I was more concerned with the nuclear deal that did everything but prevent/slow/discourage Iran's race toward developing/acquiring nuclear weapons. And the deal was signed while Iran's leader was chanting "Death to America".


OBAMA SIGNS IRAN DEAL AS ROUHANI ATTENDS A 'DEATH TO AMERICA' EVENT


7/15/15

Every year, on the last Friday of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, millions of Iranians take to the streets to engage in a bizarre ritual. As if on cue, they incessantly and rhythmically chant “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” while burning effigies of the leaders and flags of those respective countries. Occasionally, they’ll burn the Union Jack as well. Rounding off the spectacle are fiery speeches issued by various military, political and religious leaders regurgitating the same banalities about how the “Great Satan” and the “Zionist Entity” will ultimately be destroyed and replaced by the banner of Islam.

The event is called Al-Quds Day and was sanctioned by the Islamic Republic’s now deceased and criminally insane Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1979 as a way of underscoring the Muslim obligation to “liberate” Jerusalem and unshackle “Palestine” from those pesky Jewish infidels. While most normal countries maintain national holidays that celebrate freedom, independence and sacrifice, the mullahs invented a holiday that revels in an orgy of death, violence and depravity.

This year’s Al-Quds celebration – micromanaged by the thuggish enforcers of the Islamic Republic – was no exception and if anything, the anti-Israel, anti-American rhetoric was ramped upward. In attendance at an Al-Quds rally in Tehran was of course none other than Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, the so-called moderate face of the Islamic Republic. President Obama has redefined the term “moderate” to include one who professes his intent to kill you while displaying his pearly whites.

 

Deflect much?

 

Well, look who was puttin' out for Putin in.



FACT CHECK: Why Didn't Obama Stop Russia's Election Interference In 2016?


2/21/18

So why didn't Obama's administration do more?
That isn't clear. Some former administration officials who have talked about it publicly have reproached themselves for not acting more aggressively. There also was a long-standing criticism of Obama that his foreign-policy making amounted to endless process with no outcomes — hours of meetings that yielded more meetings but no ultimate action.

Plus, the relationship between the United States and Russia is multifaceted and often intensely complicated:

• Obama scaled back missile defense plans in Europe to placate Moscow.
• Obama wanted Russia to play a role in the international agreement under which Iran agreed to restrict its nuclear program — and Putin went along.
• Obama spent the end of his presidency trying to bring Russia into a multilateral agreement to end the Syrian civil war, but Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov ultimately never committed.

So Obama's team had to manage many spinning plates in addition to the active measures campaign it detected by the middle of 2016. One question Obama may address in his book is why he calibrated his choices in the way he did — whether he looked the other way on election interference to keep open other options elsewhere.
...
A partisan tightrope
Former Vice President Joe Biden also has complained that the White House wanted Republicans to join in a bipartisan statement announcing and condemning the interference campaign. In Biden's telling, however, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., wouldn't go along.

But that didn't stop then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., from alluding publicly to the Russian campaign in a letter to then-FBI Director James Comey. And Comey reportedly wanted to announce the active measures in an op-ed column, as Newsweek reported in March 2017. Two sources with knowledge about the matter told Newsweek that Obama administration officials blocked the effort.

There's no way to know what difference it might have made for U.S. officials to have confirmed and condemned the Russian interference in real time.

Obama administration officials have said they worried about appearing to put their thumb on the scales for Clinton. Combined with Obama's belief that Clinton would win, their political calculus appears to have boiled down to: Let's ride this out.

Obama himself said in December 2016 that he wasn't convinced that he should have done anything different.


------------

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/16/us/politics/obama-putin-hacking-news-conference.html

“There have been folks out there who suggest somehow if we went out there and made big announcements and thumped our chests about a bunch of stuff, that somehow it would potentially spook the Russians,” he said. “I think it doesn’t read the thought process in Russia very well.”

The president did not reveal what steps he was considering and suggested that some of the options, if they were carried out, could remain secret. “Some of it we will do in a way that they will know, but not everybody will,” he said.

The president spoke hours after Hillary Clinton, addressing campaign donors in New York, bluntly accused President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia of orchestrating the hacks of her campaign and the Democratic National Committee computers “to undermine our democracy,” as part of a “personal beef against me.”

Mr. Obama declined to place the blame so squarely on Mr. Putin, though he noted, “Not much happens in Russia without Vladimir Putin.” Mr. Obama also sought to diminish the specter of Russian influence over the American political process, saying Russia was a smaller, weaker country that “doesn’t produce anything that anybody wants to buy, except oil and gas and arms.”

 

Anytime we see world leaders talking and trying to make the world a safer place it's a good thing. To complain about getting your ass saved from a nuclear blast someday is just about the epitome of stupidity. When Nixion reached out to China when Reagan reached out to the USSR when Obama reached out to Cuba they were all good things. Young people might not think so now but when they get older they'll realize communication among adversaries is vital.

 

You people are so full of nonsensical bullshit, it has now become obvious. You're all either sub-morons in a half-way house, or, Russian agents trying to destroy America. It is one or the other.

Hush....an alias

 

You Trump sycophants aren't going to be able to Obama and Hillary your way out of this one. That is just laughable. As laughable as the lame excuse Trump came up with yesterday that he misspoke one word.

But thanks for the laugh about who uses logical fallacies when they can't even get that right. Fucking hilarious. Because they committed the logical fallacy they falsely accused.

 

It is not the world ending but you demonstrate that Putin has been doing his work a very long time..............the Chump is out of his depth and obsessed with colusion or colussion or collusion or collussion........take your pick PetCock!

Thinskin

 

none of it is real. it's all just theatre for the masses. The real agenda will never be revealed.

 

Who surrendered?

Just Like Obama, Trump’s Russia Policy Speaks Louder Than His Words

Former president of Russian target Georgia: After a lifetime of firsthand experience with Russian aggression, I must evaluate Trump’s actions against the historical context. In doing so, I find Trump’s actions speak for themselves.

7/18/18

Following Monday’s summit in Helsinki, many American pundits and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle criticized President Trump for what they perceived as his failure to hold Russian President Vladimir Putin accountable for interfering in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) slammed Trump’s “shameful” performance, and former Central Intelligence Agency director John Brennan went so far as to call Putin the “master puppeteer” of the Oval Office.

Some may expect me to lend my voice to this chorus of condemnation. After all, I have personally experienced the devastating consequences of Putin’s expansionism. In 2008, when I was the president of Georgia, Russia shocked the world by invading my country. To this day, one-fifth of Georgia’s territory remains under illegal Russian occupation, and Georgia lacks a clear roadmap to NATO membership.

The Helsinki summit did not change my view of the Russian president. As I have reiterated many times, Putin is pure evil. There is no doubt in my mind that U.S. intelligence agencies arrived at the correct conclusion: Russia did meddle in the U.S. 2016 election, and Putin himself directed the operation. Again, I speak from personal experience on this topic: In 2012, Russian intelligence services interfered in the Georgian parliamentary elections, boosting the Kremlin’s preferred candidate through disinformation operations.

Thus, my opinion of President Trump’s policy vis-à-vis Russia is perhaps more positive than one might assume from my background. My reasoning is two-fold: After a lifetime of firsthand experience with Russian aggression, I must evaluate Trump’s actions against the proper historical context. In doing so, I have found that Trump’s actions speak for themselves.

The Outrage Seems Selective
On the first point, I consider it unfair that Trump’s performance in Helsinki has garnered harsher criticism than other incidents in recent memory. In 2012, for example, a hot microphone at a global nuclear security summit picked up then-President Barack Obama assuring Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he would have “more flexibility” to negotiate with Putin after the presidential election.

During a debate with GOP opponent Mitt Romney the same year, Obama casually dismissed the Russian threat, quipping: “The 1980s called; they want their foreign policy back.” Although Trump could certainly have been more forceful by condemning Putin’s crimes, his statements at the Helsinki press conference were nowhere near as concerning as his predecessor’s remarks about Russia.

This brings me to my second point: Trump’s actions toward Russia speak louder than words—and so did his predecessor’s. Indeed, the Obama administration’s foreign policy undermined America’s credibility in my region, which Putin considers Russia’s “backyard.” There are many opinions about Trump’s rhetoric on Crimea, but it is a fact that the Russian land grab in Ukraine happened on Obama’s watch.

How, exactly, did this happen? During and after Ukraine’s revolution of 2014, which ousted a Kremlin-backed dictator, on a daily basis the United States cautioned Ukraine not to escalate in response to Russian aggression. Thus, Putin saw an opportunity to annex Crimea without risking a direct confrontation with the West—and he seized it. Putin is a bully, but not a fool.

What a Difference Two Years Makes
Rather than changing his course after Moscow redrew the borders of Europe by force, Obama doubled down. Despite bipartisan consensus in favor of selling lethal defensive weapons to Ukraine, and vocal support from his own administration officials (including Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton), Obama repeatedly refused to authorize the sales.

Instead of anti-tank weapons, the Ukrainians defending their territory from Russian invasion received hot blankets and canned goods from the Obama administration. At the same time, Obama asserted that the Ukraine conflict had “no military solution.” With these words—and more importantly, these actions—he was perceived by some on the Russian side as accepting the Kremlin’s sphere of influence in Ukraine.

Despite my warnings, the Obama administration also essentially turned a blind eye to Russian meddling in Georgia’s 2012 elections. The result was devastating not only for Georgia, but for American interests: A Kremlin-backed oligarch (who has substantial interests in Russian energy firm Gazprom) ascended to power in a strategic U.S. ally. Moreover, Russia’s meddling in Georgia’s elections functioned as a proving ground for information operations later used in the United States. To his credit, Obama accepted this reality in 2016, when he expelled dozens of Russian diplomats, but this response was too little, too late.

By contrast, Trump authorized the sale of lethal defensive weapons to both Ukraine and Georgia in 2017. The Trump administration went beyond the congressional mandate in sanctioning Russian authorities involved in the annexation of Crimea. Earlier this year, the United States imposed the harshest sanctions yet, targeting Russian oligarchs as well as government officials.

Trump’s rhetoric on energy at the Helsinki summit, which has been largely overlooked, is also a reason for optimism. The backbone of the Russian economy is energy, and Russia’s dependence on fossil fuels is Putin’s Achilles heel. At Monday’s press conference, Trump stated that U.S. liquefied natural gas exports would “compete” with Russian gas in Europe. This reflects Trump’s comments at the NATO summit, where he criticized Germany for supporting the Nord Stream II pipeline. Trump was correct to call attention to this project, which will enrich the Kremlin at the expense of struggling pro-Western allies like Ukraine.

Trump Should Amp Up American Commitments
Nevertheless, I must caution President Trump that criticizing domestic opponents in front of foreign adversaries could have been misperceived by Putin as a concession. To quell this impression and fend off undesirable consequences, I recommend taking several steps.

First, the U.S. should return to the Reagan-era policy of containing Russia on every front. Trump’s support for a stronger military is central to this strategy. Just as President Reagan advanced “peace through strength,” Trump’s proposal for a Space Force echoes Reagan’s “Star Wars” defense program.

Reagan-era increases in military spending escalated the collapse of the USSR, as the Soviet economy could no longer sustain competition with the United States on military innovation and readiness. Likewise, Trump’s strengthening of U.S. defense will overstretch Russia’s resources to the breaking point. This is especially true when the Russian economy is weak, as it is today, and Russian power-brokers are cut off from capital markets due to sanctions.

Another way to contain Putin’s ambitions is to step up NATO’s presence in Eastern Europe, offering countries like Georgia and Ukraine a roadmap to accession. In calling on NATO allies to increase military spending in line with their commitments to collective defense—while increasing the Pentagon’s budget—Trump is already taking a step in the right direction.

In his interview with Chris Wallace after the summit, Putin again articulated Russia’s bid for an exclusive zone of influence in Eastern Europe, stating that Russia would never allow Georgia or Ukraine to join NATO. The United States must also unequivocally refuse Russia’s bid for hegemony. America is at its strongest when conducting foreign policy that upholds American values.

Second, if Russian adventurism continues, Trump should respond by activating the “nuclear option” of sanctions: Blocking Russia’s access to the SWIFT international payment system. Moreover, Trump could amplify the impact of the effective sanctions against Russian oligarchs, by expanding these sanctions to Kremlin-connected businesses and individuals outside Russia, and their offshore accounts worldwide. The United States should also consider restricting the registration of Russian shell companies, which are often used for money laundering.

While these tough measures on Russia would advance U.S. interests and the security of my region, diplomacy is also necessary. We do not know what Trump and Putin discussed behind closed doors in Helsinki, and we should not make assumptions. As Reagan continued to meet with Soviet leadership until the Axis of Evil disintegrated, so Trump should continue talking to Putin.
-----------

Mikheil Saakashvili was the president of Georgia from 2004 to 2013. In 2008, he led his country through the Russian-Georgian War. Through Russian occupation and other challenges, President Saakashvili spearheaded reforms that dismantled the Soviet legacy in Georgia and built in its place a pro-Western democracy. From 2015 to 2016, he served as the governor of Ukraine's Odessa region.

 

Jimmy you need to back off.
The unsupporters don't give a rip about facts, and you are going to piss them off something horrible by repeatedly pointing out facts and ignoring their spew.
And the cry closet is closed for cleaning.
We don't need any public shows of crying just now.

 

<Drops broom> Dammit, the cry room looks like this.

WHY MUST YOU LEAVE A MESS EVERY TIME YOU VACATE A GATHERING???

<walks away muttering, I'm never volunteering to help again>

 

The Master of Facts loves facts.

His detractors respond to his many facts with insults.

 

Copied from your own post of the Helsinki transcript: Quoting Trump - "My people came to me -- Dan Coats came to me and some others -- they said they think it's Russia. I have President Putin; he just said it's not Russia. I will say this: I don't see any reason why it would be."

imported__2355, Today at 1:42 PM

Ah......
Nope. don't see it.
Trump said "I don't see any reason why it would be" (meaning he doesn't see why Russia would try to influence the election).
Now, here's the thing.
The accepted wisdom is that Russia did try to influence our election.
They didn't succeed in influencing anything, (that also is the accepted wisdom) but that isn't the point. The point is, they tried.
So here we have President Trump, standing next to Putin in a news conference. What was he supposed to say/do? Turn to Putin and say "fuck you Putin, my people say your people did it, and you lied about it, so fuck you!"
Nah. Unsupporters would attack anyway.

Now, we can argue all day, should he have said that, could he have said it differently, would he have done it differently only if he was a liberal?
Doesn't fucking matter. He said what he said.
That doesn't make him guilty of treason, or surrendering to Putin, or having gay sex with Putin, or being Putin's puppet.
All that spew is just ............. spew. From unsupporters.

 

You Trump supporters actually have a much bigger problem right now. And that is Trump met with Putin alone. And Trump isn't saying what they talked about but Putin is doing a lot of talking about all the things Trump agreed to. And the Republicans don't like that one bit. And aren't going to stand for it. Congress and the American people have a right to know what Trump told Putin.

 

I want to know what Putin told Trump. I suspect is was something like, "Do what I tell you to do, or the oligarchs will go public with the billions of dollars you owe to them."

 

Why yes, another unsupporter wet dream.

 

Trump has been lying and covering up for Putin since the day he took office.

Trump had irrefutable texts and raw evidence Putin ordered Russian hacks as early as January 2017: NYT