Coffee & Covid’s take on recent Ukraine developments. His take? Putin and Trump are negotiating via an oblivious press, with said press and many others too stupid to see it:
Every so often, we should pause to reflect on how different our world has become from that of our parents. Yesterday, literally the entire planet watched the three leaders involved in a world-shaking conflict separately trade back-and-forth public comments. And then corporate media made up wild, bias-projecting, interpretive fairy tales about what they said. One wonders how much truth our parents, deprived of real-time video, used to get in their morning news. Anyway, the Wall Street Journal ran its truth-flipped story under the sly headline, “Putin Rejects Immediate Cease-Fire in Ukraine.”
image.png
CLIP: Putin agrees with the general cease-fire framework but many questions remain (2:10).
You can hardly say he rejected the deal. He partially agreed— it was a deal half-full.
Looking prototypically bored —but at least wearing a suit— Russian President Vladimir Putin somnolently told frantic reporters that, “We agree with the proposals for the cease fire. But our position is based on the assumption that the cease-fire would lead to a long-term peace that removes the initial reasons for the crisis.” He then posed a long series of rhetorical questions.
For instance, Russia is currently rounding up defeated Ukrainian soldiers burrowed in the forests of its own Kursk territory. So under a cease-fire, what happens to them? Do they just walk out and regroup for another round, so Russia will have to defeat them again? Are they required to surrender? Or do they sit tight in their hidey-holes indefinitely?
Who exactly shall monitor this sprawling 600-mile contact line? Are those monitors ready to go right now? And, will the U.S. pause military aid during the cease-fire, or just use the lull to re-arm Ukraine?
Given these unanswered but critical questions, Putin reasonably said that Russia wants a cease-fire, a real one, but the current proposal is short of necessary details important to the Russians. Putin did not just leave it hanging; he proposed a call directly between himself and President Trump— omitting Kiev, which was a nod to the fact that everybody knows the Ukrainians are no longer calling the shots.
All that context was missing from the many corporate media articles. They all quoted cherry-picked parts of Putin’s answer. But none linked to the video of his actual comments, which was only about three minutes long. The Journal transformed the Russian president’s straightforward answer, which essentially said “okay, but we still have work to do, let’s talk” into a fake narrative of flat rejection.
For his unimportant part, Zelensky responded in a solo selfie-video, whining that President Putin was just faking it and was only trying to drag things out. In a wonderfully apt metaphor, Martial Law Administrator Zelensky was the only one of the three leaders to appear alone. Get it?
Corporate media completely missed the irony and credulously adopted Zelenksy’s take.
But President Trump got it. In answering a reporter’s question at the White House, Trump acknowledged that Putin had raised some good questions.
image 2.png
CLIP: President Trump says we’d like to see a cease-fire from Russia, acknowledges that issues remain (2:03).
In remarks with reporters, Trump allowed that a few thorny issues remain. “There’s a power plant involved; a very big power plant,” President Trump acknowledged, referring to the Zaporozhia nuclear facility— the largest in Europe, currently under Russian control. Mirroring Putin’s rhetorical questioning, he continued, “Who’s gonna get this and that? It’s not an easy process.”
Trump expressed partial agreement with Putin, saying, “You don’t want to waste time with a cease-fire if it’s not gonna mean anything.” And then he casually complained about the broken-record Ukrainians, saying with easygoing exasperation that “They discussed NATO and being in NATO, and everybody knows what the answer to that is.”
A reporter queried President Trump about Putin’s suggestion for that they talk. Unlike sour corporate media, Trump expressed optimism: “He did say that today, it was a very promising statement. He put out a very promising statement, but it wasn’t complete. But yeah, I’d love to meet with him or talk to him. Every day, people are getting killed.”
But Trump also consistently pressed for a quick agreement. Time is of the essence.
In other words, right under the noses of cross-eyed corporate media, who somehow manage to find the truth less often than blind squirrels find acorns, President Trump and President Putin are actually negotiating.
🚀 About 25 years ago (sigh), I “vacationed” in India (don’t ask). It was a fascinating excursion. Indians are world-class negotiators. Everything is up for haggling. A bottle of water? The vendor always demands more than the price on the label. If you play the game, you’ll walk away paying half.
But my real education came at the Taj Mahal. Stepping off the air-conditioned tour bus into a wall of sticky heat and acrid dust, I was instantly mobbed by a swarm of wild-eyed vendors hawking postcards, plastic trinkets, and knock-off Rolexes. They shouted prices over each other, thrusting their wares toward my hands, grinning like they already had me.
I learned fast: never ever say “no, thanks.” To an Indian street vendor, no, thanks is not a rejection—it’s an opening bid. If you say “no,” they’ll chase you around like a flock of squawking seagulls surrounding a terrified toddler holding a bag of sandwich bread.
The only real escape from the game of extended refusals is feigning boredom. No eye contact. No glancing at their wares, no hesitation. Just keep walking.
The point is that, in any negotiation, so long as the sides are still talking, they’re still bargaining. The moronic media missed it, but Trump didn’t: Putin’s request for a call wasn’t a rejection. It was an offer to dicker. Trump answered that he was open to it. Right now, neither leader is acting too eager. Both are coyly feigning mild interest, and are still communicating indirectly through cut-outs—namely, the clueless media.
It’s classic positional bargaining. He who offers first loses.
How did our media become so blind to how the world actually works? Are they really that dense? Or do they prefer narrative over reporting—missing the highest-stakes negotiation in modern history because it doesn’t fit the script? Media don’t see themselves as mere witnesses like the rest of us. They delusionally fancy themselves as the authors of events.
Fortunately, in this digital age, we can listen for ourselves. We don’t need the WSJ’s creative writing. We can ignore corporate media like an Indian street vendor—no eye contact, no engagement. Just keep walking.
https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/the-map-bender-friday-march-14-2025
