you disagree with in good faith to figure out what’s underneath the narratives
Literally from the link you posted, at the end of that bullshit write up that has zero sources listed except for the book: “Note: The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute.”
Lol
Of course, because Chinese and Russian media are state-controlled and even filter a lot of outside internet sites
So you’re saying that popular sentiment for leaders is driven by media and not, say, lived experiences?
I ask, regarding China, because…
Because there are about 100 million people in China that are over the age of 70, which means that when they grew up they were in a rice farming family living in the equivalent of $1/month and now they’re driving electric cars.
Because the home ownership rate in China is about 90%, 25 points higher than in the US.
Because China’s criminal justice has a recidivism rates 80% lower than the US’s, as well as an incarceration rate that’s around 75% lower than the US’s. The US also has twice as many people on parole as it does in prison, and China’s parole system is something tiny like 3% of their prison population.
Because China hasn’t launched engaged in military conflicts in 35 years.
I would think all of these things matter more than what people see on the media. In fact, given the proliferation of VPN and the relative level of openness China uses to speak about the fact that it wields control over media, I would think that such a thing would actually make people less happy. Wouldn’t it make you less happy to know that your government sees no problem in media manipulation and censorship?
Chinese people in the US also have lower crime rates. If we had a country made up of mostly Chinese immigrants, like a Singapore or Taiwan, we’d have the crime rate of Singapore or Taiwan
Also most people have their houses financed by their parents. Apartments in Beijing cost well north of a million USD in the central areas (there are cheaper places in Beijing, but they are like one to two hours away). You’re not buying it on your $3000-$4000 monthly salary.
Personally, living in China I have huge problems with connectivity to websites outside of China. Even those that don’t require a VPN are just dogshit slow and work faster with a good VPN. But VPNs work sporadically and randomly something will just not load for a while.
That, combined with bad air quality, traffic jams, bad walkability, smokers smoking everywhere (including bathrooms and restaurants) makes my quality of life lower here than in the US
I can’t believe Trump sided with Putin! /s
That just means that it’s definitely not true. It’s generally safe to assume the opposite of anything Trump says.
