By John Q. Hosedrinker 
According to The Wall Street Journal, Vladimir Putin leveraged his connections with the Saudi Crown Prince to select Steve Witkoff as his preferred intermediary from the Trump administration. Putin’s interest in Witkoff was communicated through Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev, utilizing the Saudi Crown Prince as an intermediary, and the Saudis even offered to recommend Witkoff to the Russian side. Witkoff, who has made several trips to Moscow, met with Putin without traditional diplomatic support, and the Kremlin carefully assessed his openness to Russia’s perspective. This approach reflects Putin’s effort to bypass established diplomatic channels, which is possibly aimed at influencing the current peace plan discussions and Trump’s decisions.
Read the original article here
Putin effectively chose Witkoff as US negotiator with Russia, – WSJ, and honestly, the implications are chilling. The idea that a foreign adversary essentially hand-picked a US diplomat to represent our country in crucial negotiations is a direct assault on American sovereignty. It’s not just a diplomatic blunder; it’s a potential betrayal of national security. When you consider the deep ties between the former administration and Russia, this doesn’t feel like a surprise, but rather, a predictable outcome.
The whispers of “Russian stooge” and “Putin’s envoy” aren’t casual insults; they’re reflections of a deeply disturbing reality. If someone is truly so deeply indebted to a foreign power, or so desperate for its good favor, how can they possibly represent the interests of the United States with any integrity? It’s like sending a sheep to negotiate with the wolves – the outcome seems preordained. We’re talking about someone who, according to some assessments, is “on the hook” with Russia, potentially due to financial entanglements. This creates an obvious conflict of interest, making him vulnerable to coercion and influence.
The reported preference for rubles over dollars is more than just a financial choice. It’s a symbolic one. It implies a deeper alignment with Russia’s economic and political interests, even if it’s purely for personal gain. The question then becomes, what is the value of loyalty to a nation when personal wealth is on the line? Is America’s reputation and security for sale? The fact that some sources suggest Witkoff is “desperate for a payout from Russia because of financial difficulties” only reinforces the perception of compromised judgment and vulnerability to pressure.
One might ask how did we get here? How did the US end up with an envoy whose loyalty, at best, is in question? The simple answer is that the Trump administration’s cozy relationship with Russia opened the door for this situation. The personnel decisions made, the seeming deference to Putin’s desires, it all points towards an administration that was willing to accommodate Russia’s interests in ways that undermined US foreign policy. The replacement of Keith Kellogg, a figure who might have resisted Kremlin pressure, with someone more pliable, speaks volumes.
The assertion that “Putin only works with people who can be forced to listen for his brainf\*cks” highlights the transactional nature of the relationship. It’s not about genuine negotiation or mutual respect. It’s about control, coercion, and the manipulation of individuals who have something to lose. The idea that Witkoff “is good at stenography,” acting as a mere conduit for Russian demands, is a particularly damning assessment of his role. This isn’t diplomacy; it’s a carefully orchestrated puppet show, and America’s reputation is the stage.
The reactions of bewilderment and frustration in the comments speak volumes. The phrase “how easy the Americans are to play” is both disturbing and unfortunately accurate. It is hard to watch a nation, once considered a global leader, be reduced to a playground for a foreign adversary, a situation where the US is effectively “buttfucked by a country whose GDP size mirrors Italy’s.” The lack of experience, the perceived incompetence, the clear susceptibility to manipulation – it’s all a recipe for disaster.
The irony here is almost unbearable. America, a nation that has historically exerted its influence across the globe, is seemingly unable to stand up to a regime it would have once easily dominated. The perceived weakness, the willing compromise of national security, it’s all incredibly disheartening. If the US is truly incapable of defending its interests, or at least unwilling, what does that say about the future of global politics?
The concern that the situation is “treason in pursuit of graft” is not an overstatement. If individuals are prioritizing personal financial gain over national security, it constitutes a fundamental betrayal of their obligations. The references to “Trump 💩is a Fucking Russian Asset” may be crude, but they reflect the depth of cynicism and distrust that this entire situation has generated. It makes one wonder if Witkoff is merely a pawn, or something worse.
It is disheartening, to say the least, to have our foreign policy representatives chosen or approved by a known adversary. The situation reflects poorly on our standing in the world. As we look ahead, we should all hope for a future where American interests are paramount and our negotiators are fully and truly loyal to the United States.