Behind the big smile, and the handshakes, and the assurances that he’s just joking, you never know what really is going through Donald Trump’s mind.

One of the major sticking points in Russia-Ukraine negotiations has been Vladimir Putin’s assertion that Volodymyr Zelensky is no longer the legitimate president of Ukraine, his term having run out in May of 2024, and therefore has no standing to negotiate peace terms. But the Ukrainian Constitution provides that no presidential election may be held while the country is at war . . . which, of course, it has been since the Russian invasion of February 2022. So Putin’s claim is specious at best, and merely another stalling tactic.

But during this week’s meeting at the White House, the subject was raised by a journalist, and Zelensky assured Trump and the others present in the Oval Office that, once the war was over, his country would definitely hold a proper, legal, democratic election.

Now, we’ve all heard Trump’s suggestive comments about finding a way to run for a third term, despite the U.S. Constitutional limitation of two presidential terms. So it comes as no surprise that he would jump on the opportunity to respond to Zelensky, in front of the assembled press corps:

“During the war, you can’t have elections? So let me just see, three and a half years from now, if we happen to be in a war with somebody, no more elections? That’s good.” [C-Span, August 18, 2025.]

Then he laughed. But somewhere in the back of his mind, might a seed have been planted to the effect that perhaps, in the next three and a half years, he could manage both to push through a similar Constitutional provision and start a war, leaving him free to remain in office?

Extreme? Certainly. And if it weren’t for his previous suggestions, this could easily be dismissed as a joke. But Trump’s friend Vladimir Putin has done it — not just once, but with two Constitutional amendments, a couple of wars in Chechnya, and an ongoing one in Ukraine.

So why not . . . ?

*. *. *

Conversely, it can also be dangerous to take Trump at his word when he is at his most serious. Case in point:

In that same Oval Office meeting on Monday, August 18th, when asked by a reporter if a failure to reach a peace deal would mean “the end of the road” for U.S. aid to Ukraine, Trump replied:

“I can never say that, it’s never the end of the road.” [Zac Anderson and Francesca Chambers, USA Today, August 18, 2025.]

And when pressed further for an answer as to whether he would be willing to send U.S. peacekeepers to Ukraine as part of post-war security guarantees, he replied that, while European nations would be the “first line of defense . . . we’re going to help them out also. We’ll be involved.” [Zac Anderson, USA Today, August 19, 2025.]

But in a Fox News interview the very next day, August 19th, he said that U.S. troops would not be involved in any peacekeeping effort in Ukraine after the war. And he was asked specifically:

“What kind of assurances do you feel like you have, going forward, past this Trump administration, that it won’t be American boots on the ground defending [Ukraine’s] border?” And his response was:

“Well, you have my assurance, and I’m president.” [Alayna Treene and Kevin Liptak, CNN, August 19, 2025.]

Well, that’s reassuring as hell!

*. *. *

What’s the old saying? . . . “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.”

I’ve lost count of the number of times we’ve already been “fooled.”

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/20/25