Russia's President Vladimir Putin addresses the nation on the recognition of independence of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics
* A recent survey revealed that 62 percent of Americans polled felt that Putin would not invade Ukraine if Trump was still in office
* A total of 38 percent of Democrats agreed that Trump would have held Putin back, with a whopping 85 percent of GOP voters agreeing
* A total of 38 percent of Americans, regardless of political affiliation, believed that Putin would have invaded Ukraine regardless of who was president
* Another 59 percent of Americans polled believed that the Russian president moved on it's neighboring country because Putin saw weakness in Biden
* Another 41 percent said that the person sitting in office did not play not a factor in Putin's decision to invade Ukraine
* The survey, which was conducted between February 23 and 24, included 2,026 registered voters
Close to two thirds of Americans believe that Russian President Vladimir Putin would not have invaded Ukraine if Trump were still president, according to a new survey released Friday.
A recent Harvard Center for American Political Studies-Harris Poll survey revealed that 62 percent of those Americans polled felt that Putin would not be launching an offense against Ukraine if Trump, rather than incumbent President Joe Biden, was still in office.
Broken down, 39 percent of Democrats and 85 percent of Republicans believe that Trump would have made Putin think twice about launching the war.
Meanwhile, 59 percent of Americans said it was Biden's perceived weakness that had prompted Putin to launch the bold attack in the first place, The Hill reported of the survey.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: After Trump met Putin in Helsinki there was a story on Russian media that Trump told Putin that should he invade Ukraine he would bomb Moscow. At the time I chalked this up as typical Russian state media propaganda painting Trump as a warmonger. A few days ago I learned that Trump did say that. I do not know if Putin took Trump's remarks in Helsinki seriously or not, but I do know that Ukraine was not a crisis that exploded into an all out war under Trump.
I think the person who had the most influence on Putin was the former German Chancellor Merkel. She defused many a crisis with Putin, and they trusted each other to make sure certain crisis did not get out of hand. My gut tells me that she would have capitalized on her relationship with Putin to make sure that this invasion and war did not take place.
27 comments:
To the people who don't necessarily follow it, it could seem far-fetched; they might tie these events to Joe Biden. But look at the timing of when this [Russian military] buildup first started. It started in the spring of 2021, just weeks after the [Jan. 6 Capitol] insurrection. Donald Trump didn’t recede into the history books, he didn’t go into quiet retirement. He continued to perpetuate this big lie and sow discord, and Vladimir Putin saw an opportunity in that.
This is 20 years building. But it was a slow creep until you get to the Trump administration, and there's a big lurch forward. We were almost at a point of no return at that point.
By the time President Biden comes into power, you have all these vulnerabilities and opportunities. From Putin’s perspective, there’s this distracted, enfeebled superpower that's casting its eyes further afield towards long term competition with China and the price to normalize and stabilize the relationship with Russia was a sphere of influence.
How subtle. The former president wants the public to know Vladimir Putin didn’t invade Ukraine during his term — unlike the current U.S. president.
There’s been plenty of related chatter of late in Republican circles. Putin targeted Georgia during George W. Bush’s tenure, Crimea during Barack Obama’s terms, and all of Ukraine after Joe Biden became president, but the Russian autocrat’s ambitions were restrained during Trump’s time in the White House. This, the right tells us, should be seen as proof of ... something.
National Review’s Rich Lowry made the case via Twitter last night, “The sheer unpredictably of Trump, his anger at being defied or disrespected, his willingness to take the occasional big risk (the Soleimani strike), all had to make Putin frightened or wary of him in a way that he simply isn’t of Joe Biden.”
That’s certainly one way of looking at recent events, though it’s probably not the best way.
It’s important to acknowledge what motivates the Russian leader. The Atlantic’s Anne Applebaum summarized matters nicely a few weeks ago:
[Putin] wants to put so much strain on Western and democratic institutions, especially the European Union and NATO, that they break up. He wants to keep dictators in power wherever he can, in Syria, Venezuela, and Iran. He wants to undermine America, to shrink American influence, to remove the power of the democracy rhetoric that so many people in his part of the world still associate with America. He wants America itself to fail.
It led The Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin to add yesterday, “Trump’s foreign policy sought to do much of what Putin wants to achieve, including intimidating Ukraine by withholding vital defensive weapons.”
Quite right. Putin wanted to undermine the NATO alliance, and Trump undermined the NATO alliance. Putin wanted to weaken the E.U., and Trump made little effort to express his disdain for the E.U. Putin wanted to weaken the U.S. political system, and Trump was unnervingly aggressive in trying to weaken the U.S. political system.
Putin wanted to hurt Ukraine, and Trump launched an extortion scheme that threatened to hurt Ukraine.
Why didn’t the Russian leader deploy troops into Ukraine during Trump’s term? Perhaps because Putin was so pleased with an American president who pursued goals in line with Moscow’s agenda.
2:09 PM
"Putin was so pleased with an American president who pursued goals in line with Moscow’s agenda."
LMAO - please spare us that tired trope.
Russia was getting killed with US energy exports under Trump. And don't forget the 200 Russian mercs who were wiped out in Syria. The notion that Trump was Putin's buddy is simple minded and lazy.
But I guess whatever fits your Trump-derangement template, you'll believe.
There's no way to know for certain as Trunp isn't president nevertheless I will forever believe the invasion wouldn't have happened if Trump were president.
You know you are over target when the flak is heavy.
2:06 & 2:09 (same person doing quick copy and pastes) had to be the first one to post and post in almost book length. 2:06 is is ap athetic loser with no kind of his own
"Lt. Col. Vindman: Trump ‘Absolutely’ At Fault For Russia’s Ukraine Invasion - VICE"
https://trump24h.com/story/lt-col-vindman-trump-absolutely-fault-russias-ukraine-invasion-vice
"Why Putin didn’t invade Ukraine during the last U.S. administration"
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/putin-didnt-invade-ukraine-last-us-administration-rcna17147
mock on. that is all you can do. why not show where the posts are wrong. name-calling is for schoolyard bullies
It's ok. Trump thought Putin was a genius. And a very VERY smart man.
So must be true right? Trump said it!
"I'll bomb Moscow, but if you do invade Ukraine, I'll compliment you for it. It be a smart move."
2:06, 2:09 & 2:45 (aka Mr Kinkos copier mat)
2:45 is constantly carping that Trump never said on mean thong to Putin. 2:45 is in tears that Trump did not badmouth Putin like a girly boy. Trump does not have girly boy's vote.
So WNU writes "After Trump met Putin in Helsinki there was a story on Russian media that Trump told Putin that should he invade Ukraine he would bomb Moscow. At the time I chalked this up as typical Russian state media propaganda painting Trump as a warmonger. A few days ago I learned that Trump did say that. "
Still girly boy does not know that Trump said mean thing to Putin. Does girly boy have TDS?
Trump said he would nuke Moscow and girly boy cannot handle the truth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FnO3igOkOk
handle it?
first: you post a fiction (film) and use the words of a man who is convicted of something he claimed he had no part of! he could not handle the truth
second: give me a link directly quoting Trump and not the one person who says he "heard it somewhere."
Putin also said Ukraine is not willing to negotiate now. Another lie: the president of Ukraine said he did not say that
One of the hallmarks of the right of center ideas is that if they post or make a statement that makes their position look very good, then they also must note that "the MSM ignores this." That is a tip to do quick search and discover: no. the other side did not because no real verification, no proof, just a claim with no factual basis to substantiate.
ok. Now the Left nonstop claimed and claims that Trump never does anything not nice about Putin.
At this post, we have a claim that Trump has said something anti Russian and anti Putin.
ok. If he did, then a lot of places would carry that item, the story, the direct words.
Now show me three links, quotes, citations that directly support what you claim Trump said. Not person A said that he read person B who heard person C......just three direct quotes from Trump
First: The youtube video is for the movie line not for the story arc. Truth is you cannot handle the truth.
Second: why do you suppose that Biden has not declassified or released the transcript of Trump's meeting with Putin? That it would harm diplomatic relations, does not stand out as a valid reason. Obviously, the Kremlin leaked it to the Russian press already. Libs in all branches of government have leaked all things Trump already. So one is left with the conclusion that the discussion does not make Trump look bad.
It is nice you went off on a tangent with your last two sentences?
So not only a copyist , but you are scatterbrained as well.
Biden's average poll rating has fallen 3 points since Thursday. If Biden does not read TOTUS correctly on Tuesday, the poohbahs of the Democrat people will give Lunchbox Joe his pink slip.
that meeting between Putin and Trump was never revealed. This is the first time there was no record given. The translation was not even allowed to be kept. It anything in that rather long meeting was classified it would have been redacted. But nothing whatsoever was made public. and I recall there was some talk of trying to get the translator to cough up notes. That too never happened. So no: that was an entire exchange that there is no record of nor reference to as classified.
As to classification and Biden: no former president has walked away with boxes filled with secret documents and taken them to his lodgings.
Now I have a bit of background in classified materials, but nothing I know of or have read of compares to this:
Donald Trump took at least 15 boxes of government documents to Mar-a-Lago after being turned out of office—in violation of federal records law—came news that some of those documents were believed to include "classified" information. That particular detail, however, has just exploded into a very big deal of its own.
The Washington Post is now reporting that some of the documents Trump took with him to Mar-a-Lago after he left office included ones "clearly marked as classified, including documents at the 'top secret' level."
--the other comments are by youngsters and offer nothing worth answering
3:56
a bit of a background. You mean you answered a telephone once
You are such a tool.
ah 3:56 you keep reading and rereading oral history I did! thank you. news for you: you do not go on tape for public record some things that are not meant to be public. and now, your low ego comment aside:
Washington Post that classified materials were found within the boxes and that torn-up records had been transferred to the Archives but not reconstructed by the Trump White House.
The inventory is expected to provide more information on the volume and scope of classified documents, including details on the level of classification, according to the two people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive topic. There are records at the very highest levels of classification, including some that can be viewed by only a small number of government officials, the two people said.
“There are records that only a very few have clearances” to review, one of the people told The Post. The documents are so sensitive that they may not be able to describe them in an unclassified way, and, therefore, such documents might be described broadly in a classified addendum to the inventory, according to the two people.
Your record reads like that of a person shunted aside by your superiors, who are fervently waiting for your term of service to end, so you can be shipped home.
If Trump was still president this war would not have commenced. Russia did not invade when he was president. There's a pattern here. JFK steals the election from Nixon. Result, the Vietnam War. Bush steals the election from Gore. Result, the Iraq War, the Afghan War. Bidens handlers steal the election from Trump. They install an old geezer with dementia who did the tiniest bit of electioneering to very small crowds. Result, the USA runs out of Afghanistan. Ukraine invaded. This is just the start. Taiwan is next I fancy. Keep ducking 🙉
Russian central bank, SWIFT is new target of White House, Canada and European allies - The Washington Post
DD214
Ask Hunter!
I watched a Marty Stouffer nature documentary. Marty recounted were a 24 year old male surfer on California was killed by a great white shark. He called the great white shark awesome.
According to the rules of interpretation and perception of the the Copier and paste, does it mean Marty approved of the shark attack?
He used the word awesome to describe the shark.
Liar
Liar!
Lapides likes to brag about his service without a shred of proof, he does this while demanding proof from other people, he's just a typical big mouth!
Like I said a phone operating REMF. Try making some sense Lapides. It's you who asks for proof while refusing to provide your own, you're just a run of the mill liar.
Liar
That old battle-axe did keep old Putin in line.
Post a Comment