The battle in the Oval Office and its consequences

Table of Contents

Zelensky did not kiss the villain’s hand but fought back against two fascist boors.

Main Event: Meeting in the Oval Office Link to heading

Good morning, dear friends! My name is Igor Yakovenko. It is 07:43 in Kyiv, and we are starting. Let’s continue thinking together about what is happening in Russia, the world, Ukraine, and in our souls.

This is an unscheduled episode of the 7-40 program—we had to go live on Saturday because what happened yesterday in, excuse my expression, the Oval Office of the American White House still requires some sort of immediate reaction, an attempt to comprehend what took place, and a discussion with you.

I will be reading the comments on this morning’s broadcast with great interest. Thinking together is important. We must not be alone at this moment. That’s why I’m coming to you today with this unscheduled Saturday stream at an unusual time.

Hopes and Their Collapse Link to heading

Without further ado—what happened?

First, I’ll start with the main point. The key conclusion I reached after carefully watching everything that took place yesterday in the White House and reviewing the commentary is this: I had a very faint hope.

I have always said that Trump’s mission to establish peace in Ukraine was impossible. But after the fact that, somehow, the Universe managed to negotiate this fleeting rare-earth deal and shape it into something that wasn’t entirely colonial—when Zelensky stated that he was ready to sign it, that Ukraine was willing to go through with it—I really wanted to believe that even this embodiment of global evil, Trump, might accomplish something, that at least some temporary peace in Ukraine could be achieved. And honestly, I would have been happy to publicly admit my mistake, even if it meant, I don’t know, eating a pen or something.

But unfortunately, everything that happened yesterday made it clear that these faint hopes were in vain. What happened, happened.

Now, to specifics. The first conclusion: Ukraine and President Zelensky did not have a single chance—I repeat, not a single chance—of receiving real support.

Conclusions on Trump’s Position Link to heading

A real peace from Trump? Yes, Zelensky had a choice—a choice between public disgrace and humiliation or the inevitable further push toward Ukraine’s capitulation. Because it is absolutely clear—crystal clear—that in this war, Trump has firmly, unequivocally, and completely taken Putin’s side. I emphasize: firmly, unequivocally, and completely. And now, this has simply become evident. Now, there is a certain clarity.

You know, to use the enemy’s language: What are your proofs?

After what happened, I am inclined to trust the reports from the French media that Trump did not want Zelensky to come to the U.S. His plan was first to negotiate everything with Putin and then force Zelensky into an agreement based on terms already coordinated with Putin—to pressure Zelensky into accepting all of Putin’s conditions.

And so, as reported by the French media, Trump was indeed against Zelensky’s visit, but Macron convinced him otherwise. Since openly opposing it would have led to Macron making it public, Trump had no choice but to graciously allow Zelensky to come, as if saying, Well, let him come if he really must.

Negotiation Scenario and Pressure Strategy Link to heading

But since Zelensky had arrived, the goal was to ensure that the meeting ended in a grand scandal. And this scandal was skillfully orchestrated. Let’s break it down step by step.

Now, let me explain based on my own life experience—where, unexpectedly, various aspects of my background came in handy.

First, why was the meeting held before the negotiations rather than after? Usually, there’s a brief press availability beforehand—participants stand, journalists stand, and the negotiators say a few words about why they are meeting, shake hands, and then proceed to the actual talks. That’s the standard format.

But here, the meeting was structured differently. Journalists were present. Officials were present. And it wasn’t just a formal greeting—it was a substantive discussion. In other words, negotiations effectively began in front of the press, before the actual talks even started. Why?

It was obvious that the nature of this pre-negotiation negotiation was designed to publicly corner Zelensky—humiliating him in front of the press, forcing him into a situation where he had only two choices: either figuratively kneel or respond in a way that would immediately escalate tensions. And as soon as that happened—boom—the scandal would erupt, and Zelensky would be blamed for ruining the negotiations.

This tactic of feigned offense—this ability to take offense as a weapon—is straight out of Putin’s playbook. And it’s yet another example of Trump’s deep kinship with Putin: both are perpetually aggrieved.

Now, we’ll later discuss the consequences of this scandal.

But let’s consider what would have happened if Zelensky had swallowed his pride, played along, and knelt figuratively in submission. The result would have been exactly what Churchill (allegedly) warned against: If you choose between dishonor and war, and you choose dishonor, you will get both.

There is no doubt about it—had Zelensky capitulated in that moment, he would have become a laughingstock, lost all credibility, and still ended up facing the same war.

Once again, it must be emphasized: there was never even the slightest chance of a different outcome. Everything about this event made that absolutely clear.

Vance’s Role and the Provocation of Zelensky Link to heading

Here’s another telling detail that proves this whole thing was staged.

Think about it—can you recall any high-level negotiations where two heads of state meet not one-on-one, but instead, one side has both the president and his vice president present, while the other side consists solely of the visiting president? I don’t have a comprehensive analysis at hand, but why was Vance there? What was his purpose?

Vance’s role was clear—he was the designated provocateur. From the very start, he threw out baseless accusations against Zelensky, claiming that he had campaigned against Trump in Pennsylvania—complete nonsense, a blatant lie. This was a long-circulating narrative meant to discredit Zelensky, even though his visits to various U.S. states were solely to secure support and persuade lawmakers to back Ukraine.

But why bring up these old, tired accusations now? The answer is simple: Vance was invited specifically to play the role of the agitator. This is a classic setup—just like in street fights, where a smaller thug starts provoking someone, and when the person reacts, the big guy steps in, saying, What, you’re picking on the little one?

That’s exactly how it played out: first, Vance provoked Zelensky, then Trump jumped in. And what they were saying—well, that’s a separate issue altogether.

If we take a moment to look at Trump’s so-called Art of the Deal, here he demonstrated a master class in how to destroy deals.

The substance of Trump’s proposal was simple: he wanted to force Zelensky into signing a ceasefire agreement—without any security guarantees. His argument? Well, Putin wouldn’t dare break the agreement, because, after all, Trump wouldn’t allow it! The absurdity of this claim speaks for itself.

Zelensky, of course, was not convinced. He insisted on actual security guarantees. And at that point, the conversation turned into open hostility. The moment Zelensky dared to question the greatness of Trump, things escalated.

Eventually, Trump and Vance simply descended into outright rudeness.

The most famous exchange from that moment was when Trump mocked Zelensky, saying he had no cards to play, to which Zelensky shot back: I didn’t come here to play cards. That remark hit a nerve, triggering visible outrage.

From there, things spiraled out of control. After the heated argument, both sides retreated to separate rooms. Then Trump made his final move—he ordered the Ukrainian delegation to leave the White House.

What’s crucial here is that Zelensky and his team were still ready to sign a deal and continue negotiations—despite all of Trump and Vance’s provocations. But Trump had no real interest in an agreement. Instead, he delivered a master class in The Art of Wrecking Deals.

And to top it all off, after kicking out Zelensky’s delegation, Trump smugly declared that Zelensky would be welcome to return—if he corrected his behavior and became ready for peace.

Provocative Manipulations and Trump’s Domination Link to heading

So, what was Trump’s master class in action?

First and foremost, he blamed Ukraine for everything that had happened. His logic? You allowed yourselves to be in a bad position—as if Ukraine was at fault when Putin invaded on February 24, 2022.

By that reasoning, was Britain also at fault when Hitler attacked? Were the U.S. and Pearl Harbor to blame when Japan struck? And so on.

This is a textbook example of victim-blaming—a classic rhetorical trick. The victim is made out to be responsible for their own suffering. And Trump took it a step further, even reviving his old narrative that Ukraine itself started this war and was therefore to blame.

Next came another familiar tactic—accusing Ukraine of ingratitude.

Over and over again: We helped you, and you should be grateful. But you’re not. You don’t show enough appreciation.

Zelensky practically wore out his voice saying thank you—to the United States, to Trump personally. But that wasn’t enough. It wasn’t just about expressing gratitude—it was about submission.

Trump’s message was clear: Get on your knees.

Now, let’s briefly touch on the reaction this spectacle provoked.

Certain figures—like Ksenia Sobchak and Alfred Koch—took to their Telegram channels to reinforce this humiliating logic: Zelensky, you are not Trump’s equal. Who do you think you are? You’re just a guest before the great and powerful master of the world. You should bow your head, kiss his hand, and thank him over and over, while he dictates your fate.

This is exactly how some people have been conditioned to see the world—through the lens of submission to power.

The goal of this entire stunt was clear: to turn Zelensky into a modern-day Edvard Beneš, the Czechoslovak leader of 1938—standing helplessly outside a locked door, peeking through the keyhole as the great powers (Trump and Putin) signed Ukraine’s surrender.

That’s how it was supposed to go. The script was written. Zelensky’s role? To bow and be grateful.

Manipulations with the Concept of Peace Link to heading

One of the constant manipulations in this entire situation was around the concept of peace.

Trump repeatedly framed Zelensky as not being ready for peace, despite Zelensky making it clear that he had come prepared for negotiations. But Trump, using his supposed supernatural insight, peered into Zelensky’s soul and saw that he wasn’t ready. Come back when you’ve learned your lesson, was essentially the message—like a teacher dismissing a student who failed an exam.

This was a deliberate distortion. Zelensky was advocating for a just peace, while Trump was demanding total capitulation.

Trump also kept pushing his exaggerated claim that one million people have died in the war, that Zelensky has no weapons, no leverage, that Ukraine is powerless. The implication? You’re weak. You came here with nothing.

Never mind that Ukraine has been fighting for three years—yes, with support, but far from sufficient support.

Then came the truly scandalous claim: Without U.S. assistance, the war would have ended in two weeks.

Zelensky had to respond—because this was the same nonsense Putin had spouted when he claimed the war would be over in three days. Now, Trump was echoing it with a new timeline—two weeks. Pure fiction.

Trump’s supporters expected Zelensky to stay silent, to just take it. But Zelensky is a wartime leader. His duty is to maintain the morale and trust of his people. Of course, U.S. support is crucial—but at the end of the day, Ukraine is the one fighting this war, not America.

So, when Trump and his team openly humiliated Ukraine, Zelensky had to respond. This was all part of a calculated strategy—to push the narrative that without the U.S., Ukraine would have collapsed in days, as if Ukrainian resistance were meaningless.

The claim of one million dead, the insistence that Ukraine has no more soldiers left, all of it was designed to strip Ukraine of its dignity and portray it as a helpless beggar. But if Zelensky had simply accepted this humiliation and stayed quiet, he wouldn’t just have lost the war—he would have lost the trust of the Ukrainian people.

That would have led to a severe political crisis in Ukraine. Elections can’t be held during wartime, but if the Commander-in-Chief had returned publicly humiliated, his authority would have collapsed.

This ties into the broader mindset pushed by figures like Alfred Koch and Ksenia Sobchak, who argue that Zelensky must accept his place beneath Trump—he should bow his head, look up with gratitude, and listen in silence while the great leader dictates his fate.

And that was Trump’s strategy—total domination.

Trump constantly interrupted Zelensky, cut him off, dismissed his words: You’ve talked too much already.

Imagine that—this coming from the President of the United States, speaking to the leader of a nation at war. You’ve talked too much.

This wasn’t diplomacy. It was tactical humiliation.

The entire setup was meant to enforce a hierarchy—I dictate, you listen. It was the classic authoritarian I am the boss, you are nothing attitude.

Diplomatic protocol demands that heads of state treat each other with some level of equality, even when their countries are vastly different in power. But here, Trump’s approach was crystal clear—I order, you obey.

The ultimate goal? To force Ukraine into permanent submission.

When Trump accused Zelensky of playing with a million lives and leading the world into World War III, it was a complete reversal of reality. The real risk of global war comes from Trump’s alliance with Putin.

And throughout it all, the message remained the same: Ukraine is nothing without us. You should be grateful. You should bow.

Trump openly said that Biden was stupid for helping Ukraine, implying that he wouldn’t have helped at all—so in his view, Ukraine should have lost already.

This wasn’t just an attempt to humiliate Zelensky personally. It was an effort to break Ukraine’s will to resist.

Trump wanted to force Zelensky into a situation where the next round of negotiations would be a three-party meeting—except next time, instead of Vance sitting next to Trump, it would be Putin.

And in that meeting, Zelensky’s only role would be to sit quietly and accept Ukraine’s total surrender.

This was clearly Trump’s plan all along.

And the French media reports that Trump originally wanted to block Zelensky from visiting at all now seem even more credible. Those reports likely came from sources close to Macron, who was in discussions with Trump.

Trump’s original strategy was simple: Meet with Putin first, agree on terms, and then force Zelensky to accept them.

But since that plan didn’t work out, he opted for Plan B—humiliate Zelensky and make it clear that Ukraine’s fate will be decided without Ukraine in the room.

Position of European Leaders Link to heading

Let’s take a look at how the world reacted. After that, we’ll return to the substance of yesterday’s events and discuss their consequences.

I won’t go over everything—I’ve compiled a list, and now we’ll go through how different figures around the world responded. I’ll start with those who supported Zelensky.

John Bolton, former U.S. National Security Advisor, stated:

Trump and Vance have declared that in the Russia-Ukraine war, they are on Russia’s side. This is a catastrophic mistake for U.S. national security. And let’s be honest—the responsibility for this policy now lies personally with Trump and Vance. This view is not shared by the majority of Americans or by either political party.

This is one of the most clear-headed reactions from the U.S., coming from a former Trump administration official.

Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, addressed Zelensky directly:

Your dignity is a tribute to the courage of the Ukrainian people. Stay strong, brave, and fearless. You are never alone, dear President.

Kaja Kallas, who is currently one of Europe’s top diplomatic figures, made a pointed remark aimed at Trump:

The free world needs a new leader.

The incoming Chancellor of Germany also addressed Zelensky:

Dear Volodymyr Zelensky, we support Ukraine in both good and difficult times. We must never confuse the aggressor and the victim in this terrible war.

The President of Lithuania, Ukraine’s neighbor, offered a message of solidarity:

You will never walk alone.

Critics and Opponents of Zelensky Link to heading

I won’t list every single reaction—there were too many. Nearly all EU countries, as well as Canada and other nations, voiced their support for Zelensky. The overwhelming majority of Europe stood with him, with one notable exception—which you’ve probably already guessed.

That exception, of course, is Viktor Orbán, Prime Minister of Hungary. His statement:

Strong people make peace. Weak people start wars. Today, President Donald Trump bravely stood for peace, even if many found it hard to accept. Thank you, Mr. President.

A truly deep and rough display of loyalty from Orbán. But did anyone expect anything different?

Naturally, Elon Musk also chimed in. He said a lot, but here are two key quotes:

Zelensky has been fired from the role he was playing.

Fired? By whom, exactly?

And another from Musk:

It’s time to find out what really happened to the hundreds of billions of dollars sent to Ukraine.

A clear insinuation—bordering on a threat.

Zelensky responded, pointing out that dozens of commissions and investigations have already verified that the aid, especially weapons, reached their intended recipients. No anti-aircraft systems or missiles were ever sold off—if they had been, it would have sparked an international scandal long ago.

Russian Reaction and Propaganda Link to heading

You wouldn’t believe the sheer joy in Russian commentary, dear friends.

Right now, I imagine they’re hurriedly repainting their slogans—switching from “Missiles on Washington!” back to “Trump, our man in the White House!”

Tonight at 22:00, we’ll go live with another episode of Mediafrenia. I’m not sure if we’ll have time to include the very latest TV propaganda, since tomorrow, we’ll have to air a second episode of Trumpofrenia. But what’s already clear is that official Russia, state media, and politicians are absolutely ecstatic over what happened in the Oval Office.

Dmitry Medvedev Link to heading

Let’s start with a quote from Russia’s infamous ghoul-in-chief, Dmitry Medvedev:

Trump gave the coke clown a brutal dressing-down in the Oval Office, telling him the truth to his face for the first time. The Kyiv regime is playing with World War III, and the ungrateful pig got a solid smack from its barnyard masters. That’s good—but not enough. Military aid to the Nazi war machine must be stopped.

And just a little later, Trump saluted and said, Yes, sir!, promptly responding exactly as Medvedev had wished. Trump wasted no time in beginning to carry out the Kremlin’s directive.

Now, am I completely certain that Trump is an actual Kremlin agent? No, I don’t know for sure. But he acts like one. Medvedev demanded an end to U.S. military aid to Ukraine, and Trump immediately started moving in that direction.

Alfred Koch Link to heading

Let’s also hear from Alfred Koch, who predictably blamed everything on Zelensky.

Looking back now, I suspect that 90% of Ukraine’s problems were caused by Zelensky’s rudeness and pettiness. But of course, you won’t believe me—you’ll just keep talking about Putin the sadistic psychopath or some grand geopolitical conspiracy.

Alfred Reinholdovich, as always, sticking to his usual repertoire.

I’m still preparing the second episode of Trumpofrenia, but rest assured—Koch has earned his place there. He’s a closet Trumpist—not openly wearing the MAGA hat, but always taking Trump’s side.

This brilliant theory of his—that Zelensky’s “rudeness” is the reason for Ukraine’s problems—has been his talking point throughout the entire war.

According to Koch’s logic, Putin had no choice but to invade. You see, Putin is a delicate, well-mannered gentleman, and he simply endured Zelensky’s insults for as long as he could. But in the end, what else could he do but start a full-scale war?

Apparently, in Koch’s world, Zelensky’s stand-up comedy career in the 2010s is what forced Russia to seize Crimea in 2014. 96% of Ukraine’s problems were already his fault back then!

And now—such a tragedy! Koch is so disappointed that he no longer feels like saying “Glory to Ukraine”. Poor Ukraine, losing such a devoted supporter!

Trump’s Reaction Link to heading

Trump himself doubled down:

We will either end this war or give in to ambition. We’ll see what happens. Putin wants to end the war, but Zelensky wants to keep fighting.

In other words—Trump’s version of events is that Putin is a peacemaker, and Zelensky is the warmonger.

Trump: Zelensky Must Stop Criticizing Putin Link to heading

Another key statement from Trump:

Zelensky must stop criticizing Putin and declare his willingness to make peace.

So, not only must Ukraine surrender, but it must also stop even verbally criticizing its aggressor.

Russia is currently killing Ukrainians—but, according to Trump, Zelensky must not speak out against Putin.

Lindsey Graham Joins In Link to heading

Senator Lindsey Graham, another Trump loyalist, also made his position clear:

Zelensky has two options—either resign and send someone we can negotiate with, or change his approach.

And, of Course, Vladimir Solovyov Link to heading

Naturally, we can’t forget Vladimir Solovyov. One of his gems:

Donald Trump is crushing Zelensky live on air. We’re witnessing the humiliation of the Kyiv junta leader. Zelensky will have to compromise on resolving the Ukrainian conflict, as Trump has made clear. The U.S. president has emphasized that it’s time to end the war in Ukraine. Russia wants peace.

Solovyov went on with many more pearls of wisdom, but I’ll spare your eyes and ears.

Actions of the Trump Administration After the Meeting Link to heading

Now, let’s look at the first consequences of this meeting before drawing some preliminary conclusions.

Immediate Fallout Link to heading

According to CNN, citing White House sources, after the heated exchange, Donald Trump asked the Ukrainian delegation to leave the White House—in other words, he kicked them out.

Zelensky and his team wanted to continue negotiations. They were ready to finalize a deal. But Trump, in his signature boorish manner, escalated his behavior even further and simply threw the Ukrainian president out.

Let’s be clear: from this moment on, every drop of blood spilled in Ukraine is not just on Putin’s hands—it is also on Trump’s hands. They are both responsible now.

Policy Shifts and Russian Demands Link to heading

According to NBC News, the U.S. State Department is halting its support for the restoration of Ukraine’s power grid.

So, here we have Trump reporting back to Medvedev. Medvedev demanded an end to aid for Ukraine, and Agent Trump is delivering: assistance for Ukraine’s energy infrastructure is now cut off.

The Record reports that the U.S. Secretary of Defense has ordered U.S. Cyber Command to cease all operations against Russia.

Once again, Agent Trump checking off another task on the Kremlin’s wish list. No doubt Medvedev will soon be updating Putin personally on Trump’s progress.

According to The Washington Post, Trump’s administration is considering stopping all current military aid to Ukraine following the confrontation with Zelensky.

At this rate, Trump might as well be reporting directly to the Kremlin.

Reactions from Trump’s Supporters Link to heading

Meanwhile, Trump’s loyalists in Congress have been furiously ranting—releasing videos and statements demanding that Zelensky never be allowed to visit the U.S. again.

Some claim that the Oval Office itself was “insulted” by Zelensky’s behavior.

Really? The Oval Office has seen worse.

Let’s not forget, for example, that Monica Lewinsky was once there, engaging in activities with a certain former occupant of the White House.

And to be clear—I have nothing against Monica Lewinsky. She was free to make her own choices. But the fact remains: what Trump and Vance tried to do to Zelensky in that room was not so different—except Zelensky fought back.

If anyone disrespected the Oval Office, it was Trump and his team, who tried to coerce a foreign leader into submission. Zelensky refused. And for that, he was thrown out.

Elon Musk’s Hypocrisy Link to heading

Elon Musk, now mourning the “humiliation” of the Oval Office, seems to have forgotten that just recently, his own four-year-old son was there, picking his nose and wiping it on the desk.

After that incident, Trump had the desk sent for restoration.

So let’s be real—the Oval Office has survived worse than Zelensky daring to stand his ground.

Consequences for Ukraine Link to heading

Now, let’s get serious.

Once again, there was no alternative. There was never a chance to come out of this with peace. Not even the slightest.

It’s clear now that Ukraine must win its own peace—with real allies.

Had Zelensky played by Trump’s rules, had he allowed himself to be humiliated, had he kissed the villain’s hand, as Russian literature puts it, the next steps would have been obvious.

The next meeting would have been Trump and Putin—where they would have settled everything between themselves.

Then, there would have been another meeting—this time the three of them.

Except, by then, Vance wouldn’t be needed. Putin himself would take on the role of the “provocateur.”

Together, Trump and Putin would have forced Zelensky into submission.

Maybe not literally, but in every practical sense, Ukraine would have been pushed into full and final capitulation—perhaps along the lines of those infamous Istanbul agreements that were once discussed.

Remember what was in them?

Ukraine’s army would have been reduced.
Ukraine would have been forced to accept Russia’s territorial claims.
And now, after Putin wrote half of Ukraine into the Russian Constitution, it would have meant surrendering Zaporizhzhia, Kherson, and more.

A total, unconditional capitulation.

But it didn’t happen.

The Road Ahead for Ukraine Link to heading

Now, things will be much harder for Ukraine.

But honestly—when has it ever been easy?

Since 2014? No. Since February 24, 2022? Definitely not.

At least now, some things are clear.

Not everything, of course—some questions remain murky—but overall, there is a new level of clarity.

So, what matters now?

What happens in Ukraine
What happens in Russia
What happens in the United States
What happens in Europe

What’s Next for Ukraine? Link to heading

Some things here are already predictable.

In December, Zelensky’s approval rating was around 53-57%.

Then, in February, after Trump called Zelensky a dictator, something interesting happened—Zelensky’s rating jumped to nearly 70%.

That was confirmed by Yevhen Holovakha, head of the Ukrainian Institute of Sociology, based on polling conducted after Trump’s remarks.

And now?

If polling agencies like Rating Group or the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology conduct another survey, I expect Zelensky’s approval to spike again—possibly back to 90%.

I could be wrong, of course. But given what happened, this seems like the most likely outcome.

So, in Ukraine, things are relatively predictable—for now.

Consequences for Russia Link to heading

What will happen in Russia is also fairly predictable.

The so-called “party of peace” has once again been shoved under the bench.

Now, we can expect a wave of triumphalism.

I anticipate an explosion of optimism in Russian media—celebrations, joy, and total monopolization of the information space by the war party.

Their new slogan will be obvious:

“Trump is with us! With Trump, we will defeat Ukraine!”

And why not? Diplomatic missions are reopening, and I wouldn’t be surprised if air travel between the U.S. and Russia is restored soon.

In fact, I wouldn’t rule out the possibility that Trump might attempt to strike some kind of deal with Putin.

Of course, it would be nothing serious—more of a fake deal, an imitation of diplomacy.

Not to mention that dirty word—rare earth elements.

It’s laughable, of course, but Trump could try to stage some theatrical agreement, even if it means nothing in practice.

No serious foreign investment is coming to Russia, no one is rushing in to develop its resources.

But as propaganda, it could be useful.

So, in Russia, we’re about to witness the total triumph of the war party.

Consequences for the U.S. Link to heading

The situation in the United States is a bit more complex.

I don’t think what happened yesterday in the Oval Office will immediately have a major impact—at least not directly.

Yes, there is significant outrage in political circles, but I’m not sure this will resonate deeply with the broader American public.

Most likely, the real consequences of Trump’s policies will only become apparent later—not because of this specific incident, but through economic shifts and declining living standards.

And when that happens, then we might see serious public discontent.

But for now, I don’t expect any major immediate changes in the U.S. as a result of this event.

Consequences for Europe Link to heading

And now, the most important question—what will happen in Europe?

We’ve seen near-total consolidation in support of Zelensky—almost 100%, with just one Trojan horse standing apart.

So, the key question is: Can this unity translate into stronger, more tangible support for Ukraine?

I think there’s a real chance.

Can Europe Replace U.S. Military Aid? Link to heading

Yes—but only under certain conditions.

The biggest factor? Whether Trump actively tries to block European arms purchases.

But here’s the thing—Trump is a businessman first and foremost.

He sees himself as the ultimate deal-maker, the money man, the master of American profit.

So, will he really go out of his way to stop European countries from buying American weapons for Ukraine—bringing money into the U.S. economy?

I doubt it.

He might grumble, he might grandstand, but at the end of the day, he’s unlikely to seriously fight against European-funded arms deals.

So, when it comes to Europe—this could be a turning point.

The End of Illusions and Clarity in Positions Link to heading

The most important outcome of yesterday’s events is the clarity that has emerged—now that the rare-earth fog has lifted.

Clarity is always better than uncertainty.

At the very least, things are now clear:

Who truly supports Ukraine
Who openly opposes it
Who is, in effect, siding with Russia

And that, I believe, is the one positive takeaway from this situation.

Of course, it’s disappointing—some hopes were there, but in the end, they turned out to be illusions.

Conclusion and Upcoming Broadcasts Link to heading

Tonight at 22:00, we have Mediafrenia.

Tomorrow, we’ll wrap up the week on both channels, followed by the second episode of Trumpofrenia in the evening.

Well, dear friends, that’s where we’ll end this special morning broadcast.

There will be no Q&A today—I’ll answer all your questions on Monday.

Glory to Ukraine!

Take care of yourselves. Freedom for Alexander Skobov, Russian political prisoners, and Ukrainian captives!

Everything continues. And in times like these, clarity is not the worst thing we could have hoped for.

Stay safe, and see you soon—tonight at 22:00.

Goodbye.

Source: https://youtu.be/o4yteFeAiVk