You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Vladimir Putin’ tag.
It happened, but it happened two years too late.
A third Telegraph journalist has come out against Joe Biden.
Earlier this month, Tim Stanley declared that Trump made the right assessment about Russia.
This week, Nile Gardiner asked whether Europe has finally awakened to the truth about Joe Biden.
Two days later, on March 30, 2022, Allister Heath wrote ‘Joe Biden is president in name only but the US establishment refuses to admit it’.
Heath details the chaos of the White House at home and abroad. Emphases mine below.
First, there were his pronouncements about Putin and Russia from last month to the present:
His embarrassingly downgraded role became obvious last week when he suddenly veered off-script during his keynote address in Poland, ad-libbing of Vladimir Putin that “for God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power”. It was a dramatic escalation, a clear and simple message that no reasonable person could possibly misinterpret, and yet the White House appeared not even to ask him for permission before “clarifying” his statement. Biden’s people – who are supposed to work for him, rather than the other way around – immediately denied that he was calling for regime change. They claimed, within seconds of his speech, that the words he uttered didn’t actually mean what he obviously intended them to signify.
They were undoubtedly seeking to protect Biden from himself, and to look after US interests, by cancelling an intervention that could have provoked a furious Russian reaction. But it was an astonishing moment none the less, demonstrating that Biden’s role is now largely ceremonial: this is a collegiate administration, with an all-powerful Democratic Cabinet and federal bureaucracy. What Biden says should not be taken too seriously. He is not the fount of power, and has a habit of blurting out what colleagues might have been discussing in private.
Time and again in recent days, the President’s pronouncements have been “walked back” by those really in charge. Most notably, he wrongly told members of the 82nd Airborne Division that they would be “going to” Ukraine soon; he said America would respond “in kind” were the Russians to use chemical weapons.
His worst blunder came when he claimed prior to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine that “it’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do”. He was then asked whether he was “effectively giving Putin permission to make a small incursion into the country”. Biden’s answer sent an even more catastrophic message to the Russians: “Good question. That’s how it did sound like, didn’t it?”
Heath notes that the American media are, unsurprisingly, giving Biden a pass:
… the president isn’t really presiding and … America’s constitution is once again in deep crisis. It is a scandal.
Mainstream commentators were grumpy at the White House denials, but refused to ask the obvious questions about the president’s series of gaffes or to demand an investigation into why this may be happening. Had this been Trump, there would have been calls for the Cabinet to at least consider invoking the 25th amendment to the US constitution relating to whether a president could be considered unfit to remain in office …
There is no excuse for failing to scrutinise and hold to account any president, regardless of party.
Then there are Biden’s Afghanistan disaster as well as his intent to turn back the clock with Iran:
On foreign policy, he is seeking to turn the clock back to the time when he was vice president. Biden is proposing a disastrous surrender to Iran on the nuclear issue, and even to remove the Revolutionary Guards’ terrorist designation. His withdrawal from Afghanistan was right in theory but catastrophically executed, and helped signal to rogue regimes that the US had gone soft.
Biden has done no better domestically. He began rolling back Trump’s successes as soon as he was sworn in.
Now he is considering a radically left tax plan for Americans — taxing unrealised capital gains. Scary. This would affect many middle class taxpayers:
Biden’s shocking weakness also helps to explain the disastrous drift of US policy in all other respects. He was supposedly elected as a reasonable centrist, a liberal rather than a woke activist, a traditional Democrat rather than a neo-socialist.
Yet on economics, his latest tax proposal is far worse than anything Jeremy Corbyn dreamt up. Biden wants to tax unrealised capital gains, something that has never been attempted before in this way. He wants to tax wealthy Americans – in reality, not just billionaires but many other entrepreneurs and investors without whose contributions the US economy would collapse – on the basis of the paper increase in their fortunes. This would be a recipe for economic meltdown, a brain drain, capital flight and a massive recession.
Heath concludes that radical advisers behind the scenes are running the show:
The fact that Biden is in office, but not in power, has given his party’s hardliners free rein to wreak havoc. His presidency is turning out to be a catastrophe for America, and a calamity for the rest of the world. For how much longer will we have to put up with this travesty?
There’s no way back for the time being.
It is hard to imagine that voters preferred Joe Biden to Trump and his ‘mean tweets’ in 2020, but there we are.
Mid-term elections cannot come soon enough. All being well, Republican control will pave the way for further victory in 2024.
Over the past month, Neil Oliver has had some exceptionally good Saturday night programmes on GB News.
While his shows are a must in my household, for those who haven’t been tuning in, his shows over the past month have contained even more insight than usual.
This video is from February 26, 2022, the week when Russia invaded Ukraine:
Oliver’s editorial begins at the 5:00 point. He rightly wonders what the invasion is really about. He says that he cannot rely on mainstream media to tell the truth.
However, he also discusses the situation in the West and says that we do not realise how exceptional our era of individual liberty and freedom over the past few decades has been.
He points out that we are taking it for granted.
Unfortunately, the pandemic has seen Western governments become authoritarian. He points to Justin Trudeau, who condemns Putin when he himself has had the bank accounts of protesting truckers frozen because they protested against mandatory vaccinations. Oliver says that the sheer hypocrisy of it all is stunning.
He also lambastes the leaders in New Zealand and Australia for authoritarian measures during the pandemic, making the point that, given mankind’s natural inclination towards dictatorial policies, Western leaders are happily following along. Therefore, we need to keep an eye on what they are doing and call them out accordingly.
He says that we need to get serious: stop worrying about identity politics and pronouns. Instead, we have our freedoms to defend.
At the 21:00 point, he interviews a journalist to discuss what is really happening in Ukraine. The journalist said that China is also a player in this situation. Although it looks to most people as if Russia and China are enemies, they have a common goal: to bring down the West.
At the 23:00 mark, welcomes Sebastian Gorka to give his views.
Gorka says that Putin’s invasion of Ukraine would not have happened had Joe Biden not pulled out of Afghanistan last year. He says that President Trump would have managed Afghanistan much differently and that, consequently, the Ukraine invasion would not have happened.
Gorka also brings up energy independence, which Trump initiated in the United States and warned Europe about in 2017. (Everyone laughed. They’re not laughing now.) Gorka said that it was ‘moronic’ for Biden to reverse Trump’s energy policy in the US.
On Biden, I was heartened to see another article in The Telegraph which has been critical of him.
On March 28, the paper’s Nile Gardiner asked, ‘Will Europe finally wake up to the truth about Joe Biden now?’
He writes (emphases mine):
It is amateur hour on the world stage from the Biden Presidency. His visit last week to Europe was a train wreck, from his bizarre press conference in Brussels to the ad-libbed final words of his speech in Warsaw.
At times Mr. Biden looked dazed and confused, struggling to command his sentences, and drifting into incoherence. The messaging was muddled, forcing even the president’s top officials to disown their own leader’s comments.
In 20 years in Washington, I have not seen a White House more disorganised, incompetent or mismanaged, in both the president’s and vice president’s office. It has a distinctly Monty Python-esque feel to it. Having visited the Trump White House on multiple occasions, and met with the former president several times, I can attest it was a model of efficiency compared to what we’re seeing now.
On no fewer than three separate occasions, Biden’s own staff had to clarify or even refute the words of their commander in chief. Biden officials had to explain to the world’s media that he was not calling for US troops to go into Ukraine, that the United States would not respond to Russia with chemical weapons if Moscow used them, and that the Biden administration was not seeking regime change in Moscow. These are big misstatements, not minor gaffes, with major global ramifications, and a direct impact on the war in Ukraine.
There is a major lack of discipline in messaging from the Biden administration, and clearly deep-seated divisions as well among policy staff. Biden himself has been stung by the charge from political opponents that he has been weak over Ukraine, as well as by sinking poll numbers, and is trying to overcompensate with tough rhetoric on Putin. His own aides are trying to rein him in. As a result, confusion reigns …
By contrast:
Donald Trump used to come under heavy fire from the French, Germans and European elites at Nato summits, and his message was not always popular. But he was far more effective than Joe Biden at getting results, increasing defence spending, and shaking up the complacent status quo in Europe.
True!
As Neil Oliver says, our leaders are not up to scratch.
Furthermore, we, the general public, must also stop being complacent about civil liberties and our Western freedoms. As we saw in the pandemic, our leaders can take them away instantly, without any qualms. Restoring them will take much longer.
Twitter users have posted fantastic videos about the situation in Ukraine, a selection of which follows.
On Tuesday, March 15, 2022, Oleksiy Goncharenko, a member of the Ukrainian parliament posted a short, upbeat video showing a nearly full house. Parliament was very much in session:
It is sad to see history repeat itself. Here are two photos of the opera house in Odessa. The one on the left was taken during the Nazi occupation. They put up the fortifications:
The Scottish Conservatives welcomed a Ukrainian student to their Spring conference in Aberdeen at the end of last week. Her speech (split between the two tweets below) is really inspiring. She certainly loves the United Kingdom:
She also had the opportunity of meeting Boris Johnson and meet with him privately. Well done, Boris:
Speaking of the UK, hats off to a group of London black taxi drivers who took supplies to Warsaw to help the refugee effort. All being well, they will bring back refugees to Britain:
Here they are in Warsaw:
In Slovakia, border guards took time out to play with child refugees:
Back in Ukraine, there has been time for entertainment, whether it’s comedy in Sumy or music in Lviv:
As for Putin, no one wants to shake his hand. This is a short, must-see video:
Prayers continue for Ukraine. Their upbeat attitude is unparalleled in modern times and is truly exemplary.
This week, Mark Steyn visited Ukraine for GB News.
Before we get to those videos, however, here is his broadcast from Thursday, March 10, 2022:
Halfway through is his interview with Harry Kazianis, a defence specialist, who explains why retaliative air strikes are a huge mistake that would lead to World War III. Kazianis said that even if Ukrainian pilots know how to fly certain types of aircraft, that the controls may be laid out differently and the descriptors will be in a foreign language, e.g. Polish. He said that it would take much longer than a day to train Ukrainian pilots to fly them competently. Kazianis ended by pointing out that, in order to be successful, retaliative air strikes would be dependent on Ukrainians destroying Russian combat infrastructure first, which is unlikely, hence his warning about triggering World War III. He concluded:
This is not a video game.
At 47:11, Steyn discusses the oil and gas situation with Thane Gustafson from Georgetown University. He wrote a book called The Bridge, which has an entire chapter devoted to Ukraine. Ukraine was the original supplier of gas in the Soviet Union until it was tapped out. The pipelines are still there. Gustafson says that this has been an underlying source of tension between Ukraine and Russia ever since: ‘a messy divorce’. Russia and some of the ‘stans’ are now members of OPEC, which has decided not to produce more oil in order to keep the price up. Steyn asked about the ‘majors’ pulling out of Russia. Gustafson said that the only company that would be significantly affected would be the French company, Total, which has invested heavily in LNG development in a private sector startup, Novatec. The French do not want to give up this partnership. (Perhaps that’s why Emmanuel Macron has been to see Putin?) Gustafson agreed with Kazianis in that the situation is dangerous and unstable.
Incredibly, Mark Steyn began broadcasting from Ukraine on Tuesday, March 15, Day 20 of the conflict. One side of his family, long gone, came from Odessa on the south coast. Steyn went to a border town near Hungary — in the region of Trans-Carpathia — where he stayed for three days. In this video he explains from his hotel how many people from Kyiv are there. One woman from Kyiv is actually cooking at the establishment. It’s pretty mind blowing:
He tells us about Trans-Carpathia, which he says is the crossroads of history. He shows a beer tap of a Ukrainian beer which is no longer available because Chernihiv, the city where it’s made, has been reduced to rubble. He then goes out on the streets to speak with two Ukrainian men, one of whom translates for Steyn. They tell him that some men in rural districts have been taking home-brewed alcoholic drinks out to the Russian troops. When the troops get drunk and fall asleep, the Ukrainians steal their weapons.
Back at the hotel, Steyn introduces us to Janos, who runs the hotel bar. He shows Steyn a local wine. Janos describes it as ‘vinegar’ and Steyn says ‘wine’. This is significant because the Ukrainian government had banned alcohol consumption at the beginning of the conflict. March 15, the day of the broadcast, was the first day alcohol became legal again. Janos probably didn’t want any trouble with the law, hence his use of the word ‘vinegar’.
After the commercial break, John O’Sullivan, one of Margaret Thatcher’s speechwriters goes on air to give a geopolitical view of what is happening between Ukraine and Russia. At one point he says that Putin is:
a nasty son of a bitch.
In the next segment Steyn discusses the exodus that Ukrainians have made from cities under attack. He says that he has met people from all over Ukraine just in the hotel itself. He tells us about the lady who is running the hotel. Amazingly, she has just escaped from Lviv. The cook has just come in from another city in Ukraine. From that, it would seem that the men who had those roles previously must have gone off to war, and these newcomers are temporary replacements.
After that, Steyn talks with a Polish man who is an authority on the Donbas region. The man is speaking from Norway. Steyn asked him how well the Russians were doing in Donbas. He thinks that the Russian strategy is to surround cities in the east and the south coast. He also said that it is likely that Putin will send in more troops, but probably not right away. It could be in two weeks or even two months:
I’m afraid that this war is going to continue.
The man had been in Odessa two days before. The port city has always had close links with Russia. However, from what he heard from people there is that they want to stay in Ukraine. He said that he had also travelled elsewhere in the country. Each town has its own defence force, so they are prepared to fight. He said that people have told him they have a duty to stay put and fight for their freedom. He said that he had also heard many anecdotes in the past few days about the cruelty of Russian soldiers.
In the final segment, a Ukrainian journalist from Odessa tells Steyn that if Putin ‘loses it’, he will unleash a massacre on the city, which will serve only to strengthen Ukrainian resolve. Odessa’s port, Steyn says, is still operating. Its exports go to the Middle East and North Africa. The journalist said that those cities that have been taken over thus far were not prepared for the invasion. Therefore, everyone else is prepared now, so the Russians will have less success.
Steyn’s broadcasts from Ukraine continued on March 16:
He said that in Chernihiv, where the aforementioned beer used to be made until Russians destroyed it, troops massacred ten people who were in a queue for bread. This was the day when the theatre in Mariupol was destroyed, with children inside. (When you see aerial photos of the theatre, you see a word painted on the pavement in front and at the rear of the theatre. That word is ‘children’.)
Steyn then introduces us to the woman from Lviv who is running the hotel where he is staying. Before leaving Lviv, the lady told her 13-year-old son to make his way to Poland, then get to Germany where he would find refuge. Understandably, he cried. In the end, he did what his mother asked. She put him in touch with people along the way so that he could communicate by phone with them for the next stage of his journey. He did end up in Germany and Steyn showed us a clip of him on television there.
How did this happen? The woman’s sister is a television presenter in Ukraine. She got in touch with contacts in Germany, hence the boy’s appearance on a German channel. Thanks to his aunt, he has also been on Ukrainian television. That was a few years ago, when he conducted an interview of his own at the age of nine. He had taken a broadcasting course for children. We see a clip of the interview. The child has a future in broadcasting for sure. He was incredibly professional and poised.
Britain’s Lt Gen Jonathon Riley was the next interviewee, speaking from his home. There is a large Russian naval presence off Odessa at present. So far, Riley said, it has not been used. He said that there are other military formations that we have not yet seen. He said that destroying Odessa and Kyiv would be important for Russia. Riley said that it was unusual for Russian generals to be killed; four had met their death at that point. He said they have had to go to the front line in order to get their troops to fight. Morale is bad. Ukrainian troops currently outnumber the Russians.
Steyn then talked with an English teacher from Kyiv. It took her three days to reach the town Steyn was in. She has no plans to leave Ukraine and is looking forward to returning to Kyiv, where her friends are taking care of her cat. Pets figure hugely in Steyn’s interviews with Ukrainians; the mother of the 13-year-old said that she made arrangements for her pets to be cared for in her absence. More of these stories followed on Thursday.
Steyn then spoke with Dennis, who is also from Kyiv. He got a call from his mother early in the morning when the conflict started. He didn’t believe her, so checked online for confirmation. He did not expect the conflict because:
this is 2022.
Dennis is in the quarrying business and exports Ukrainian granite to Asia. His quarry is in one of the hot spots. He tried work in the early days of the conflict but got too distracted.
Lord Black — Conrad Black — was the last guest. He said that the Americans might send sophisticated drones to Ukraine, which he thinks would be most helpful in attacking Russian vehicles. Black does not foresee nuclear war.
The last video is from Thursday, March 17, day 22 of the conflict:
Steyn opened with thoughts on the four — possibly five — Russian generals who have been killed so far. That is either 20 per cent or 25 per cent of all of Russia’s generals:
That is extraordinary.
He talks about the thousands of troops killed so far, which also struck him as extraordinary.
Putin is out to terrorise Ukrainians, but it isn’t working. Steyn says that these attacks are only causing people to display more
cold hard contempt
for Putin.
Steyn then went out on the streets of the town where he is staying. One couple who live near Kyiv were on holiday when the conflict started. How inconvenient! Their children are staying with family. Her father is at home with four dogs. She says that it is important to stay in Ukraine. She does not know how long the conflict will last.
While the woman is talking, the street is abuzz with people. One woman nonchalantly carries a pastry box back home. Everyone is walking around, shopping, chatting. Then again, that part of Ukraine is not under attack, but one must admire their sang froid nonetheless.
Inna Sovsun, a former Ukrainian education minister talks to Steyn from her home. She is positive about the conflict so far, except for the air strikes, such as the one over the theatre in Mariupol. They discussed how unusual it is for so many civilian targets to be attacked. She said there is a big morale problem. Russian soldiers take all the alcohol they can find off supermarket shelves so that they can drink. Steyn said that he heard Russian soldiers are literally shooting themselves in the foot so they can be sent home injured. Inna Sovsun confirmed that story.
Steyn returned to the street where he was before and pointed out how normal everything seemed. However, he said that most of the people were not from that town, rather it was the place they are living in for the time being, having left their homes elsewhere. He talked to a man from Kyiv who is there with his family. They arrived two weeks ago. Incredibly upbeat, he said he is looking forward to returning to Kyiv to restore their house once the conflict is over. He thinks that Russia will be finished by the time this is over. He ended with this:
We are freedom country. We can live without Putin and Russia.
From his hotel, Steyn told us about the Ukrainian who was driving down an isolated street when he saw a Russian armoured vehicle. He stopped the car, got out and put his hands up. The Russians shot him dead.
Steyn then interviewed an Orthodox priest, Joel Sterling Brown, an American who was assigned to a parish in Ukraine and married a local girl. He has been married and living the Ukrainian life for several years now. He loves it. He is currently aiding in the refugee effort. It seems he has turned his church hall into a refugee centre. He takes in 300 to 500 people a day. He said they spend the night and leave the next day to go to their final destination. They come from all over Ukraine. They tell him they’ll return home one day:
We’ll be back when we win.
He said he will stay, because, if he leaves, what message would it send about his faith?
Back on the street, Steyn interviewed a young woman who was with her mother and sister. She said that relatives are minding her flat in another city — along with her cat, even though they have brought their dogs with them. She and her sister said that they were not Russian and wanted Ukraine to stay as it is. She said:
Okay, Crimea is gone, but just leave the rest of us alive.
Mark Steyn said on Tuesday that he hoped to be able to see more of the country, because it might be his only opportunity to do so. Even if he didn’t get to Odessa, where his ancestors were from, at least he got to see Ukraine and meet a lot of the people there.
I admire the Ukrainians. The West has a lot to learn from watching these displaced persons who are acting so normally.
They are handling their plight perfectly.
No one is crying.
Everyone is upbeat.
May God continue to watch over them.
Everyone laughed in 2019 when comic actor Volodymyr Zelenskyy was elected as Ukraine’s president.
The following thread explains why he won:
Zelenskyy, 44, has a Law degree and speaks fluent English. Prior to entering politics at the most senior level, he starred in Ukraine’s hit television show, Servant of the People, which he also created and produced.
The following clip comes with a bit of choice language which perfectly expresses his frustration as a teacher who, as a taxpayer, has to fund corrupt politicians. The teacher then runs for president of Ukraine — and wins. Life imitates art.
And, yes, Zelenskyy can dance, too:
His wife, Olena Zelenska, also 44, trained as an architect at university. However, she became a writer for his comedy troupe instead. As first lady, she has graced the cover of the Ukrainian version of Vogue twice.
The Zelenskyys met at university. They are parents to a son and a daughter.
Zelenska was initially opposed to her husband’s intention of running for president, but, as the Daily Mail reports, gave up her objections and joined him on the campaign trail. She now accompanies him on his many engagements:
When her husband first told her of his plans to leave his career to run for president, she said publicly that she was ‘aggressively opposed’ to the ‘project’.
And yet, when the time came for him to campaign, Olena dutifully appeared by his side for photo ops and campaign speeches. Now, less than three years after Zelensky’s landside victory, the mother-of-two has fully embraced her role as a First Lady on the global stage.
She accompanies her husband on his engagements and is forging her own career as a First Lady of action, using her influence and position to champion causes including childhood nutrition and gender equality.
The couple visited Buckingham Palace in 2020, warmly received by the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
Today, while Zelenskyy is fearing for his life and fighting off the Russian Bear, his wife is busy keeping up Ukrainian resolve:
Now Olena is once again rising to the challenge and has remained a steadfast support of her husband in the face of Putin’s aggressions. Despite being personally at risk, the couple have chosen to remain in Kyiv.
Sharing a photo of the Ukrainian flag on Instagram on Friday, she wrote: ‘My dear people! Ukrainians! I’m looking at you all today. Everyone I see on TV, on the streets, on the Internet. I see your posts and videos. And you know what? You are incredible!
‘I am proud to live with you in the same country! It is said that many people are a crowd. This is not about us. Because many Ukrainians are not crowds. This is an army!
‘And today I will not have panic and tears. I will be calm and confident. My children are looking at me. I will be next to them. And next to my husband. And with you. Love you! I love Ukraine!’
Yesterday she shared a photo of a baby born in a Kyiv bomb shelter, along with the rousing message: ‘This was to take place in completely different conditions, under peaceful skies. It is what children should see.
‘But the main thing is that despite the war, there were doctors and caring people on our streets next to her. She will be protected and defended.
‘Because you are incredible, dear compatriots! In those two days, you all became an army. In the subway, bomb shelters, with children and pets (because you don’t leave younger brothers either) – you do your job, you have time to take care of others, to help each other.
‘Get together on social media to protect homes and help lonely neighbors. Offer your home to those who need shelter. You prepare food for the terrorists and sign up for it yourself. Donate blood for soldiers and victims. Report the movement of enemy vehicles.
‘And, of course, you are helping the Armed Forces, which are fighting on all fronts. For days, you can spend “eSupport” money to help the army (this can be done in the “Action” application). We are the army, the army is us.
‘And children born in bomb shelters will live in a peaceful country that has defended itself.’
In related news, Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who has spearheaded an international effort — yes, including the US — to help Ukraine, appeared at the Ukrainian cathedral in London’s Mayfair on Sunday evening, February 27:
He lit a candle and gave a short, supportive address to the congregation:
The next two tweets have the content of his address:
When Boris finished, the Ukrainians gave him a standing ovation:
https://twitter.com/catbum35/status/1498041320098652160
It is touching to see how much they appreciate Boris. I wish more Britons saw him in a better light.
That said, Boris’s ratings have gone up this week, thanks to his action on Ukraine, no doubt. For the first time in a few months, he’s back on level pegging with Labour’s Keir Starmer:
On Wednesday, March 2, the Ukrainian ambassador was a guest in the House of Commons gallery for Prime Minister’s Questions. After the Speaker of the House, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, told MPs of their guest, the whole House rose and gave the ambassador a standing ovation, accompanied by spontaneous applause — normally forbidden in the Chamber, although Sir Lindsay said that, on this occasion, it was certainly warranted:
Nearly every MP is wearing Ukrainian ribbons or a UK-Ukraine lapel pin.
This is a great image; I don’t know who made it:
Together, let’s hope that we can help Zelenskyy and his countrymen make Putin go pop.
Yesterday’s post discussed developments that immediately followed the US-North Korea Singapore Summit held on Monday, June 12, 2018.
Much went on with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s trip to South-east Asia and the US-Chinese trade war early in July.
Keep in mind this explanatory graphic about the relationship between North Korea and China from The Conservative Treehouse:
On July 7, the US state department’s impression of the two nations’ talks was different to that of North Korea, according to an unnamed North Korean official who called them ‘regrettable’. Townhall reported:
Just hours after Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that his talks during the past two days with the North Korean government were “productive” and beneficial regarding “central issues,” the communist nation’s Foreign Ministry categorically disagreed, calling the meetings in Pyongyang “regrettable.”
The Associated Press reports that an “unnamed North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman” claims that the United States “betrayed the spirit of last month’s summit between President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un by making unilateral demands” regarding denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.
The North Koreans issued a lengthy official statement along those lines, which ended with this:
If the objective situation does not stand in favor of the denuclearization against our wills, this would rather cast a heavy cloud over the atmosphere of developing bilateral relations which had shown its good movement in its beginning.
Should the headwind begin to blow, it would cause a great disappointment not only to the international society aspiring after global peace and security but also to both the DPRK and the U.S. If so, this will finally make each side seek for another choice and there is no guarantee that this will not result into yet another tragedy.
We still cherish our good faith in President Trump.
The U.S. should make a serious consideration of whether the toleration of the headwind against the wills of the two top leaders would meet the aspirations and expectations of the world people as well as the interests of its country.
The Conservative Treehouse pointed out (emphases mine):
Keep in mind that Secretary Pompeo was not permitted to meet with Kim Jong-un. If our ongoing thesis is accurate it is likely Red Dragon (Chairman Xi) is positioning the DPRK for maximum trade and economic leverage. It would be against Chinese Chairman Xi Jinping’s interests for Pompeo and Kim Jong-un to have a public display of agreement.
Until there is an empirical or factual reason to counter what seems like an obvious geopolitical strategy, we should consider all events through the prism that the primary leadership within the DPRK, the officials controlling Kim, are under the control of China.
The trade confrontation is China’s biggest geopolitical risk. The primary weapon China holds toward demanding terms from the U.S. would be their ability to change the dynamic in North Korea at any given moment. From this frame-of-reference things begin to make more sense.
On the surface it appears the U.S. is negotiating terms for a denuclearized North Korea; however, under the surface the bigger issue is the ongoing economic confrontation between the U.S. and China. The DPRK is Red Dragon leverage.
That day, Mike Pompeo had left North Korea for Japan:
He also met with foreign ministers Kong and Kang, from China and South Korea, respectively:
The US-China trade war also attracted attention.
US tariffs on Chinese goods went into effect on July 6. To mask what was really going on in their economy, the Chinese maintained that Americans did not support this policy:
In fact, the truth is that most Americans want tariffs on foreign goods:
The Rasmussen survey of March 12 says:
… 89% of American Adults believe it is at least somewhat important for the United States to have a major manufacturing and industrial base, including 63% who believe it is Very Important. Only eight percent (8%) say it is not very or Not At All Important to keep a manufacturing base at home. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
On July 6, White House Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy Director Peter Navarro appeared on Fox Business to explain the American view of trade with regard to China. As The Conservative Treehouse explained:
Almost all of the financial media and economic punditry are intentionally obfuscating the underlying nature of China’s economic model.
China is a communist central government controlled economic system. Free-market principles do not apply when dealing with China; therefore trade strategies based on ‘free markets’ cannot succeed against the centralized planning of a communist regime.
Charlie Kirk, founder and president of Turning Point USA, active on university campuses, put it bluntly:
On July 8, Mike Pompeo met with Taro Kono, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan and Kang Kyung-wha, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Korea in Tokyo. The full State Department transcript of their press conference is here. Interestingly, some of the media correspondents there asked about the ‘abductions’ by the North Koreans of the Japanese (emphases in the original, video here):
FOREIGN MINISTER KONO: (Via interpreter) …
Now on the question of abduction, from Secretary Pompeo this time around the issue was raised, and I’d like to thank him for raising the issue at the meeting. Regarding the reaction from North Korea, I will refrain from making any comment.
As far as Japan is concerned, the U.S. and North Korean negotiations should advance furthermore, and we’d like to work in tandem with the international community so that Security Council resolution-based sanction can be solidly implemented regarding North Korea.
FOREIGN MINISTER KANG: … On the abduction issue, yes, my president has also raised this in two rounds of discussions with Chairman Kim, and we urge them to engage in bilateral discussions with Japan on this issue. After all, it’s a bilateral issue. We also have a couple of our nationals detained in North Korea, so it’s an issue that concerns us as well.
SECRETARY POMPEO: … I did raise the issue of the abduction of Japanese. I’ve done it at each conversation I’ve had with my North Korean counterparts, whether it was on my first two trips with Chairman Kim or on this trip with Kim Yong-chul. I’ve raised it repeatedly. I won’t go into any of the details about particular parts of that element of our discussion. Know that it is important to the United States; it’s part of our discussions each and every time we interact with our North Korean counterparts.
Pompeo and US officials also met privately with Kono and his delegation:
On July 9, the South China Morning Post reported that China responded to the imposition of tariffs by the United States with tariffs on American goods going into the country. The main thrust of the article, however, was that the Chinese government thought it would be a good idea to go easy on Trump (emphases mine):
After answering Washington’s 25 per cent levy on US$34 billion of Chinese goods with equivalent tariffs on US products, Beijing has directed state media to watch how they report on US President Donald Trump, mainland media sources said.
“It’s been said that we should not use aggressive language for Trump,” said one of two sources who declined to be named because internal directions often are regarded as confidential information.
Even though Chinese officials and state media have attacked the trade policies of the Trump administration, so far they have not laid blame on the US president or his officials – a move seen as an attempt to avoid antagonising Trump and further complicating negotiations.
While the Beijing directive may not have been issued across the board – two other state media sources said they were not instructed how to write about Trump with regards to trade – it mirrored one of the guidelines on an official propaganda instruction widely circulated on social media.
The edict called on media outlets not to make vulgar attacks on Trump to avoid “making this a war of insults”.
Breitbart had more. One way the Chinese are able to criticise Trump is by quoting Westerners:
Reuters’ sources also said they were “instructed not to mention the impact of the trade war on Chinese companies” because they don’t want to give the impression pressure against China might be working …
“China might need to restrict the market access of American companies. But to purge American companies that are already operating in China might be a very bad idea. Those companies generate jobs and revenue for China. Most Apple products are made in China. To do something to harm American firms that are already operating in China would be very stupid,” ventured trade expert Wang Jiangyu of the National University of Singapore.
The Communist Party People’s Daily provided an interesting example of the tightrope walked by Chinese media on Wednesday, publishing an article that attacked Trump for accusing China of sabotaging talks with North Korea but using a few Westerners plucked from Twitter at random to do it, rather than editorializing against Trump directly or quoting Chinese social media users.
That day, the tension surrounding Pompeo’s meetings with North Korea was still in play. Trump tweeted:
CNBC reported that, after leaving south-east Asia, Pompeo made an unscheduled trip to Kabul, Afghanistan, where he told the media:
“We still have a long ways to go. But that commitment that the North Koreans made, frankly that Chairman Kim personally made to President Trump, remains as when reinforced,” he said.
Pompeo also stressed that North Korea’s remarks were “mixed,” and represented an expression of Kim’s continuing “desire to complete the denuclearization to which he is so committed.”
Meanwhile, the North Koreans were still committed to strengthening ties with their fellow travellers:
On July 12, Trump received a gracious letter from Kim Jong Un …
… which Big Media ignored:
On July 15, the US and North Korea held meetings to discuss the return of American soldiers’ remains, the first since 2009:
Korean media reported:
The North Koreans agreed to transfer the remains already in their possession to the United States on:
July 27, which is the 65th anniv of the Armistice Agreement …
This was another result:
The Premium Times said that the head of the North Korean government occasionally grants amnesty. The last time was in 2015. This year’s is part of marking North Korea’s 70th anniversary:
The Communist Leadership in Pyongyang would grant amnesty to those convicted of crimes against the state in light of North Korea’s 70th anniversary, the state-run KCNA reported on Monday …
Similar to other instances in which amnesty has been granted, it remained unclear exactly which groups the announcement applied to and how many prisoners would be affected.
The following day, the Trump – Putin Helsinki Summit of July 16 included discussions about North Korea and China.
Two days later:
Trump tweeted:
He enjoys solving problems:
His 2020 campaign manager made an excellent point:
Tomorrow’s post will cover the most recent developments between the United States, North Korea and China.
Although President Trump has been roundly criticised for meeting with President Putin, this meeting is important for world peace.
Remember that those criticising it are afraid of the intel Putin told — and gave — to Trump.
The Gateway Pundit has more on outrage from frightened Democrats (emphasis in the original):
Mueller, Rosenstein, Obama, the Clintons and many more have questionable actions in the past related to Russia. These people do not want Trump to obtain evidence of their sordid actions with Russia. They are trying to prevent Trump from meeting Putin and finding out.
Uranium One is but one example:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018818890510594048
No doubt Putin and Trump discussed the ‘Russian hack’ — more like an inside leak — of the Democratic National Committee’s emails. On that subject:
At least one anti-Trump Republican chimed in, too:
As did Bush II’s CIA director, Michael Hayden:
https://twitter.com/JoeFreedomLove/status/1018927961007767552
Putin has been observing all the reaction, as he explained in a talk about the summit on July 19. The following video is subtitled. ‘Going off script’, he says that the ‘forces’ are Americans with ‘political ambitions’. Enough said:
The meeting, as all between the US and Russia have been in the past, was one of global importance:
https://twitter.com/Surabees/status/1018842874287411200
Before Helsinki 2018 on Monday, July 16:
Despite a small protest going on outside, inside Finland’s Presidential Palace, things went to plan, including Trump’s characteristic handshake:
It is bound to produce positive long-term results:
https://twitter.com/HeshmatAlavi/status/1018890225928605697
https://twitter.com/HeshmatAlavi/status/1018899498804838400
Affirmation for President Trump came from Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky):
And from best-selling author and film producer Larry Schweikart:
And from Dilbert’s Scott Adams:
And actor James Woods:
Rep. Diane Black (R-Tennessee) took exception to media reports of Trump’s ‘weakness’:
Trump also received support from the Australian prime minister:
Independent journalist Michael Tracey observed that diplomacy involves a certain amount of flattery. In 2009, it came from Obama, but no one objected:
And what about this from 2012, when Obama said he ‘would have more flexibility after the election’?
PJ Media’s Roger Simon contrasted Trump with Obama (emphases mine below):
The bad cop part is what Trump actually does concretely — and, as Putin certainly knows, this is far more important than photo ops and press conferences with all the attendant words. Trump’s actions vis-a-vis Russia have been considerably more stringent than his predecessor’s — opening the energy spigots, increasing sanctions, arming the Ukrainians, ejecting 60 Russian agents, etc. As Walter Russell Mead pointed out, if Trump is in Putin’s pocket, he’s doing a terrible job of it.
Barack Obama — although the New York Times would burn down its own building rather than admit it — did an abysmal job with Putin and was indeed the one who was truly “owned” by the Russian. And it wasn’t just the silly reset button and the embarrassing video of Barack whispering into Medvedev’s ear to tell Vlad he — Barack — would be more flexible on missiles after the election. (What a toady!) Even worse, in his Chamberlainesque ardor to make a deal with Iran’s mullahs, Obama let Putin play him in Syria, agreeing not to honor his redline against Assad’s use of chemical weapons in order not to endanger the deal. Trump never did anything nearly that pathetic. Actually, he stands up strong.
Furthermore, other previous presidents had a jolly time with Putin — and no one cared:
https://twitter.com/alinabrouwer/status/1019254364077264897
Check out Buzzfeed‘s ‘The 25 Biggest Bromance Moments Between George W Bush and Vladimir Putin‘. Remember this one? Emphasis in the original:
12. When Bush invited Putin to his home in Maine for a ‘lobster summit.’
And Kennebunkport welcomed him with open arms.
In fact, until Trump, the only president in recent years to be criticised for meeting with a Russian leader was Ronald Reagan:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018969293353115649
In closing:
Good things will come from this meeting — better than from any previous president.
I have dozens of tweets about the outrage and opprobrium President Donald Trump received after Helsinki 2018 on Monday, July 16, 2018.
It’s truly remarkable.
CNN and Time
Here’s Jake Tapper covering the summit. Never mind him, check out the banner at the bottom:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018978244589170688
Fortunately, Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) appeared later on CNN to call out Wolf Blitzer and others on their Trump Derangement Syndrome:
The channel’s ex-CIA guy (summer job only), Anderson Cooper — Gloria Vanderbilt’s son — aired his outrage with Trump:
https://twitter.com/freedom_moates/status/1018888668080234496
There’s truth in humour:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1019213834886709248
The following day, Trump reacted …
… and had another go that Thursday:
Perhaps Trump had seen that week’s Time magazine cover of a morphed Putin-Trump. Hideous:
A few days later, Jake Tapper admitted to a bemused news panel that Trump has been ‘tough’ on Russia:
https://twitter.com/WiredSources/status/1022007050677702657
Helsinki 2018 press conference
Here’s Trump at the press conference following the meeting he and Putin held:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018879395551961091
Nonetheless, the summit and Trump’s words drew opprobrium from politicians, media and members of the intelligence community.
This was the reaction from former CIA director John Brennan:
Senator Rand Paul responded in an interview with Fox News:
https://twitter.com/PoliticalShort/status/1019595654757257216
Bernie Sanders chimed in on Trump’s meeting:
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California) wanted the interpreter for the summit meeting subpoenaed:
A possible reason for the anger
There is a possible reason for the outrage and opprobrium.
What did Putin tell Trump? Did he give him any information to take away?
I’m not a Hal Turner Radio Show listener, but someone on The_Donald is, therefore, a tip of the hat to him for this link from July 17 (updated two days later), ‘Dear God; They Caught Them ALL! …’
We can only hope and pray this is true. Please read Hal’s post in full.
Excerpts follow, emphases in purple mine (those in bold and red are Hal’s):
Thanks to my long-time former colleagues from the Intelligence Community, whom I worked with in my years with the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force, from both inside and outside the US, I am pleased to be the ONLY media outlet to be able to report this extraordinary information . . . .
At the meeting in Helsinki, Finland, between Presidents Putin of Russia and Trump of the USA, the Russians gave to Trump at least 160 TERABYTES of Russian Intelligence Intercepts which expose horrifying activities of many, many, people to deliberately foment social, cultural, and political chaos, violent riots, demonstrations, media smears, phony scandals, and fake news.
Some of those intercepts reveal who has been financing weapons, supplies, travel, hotel, vehicle rentals and secure communications gear for Terrorist groups, inside Syria, Iraq, and terror attacks in Europe and the US.
Among the intercepted communications are mostly international phone calls, faxes, emails by members of the US Congress, US Senate, federal Judges, state-level elected officials from California, Oregon, Washington, New York (City & State), New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maryland and Virginia. Once those communications left the United States, they became fair game for any country to spy on.
A great number of these communications were encrypted, but Russia has found a way to BREAK much of the encryption! And as part of their effort to improve relations with Trump, they provided the original encrypted versions of the intercepts AND the key which decrypts them so the US can use US-obtained intercepts (which may still be encrypted) along with the Russian-provided decryption key to prove the info is accurate and unedited!!!
Holy moly! Turner says this international group comprises politicians, members of the intelligence community, military officers, wealthy people, social media managers — and, of course, journalists.
Turner writes that he was told:
Foggy Bottom (the nickname for the State Dept.) is turning out to be THE epicenter of evil for a lot of things . . .
Uh oh.
Turner’s sources also deeply implicated the US Department of Justice:
Worst of all, some of the Signals Intelligence grabbed-up certain well-known individuals inside the US Department of Justice. What these people have done will no doubt smash the reputation of the legal system for decades. Not only are some people inside the Justice Department going to prison, their liability for things they’ve done WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION, will expose them to personal liability which will utterly destroy them and their families civilly.
Wow.
Allegedly:
During that meeting, Putin laid out the inner workings of the vast global network of “elites” and the activities they have engaged in to bring wars, refugees, all manner of social and political chaos to countries around the world, much of it in the USA. Russia even provided charts showing “organizational” structures (which are not really “organizations” but more defacto operational realities); who is tasked with what topics or activities, how much they have been paid and by whom.
Actual copies of communications and Signals Intercepts with descrambled recordings of phone calls, descrambled “secure” fax transmissions, descrambled encrypted emails. Vast reports on money transactions via wire transfer, control numbers, account names, amounts, dates, purposes . . . and the recipient info too.
In total, more than 160 TERABYTES of this type of data was given to President Trump in the form of 1 Terabyte USB Flash Memory Drives. The USB drives are DataTraveler® HyperX® Predator 3.0 USB Flash drives which hold 1 terabyte of data each.
The level of criminal conspiracy is so enormous, and the global scale and reach of these efforts is so gigantic, it boggles the mind.
Bankers and titans of industry are also involved. I can also report that Union bosses figure prominently in the intercepts.
Dear me.
Brexit
On Brexit, Turner says his sources revealed that Remainers — including Conservatives — dislike not only the Royal Family but also Britain itself.
Remainers want to remain in the EU to weaken Britain:
These are ELECTED officials who are literally trying to destroy the sovereignty of their own country!
The Clintons
Turner alleges that both Clintons have been under Russian surveillance since 1992. There’s a lot of information:
Now, I’m told, President Trump has it all.
Next steps
Turner says that trusted members of the Trump administration have been sworn to absolute secrecy — including denial — about these data and have been told to sort through them carefully:
… paying particular attention to any activity which resulted in violence, death or property damage, so as to be able to criminally prosecute ALL the Conspirators based on any end-result violence or property loss/damage. Whether the Conspirators intended such acts or not, the acts themselves “were a foreseeable consequence” of their efforts, thus making them ALL guilty …
I asked if any of this evidence can actually be used in court since none of it was obtained via Warrant? I was told that ALL of it is admissible because the United States did not solicit the information and had no part in it being illegally obtained! Thus, there is no “fruit of a poison tree” to block admissibility!
Hal’s conclusion
Turner says this information will take a long time to catalogue but foresees that it is the reason for the outrage and opprobrium:
It seems as though the Putin-Trump meeting in Helsinki has, in fact, become the worst nightmare of a whole slew of people.
Prior to the summit, many people took extraordinary efforts to try to derail the meeting altogether.
After the meeting, those folks and their minions are making enormous noise about anything they can.
They’re worried they’re caught. They think they might be caught. I can report tonight, they are right to worry; they ARE caught!
They think that creating distractions through scandals will prevent them from being held accountable. It won’t.
And this is why the Democrats are scurrying around in a panic:
Democrat Senators and Congressmen ARE COMPLETELY FLIPPING-OUT OVER THIS; they’re calling for Congressional Hearings and to bring Trump’s Interpreter in to testify as to what was discussed and what happened in that meeting!
I sincerely hope this is true.
Q has returned from a three-week absence and, while he/they did not mention this information for obvious reasons, this was one of the first messages to appear on July 24:
Now we know for certain — it’s no longer speculation — why there has been such a hullabaloo over a) Brexit, b) Trump’s election as US president and c) Democrat (including media) rage against Russia!
More on Helsinki tomorrow.
In reading about Helsinki 2018, it was gratifying to see that the Finns were so supportive of President Donald Trump.
Meanwhile, in the US, he is still loathed (image below from Rumpole2 in New Zealand):
As Trump said over a year ago:
This week, former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper gave credit to Obama for the Mueller probe:
President Obama is responsible for that, and it was he who tasked us to do that intelligence community assessment in the first place. I think that’s an important point when it comes to critiquing President Obama.
In other words (image from 8chan):
Remember that Clapper and a whole host of other intelligence community people still have their security clearance, even if they are no longer working in government.
So, it comes as good news to read that Trump is thinking of taking action — based on criticism he received after Helsinki 2018. From Bloomberg (emphases mine):
President Donald Trump is considering revoking the security clearances of former FBI Director James Comey, ex-CIA Director John Brennan and other Obama-era national security officials who have criticized him.
Trump has been seething over criticism of his Helsinki summit last week with Russian leader Vladimir Putin and public doubts Trump expressed about U.S. intelligence findings that Russia interfered with the 2016 presidential election. Brennan called Trump’s performance “treasonous.”
The president is “exploring the mechanism” to remove their access to classified information because of criticism the officials have leveled against his conduct of relations with Russia, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters Monday.
“They’ve politicized and in some cases monetized their public service and security clearances,” Sanders said. “Making baseless accusations of improper contact with Russia or being influenced by Russia against the president is extremely inappropriate.”
Sanders said Trump also was considering stripping security clearances from James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence; Michael Hayden, former director of the National Security Agency; and Susan Rice, President Barack Obama’s national security adviser …
“This is just a very, very petty thing to do,” Clapper said on CNN. “The security clearance has nothing to do with how I or any of us feel about the president. I don’t get briefings, I don’t have access to any classified information, it’s frankly more of a courtesy.”
In other words (image from 8chan):
EXACTLY!
On the lighter side of things, Coca Cola are personalising their bottles on request (image from The_Donald):
But I digress.
On to Helsinki 2018 — Monday, July 16, 2018 — and various tweets that show the Finnish capital that day.
The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland was welcoming:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018784099253833728
Here are the two leaders’ planes at the airport:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018793095247355904
The ‘summit’ took a lot of planning:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018756678886547456
This was the scene at the site of Helsinki 2018 that morning …
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018752026849705984
… ready to host a historically significant meeting:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018809808546353152
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018819158128111616
Security was tight:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018749548204904448
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018735069740052486
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018751427848654849
Nonetheless, crowds of onlookers appeared:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018796897388191744
It’s a shame that Trump received such scathing — and unwarranted — criticism. Could this be the reason?
But, there’s something more to the Democrats’ and GOPe’s criticism: they’re afraid of intelligence Putin might have given Trump about them and their friends in Washington DC.
Regardless:
https://twitter.com/morrison_bryson/status/1018992903765585928
How true.
I’ll cover the outrage in tomorrow’s post.
Monday, July 15, 2018 was not the first time President Trump had a meeting with President Putin.
They had met at the G20 in 2017:
Also:
The Left and the GOPe in hysterics over Helsinki 2018. Hmm!
Anyway, before going into the Trump-Putin summit, this is what happened beforehand.
The president, first lady and their entourage arrived in Helsinki, Finland, on Sunday, July 15:
Many locals lined the motorcade route:
Jack Posobiec of OAN was also in town to cover the event:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018573663082295298
This was the president’s schedule for Monday, July 16:
https://twitter.com/POTUS_Schedule/status/1018607433466474497
President Trump renewed his friendship with President Sauli Niinistö, whom he had hosted at the White House on August 28, 2017 (fashion notes here):
There American and Finnish officials had a working breakfast (another video here):
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was an important part of the delegation and was grateful to Finnish officials for their hard work in setting up not only the breakfast meeting but also arrangements for meetings with the Russians. Pompeo met with Russia’s foreign minister Sergey Lavrov.
While the presidential motorcade was on its way to the Hilton Helsinki, Putin’s plane was landing. Putin went straight to the Presidential Palace for his meeting with Trump.
Trump’s and Pompeo’s staff met up. Pompeo visited the US embassy.
The Finnish president and first lady escorted their American counterparts into the Presidential Palace, in the eastern part of the city:
The Trumps greeted Putin:
https://twitter.com/WiredSources/status/1018840737885179904
This is where they met:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018813955911901184
The Russians and Americans shared a working lunch:
https://twitter.com/WiredSources/status/1018854907309363202
When their meeting ended, the two presidents held a joint press conference (OAN videos here and here), after a member of the press corps had to be escorted out by the Secret Service for holding up a written message about a nuclear weapons ban (videos here and here):
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018880528072822784
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018879727627653120
Then, Putin lobbed a few zingers, such as this one:
And this one:
https://twitter.com/joshdcaplan/status/1018903529279381504
Putin also gave a World Cup football to Trump, which worried Senator Lindsay Graham (R-South Carolina):
https://twitter.com/joshdcaplan/status/1018920861385011204
Trump said he would give the ball to his 12-year-old son Barron.
Ultimately:
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1018958676328054785
Fox News posted press conference highlights, and the White House has a full transcript, excerpted below, emphases mine:
PRESIDENT PUTIN: (As interpreted.) Distinguished Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen: Negotiations with the President of the United States Donald Trump took place in a frank and businesslike atmosphere. I think we can call it a success and a very fruitful round of negotiations.
We carefully analyzed the current status — the present and the future of the Russia-United States relationship; key issues of the global agenda. It’s quite clear to everyone that the bilateral relationship are going through a complicated stage, and yet those impediments — the current tension, the tense atmosphere — essentially have no solid reason behind it.
The Cold War is a thing of past. The era of acute ideological confrontation of the two countries is a thing of the remote past, is a vestige of the past. The situation in the world changed dramatically …
We’re glad that the Korean Peninsula issue is starting to resolve. To a great extent, it was possible thanks to the personal engagement of President Trump, who opted for dialogue instead of confrontation …
Once again, President Trump mentioned the issue of the so-called interference of Russia when the American elections, and I had to reiterate things I said several times, including during our personal contacts, that the Russian state has never interfered and is not going to interfere into internal American affairs, including the election process …
PRESIDENT TRUMP: Thank you. Thank you very much.
Thank you. I have just concluded a meeting with President Putin on a wide range of critical issues for both of our countries. We had direct, open, deeply productive dialogue. It went very well.
Before I begin, I want to thank President Niinistö of Finland for graciously hosting today’s summit. President Putin and I were saying how lovely it was and what a great job they did.
I also want to congratulate Russia and President Putin for having done such an excellent job in hosting the World Cup. It was really one of the best ever and your team also did very well. It was a great job …
But our relationship has never been worse than it is now. However, that changed as of about four hours ago. I really believe that. Nothing would be easier politically than to refuse to meet, to refuse to engage. But that would not accomplish anything. As President, I cannot make decisions on foreign policy in a futile effort to appease partisan critics or the media, or Democrats who want to do nothing but resist and obstruct …
During today’s meeting, I addressed directly with President Putin the issue of Russian interference in our elections. I felt this was a message best delivered in person. We spent a great deal of time talking about it, and President Putin may very well want to address it, and very strongly — because he feels very strongly about it, and he has an interesting idea.
We also discussed one of the most critical challenges facing humanity: nuclear proliferation. I provided an update on my meeting last month with Chairman Kim on the denuclearization of North Korea. And after today, I am very sure that President Putin and Russia want very much to end that problem. They’re going to work with us, and I appreciate that commitment …
Q Thank you. Mr. President, you tweeted this morning that it’s U.S. foolishness, stupidity, and the Mueller probe that is responsible for the decline in U.S. relations with Russia. Do you hold Russia at all accountable for anything in particular? And if so, what would you consider them — that they are responsible for?
PRESIDENT TRUMP: Yes, I do. I hold both countries responsible. I think that the United States has been foolish. I think we’ve all been foolish. We should have had this dialogue a long time ago — a long time, frankly, before I got to office. And I think we’re all to blame …
But I do feel that we have both made some mistakes. I think that the probe is a disaster for our country. I think it’s kept us apart. It’s kept us separated. There was no collusion at all. Everybody knows it. People are being brought out to the fore.
So far, that I know, virtually none of it related to the campaign. And they’re going to have try really hard to find somebody that did relate to the campaign. That was a clean campaign. I beat Hillary Clinton easily. And frankly, we beat her — and I’m not even saying from the standpoint — we won that race. And it’s a shame that there can even be a little bit of a cloud over it.
People know that. People understand it. But the main thing, and we discussed this also, is zero collusion. And it has had a negative impact upon the relationship of the two largest nuclear powers in the world. We have 90 percent of nuclear power between the two countries. It’s ridiculous. It’s ridiculous what’s going on with the probe …
PRESIDENT PUTIN: (As interpreted) …
We heard the accusations about the Concord country [sic]. Well, as far as I know, this company hired American lawyers. And the accusations doesn’t — doesn’t have a fighting chance in the American courts. So there’s no evidence when it comes to the actual facts. So we have to be guided by facts and not by rumors.
Now, let’s get back to the issue of these 12 alleged intelligence officers of Russia. I don’t know the full extent of the situation, but President Trump mentioned this issue, and I will look into it …
Moreover, we can meet you halfway; we can make another step. We can actually permit official representatives of the United States, including the members of this very commission headed by Mr. Mueller — we can let them into the country and they will be present at this questioning …
For instance, we can bring up Mr. Browder in this particular case. Business associates of Mr. Browder have earned over $1.5 billion in Russia. They never paid any taxes, neither in Russia nor in the United States, and yet the money escaped the country. They were transferred to the United States. They sent a huge amount of money — $400 million — as a contribution to the campaign of Hillary Clinton. Well, that’s their personal case. It might have been legal, the contribution itself, but the way the money was earned was illegal …
PRESIDENT PUTIN: (As interpreted.) I’d like to add something to this. After all, I was an intelligence officer myself, and I do know how dossiers are made up. Just a second. That’s the first thing.
Now, the second thing: I believe that Russia is a democratic state, and I hope you’re not denying this right to your own country. You’re not denying that United States is a democracy. Do you believe the United States is a democracy? And if so, if it is a democratic state, then the final conclusion in this kind of dispute an only be delivered by a trial by the court, not by the executive — by the law enforcement.
For instance, the Concord company that was brought up is being accused — it’s been accused of interference. But this company does not constitute the Russian State. It does not represent the Russian State. And I brought several examples before.
Well, you have a lot of individuals in the United States — take George Soros, for instance — with multibillion capitals, but it doesn’t make him — his position, his posture — the posture of the United States? No, it does not. Well, it’s the same case. There is the issue of trying a case in the court, and the final say is for the court to deliver.
We’re now talking about the private — the individuals, and not about particular states. And as far as the most recent allegation is concerned about the Russian intelligence officers, we do have an intergovernmental treaty. Please, do send us the request. We will analyze it properly and we’ll send a formal response …
Of course, all of this blew up that day and the rest of the week. More on that to follow.
Trump tweeted his thanks to the Finnish president:
And to the people of Helsinki:
That evening, the president and first lady arrived in Washington (another video here):
More on Helsinki 2018 to follow.
Churchmouse Campanologist 