2/ You cannot erase the context. Trump has been calling Zelensky a corrupt dictator and spreading Russian propaganda that Russia didn't invade Ukraine.
All these lies are Trump's pretext to sign a deal with Russia that hands Ukraine to Putin. Zelensky knows this.
3/ Zelensky - who's been cut out of the talks - knows what Trump and Putin are scheming. A "ceasefire" without any guarantee for Ukraine's future security is a trap. Trump's deal will require Ukrainian forces to withdraw, and when they do, Putin will pounce. It's a set up.
4/ So it's true that the first 40 minutes or so of the meeting LOOK cordial.
But listen to Trump. He keeps repeating that he's going to impose on Zelensky this fake "ceasefire", without any new weapons to Ukraine, without any security guarantee, without any way to enforce it.
4/ So at the 40 minute mark, Vance chimes in. He appears agitated. He says that Trump's fake "ceasefire" is the only way.
All that happens at this point is that Zelensky asks Vance a simple, calm question. Zelensky isn't being rude. And here's the essence of the question:
5/ "Putin has signed many agreements about Ukraine and he hasn't honored any of them. Aren't you worried Putin will violate the terms of this ceasefire?"
That's it. That's the question.
And this is where Vance and Trump explode. The trap was set and now the ambush starts.
6/ Vance - visibly angry - calls Zelensky "disrespectful" for asking his simple question. And then starts listing Russian talking points about how weak the Ukrainian army is how poor a leader Zelensky is.
It's Vance that takes a cordial meeting to a hostile one.
7/ You've seen the clips that follow. But the whole meeting is a set up.
By pushing this plan to hand Ukraine to Putin (IN FRONT OF ZELENSKY!), Trump is trying to either humiliate or provoke Zelensky.
But he does neither, and so Vance has to light the match.
8/ Of course Zelensky had to make his point that Putin won't honor the "ceasefire". He does it diplomatically with a question to Vance (likely so as to not directly confront Trump on TV).
And then Vance see his chance. He commences the ambush.
The whole thing was a set up.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It’s crystal clear now that Trump has lost control of this war. He badly misjudged Iran’s ability to retaliate. The region is on fire.
1/ I’m going to explain to you in this🧵what I’ve learned - in part from closed door briefings - about the four biggest current crises.
2/ CRISIS ONE: Trump believed Iran would not close the Strait of Hormuz. He was wrong. And now oil prices are spiking.
If the Strait stays closed, a global recession will result. It actually may already be too late. Gas prices are the first to spike, but food prices are next.
2/ Right now, Trump has no plan to reopen the Strait. And a plan may not exist.
The assets Iran uses to harass and attack tankers - thousands of small drones, speed boats and mines - cannot be eliminated. They are too numerous, too spread out and hidden. foxnews.com/world/iran-dep…
I was in a 2 hour briefing today on the Iran War. All the briefings are closed, because Trump can't defend this war in public.
I obviously can't disclose classified info, but you deserve to know how incoherent and incomplete these war plans are.
1/ Here's what I can share:
2/ Maybe the lead is that the war goals DO NOT involve destroying Iran's nuclear weapons program. This is, uh...surprising...since Trump says over and over this is a key goal.
But then of course we already know air strikes can't wipe out their nuclear material.
3/ Second, they confirmed "regime change" is also NOT on the list. So, they are going to spend hundreds of billions of your taxpayer dollars, get a whole bunch of Americans killed, and a hardline regime - probably a MORE anti-American hardline regime - will still be in charge.
Democrats MUST insist on a vote on an Authorization of Military Force (an AUMF) for Trump’s war in Iran.
My friend @TimKaine is leading the charge on a War Powers Resolution (WPR) that I support. But it's not a substitute for an AUMF.
1/ A 🧵on the difference. It's important.
2/ What’s the difference? A WPR is a vote AGAINST war.
I’m a co-sponsor of the WPR. But even if Congress passes it, Trump won’t sign it. It's basically symbolic.
3/ An AUMF is a vote FOR war. Trump doesn’t want to come to Congress with legislation authorizing his war because he’d need 60 votes in the Senate (which he likely wouldn't get), and it would force tough questions around the cost, timelines, and specific goals of the war.
Last night I went to the Senate to detail ICE's horrific abuse and violation of the law. I came armed with specific examples.
I'm sharing my speech here bc you need to know why we cannot give ICE another dime.
1/ It starts w the dystopian, roving "show your papers" patrols.
2/ Masked, unidentified men, driving unmarked cars now patrol American streets, dragging Americans out of their vehicles and terrorizing communities. Totally illegal. Reminiscent of Stalin and Pinochet. Fundamentally unAmerican.
3/ No place is safe. ICE ambushes churches, chases kids at bus stops, and tear gasses schools.
As the DHS funding bill moves closer to a vote in the House, and likely a vote in the Senate (where it could be combined with DoD and other budgets), I want to spell out the dangers of a bipartisan vote to keep funding this version of DHS.
2/ I get my colleagues' desire to support government funding. Even under Trump, the government performs many vital tasks.
But not at any price. The political police force Trump is building at DHS - and their daily violation of the law - threatens to unwind our republic.
3/ What Trump is doing in Minneapolis is a test case. His goal is likely to create disruptions in cities in Democratic and swing states as a pretext to interfere in the fall elections.
Yes, he's got loads of money from BBB for this, but this budget gives him $28 billion more.
We told you the Venezuela invasion was just corruption. It took one whole week to get the proof.
Trump took Venezuela's oil at gunpoint, and gave it to one of his biggest campaign donors.
1/ But when you learn the details, it's even worse. A short🧵on this corruption story.
2/ John Addison donated a stunning sum to Trump's election campaign: $6 million. And then, as the Venezuelan operation unfolded, his company, Vitol, asked Trump for a license to trade Venezuelan oil - before their competitors.
3/ And then, just days later, Trump selected Vitol for the first sale of Venezuelan oil - at a discount that will likely allow Vitol to make a huge profit when it sells it to secondary buyers.