The Putin Summit - God help us.

DaveSchmidt said:

Thanks, PVW. I heard McFaul mention in an NPR interview this weekend that he was worried about the Red Notices. I agree with Paul, though, that statements like this go beyond what Putin said in Helsinki, at least in public: 

Perhaps the best-known examples of this phenomenon since Putin came to power are the Russian opposition leader Aleksey Navalny; Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the CEO of Yukos, the Russian oil giant; and Bill Browder, the co-founder of Hermitage Capital Management—one of those Putin asked be returned to Russia for questioning during his July 16 summit with Trump in Helinski. 

 

I think it's more accurate to say that the statement is a falsehood. And that's being charitable because the author knew what Putin said.

nan said:

Cohen is brilliant and wise and has a deep understanding from many years of experience.  

Cohen’s history was a little off in that CNN appearance: “I being older than both of you, maybe you don’t remember. In early 1986, President Ronald Reagan met alone with then-Soviet leader Gorbachev for, I think, about two and a half hours. And everybody was very upset about it because Reagan was getting older in years, and people were worried. When the guys came out, Reagan and Gorbachev, they said, ‘We’ve decided to abolish nuclear weapons,’ and aides on both sides said, ‘You can’t do that, just like that.’ So they backed off. But what happened one year later? Reagan and Gorbachev abolished a whole category of nuclear weapons, the intermediate range. So good things got done.”

First, the private talks were held in November 1985, and they totaled close to five hours over a couple of days, in sessions as short as 20 minutes — leaving time in between to bring aides up to date and go over what had been discussed. Second, Reagan was less than a year into his second term and only two years older than Trump; I can’t speak for “everyone,” but I don’t recall his age being a big worry at that time. Third, Reagan and Gorbachev didn’t come out from these talks agreeing to abolish nuclear weapons only to have aides throw cold water on them. That was a later proposal by Gorbachev, which he and Reagan discussed at their next summit in October 1986. They came close to an agreement, but parted without one because of Reagan’s insistence on maintaining the “Star Wars” missile defense system. Not until December 1987 did they reach the pact on land-based intermediate-range missiles.

The details are worth noting not to nitpick an expert who’s speaking off the top of his head on live TV but to remind ourselves that Helsinki 2018 was not Geneva 1985, and that Trump and Putin are not Reagan and Gorbachev.

DaveSchmidt said:

nan said:

Cohen is brilliant and wise and has a deep understanding from many years of experience.  

Cohen’s history was a little off in that CNN appearance: “I being older than both of you, maybe you don’t remember. In early 1986, President Ronald Reagan met alone with then-Soviet leader Gorbachev for, I think, about two and a half hours. And everybody was very upset about it because Reagan was getting older in years, and people were worried. When the guys came out, Reagan and Gorbachev, they said, ‘We’ve decided to abolish nuclear weapons,’ and aides on both sides said, ‘You can’t do that, just like that.’ So they backed off. But what happened one year later? Reagan and Gorbachev abolished a whole category of nuclear weapons, the intermediate range. So good things got done.”
First, the private talks were held in November 1985, and they totaled close to five hours over a couple of days, in sessions as short as 20 minutes — leaving time in between to bring aides up to date and go over what had been discussed. Second, Reagan was less than a year into his second term and only two years older than Trump; I can’t speak for “everyone,” but I don’t recall his age being a big worry at that time. Third, Reagan and Gorbachev didn’t come out from these talks agreeing to abolish nuclear weapons only to have aides throw cold water on them. That was a later proposal by Gorbachev, which he and Reagan discussed at their next summit in October 1986. They came close to an agreement, but parted without one because of Reagan’s insistence on maintaining the “Star Wars” missile defense system. Not until December 1987 did they reach the pact on land-based intermediate-range missiles.
The details are worth noting not to nitpick an expert who’s speaking off the top of his head on live TV but to remind ourselves that Helsinki 2018 was not Geneva 1985, and that Trump and Putin are not Reagan and Gorbachev.

 Cohen would be more effective -- and precise -- if he committed more of his analyses to writing. Most of his articles in The Nation are actually transcripts of weekly radio interviews with John Batchelor.

cramer said:
" ICE has been detaining asylum-seekers on the basis of Russian Red Notices, which are notoriously politically motivated. “Backdoor extraditions” are the result. “DHS & DOJ have more and more put themselves in the position of doing Putin’s dirty work.”
https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1023898769836920832 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/07/how-russia-persecutes-its-dissidents-using-us-courts/566309/



"I’m relieved to know that my government will not ask me to be interrogated by Russian law enforcement officials, but I still need my president to defend me and the other Americans from the next possible escalatory step — a warrant for my arrest, followed by the issuance of a Red Notice by Interpol to detain me in a third country and, in the worst of all worlds, extradite me to Russia. The Russian government has a reputation for abusing Interpol procedures for political ends."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/putin-wanted-to-interrogate-me-trump-called-it-an-incredible-offer-why/2018/07/26/7bb11552-90d2-11e8-b769-e3fff17f0689_story.html?utm_term=.39fa450f6de3

 McFaul's doesn't mention the US-Russian Treaty on Mutual Assistance in Legal and Criminal Matters, which is the basis for Putin's proposal. Why not?

PS

Article VI of the Constitution:

All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

I'll note that my intent in posting the Atlantic article was primarily with the narrow aim of showing that, even in the absence of an extradition treaty, people still can find themselves removed from the US to other countries, including Russia.  As far as parsing how truthful or not statements and analysis following the Trump-Putin Helsinki talk have been, I'll refrain. 

paulsurovell said:

 McFaul's doesn't mention the US-Russian Treaty on Mutual Assistance in Legal and Criminal Matters, which is the basis for Putin's proposal. Why not?

The treaty allows for direct questioning by investigators from the non-host nation. Putin didn’t mention that. Why not?

DaveSchmidt said:

paulsurovell said:

 McFaul's doesn't mention the US-Russian Treaty on Mutual Assistance in Legal and Criminal Matters, which is the basis for Putin's proposal. Why not?

The treaty allows for direct questioning by investigators from the non-host nation. Putin didn’t mention that. Why not?

He should have.

paulsurovell said:

He should have.

OK. Why didn’t he? What’s the reasonable explanation, that type of plausible excuse that you don’t discern in McFaul’s case?

Anyway, one possible answer: Maybe Putin didn’t intend for his public comments in Helsinki that day to be the final word on his proposal. Maybe he discussed other details with Trump in private, or aides broached these matters afterward. Which could also shed some light on McFaul’s worries and some of the descriptions of the offer in the press.

DaveSchmidt said:

paulsurovell said:

He should have.

OK. Why didn’t he? What’s the reasonable explanation, that type of plausible excuse that you don’t discern in McFaul’s case?

 In Putin's case he was verbally answering a question in a news conference.

In McFaul's case he was writing a detailed response to what Putin said about the US-Russian mutual legal assistance treaty. He had time to research and edit his comments before submitting them to his editor at WaPo who also perused them.

It's inconceivable that someone can hate Clinton, Mueller and McFaul so much that they think it is acceptable that Russia be allowed to interrogate an ex-ambassador in the U.S. Not only acceptable, but a good idea. 

dave23 said:

cramer said:

 gerritn - I meant that the far-left, and it really is just some on the far-left, are still arguing that Russia didn't hack. It's almost as if they're making Putin's case for him. 

 It's a very small minority, but it is there. It's where Paul, Nan, Greenwald, etc. meet the alt right.

 Bingo. I was away from the political threads for a while, getting my fill from some excellent podcasts like Pod Save America and a few other Crooked Media productions as well as On the Media but I must say I was saddened to see the Who Colluded More Thread still going strong by Paul. Very sad and so not productive.

wendy said:

dave23 said:

cramer said:

 gerritn - I meant that the far-left, and it really is just some on the far-left, are still arguing that Russia didn't hack. It's almost as if they're making Putin's case for him. 

 It's a very small minority, but it is there. It's where Paul, Nan, Greenwald, etc. meet the alt right.

 Bingo. I was away from the political threads for a while, getting my fill from some excellent podcasts like Pod Save America and a few other Crooked Media productions as well as On the Media but I must say I was saddened to see the Who Colluded More Thread still going strong by Paul. Very sad and so not productive.

 Facts Matter.

paulsurovell said:

Facts Matter.

 Amen.

wendy said:

dave23 said:

cramer said:

 gerritn - I meant that the far-left, and it really is just some on the far-left, are still arguing that Russia didn't hack. It's almost as if they're making Putin's case for him. 

 It's a very small minority, but it is there. It's where Paul, Nan, Greenwald, etc. meet the alt right.

 Bingo. I was away from the political threads for a while, getting my fill from some excellent podcasts like Pod Save America and a few other Crooked Media productions as well as On the Media but I must say I was saddened to see the Who Colluded More Thread still going strong by Paul. Very sad and so not productive.

 It's still going?

*checks to see if it is and sees 83 new posts* 

Damn, I'm staying out of that hot mess.

nan said:

 Individual Democrats do not represent what the Democrats stand for.  Some Democrats stand for Medicare for All and some are for Trump's Supreme Court nomination.  The Democrats need to have a unified message so when you think of Democrats you can know at least a few things they stand for. The Republicans have that.  They stand for smaller government and fewer regulations, etc.  These are specific things.  What specific things do the Democrats stand for?  A woman's right to choose does come to mind.  But, they need more.

 The Republican Candidate for Senate from this State supports the Right to Abortion. Must Republicans do not. Trump supports tariffs. The Republican Senator from Wisconsin and others have criticized tariffs. Terp has clearly explained how the republicans' claim that they are for small government is absolutely bogus.

Our Political Parties boast that they are "Big Tents" accommodating people with a variety of view points. They are certainly not narrowly ideological like Third Parties or most European Parties. And we do not vote for Parties. We vote for individuals.

So you are just mistaken. It is the individual candidate running under a Party label who determines what that Party stands for in that individual Election.

Now, broadly speaking I would hope that there is not one person running for any office anywhere as a Democrat who believes the places where  the Administration has put children in cages is "like summer camp".

I know that this is not what this thread is about but, frankly, this thread has become absurd. 

dave23 said:

paulsurovell said:

Facts Matter.

 Amen.

 The sad thing about this is that the energy paul and nan for that matter is spending on that thread and all these other threads instead putting a tenth of it into turning Congress blue - whether it be Progressive Democrats or just Regular Democrats who would have not given the rich a billion dollar tax cut and put children in cages, putting aside the Garland and Kavenaugh supreme court stuff - is not limitless. And that's why it's sad. Use your facts to fight the immigration lies that the Trump base is clinging too. Thanks in advance.

paulsurovell said:

wendy said:

dave23 said:

cramer said:

 gerritn - I meant that the far-left, and it really is just some on the far-left, are still arguing that Russia didn't hack. It's almost as if they're making Putin's case for him. 

 It's a very small minority, but it is there. It's where Paul, Nan, Greenwald, etc. meet the alt right.

 Bingo. I was away from the political threads for a while, getting my fill from some excellent podcasts like Pod Save America and a few other Crooked Media productions as well as On the Media but I must say I was saddened to see the Who Colluded More Thread still going strong by Paul. Very sad and so not productive.

 Facts Matter.

 Really nice, Wendy, accusing your neighbors of being like the alt right just because they don't agree with you.  

paulsurovell said:

wendy said:

dave23 said:

cramer said:

 gerritn - I meant that the far-left, and it really is just some on the far-left, are still arguing that Russia didn't hack. It's almost as if they're making Putin's case for him. 

 It's a very small minority, but it is there. It's where Paul, Nan, Greenwald, etc. meet the alt right.

 Bingo. I was away from the political threads for a while, getting my fill from some excellent podcasts like Pod Save America and a few other Crooked Media productions as well as On the Media but I must say I was saddened to see the Who Colluded More Thread still going strong by Paul. Very sad and so not productive.

 Facts Matter.

 Don't do that.

nohero said:

paulsurovell said:

wendy said:

dave23 said:

cramer said:

 gerritn - I meant that the far-left, and it really is just some on the far-left, are still arguing that Russia didn't hack. It's almost as if they're making Putin's case for him. 

 It's a very small minority, but it is there. It's where Paul, Nan, Greenwald, etc. meet the alt right.

 Bingo. I was away from the political threads for a while, getting my fill from some excellent podcasts like Pod Save America and a few other Crooked Media productions as well as On the Media but I must say I was saddened to see the Who Colluded More Thread still going strong by Paul. Very sad and so not productive.

 Facts Matter.

 Don't do that.

 Right, don't use facts when hysteria is so much better.

paulsurovell said:

wendy said:

dave23 said:

cramer said:

 gerritn - I meant that the far-left, and it really is just some on the far-left, are still arguing that Russia didn't hack. It's almost as if they're making Putin's case for him. 

 It's a very small minority, but it is there. It's where Paul, Nan, Greenwald, etc. meet the alt right.

 Bingo. I was away from the political threads for a while, getting my fill from some excellent podcasts like Pod Save America and a few other Crooked Media productions as well as On the Media but I must say I was saddened to see the Who Colluded More Thread still going strong by Paul. Very sad and so not productive.

 Facts Matter.

 Disgusting!

.

My mistake. Withdrawn.

DaveSchmidt said:

nan said:

 Right, don't use facts when hysteria is so much better.

Don’t attribute to wendy a comment that dave23 made:

nan said:

wendy said:

dave23 said:  It's a very small minority, but it is there. It's where Paul, Nan, Greenwald, etc. meet the alt right.

 Bingo. I was away from the political threads for a while, getting my fill from some excellent podcasts like Pod Save America and a few other Crooked Media productions as well as On the Media but I must say I was saddened to see the Who Colluded More Thread still going strong by Paul. Very sad and so not productive.

 Really nice, Wendy, accusing your neighbors of being like the alt right just because they don't agree with you.

 Wendy endorsed it.  They both should be called out for this.  Basically saying we are Nazis.  Really?  That's OK?  

nan said:

DaveSchmidt said:

nan said:

 Right, don't use facts when hysteria is so much better.

Don’t attribute to wendy a comment that dave23 made:

nan said:

wendy said:

dave23 said:  It's a very small minority, but it is there. It's where Paul, Nan, Greenwald, etc. meet the alt right.

 Bingo. I was away from the political threads for a while, getting my fill from some excellent podcasts like Pod Save America and a few other Crooked Media productions as well as On the Media but I must say I was saddened to see the Who Colluded More Thread still going strong by Paul. Very sad and so not productive.

 Really nice, Wendy, accusing your neighbors of being like the alt right just because they don't agree with you.

 Wendy endorsed it.  They both should be called out for this.  Basically saying we are Nazis.  Really?  That's OK? 

Wendy and dave23 correctly point out that many critics of Russiagate are right-wing, but it's also true that many supporters of Russiagate are right-wing, Senator Richard Burr, for instance, or Shepard Smith of Fox News. And as I've pointed out before, many of the leading proponents of Russiagate are the worst warmongers in America, whose motivation is to promote US-Russian military confrontation in Europe and the Middle East. The entire cast of the Project for the New American Century is solidly behind Russiagate.

More later.

[continued Aug 3]

I'm proud to be associated with three VIPS members who have spoken at Maplewood antiwar meetings who are now leading critics of Russiagate: Scott Ritter, Ray McGovern and Matthew Hoh. All three are American heroes -- Scott Ritter, a former Marine and UN WMD inspector who warned Americans about the WMD lies of the Bush administration [FBI director Robert Mueller]. Scott and Mueller are again on opposite sides -- Scott recently challenged Mueller's indictment of Russian GRU officers as a political act designed to manipulate American public opinion against Russia.

Ray McGovern has evolved from CIA Soviet division chief, who delivered the Presidential briefing during the Reagan administration, to a fully committed antiwar activist, challenging the entire war machine.

Matthew Hoh was a Marine officer in Iraq who worked for the Foreign Service in Afghanistan and publicly resigned because of the futility of the war and its cost in lives and treasure. Like Ray, Matthew is a full-time peace advocate.

There is nothing alt-right or right-wing about Scott, Ray or Matt's positions on Russiagate, which like mine -- and I think I can speak for Nan as well -- are based on its absence of evidence, flawed arguments, hysteria and the poisoning of US-Russian relations that constitutes the greatest threat to peace that we face.

paulsurovell said:

nan said:

DaveSchmidt said:

nan said:

 Right, don't use facts when hysteria is so much better.

Don’t attribute to wendy a comment that dave23 made:

nan said:

wendy said:

dave23 said:  It's a very small minority, but it is there. It's where Paul, Nan, Greenwald, etc. meet the alt right.

 Bingo. I was away from the political threads for a while, getting my fill from some excellent podcasts like Pod Save America and a few other Crooked Media productions as well as On the Media but I must say I was saddened to see the Who Colluded More Thread still going strong by Paul. Very sad and so not productive.

 Really nice, Wendy, accusing your neighbors of being like the alt right just because they don't agree with you.

 Wendy endorsed it.  They both should be called out for this.  Basically saying we are Nazis.  Really?  That's OK?  

 Wendy and dave23 correctly point out that many critics of Russiagate are right-wing, but it's also true that many supporters of Russiagate are right-wing, Senator Richard Burr, for instance, or Shepard Smith of Fox News. And as I've pointed out before, many of the leading proponents of Russiagate are the worst warmongers in America, whose motivation is to promote US-Russian military confrontation in Europe and the Middle East. The entire cast of the Project for the New American Century is solidly behind Russiagate.
More later.

 Hey Paul...Facts Matter !

nan said:

DaveSchmidt said:

nan said:

 Right, don't use facts when hysteria is so much better.

Don’t attribute to wendy a comment that dave23 made:

nan said:

wendy said:

dave23 said:  It's a very small minority, but it is there. It's where Paul, Nan, Greenwald, etc. meet the alt right.

 Bingo. I was away from the political threads for a while, getting my fill from some excellent podcasts like Pod Save America and a few other Crooked Media productions as well as On the Media but I must say I was saddened to see the Who Colluded More Thread still going strong by Paul. Very sad and so not productive.

 Really nice, Wendy, accusing your neighbors of being like the alt right just because they don't agree with you.

 Wendy endorsed it.  They both should be called out for this.  Basically saying we are Nazis.  Really?  That's OK?  

She never said that you are a Nazi Nan.   

Stop being so dramatic and defensive.   Wendy was merely pointing out that politically you're a hot mess these days.   And I think she would be interested in doing an intervention for you to pull you back from the Jimmy Dore abyss.  

Man, for a post I almost instantly regretted and removed, it sure had legs.

sbenois said:

nan said:

DaveSchmidt said:

nan said:

 Right, don't use facts when hysteria is so much better.

Don’t attribute to wendy a comment that dave23 made:

nan said:

wendy said:

dave23 said:  It's a very small minority, but it is there. It's where Paul, Nan, Greenwald, etc. meet the alt right.

 Bingo. I was away from the political threads for a while, getting my fill from some excellent podcasts like Pod Save America and a few other Crooked Media productions as well as On the Media but I must say I was saddened to see the Who Colluded More Thread still going strong by Paul. Very sad and so not productive.

 Really nice, Wendy, accusing your neighbors of being like the alt right just because they don't agree with you.

 Wendy endorsed it.  They both should be called out for this.  Basically saying we are Nazis.  Really?  That's OK?  

She never said that you are a Nazi Nan.   
Stop being so dramatic and defensive.   Wendy was merely pointing out that politically you're a hot mess these days.   And I think she would be interested in doing an intervention for you to pull you back from the Jimmy Dore abyss.  

More bullying of people that don't agree with your point of view.  

paulsurovell said:

wendy said:

dave23 said:

cramer said:

 gerritn - I meant that the far-left, and it really is just some on the far-left, are still arguing that Russia didn't hack. It's almost as if they're making Putin's case for him. 

 It's a very small minority, but it is there. It's where Paul, Nan, Greenwald, etc. meet the alt right.

 Bingo. I was away from the political threads for a while, getting my fill from some excellent podcasts like Pod Save America and a few other Crooked Media productions as well as On the Media but I must say I was saddened to see the Who Colluded More Thread still going strong by Paul. Very sad and so not productive.

 Facts Matter.

 If you think Facts Matter, you should pay attention to them.

nohero said:

paulsurovell said:
 Facts Matter.

 If you think Facts Matter, you should pay attention to them.

 Please cite examples of where you think I haven't.