Category: Michael Novakhov – SharedNewsLinks℠
Category Added in a WPeMatico Campaign
 |
Michael_Novakhov shared this story from  Recent Contributors to The National Law Review.
|
DOJ Reform on Collision Course: EDNY’s Netflix ‘Evidence’ and FBI Misconduct Under Scrutiny
Monday, February 24, 2025
As the Department of Justice undergoes a seismic shift under the Trump administration, prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York (EDNY) find themselves at the center of controversy over the prosecution of OneTaste co-founder Nicole Daedone and former sales leader Rachel Cherwitz. The case, which invokes human trafficking laws against meditation instructors, is emerging as a key test of the DOJ’s evolving priorities and its commitment to FBI reform.
The government’s attempt to introduce content from a Netflix documentary as trial evidence—journal entries created specifically for the streaming platform’s 2022 production—has already drawn scrutiny, particularly as the film predated the indictment by only a few months. With allegations of FBI misconduct also mounting, this prosecution may soon face the same intense DOJ oversight that recently rocked the Southern District of New York (SDNY).
Mounting Evidence of FBI Misconduct
A formal complaint filed with multiple federal oversight bodies by OneTaste’s legal team—led by former senior DOJ prosecutor Paul Pelletier—alleges a “pervasive pattern of prejudicial investigatory misconduct.” The 36-page document details allegations against FBI Special Agent Elliot McGinnis, including:
- Participation in Netflix productions while investigating targets
- Instructing witnesses to delete evidence
- Using personal email accounts to evade oversight
- Filing misleading affidavits
- Suppressing Brady material
- Illegally obtaining and utilizing attorney-client privileged materials
Despite defense motions for dismissal and requests for an evidentiary hearing into the FBI’s conduct, EDNY trial judge Diane Gujarati has thus far declined to intervene. However, with the expected confirmation of incoming FBI Director Kash Patel, this case could soon find itself under heightened scrutiny. Patel, whose nomination cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee on February 13, has signaled a commitment to rooting out political bias within the bureau. Senator Chuck Grassley, in supporting Patel’s confirmation, characterized the FBI as being “badly infected with political decision-making” and emphasized the need for transparency and accountability.
The SDNY Shake-Up and Its Implications for EDNY
The upheaval in the SDNY provides a stark warning to EDNY prosecutors. On February 10, Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove ordered SDNY to dismiss corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, citing two primary concerns: improper interference with Adams’ 2025 reelection campaign and the diversion of prosecutorial resources away from violent crime and immigration violations.
This decision ignited a firestorm within SDNY, culminating in the resignation of Acting U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon after she appealed directly to Attorney General Pam Bondi. DOJ officials responded swiftly, accusing Sassoon of pursuing a “politically motivated prosecution” based on “aggressive” legal theories. The Adams case was subsequently reassigned to DOJ headquarters in Washington, D.C., and seven SDNY prosecutors were terminated in the fallout.
SDNY’s long-standing reputation for operating with relative independence—often referred to as the “Sovereign District of New York”—appears to be a thing of the past under the current DOJ. EDNY prosecutors, who have historically enjoyed similar autonomy, now face the prospect of increased oversight as they navigate this high-profile case.
The Human Trafficking Paradox
On February 5, Attorney General Bondi issued directives instructing federal prosecutors to focus on “the most serious, readily provable offenses,” emphasizing illegal immigration, transnational crime, and human trafficking. Yet, as this directive takes effect, EDNY prosecutors continue to invest significant resources in a novel, single-count forced labor conspiracy case against wellness educators under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). The government’s untested theory of “coercive control” as a form of trafficking has drawn criticism from legal experts, who argue that it blurs the distinction between social pressure and criminal coercion.
The case against OneTaste presents a paradox: at a time when the DOJ is pivoting towards dismantling actual human trafficking operations, EDNY’s six-year-long pursuit of this prosecution may soon come under question. The precedent set by the SDNY shake-up suggests that DOJ leadership is willing to intervene aggressively when a prosecution is deemed misaligned with national priorities.
A Trial Under Increasing Pressure
With jury selection set to begin on May 5, 2025, the ground beneath the OneTaste prosecution is shifting rapidly. Judge Gujarati’s refusal to schedule additional pre-trial conferences suggests confidence in the case, but the broader DOJ realignment paints a different picture.
The question now is not just whether this case will proceed to trial, but whether EDNY prosecutors will maintain their current course in the face of growing federal scrutiny. As the DOJ consolidates control over its regional offices and refocuses its priorities, EDNY must weigh its prosecutorial independence against the new realities taking shape in Washington. If SDNY’s recent upheaval serves as any indication, the days of unchecked autonomy for federal prosecutors in New York may be numbered.
|
Michael_Novakhov shared this story from |
Which way does your sexuality swing?
The bisexual cohort — those who are sexually attracted to both men and women — is growing. A 2024 Gallup poll showed that 4.4% of American adults say they are bisexual, including 57.3% of those who already identify as LGBTQ+.
However, research has recently shown that bisexuality may be even more ubiquitous than we previously understood.
Dr. Jason Hodgson, an evolutionary geneticist at Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge, spoke to Daily Mail about his studies on the human “bisexual range,” claiming that people are rarely wholly heterosexual or homosexual — instead falling somewhere on a spectrum of sexuality.
“I predict that most people should actually be bisexual,” Hodson said.
“The genes that influence same-sex sexual behavior are probably just genes that influence general sociality, and people in the middle of the range of variation are probably better at all social relationships.”
“Therefore people who would engage in same-sex sexual behavior in some situations are probably also better at forming heterosexual relationships.”
Hodgson uses a simple numeric formula to illustrate his point: Everyone is placed in a 0 to 1 range, with 0 denoting heterosexuality and 1 indicating pure homosexuality.
“So, if a person had one homosexual experience and 99 heterosexual experiences their value would be 1/100 or 0.01 — just slightly in the bisexual range.”
It should also be noted that a sexual “experience” may come in the form of a true physical encounter with another person, but could also cover those who experience arousal at the mere sight or thought of another. Ergo, a person would not need to engage in both heterosexual and homosexual acts in real life to qualify as bisexual.
“I suspect most people would be slightly in the bisexual range if given the right social circumstances,” Hodgson said, adding that engaging in bisexual experiences is not the same as identifying as bisexual.
The anthropologist said this rule holds true of most primates, explaining how bisexuality plays an important social role. In a 2016 study, Hodgson discovered that bonobos are one of the few animal species that engage in regular same-sex sexual interactions, often even more than with opposite-sex.
“Bonobos are bisexual, and this is thought to contribute to group cohesion,” Hodgson wrote in the paper, published in the Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science. “Bisexuality may be the norm, as those individuals involved in homosexual sex often also take part in reproductive sex.”
Hodgson also noted that “many, many genes” work together to determine human sexuality, meaning that sexual orientation is to some degree a heritable trait.
“Genes that influence same-sex sexual behavior are common, and most everyone has them to a lesser or greater degree,” he said.
|
Michael_Novakhov shared this story from |
Western thinking of Turkish and Azerbaijani Presidents Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Ilham Aliyev has been very wrong. Both countries are Ukraine’s strongest allies in the Greater Middle East, where Arab countries and Israel are sitting on the fence and trying to play both sides or hiding their heads in the sand. This is not the case with Turkiye and Azerbaijan.
Turkiye and Azerbaijan have a close military and political alliance drawn up after the 2020 Second Karabakh War. Both countries are critically disposed toward Russia and align with the pro-Western camp: Turkiye as a NATO member and Azerbaijan as a non-aligned country that has stayed away from Russian-led Eurasian integration projects.
Turkiye is home to millions of Crimean Tatars who moved to the Ottoman Empire in the nineteenth century. Their Crimean homeland was occupied by the Russian Empire in 1783 which changed its ethnic balance. Crimean Tatars, who closely follow developments in Russian-occupied Crimea, where racism, Islamophobia, and political repression is endemic, are a powerful anti-Russian lobby in Turkiye.
Iran meanwhile has become Russia’s staunchest ally in the Kremlin’s fight against the US-dominated unipolar world and its replacement by an allegedly more ‘democratic’ multipolar world. Iran is constructing a facility to build Shaheed drones in Russia, while Turkiye is building a plant to build Bayraktar drones in Ukraine.
Western governments have wrongly portrayed President Erdogan as being in bed with Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, and were therefore wrong-footed by his recent steps. In the space of a week, Erdogan released Ukrainian POWs from the Spring 2022 battle for the port of Mariupol, infuriating the Kremlin because they had been released from Russian captivity on the basis that they would spend the entirety of the war in Turkiye.
But Erdogan went even further. On the eve of the recent NATO summit, Erdogan extended strong support to Ukraine becoming a member of NATO. Turkiye’s support infuriated the Kremlin who has expressed strong opposition to Ukraine joining NATO and the EU because this would definitively end any possibility of bringing the country into the Russian World.
In addition to 35 Bayraktar TB2 and 24 Mini-Bayraktar reconnaissance drones, Turkiye is sending other types of military equipment to Ukraine. Before the US announcement, Turkiye said it would supply Ukraine with cluster munitions. Turkiye sent up to 200 TRLG-230 Rokestan missiles to Ukraine that can be fired from multiple rocket launchers and have a range of 20 to 70 kilometers. Turkiye also sent 200 Kirpi mine-resistant armoured personnel carriers and 20 COBRA II 4×4 Tactical Wheeled Armoured Vehicles.
During the same week of NATO’s summit in Vilnius, Turkiye said it’s navy would escort Ukrainian grain ships through the Black Sea. Turkiye’s offer will be tested later this month after Russia refused to extend the UN-Turkish brokered grain deal beyond July 17. Turkiye’s battle of wills with Russia will impact the Kremlin’s arrogant view of the Black Sea constituting a ‘Russian lake.’
Azerbaijan’s strategic importance to Ukraine is six-fold. Firstly, Azerbaijan is the only south Caucasian state that has successfully resisted Russian control over its affairs. With three Russian military bases, Armenia is a long-time ally of Russia since the early 1990s and is a member of all Russian-led integration projects in Eurasia. Georgia has been captured by Georgian-Russian oligarch Bidzina Ivanishvili who has put former President Mikhail Saakashvili, a long-time opponent of Putin, in jail on trumped up charges.
Secondly, Azerbaijan is alone in the south Caucasus in not breaking Western sanctions against Russia. Armenia and Georgia are actively involved in sanctions busting both due to high-level corruption and because the Kremlin has influence over the ruling elites of both countries.
Thirdly, Armenia and Georgia, but not Azerbaijan, are disseminating the Kremlin’s talking points justifying Russia’s so-called ‘special military operation’ against Ukraine. Georgian leaders have parroted the Kremlin’s disinformation by blaming the West for the war in Ukraine. Speaking at the GLOBSEC Bratislava security forum in May, Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Garibashvili said ‘one of the main reasons’ behind the war in Ukraine ‘was NATO expansion … the desire of Ukraine to become a member of NATO.’ The Georgian Orthodox Church has taken the side of the Russian Orthodox Church over Ukraine receiving Orthodox autocephaly (independence). The Georgian Orthodox Church joined the Kremlin in protesting against Ukraine’s clamp down on subversion and Russian Orthodox clergy collaboration with Russian occupying forces.
Fourthly, Azerbaijan and Ukraine uphold the territorial integrity of states, which is not true of irridentist powers such as Russia and Armenia. Ukraine has given unqualified support to Karabakh constituting Azerbaijani sovereign territory. Meanwhile, Azerbaijan has not supported Russia’s invasion and occupation of Ukrainian territory during votes on critical resolutions at the United Nations.
Fifthly, Azerbaijan’s supply of energy to the European Union, together with other countries such as the US and Norway, removes Russia’s stranglehold over energy supplies. Azerbaijan is one of the strategically important countries assisting Europe to become energy independent of revanchist Russia.
Finally, Azerbaijan provides free energy to Ukraine for humanitarian work. Since Russia’s invasion, the Azerbaijani state energy company SOCAR has been providing free gas and petrol to vehicles used for humanitarian missions, such as delivering aid to internally displaced people, ambulances and fire trucks. In June Azerbaijan supplied twenty tons of fuel to Ukraine free of charge as humanitarian aid, as well as water pipes, water pumps, and life jackets, in response to Russia’s terrorist destruction of the Kakhovka dam.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has highlighted how Turkiye and Azerbaijan are close allies of Ukraine over a wide range of areas. As the second biggest military power in NATO, Russia is forced to take Turkiye seriously when it supplies military equipment to Ukraine and protects grain convoys sailing through the Black Sea.
Turkiye, Azerbaijan, and Ukraine oppose Russian irridentism in Eurasia and Russian-led Eurasian integration projects; uphold the territorial integrity of states and Karabakh as Azerbaijani sovereign territory; and recognize the importance of European energy independence from Russia. Turkiye and Azerbaijan stand with Ukraine during votes at the UN condemning Russia’s invasion and occupation. Unlike Georgia and Armenia, Turkiye and Azerbaijan do not fan Russian disinformation about the causes of the Russian invasion.
Taras Kuzio is a professor of political science at the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy. His latest book is Fascism and Genocide. Russia’s War Against Ukrainians
The views expressed in this article belong to the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect those of <a href=”http://Geopoliticalmonitor.com” rel=”nofollow”>Geopoliticalmonitor.com</a>.
|
Michael_Novakhov shared this story from  Trend – News from Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Iran and Turkey..
|
BAKU, Azerbaijan, February 16. Azerbaijan’s
Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov met with Türkiye’s Foreign
Minister Hakan Fidan on February 15, on the sidelines of the Munich
Security Conference, Trend reports.
The ministers discussed political, security, economic, and
transport-communication aspects of Azerbaijan-Türkiye allied
relations, as well as key regional and international developments.
They emphasized the importance of continued cooperation and mutual
support within regional and international organizations, including
the Organization of Turkic States (OTS), the UN, and the
Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).
The discussions also covered developments in the Middle East,
particularly in Gaza and Syria. Minister Bayramov provided a
detailed update on the regional situation and the ongoing
Azerbaijan-Armenia peace process.
The two sides also exchanged views on other issues of mutual
interest.
|
Michael_Novakhov shared this story from  Islamabad Post.
|
By: Qamar Bashir
Macomb, Detroit, Michigan
President Donald Trump accused the U.S. bureaucracy of massive fraud, waste, and abuse, citing an investigation led by Elon Musk that uncovered billions of dollars in misused funds. He condemned judges for obstructing his reform agenda, calling their block on his $3 billion federal grant freeze “intolerable judicial interference.” Trump also charged the Pentagon with corruption and financial mismanagement, referencing a 2023 audit that found $2.1 trillion unaccounted for. He accused USAID of funneling billions into mainstream media as payoffs for pro-Democrat coverage, calling it “too big, too dirty” to ignore. Further, he alleged USAID provided over $697 million to terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, and ISIS under the guise of aid and meddled in foreign elections by sending $15 million to Pakistan’s Election Commission to manipulate the 2024 vote, as exposed by journalist Ryan Grim and others.
For the first time in U.S. history, President Donald Trump is spearheading an unprecedented effort to uproot not only the entrenched bureaucracy but also the military, federal institutions like USAID, IRS, Pentagon, health agencies, law enforcement, CIA, and FBI, as well as the judiciary and the media. Trump has positioned himself as the only leader who has truly recognized the deep-seated corruption, overregulation, and misuse of tax dollars by these institutions.
He asserts that federal agencies have participated in unauthorized commissions and omissions, directed taxpayer funds towards inefficient projects, and established a bureaucratic grip that hinders economic and financial liberty.
He argues that instead of fulfilling their duty to serve the public, these institutions—including judges, bureaucrats, politicians, and the media—have formed a corrupt nexus to amass wealth, secure lavish perks, and misuse their power. This unchecked authority, rather than facilitating public welfare, has crippled economic activities through excessive regulations, leading to inflation, soaring unemployment, and an unprecedented cost-of-living crisis.
These institutional failures have not only burdened American citizens but also weakened the United States’ global leadership in military power, economic dominance, trade, and investment.
Once regarded as the world’s strongest economy, the U.S. now faces the reality of losing its competitive edge to rising powers like China, the Middle Eastern economic hubs, and industrial giants in South Korea, Japan, and Europe.
While these nations are constructing advanced infrastructure such as highways, airports, and ports, the infrastructure in the U.S. is rapidly deteriorating.
A firsthand experience of this decline can be seen in Michigan, where our family arrived in September 2024, only to find crumbling roads, broken highways, and entire neighborhoods—like Hamtramck in Detroit—worse than many underdeveloped countries.
Even major airports and subways in cities like New York, which should symbolize American progress, are far inferior to those in rising global economic centers. This visible decay has become a symbol of how mismanagement and corruption have weakened the country from within.
President Donald Trump has laid out a powerful argument against the unchecked power of the judiciary, questioning how an unelected, taxpayer-funded judge can override the orders of a democratically elected president. He argues that this authority is often motivated by self-interest—protecting judicial power, safeguarding the bureaucracy, and maintaining strong ties with economic and political elites.
Trump has rightly argued that if an unelected judge holds the power to veto presidential orders, it raises serious doubts about the integrity of the democratic system. A president, chosen by the people to enact policies in the public interest, should not have their authority unilaterally obstructed by an appointed judge. Such interference, he contends, undermines the very foundation of democracy, shifting power away from the electorate and into the hands of unaccountable judicial figures.
His assertion is rooted in logic: either power must rest with the elected representatives of the people, or the current system is nothing more than an illusion of democracy, controlled by an entrenched elite that serves itself rather than the nation.
The very foundation of American democracy is now facing an unprecedented challenge. Instead of functioning as a government of, by, and for the people, the U.S. system has become a battleground where institutions operate with separate mandates and self-serving agendas, often at odds with the will of the public.
The bureaucracy—both civil and military—along with the judiciary, has consolidated power to such an extent that elected representatives have been reduced to mere figureheads, unable to implement meaningful change. As a result, the wealth and power of the country have been diverted away from the general public and into the hands of bureaucratic elites, further deepening economic inequality and weakening the nation.
This imbalance has led to a situation where the system exists to sustain itself, rather than to serve the citizens it was designed to protect. The more the bureaucracy tightens its grip, the more the country drifts away from its founding democratic principles.
In contrast, nations where government institutions function in harmony—where every pillar of the state aligns itself with the leadership’s vision—are proving far more effective in delivering stability, prosperity, and national progress. When leadership sets a course, and institutions work collectively to implement it, these governments are able to build state-of-the-art infrastructure, boost economic growth, and enhance the well-being of their people.
The U.S., on the other hand, is witnessing institutional fragmentation, where different branches of government operate in conflict rather than in unison, obstructing national progress instead of facilitating it.
This is why Trump’s call for systemic reform is not merely about politics—it is about ensuring that power is exercised with accountability, that democracy is truly representative, and that government institutions work for the people, rather than against them.
Recognizing these deep-rooted structural failures, President Trump has declared war on nearly all pillars of the state and their subordinate institutions. His agenda aims to dismantle the bureaucratic stranglehold, expose the judiciary’s complicity, and challenge the media’s biased role in shaping public perception.
This is not just a political battle but a fundamental restructuring of how power is distributed and exercised in the country. Trump’s reforms are not merely cosmetic changes—they are surgical interventions aimed at breaking the alliance between corrupt bureaucrats, activist judges, and self-serving media elites.
Whether he succeeds in his mission or faces unprecedented resistance from these institutions, his presidency has already sparked the most radical political and institutional shake-up in modern U.S. history.
By: Qamar Bashir
Press Secretary to the President (Rtd)
Former Press Minister at Embassy of Pakistan to France
Former MD, SRBC
|
Michael_Novakhov shared this story . |
Kash Patel, U.S. President Donald Trump’s nominee to be director of the FBI, looks on as he testifies before a Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., January 30, 2025.
Evelyn Hockstein | Reuters
President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the FBI, Kash Patel, was accused Tuesday of personally directing an “ongoing purge” of civil servants at the agency before being confirmed by the Senate.
In a letter to the Justice Department’s internal watchdog, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., wrote that he had “received highly credible information from multiple sources,” who described Patel’s alleged involvement in the personnel decisions.
“This alleged misconduct is beyond the pale and must be investigated immediately,” wrote Durbin, the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, in the letter to Inspector General Michael Horowitz.
“It is unacceptable for a nominee with no current role in government, much less at the FBI, to personally direct unjustified and potentially illegal adverse employment actions against senior career FBI leadership and other dedicated, nonpartisan law enforcement officers,” the senator wrote.
Trump nominated Patel, a loyalist who has called for rooting out anti-Trump “conspirators” in the government and the media, on Nov. 30.
Patel has not yet been confirmed by the Senate; the Judiciary Committee is expected to vote Thursday on whether to advance his nomination.
“If these allegations are true,” wrote Durbin, then Patel “may have perjured himself” at his recent Senate confirmation hearing.
Lying to Congress — whether under oath or not — is a federal crime punishable by up to five years in prison. But doing so rarely leads to criminal charges.
After asking the White House for comment on the letter, CNBC was referred to a tweet earlier Tuesday from Patel spokeswoman Erica Knight, who accused media outlets of “relying on anonymous sources and second-hand gossip to push a false narrative.”
“Kash Patel is a highly qualified national security expert who has been fully transparent with the American people throughout this process and has demonstrated the integrity and leadership needed for this role,” she wrote in the post. “The Senate should confirm him without delay.”
The FBI declined to comment on Durbin’s letter, which was first reported by The New York Times.
Durbin’s sources alleged Patel has been receiving internal FBI information from a member of a newly established unit called the Director’s Advisory Team.
Patel then allegedly “provides direction” to White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, who relays it to top Trump officials, including acting deputy Attorney General Emil Bove, Durbin wrote.
Patel’s relationships with people running the FBI in an acting capacity were previously reported by NBC News.
Durbin’s subsequent allegation that Patel may have perjured himself before the Senate stems from an exchange Patel had with Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., during his confirmation hearing before the Judiciary panel on Jan. 30.
“Are you aware of any plans or discussions to punish in any way, including termination, FBI agents or personnel associated with Trump investigations?” Booker asked Patel.
The nominee replied that he was “not aware.”
Patel also claimed that he did not know “what’s going on right now over there, but I’m committed to you, senator, and your colleagues that I will honor the internal review process of the FBI.”
“All FBI employees will be protected against political retribution,” Patel told the senators, while downplaying some of his other controversial past remarks.
Patel’s remarks came as the Trump administration was pushing out several top FBI officials and federal prosecutors, including some who were involved in prosecuting people charged in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.
The events at DOJ have opened a “leadership and experience vacuum” that has “made Americans less safe,” Durbin wrote to Horowitz.
“The ramifications of removing senior leaders and threatening the removal of thousands of other FBI agents are particularly disastrous,” he added.
“The urgency of this matter cannot be overstated,” wrote Durbin.
|
Michael_Novakhov shared this story . |
The Kremlin said Monday that U.S.-Russia relations were on the brink of collapse and refused to confirm whether Russian President Vladimir Putin had spoken with President Donald Trump, despite Trump saying so Sunday.
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told a media conference Monday that relations with Washington “are balancing on the brink of a breakup” and reiterated that the war in Ukraine would last until Kyiv drops its ambitions to join NATO and withdraws from the four regions occupied by Russian forces.
In remarks suggesting Moscow is maintaining its tough negotiating stance, Ryabkov said that “we simply imperatively need to get … the new U.S. administration to understand and acknowledge that without resolving the problems that are the root causes of the crisis in Ukraine, it will not be possible to reach an agreement.”
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said the same day that he would “neither confirm nor deny” Trump’s comments to reporters on Air Force One on Sunday that he and Putin had spoken in his first officially acknowledged contact with the Russian leader since 2022.
Referring to his contact with the Russian leader, Trump told reporters, “let’s just say I’ve had it … and I expect to have many more conversations. We have to get that war ended.”
“I hate to see all these young people being killed. The soldiers are being killed by the hundreds of thousands,” he said, but declined to provide any more details about how many times the two had spoken, responding, “I’d better not say.”
The remarks from Trump and spokespeople for the Kremlin come at a crucial juncture for the war in Ukraine, with Kyiv and its European neighbors nervously awaiting details of Trump’s peace plan to end the conflict that Russia launched with its full-scale invasion three years ago.
Between winning election in November and being inaugurated last month, Trump said he planned to end the war in a single day upon taking office.
Referring to Trump’s remarks Sunday, Keir Giles, a senior fellow of the Russia and Eurasia Program at the London think-tank Chatham House, said “it would be tempting to think that this was all part of a careful plan for not releasing information too early in order not to bridge this process.”
“Or it could simply be that, as seems to be the case with Trump’s earlier promises of immediate action to bring the conflict to an end, that there isn’t, in fact, a plan yet,” he told NBC News.
Giles added that more clarity on the situation may come later this week, with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy due to attend the high-profile Munich Security Conference, which senior U.S. officials are also attending.
Trump’s national security adviser, Mike Waltz, told NBC News’ “Meet the Press” on Sunday that the U.S. officials would be “talking through the details of how to end this war and that will mean getting both sides to the table.”
He added that Trump would be “prepared to tax, to tariff, to sanction” Moscow to get Putin to the negotiating table, while also stripping back assistance to Ukraine to force European allies to ramp up support to Ukraine.
Ryabkov’s comments today came after Zelenskyy told the British broadcaster ITV last week that he was ready to hold talks with Russia as long as “I had an understanding that America and Europe will not abandon us and they will support us and provide security guarantees.”
The Ukrainian leader also told Reuters on Sunday that it was important he meets Trump before any negotiations with Putin, “otherwise, it will look like a dialogue about Ukraine without Ukraine.”
A Russian drone attack on Kyiv late Sunday injured a woman and damaged several houses in the northeastern city of Sumy, Ukrainian officials said Monday.
Astha Rajvanshi
Astha Rajvanshi is a reporter for NBC News Digital, based in London. Previously, she worked as a staff writer covering international news for TIME.