President Trump’s latest foreign policy misstep has even staunch conservatives scratching their heads.
According to The Hill, over a whirlwind few days at Mar-a-Lago, Trump met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to hash out a 20-point peace proposal, only to pivot the next day by seemingly endorsing Russia’s unverified claims of a Ukrainian drone assault on Vladimir Putin’s residence, prompting sharp criticism from retiring Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) for jumping the gun on blame.
Sunday saw Trump hosting Zelensky at his Palm Beach, Fla., estate, discussing a potential roadmap to end the grinding conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
By Monday, the tone had shifted as Trump greeted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the same venue; however, it was a phone call with Putin earlier that day that had grabbed headlines.
Trump told reporters he learned from Putin himself about an alleged overnight attack involving 91 long-range drones targeting the Russian leader’s residence in the Novgorod region.
“I was very angry about it,” Trump declared, doubling down with, “It’s a delicate period of time. This is not the right time.”
Let’s unpack that: Trump’s frustration over an unconfirmed incident, relayed by a leader with a questionable track record for truth, feels like a diplomatic fumble when peace talks are on a knife-edge.
Rep. Don Bacon, never shy about calling out Trump on foreign policy blunders, didn’t hold back on Monday with his critique of the president’s hasty judgment.
“President Trump and his team should get the facts first before assuming blame. Putin is a well known boldface liar,” Bacon stated, cutting to the heart of why conservatives should demand verification over blind trust in Moscow’s narrative.
Bacon, who’s stepping away from Congress soon, has a history of challenging Trump’s approach to the Russia-Ukraine mess, and his latest jab carries the weight of experience over impulsive rhetoric.
Trump’s comments, framed around what he called a “delicate period of time,” suggest he’s aware of the high stakes in ongoing peace negotiations, yet his willingness to echo Putin’s story muddies the waters.
Is this really the moment to take sides based on a phone call, especially when the other party has a reputation for spinning tall tales? It’s a head-scratcher for those of us who value strategic clarity over emotional outbursts.
On the flip side, Trump did leave a sliver of doubt, telling reporters, “Well, we’ll find out,” when pressed on whether the attack even happened, though he quickly noted Putin’s personal account as his source.
Still, for a leader championing America First, leaning into Russia’s version of events without hard evidence feels like a betrayal of the skepticism conservatives usually bring to the table against progressive globalist agendas.