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.
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
Wow, did you just say that Chinese people commit less crime because they're Chinese people? That's pretty disgusting. That's not how any of this works. And honestly I don't have the time to educate you.
Suffice to say that the US prison system was 90% white before abolition of slavery and then became 90% back a few years after abolition of slavery. The US created new laws after abolition that targeted black people. They were called Black Codes. The prisoners were then leased back to plantation owners. The system has never recovered.
So you're saying it's possible to build generational wealth in 70 years or less. Interesting.... Who care if people have their homes financed by their parents? That is, in fact, part of the point. In China, economic precarity is falling while in the US it's rising. During the height of economic boom in the US we didn't reach anywhere near 90% home ownership rates.
Your VPN story tells me nothing to except that when you're on the other side of the world from the servers you are accessing, the speed of light matters, and that American companies, which have the lion's share of online services, are not all in on replicating their content in China. That's pretty normal and has nothing to do with anything, honestly.
Sounds like Los Angeles.
Honestly now you're just grasping at straws. I get that you're American, you resent that Chinese parents have enough money buy their kids homes, you live in a city that isn't your preferred city, and you're not a smoker, but your opinion of your experience in China is a personal anecdote and has no bearing on this conversation.
LA air quality
Beijing air quality
Disgusting or not, it's a fact. In every country Chinese people go to, they commit relatively little crime.
It's not about the speed of light. Chinese censors specifically drop long running connections, UDP connections, ECH connections... Chinese ISPs don't give a shit that their connections to the outside world are extremely congested at peak hours. I'm connecting to a server in South Korea, but it's so bad it drops 30% of packets at peak hours
And if you think LA is as bad as Beijing, you haven't been to Beijing
Russia was a brutal state long before the state took control of all the media. Putin was democratically elected again and again and people loved their strong leader. They still do. The media just lets them pretend they are not as barbaric as they really are.
Of course, since the best opposing candidates went to prison. Can't elect a guy who's not running. Navalny was a very popular candidate and people would have voted for him, if they had the chance. But we won't know that because Putin killed him
Putin is in power since 2000. Navalny funded his organization in 2011. He was still at a university when Putin took over. People voted Putin for president twice and then they voted for his puppet Medvedev in 2008. Yes, after decades in power he imprisoned or assassinated his opponents and obviously the elections are just for show now but you're ignoring the first decade when he didn't have a total grip on power and Russians still happily voted for him. It's not because they didn't know what he represents but because they liked it.
The first time he got elected he already started to shut down the free press. He shut down Kukly in 2002
Yeah, and people still voted for him in 2004. He didn't shut down everything and kill all his opponents in his first term. From wikipedia about 2004 elections:
"the elections were generally well administrated and reflected the consistently high public approval rating of the incumbent president but lacked elements of a genuine democratic contest."
Russia was never a healthy democracy but at the beginning people voted for Putin because they liked him. He managed to get absolute power because most people approved of his actions for two decades.
Because Russians loved him for the Chechen war. He got a similar boost in popularity after annexation of Crimea in 2014
Yes, that's exactly my point.