Posted on 08/21/2025 4:01:52 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
As President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine headed into a high-stakes meeting in the Oval Office this week, Vice President JD Vance warned him to “behave.”
“Mr. President, so long as you behave, I won’t say anything,” Mr. Vance recounted to Fox News in an interview broadcast on Wednesday, adding that the Ukrainian leader chuckled in response.
It was not the first time that Mr. Vance had addressed Mr. Zelensky during a critical diplomatic summit with words more commonly spoken to toddlers than heads of state.
In February, during a highly contentious Oval Office meeting with President Trump, Mr. Vance blasted Mr. Zelensky for being “disrespectful” and complained that he had not thanked the United States for the military assistance it had sent Ukraine to help in its war against a Russian invasion.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Vance makes an effective wingman.
…against a corrupted, penis piano playing comedian. How can anyone ( who knows) back such a depraved leader?
As long he presents a tough position towards the Ukrainian ingrate.
“I’m Happy.”
“Time to Wrap it Up.”
Right, Nathan?
So, all you care about is bashing Zelensky? You think it is ok for Putin to kill civilians every night... You don’t care if Putin kidnaps 1,000s of kids from Ukraine... You don’t care if Putin kills 100s of thousand of his soldiers to take no land? You don’t care if Putin ruins his country financially,,,
So, all you care about is bashing Zelensky?…..
—————
You have fallen victim to senile Joe’s narrative. You have been played.
Zelensky is just an actor playing a role.
“That fiasco was an ambush, cynically calculated and deliberately implemented on international television by bullies disguised as statesman, to deepen the humiliation. Its purpose was not to maintain the dignity of the White House, that was waived by President Trump when he unceremoniously evicted president Zelinski from the premises because Zelinski had too much grit, and too much patriotism to submit to Trump's demands and would not acknowledge Trump's transparent distortions.”
“The dignity of the White House was lost in the indignity of the host's ignominious treatment of his guest. Never in our history has a President of the United States defiled the sacred ground of the White House with such a wretched display of rudeness.”
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4335170/posts?page=33#33
JD did most of the talking with Zelensky at that meeting.
Yes, I fully expected you to talk to this, due to Vance's key role as one of those two “statesman.”
No, all I have to do is read your posts and see you never say anything negative about Putin. You are wasting your time trying to gaslight me.
“No, all I have to do is read your posts and see you never say anything negative about Putin.”
He is a Putin shill always lying about how great Russia and the legendary Vlad are.
He also has relatives in Russia.
To make the record complete, let me finish quoting my remarks, part of which you just incorporated into your reply:
Winston Churchill appeared to Franklin Roosevelt in the White House in the nude and famously quipped, "the Prime Minister of Great Britain is nothing to hide from the president United States." Zelinski can wear the best garment from Savile Row or a Suit of Lights and it will make no difference because Trump is bent not on maintaining the dignity of the White House but of shaming Zelinski into accepting a very bad deal-a deal which must be accepted only if it is made palatable by a very real guarantee of Ukraine's sovereignty.
This last part goes to the heart of the discussion. The ambush of Zelinski in the White House was delivered and contrived for a purpose: to bludgeon Ukraine into acceptance of Vladimir Putin's war demands. Further, the last part also points to the real turning point in the quest for peace, the providing of American security for Ukraine, which was the principal breaking point between the parties at the ambush.
To believe for a second that these matters of life-and-death, existence or extinguishment of Ukraine, turned on Zelinski failing to wear a suit or turned on his alleged disrespect, is to trivialize that proceeding and to create fantasies to protect the reputation of the parties, by the parties I mean Trump and Vance.
Do you really believe that the President of the United States conditioned his support for or against Ukraine on the clothes worn in an internationally televised White House conference of such serious import? If one does believe that, one has damned the President of the United States and the Vice President of the United States as unserious players who are strutting their petty egos about the Oval Office.
I have recited many times in this forum the history of Trump's near officious intermeddling in the negotiating process and his departure from the role of an ally (which America had in fact been with Ukraine, despite indignation to the contrary on this forum) to a special pleader for Russia. There is no reasonable conclusion to come to except that it was Trump's policy to force Ukraine into a peace arrangement with Russia at whatever price Russia demanded.
This conclusion is reinforced when Trump temporarily terminated intelligence and the supply of arms. Was this done because Zelinski was not wearing a suit? Because Zelinski was disrespectful? Because Zelinski sought security protection from an ally for his twice-invaded nation?
At this point the question becomes, what kind of judgment should one render about Trump's overall behavior? Was he motivated by petty and base motives to protect his own reputation for failing to achieve peace, "in one day?" Or, did Trump have a greater, larger vision?
As I had previously posted, Trump might well be motivated by his humanitarian concerns for loss of life in the war. Equally, he might be motivated by his oft-stated need for America to avoid foreign wars in which we have been less than successful. Finally, he might have been motivated by a desire to bring Russia into the family of Western nations and pry it away from its embrace with China and Iran.
Whatever the motivation, or combination of motivations, it might well have brought Trump to the conclusion that Ukraine was simply expendable in the great game of geopolitics. That Ukraine was expendable in a forlorn cause because it was necessary to defend America against the landmass of Russia and China.
These plausible motives say more on behalf of the character of Donald Trump than does the picture of a petty Oval Office bully beating up on a guest.
Whatever the motives, an earnest conservative should not abide a charade that serves no purpose other than to delude the public about what is really going on. If only Zelinski had worn a suit, we might have had peace, but, alas, he did not. So let us proceed blackarding Zelinski to finish conditioning public opinion. We will talk about Zelinski diminutive size or his alleged homosexuality or we will accuse him of personal corruption without any actual evidence, we will accuse him of cowardice when he has bravely conducted himself and has bravely, and surprisingly successfully, led his nation against tremendous odds.
Are we to be silent in a process of destruction of Vladimir Zelinski for political ends? Are we to permit a man to be destroyed merely because Trump does it? And, when Trump rehabilitates him, as he has just done in the Washington meeting, are we compelled to reverse our judgment just to keep pace with Trump?
You question the role of JD Vance whom I supported long before Trump chose him for vice president, and whom I still support even as I deplore his conduct that day in the Oval Office. In the modern age it has become the lot of the vice president to carry water, indeed to be the hatchet man, of the President of United States. Hopefully, when the vice president does the president's dirty work, it is done in a good cause. I reject the cause in this case, even as I continue my support for Vance.
As I said at the tail end of my reply that generated your inquiry, it has now come to the point where guarantees will or will not carry the day for peace. At this point, the character of Donald Trump will be tested about whether he seeks to exonerate himself for failing to end the war, or whether he will conduct himself as a statesman.
…see you never say anything negative about Putin.
—————-
Zelensky:
-Corrupt
-Debauched ( played the piano with his penis, on air, dressed in high heels, etc)
- Filmed using cocaine
-Illigitimate ( no elections since last May)
- Banned Russian Orthodox Christianity, shut down Russian Orthodox churches.
- Changed Christmas celebration from January 7th to December 25th.
- Unqualified, a professional comedian by occupation, but did graduate with a University of Economics degree.
- Enforced Ukraine only launguage ( banned Russian) in schools and government….was raised a Russian speaker, he had to learn Ukrainian.
- Claimed to be Jewish but married a Christian, both kids baptized ( liar, not Jewish).
Putin:
- Corrupt ( never proven, but no doubt).
- A lawyer by education, graduated from Leningrad State University in 1975 with a degree in law.
- Never cancelled elections and was re- elected numerous times.Served as President since 2012 , and prior from 2000-2008.
How is that for a start?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.