Did Democrats Sink the Zelensky-Trump Meeting—and Break the Law Doing It? By Chris Knight (Florida)

Something stinks in the corridors of power, and it's not hard to trace the stench back to a single explosive question: Did a cadre of Democrats deliberately torpedo a critical meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and President Donald Trump in early 2025—and in doing so, violate the Logan Act? The pieces are falling into place as of March 3, 2025, and what's emerging is a picture of calculated interference that could have far-reaching implications for America, Ukraine, and the rule of law. If this is true, we're not just talking about political gamesmanship—we're talking about betrayal, illegality, and blood on their hands. Treason in fact.

The story starts with a meeting that never stood a chance. Trump, fresh into his second term, was reportedly gearing up for a phone call with Zelensky, aiming to broker a peace deal or at least nudge Ukraine toward negotiations with Russia. The details are murky, but whispers of a minerals deal—potentially tying Ukraine's resources to American interests—were in the air. Enter the Democrats. According to reports, key figures like Senator Chris Murphy and a shadowy lineup of Obama-era operatives met with Zelensky just before this pivotal call. The Focal Points lays it bare: Democrats urged Zelensky to ditch any deal with Trump, warning him not to trust the new administration's promises. Geller Report names names—Victoria Nuland, Susan Rice, Alexander Vindman—claiming they told Zelensky to hold firm, effectively scuttling Trump's plans. The result? A diplomatic trainwreck, with Trump and Zelensky at odds and peace talks stalled.

Let's cut to the chase: This smells like sabotage. If these accounts hold water, Democrats didn't just meddle—they actively undermined a sitting president's foreign policy. The Focal Points suggests their motive was pure Trump Derangement Syndrome—cripple his agenda, make him look weak, even if it meant prolonging a war. Geller Report goes further, painting it as a deep-state power play by neocons and Biden loyalists desperate to keep Ukraine as a proxy battlefield. Whatever the reason, the outcome is the same: Zelensky dug in, Trump fumed, and the chance for de-escalation slipped away. Every day the war drags on, more Ukrainian and Russian lives are lost, casualties that might rest on the conscience of those who pulled these strings.

Now, the legal bombshell: Could this violate the Logan Act? This 1799 law bars private U.S. citizens from interfering in foreign policy without authorisation, with penalties up to three years in prison. It's rarely enforced. If Murphy, Nuland, Rice, and Vindman, acting as private citizens or outside their official roles, coached Zelensky to defy Trump, they weren't just playing politics, they were stepping into territory the law forbids. Posts on X are buzzing with this theory, pointing to past Logan Act scrutiny of Trump allies like General Michael Flynn. If the Obama DOJ could target Flynn for talking to Russia, why not turn the tables here? The hypocrisy is glaring.

But let's not get ahead of ourselves—there's a flip side. The Logan Act's vagueness is legendary; courts have never convicted anyone under it. Were these Democrats still in official roles, like Murphy as a senator? If so, they might argue it's within their purview to meet foreign leaders. And motive matters—did they intend to usurp Trump's authority, or just sway Zelensky's perspective? The Focal Points hints at coordination with Kamala Harris's team, suggesting a broader Biden-era holdover plot, but evidence is thin. Geller Report's claims of Nuland and Rice's involvement lean on unnamed sources, raising red flags about reliability. Still, the timing—days before the Trump call—reeks of intent. Coincidence doesn't stretch that far.

The stakes couldn't be higher. If Democrats sank this meeting, they didn't just kneecap Trump—they prolonged a war that's bleeding Ukraine dry and risking global escalation. Russia's grinding advance continues, and every stalled negotiation is a win for Putin. Meanwhile, Trump's "America First" base fumes, seeing this as proof the swamp still rules. Posts on X scream "treason" and "arrest them," reflecting a raw public anger that's hard to dismiss. Even if the Logan Act doesn't stick, the court of public opinion is less forgiving—and it's already rendering a verdict.

So, where does this leave us? We've got a tantalising thesis: Democrats, driven by spite or ideology, meddled in a way that could be illegal, immoral, or both. The evidence, circumstantial but damning, points to a pre-emptive strike on Trump's diplomacy. Yet, without hard proof of their words to Zelensky or a smoking-gun document, it's a hypothesis. What's not in doubt is the fallout: a fractured U.S.-Ukraine alliance, a war with no end, and a law that's either a relic or a sleeping giant. Did they break the Logan Act? We should demand answers. Because if this is true, "traitors" might not be too strong a word. In the US, the penalties for treason are the death penalty or an imprisonment for a minimum of five years, with no upper bound.

https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/zelensky-met-with-dems-before-he

"I just saw a New York Post report that confirms my intuition. Turns out, Zelensky met Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) before he met President Trump at the Oval Office. As the Post reported:

Before meeting Trump, Zelensky met with anti-Trump Democrats who advised him to reject the terms of the mineral deal the president was offering, according to Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.).

"Just finished a meeting with President Zelensky here in Washington. He confirmed that the Ukrainian people will not support a fake peace agreement where Putin gets everything he wants and there are no security arrangements for Ukraine," Murphy's office posted on X at 11:15 a.m. Friday.

He attached a picture of Zelensky at a conference table, with Murphy seated on the opposite side. Forty minutes later, Zelensky arrived at the White House, where Trump met his car, smiled, shook his hand and walked him into the Oval Office.

This is consistent with my suspicion that many Democrat politicians have been acting as agents for the Ukrainian state. They may claim that their agency is purely out of personal conviction in the righteousness of the Ukrainian cause, but the sheer amount of public money that has been transferred to Ukraine raises the suspicion of corruption.

Because the mainstream media and the Democrats have succeeded in creating widespread adulation for Zelensky and Ukraine, it seems that approximately half of Americans don't recognize the danger to U.S. national security that this state of affairs poses.

We don't know who is actually running Ukraine and who is actually receiving the money and taking possession of the weapons, and where the weapons are ending up. What we do know is that multiple international watchdog organizations, including the European Commission, have long regarded Ukraine as one of the most corrupt countries in the world.

I do not share the common affliction of having a short memory, and I still vividly recall this 2015 report in the Guardian and many other similar reports, including reports issued by the European Commission. As recently as 2023, former European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker characterized Ukraine as "massively corrupt."

I hope that the FBI under Kath Patel is considering the possibility that Democrats such as Chris Murphy have violated—or at least subordinated—their duty to uphold the U.S. Constitution by acting as agents (official, unofficial, or undeclared) for the oligarchic state apparatus of Ukraine.