In his words: Trump's rhetoric about Zelenskyy and Putin has evolved
Trump's rhetoric toward both Zelenskyy and Putin has evolved during his second term in the White House.
Trump initially was conciliatory toward Putin, for whom Trump has long shown admiration. But in recent days the Republican leader has expressed increasing exasperation with Putin, criticizing the Russian leader for his unbudging stance on U.S-led peace efforts and for prolonging the war.
Until recently, Trump had repeatedly said Russia seemed more willing than Ukraine to get a deal done.
Trump appears to have softened toward Zelenskyy after a February blowout in the Oval Office. And, in a reversal, has promised to send badly needed Patriot air defense missiles to Ukraine amid Russia's stepped up aerial attacks.
Russia's bigger army is pressing hard on parts of the 620-mile (1,000-kilometer) front line, where thousands of soldiers on both sides have died since the Kremlin ordered the full-scale invasion in February 2022.
June brought the highest monthly civilian casualties of the past three years, with 232 people killed and 1,343 wounded in Ukraine, the U.N. human rights mission in Ukraine said Thursday.
Here's a look at what Trump has said so far during his second term:
Jan. 31
'We want to end that war. That war would have not started if I was president.'
Trump says his new administration has already had 'very serious' discussions with Russia and that he and Putin could soon take 'significant' action toward ending the conflict.
Feb. 19
'A Dictator without Elections, Zelenskyy better move fast or he is not going to have a Country left."
Trump's harsh words for Zelenskyy on his Truth Social platform drew criticism from Democrats and even some Republicans in the United States, where defending Ukraine from Russian aggression has traditionally had bipartisan support. Zelenskyy said Trump was falling into a Russian disinformation trap — and he was quickly admonished by Vice President JD Vance about the perils of publicly criticizing the new president.
Feb. 28
'You're gambling with World War III. And what you're doing is very disrespectful to the country, this country that's backed you far more than a lot of people said they should have.'
Trump and Vance berated Zelenskyy over the war in Ukraine, accusing him of not showing gratitude after he challenged Vance on the question of diplomacy with Putin. The argument in the Oval Office was broadcast globally. It led to the rest of Zelenskyy's White House visit being canceled and called into question the U.S. support of Ukraine in its defense against Russia's 2022 invasion. A few days after the blowup, Trump temporarily paused military aid to Ukraine to pressure Zelenskyy to seek peace.
March 30
'I don't think he's going to go back on his word. You're talking about Putin. I don't think he's going to go back on his word. I've known him for a long time. We've always gotten along well.'
Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, the U.S. president said he trusts the Russian president to hold up his end of a potential peace deal. The comments were among the last positive remarks Trump made about Putin this year.
April 24:
'I am not happy with the Russian strikes on KYIV. Not necessary, and very bad timing. Vladimir, STOP! 5000 soldiers a week are dying. Lets get the Peace Deal DONE!'
In a Truth Social post, Trump was reacting to Russia attacking Kyiv with an hourslong barrage of missiles and drones. It was the first of his rare criticism of Putin amid increased Russian attacks on Ukraine.
April 29
"A lot of his people are dying. They're being killed, and I feel very badly about it.'
Trump addressed the toll on Ukrainians during an interview with ABC News after he met with Zelenskyy on the sidelines of Pope Francis' funeral. It was the first time the two leaders had met since the Oval office spat, and signaled a shift in Trump's attitude toward the Ukrainian president.
May 25
'I've always had a very good relationship with Vladimir Putin of Russia, but something has happened to him. He has gone absolutely CRAZY!'
Trump's Truth Social post made it clear he was losing patience with Putin as Moscow pounded Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities with drones and missiles in stepped-up aerial attacks.
June 25
'He was very nice actually. We had a little rough times, sometimes. He was ... Couldn't have been nicer. I think he'd like to see an end to this, I do.'
Trump had a closed-door meeting with Zelenskyy during a NATO summit in The Hague. Trump's comments to reporters later also opened the possibility of sending Patriot air-defense missiles to Ukraine.
July 8
'We get a lot of bull--—t thrown at us by Putin, if you want to know the truth. He's very nice all the time, but it turns out to be meaningless.'
Trump also said he's 'not happy' with his Russian counterpart and that Moscow's war in Ukraine is 'killing a lot of people' on both sides. Trump's comments during a Cabinet meeting came a day after he said the United States would send more weapons to Ukraine. It was a dramatic reversal after earlier announcing a pause in the delivery of previously approved firepower to Kyiv, a decision that was made amid concerns that America's military stockpiles had declined too much.
July 13
'I am very disappointed with President Putin, I thought he was somebody that meant what he said. He'll talk so beautifully and then he'll bomb people at night. We don't like that.'
Trump's remarks to reporters came as Russia has intensified its aerial attacks against Ukraine.
___
Follow AP's coverage of the war in Ukraine at https://apnews.com/hub/russia-ukraine
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Laverne Cox Defends Past Relationship With ‘MAGA Republican' Cop After Intense Backlash
Laverne Cox is sharing more details about her former 'MAGA Republican voter' boyfriend just days after news of the relationship drew backlash from fans. The Emmy-winning actor, who is transgender, made the eyebrow-raising comment about her ex while promoting her forthcoming live show, 'Gurrl, How Did I Get Here?' set to take place in New York next week. Though Cox didn't identify the man by name, she described him in a short Instagram video as 'blond-haired, blue-eyed MAGA Republican voter who is a New York City police officer,' later boasting he was 21 years her junior and 'hot.' 'We were madly in love,' she said in the clip, posted Monday. 'I did not develop any of his politics. I still have my own.' Cox appears to have previously alluded to the relationship in interviews where she spoke about a breakup with a former partner who wasn't 'aligned with my values.' Still, it wasn't long before the 'Orange Is the New Black' and 'Inventing Anna' actor's Instagram post was flooded with negative responses from followers who called her out for being hypocritical. 'You are able to look past the fact that someone voted against your community and basically everything you represent…?' one person wrote. 'I don't get the punch line… nor does this entice me to want to go to a show to figure out how you justify this.' Added another, 'Sooooo the morals are dismissed when he's hot. Got it.' Cox attempted to clarify her comments in a followup video posted to Instagram Tuesday, noting she hadn't anticipated the criticism. 'I never adapted any of my ex's politics,' she explained in the roughly 50-minute clip. 'I always challenged him with love and empathy and tried to listen to his perspectives, often corrected him with facts, and I wanted to see if it possible to have a relationship with someone with different political beliefs in theory.' Though she warned against 'dehumanizing' those with different views, she went on to note, 'I think, with this current administration, lines certainly have to be drawn, because we're fighting for our lives in a different way than we were five years ago.' 'Everything Trump is doing, I'm against,' she said. Though Cox publicly backed former Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election, her latest comments about her ex coincide with a new interview in which she offered a less-than-complimentary take on Harris' campaign. 'The way you win an election is turning out the base,' she told Ts Madison on her 'Outlaws' podcast last week. 'Trump turned out his base. The white supremacists who hadn't voted for years, they got up and they got out and the voted. She needed to turn out the base, but she needed to do it with a message that resonated with people that made them feel like she understood what working people are going through.' Related... Laverne Cox Shares The Reason She Doesn't Drive And It Comes With An Emotional Twist Joslyn DeFreece Recalls Her Early Days 'Nerding Out' With Laverne Cox In New Film 'Baby Reindeer' Actor Offers A Different Take On The Smash Netflix Series
9 minutes ago
Justice Department faces subpoena over Epstein files by House Oversight Committee
A House Oversight subcommittee voted Wednesday to subpoena the Department of Justice to release the Jeffrey Epstein files. The motion passed by a vote of 8-2. Notably, three GOP lawmakers -- Reps. Nancy Mace, Scott Perry and Brian Jack -- joined with Democrats on the subcommittee to approve the subpoena, defying Republican leadership. The House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer must sign the subpoena before it can be officially issued, per committee rules. Comer plans to sign off on the subpoena, a Republican committee source told ABC News. The top Democrat on the subcommittee, Rep. Summer Lee, initially offered the motion. Audrey Strauss, acting U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, points to a photo of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, during a news conference in New York on July 2, Minchillo/AP, FILE Republicans on the committee pushed back and amended the subpoena to also include communications by Biden administration officials and the DOJ. These officials include Bill and Hillary Clinton, James Comey, Loretta Lynch, Eric Holder, Merrick Garland, Robert Mueller, William Barr, Jeff Sessions and Alberto Gonzales. Oversight Ranking Member Rep. Robert Garcia said in a statement that the subcommittee's vote on Wednesday "was just the first step toward accountability, and we will continue pushing for the truth." "Today, Oversight Democrats fought for transparency and accountability on the Epstein files and won. House Republicans didn't make it easy, but the motion was finally passed to force the Department of Justice to release the Epstein files," Garcia said. The news comes the same day House Oversight Committee Chairman Comer on Wednesday issued a subpoena to Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted associate of Jeffrey Epstein, for a deposition to occur at Federal Correctional Institution Tallahassee on Aug. 11. "The facts and circumstances surrounding both your and Mr. Epstein's cases have received immense public interest and scrutiny," Comer wrote in a statement Wednesday. Maxwell was convicted of sex trafficking and other charges and sentenced to 20 years in prison in 2022. "What we're talking about here is someone who's in federal prison on appeal, so our attorneys will have to communicate with her attorneys to see if there are terms, if she wants," Comer said before the subpoena was issued. "If there are no terms, we'll roll in there quick." The situation will be similar to Comer's effort to interview Jason Galanis, a former business partner of Hunter Biden and Devon Archer, during the GOP's impeachment inquiry of then-President Joe Biden. "I did that with [Jason] Galanis, and the Democrats were real offended that we would want to interview anyone in prison. But now you know they're, they're all they want to interview someone in prison," Comer said. The committee has shown a propensity to record video of the interviews and release content afterwards -- as it did with several former Biden officials who invoked their 5th Amendment rights earlier this summer -- so it's possible there could be handout video from the deposition. Separately, Attorney General Pam Bondi said Monday that Deputy Attorney Todd Blanche will meet with Maxwell sometime in the "coming days." President Donald Trump last week said on his social media platform that he had ordered the Justice Department to "release all Grand Jury testimony with respect to Jeffrey Epstein, subject only to Court Approval." Comer has also signaled that the circumstances of a closed-door deposition at a federal prison could attract both Democrats and Republicans to attend the interview. "There will be so many members of Congress that'll want to be in that prison," Comer said. "I would assume that there'll be a lot of members of the Oversight Committee on both -- in both parties that'll want to be there." Ghislaine Maxwell attends VIP Evening of Conversation for Women's Brain Health Initiative, Moderated by Tina Brown at Spring Studios on October 18, 2016 in New York Gaboury/Paul Bruinooge/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images A congressional subpoena is a formal legal order issued by a congressional committee or individual compelling their testimony. David Oscar Markus, appellate counsel for Maxwell, said in a statement to ABC News that Maxwell "looks forward" to meeting with Blanche and that meeting will inform how she proceeds with the subpoena. "As for the congressional subpoena, Ms. Maxwell is taking this one step at a time. She looks forward to her meeting with the Department of Justice, and that discussion will help inform how she proceeds," he said. Markus also responded to comments from House Speaker Mike Johnson earlier Wednesday questioning Maxwell's credibility as a witness. "If they see fit to bring in Ghislaine Maxwell for testimony, that's fine. I will note the obvious concern, the caveat that Chairman Comer and I and everyone has that could she be counted on to tell the truth? Is she a credible witness?" Johnson said to reporters. "We understand Speaker Johnson's general concern -- Congress should always vet the credibility of its witnesses. But in this case, those concerns are unfounded. If Ms. Maxwell agrees to testify before Congress and not take the 5th -- and that remains a big if -- she would testify truthfully, as she always has said she would and as she will with Mr. Blanche. The truth should not be feared or preemptively dismissed," Markus said in a statement.
Los Angeles Times
11 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump ordered purge of ‘unpatriotic' signage from national parks. How one California spot complied
Four years ago, National Park Service employees seeking to provide a more robust look at the history of Muir Woods National Monument in Marin County began the 'History Under Construction' exhibit. The concept of the work was to expand an existing sign featuring a timeline detailing the preservation of Muir Woods. Employees placed caution tape on the sign within Founder's Grove and used yellow sticky notes to add facts and dates that were missing from the original timeline. Among the information added were the efforts of Indigenous people who originally maintained the land, as well as the role of women in creating the national monument. A letter on the plaque assured passersby that 'everything on this sign is accurate, but incomplete. The facts are not under construction, but the way we tell history is.' But, as of this month, the yellow notes are no more. The expanded exhibit became the first in the nation to be altered following an executive order by President Trump in March to rid park signage of any language he would deem unpatriotic. The president's aim was to restore federal sites that he said had been changed since 2020 to perpetuate a 'false reconstruction of American history' including 'improper partisan ideology.' The Muir Woods change was first reported by SF Gate. Elizabeth Villano, a former park ranger who helped create the new version of the sign, criticized the move, writing in a post on Medium that the Trump administration 'is actively censoring American history from the public.' She said the goal of the project was to make sure nothing on the original sign was erased, but to add details so people could see the difference in how history was told and how it could be expanded to include more voices. 'We wanted to tell the true story of the woods in a way that helped people learn from the past, and apply those lessons towards a brighter future,' she wrote. 'Despite this care not to erase history, here I am, watching history be erased.' A spokesperson for the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, which includes Muir Woods, could not immediately be reached for comment on Wednesday. Before the notes were added in 2021, the first date included in the sign's timeline, called 'Path to Preservation,' was the establishment of the first national park in the United States, Yellowstone, in 1872. The next was 1892 when the Sierra Club was founded in San Francisco with John Muir as the first president. But staff at the time found that some key information was missing from the timeline, namely the work of the Coast Miwok and Southern Pomo people who tended to the land before Europeans arrived in North America. They also included the first campaign to save the region launched by a women's club in 1904. Of course, not all the information added to the timeline was positive. Staff detailed Spanish missionaries exploiting the work of Indigenous people in the Bay Area to build California missions and congressional actions stripping Coast Miwok people of title to their ancestral lands, including Muir Woods. The revised timeline didn't shy away from pointing out the complex legacies of key figures who helped spearhead the creation of the national monument. It noted that John Muir referred to Indigenous people using racist language in his diary, which was published years before his death, and pointed out William Kent's vote in Congress to prevent non-citizens from owning or leasing land. The rangers didn't cast blame for the omissions, saying that the expanded narratives were reflective of increasing diversity among park service employees in the years since the timeline was first unveiled. 'From redwood conservation to the legacy of the country's founders, American stories are enriched by complexity, dimension, and challenge. It's not our job to judge these stories or promote a singular narrative. As national park rangers, it is our mandate to tell complete stories that reflect who we are as a society. And as Americans, it's important that we hear them,' according to a National Park Service post about the changes. Trump's executive order directed the Department of the Interior to identify any public monuments, memorials, statues or markers that had been removed or changed since 2020 to 'perpetuate a false reconstruction of American history,' minimize the value of historical events or figures or include 'improper partisan ideology' and to reinstate prior monuments. The order also directed officials to ensure that monuments do not contain content that disparages Americans. Instead, the monuments should focus on 'the greatness of the achievements and progress of the American people or, with respect to natural features, the beauty, abundance, and grandeur of the American landscape,' the order states. Critics have said Trump's directive demands a rose-colored view of more complex events that make up American history. Villano, the former park ranger, wrote in the Medium essay that it's disparaging to Americans to take away people's ability to think critically and have a better understanding of history. 'Why doesn't the White House want you to see a more complete version of history? Maybe it's because, when we see ourselves in history, we realize that we can reshape it,' she wrote. 'For a government like this, that must feel like a threat. It doesn't benefit people in power to understand that anyone can be a part of history.'
