Bill Clinton: Putin kept his word, he can be trusted

[webfact]

Bill Clinton: Putin kept his word, he can be trusted

NEW YORK, September 26 (Itar-Tass) - Ex-President of the USA Bill Clinton believes that Russian President Vladimir Putin can be trusted. "He kept his word in all the deals we made," Clinton told the CNN in an interview on Wednesday.

"Mr. Putin is very smart," Clinton pointed out. He said he knows the Russian president well, and they have a "brutally blunt" relationship. In response to a question whether the Russian leader had ever broken his word, the former US president replied, "Never. He had never reneged on a personal agreement with me".

When touching upon the Russia-US initiative about putting Syria's chemical weapons under international control, Clinton said the United States will "just have to see what happens" over efforts to disarm Syria of its chemical weapons. "You work for the best and prepare for the worst in this business. But I think it would be a terrible mistake not to take advantage of the opportunity", Clinton pointed out.

Clinton had left the US presidency in January 2001, several months after Putin became president.

Source: http://www.itar-tass.com/c32/891750.html

-- ITAR-TASS 2013-09-26

[Chicog]

The problem with this is that Putin has made a promise that Assad is expected to keep.

[Chicog]

"I did not have sex with that woman".

(I simply shoved a cigar up her vagina and knocked one out over her dress).

[RickeyParkany]

...so, Bill *Bubba* Clinton is now an expert on moral & ethical compasses; anyone with a body part for a moral compass has no bearings on this argument...who asked him, anyway; what else would you expect from such a Shill for the Corporate Citizen? they deserve each other, these two. ;-} rap.

Edited September 26, 2013 by RickeyParkany

[Gummigalgen]

Within 2 months Bill is invited to lecture in Moskou for a fee of + USD$1,000,000. + Travel expenses and lump sum for entertainment.

[Utley]

In response to a question whether the Russian leader had ever broken his word, the former US president replied, "Never. He had never reneged on a personal agreement with me".

Since their presidencies only overlapped by a few months, the question that should be asked is "Did Putin ever make a personal agreement with you - Slick Willy?"

If he had never made one then of course he didn't renege.

[hawker9000]

Well, it probably IS true that Putin enjoys considerably more credibility than certain other world leaders with whom he's been dealing lately...

[HUAHIN62]

Within 2 months Bill is invited to lecture in Moskou for a fee of + USD$1,000,000. + Travel expenses and lump sum for entertainment.

The entertainment part must include a box of Cuban cigar and someone to share them with.

[Frank James]

Well, no worries, then. What a relief.

[lee b]

And how can we trust what Bill Clinton has to say?

[Publicus]

*Deleted post edited out*

The OP notes Clinton and Putin only had several months experience with one another as presidents. I know I couldn't, wouldn't, say much about a person's character after only several months of interaction. I could say more in this respect after 16 months of interactive experience, and could say a whole lot more after 6 years of it.

So it remains unclear why Clinton is running his mouth about Putin and why he should be doing so at this time.

As has been suggested, a million bucks or so could explain it.

Edited September 27, 2013 by Scott
Deleted post edited out

[Slickrick]

OK, so Bill says you can trust an ex KGB agent. I wonder if he really beleives that.

[F430murci]

Not exactly what Clinton said, but certainly one interpretation.

-----

Clinton said he knows the Russian president well, and they have a brutally blunt relationship. He said Putin had never reneged on a personal agreement with him.

He kept his word in all the deals we made, Clinton said.

[Chicog]

Well, it probably IS true that Putin enjoys considerably more credibility than certain other world leaders with whom he's been dealing lately...

Dear God, that *is* clutching at straws.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts have been removed.

[Torrens54]

When Obama was FIRST elected President, I had great hopes for his administration.

Sad to say, PUTIN ought to be the President of the USA. The guy demonstrates that he has the "testicles" for it, something that Obama is sadly lacking and there would seem to be very few alternatives, in either party at the moment.

[Scott]

And some more posts deleted. Please read the OP and post about the topic.

[daveinthailand]

Regarding Bill...His wife is his path back to the White House. Imagine an unemployed Bill in DC with a working wife touring the world!!! STAINS are CUMMING!

[Wat dee]

Sorry but you just can't trust russian!

[ricklev]

Bill Clinton, through the Clinton foundation, has done much more for the world after his presidency than almost any president. Of course Carter has never stopped working for the good of mankind. What did those great heroes Reagan and the Bushes do when they left office?

[daveinthailand]

Google it, don't wing it. George Bush has done more for Africa than any other US Pres. Stick to the facts and keep it light. I spent 11 months riding a motorcycle through Africa and have had the pleasure of meeting so many fine folks on this amazing continent. Please put your politics aside and stay with the facts. BE WARNED: The facts may not support your point of view- the same for me. PS I am not diminishing the great work Bill Clinton has done. Google Clinton-Bush foundation. These great guys are still doing good!

This can get you started: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Bush_Haiti_Fund

Regarding President Reagan. I met the man. He and Mr Gorbachev helped end the cold war. Good deal for everyone!

Edited September 26, 2013 by daveinthailand

[Publicus]

When Obama was FIRST elected President, I had great hopes for his administration.

Sad to say, PUTIN ought to be the President of the USA. The guy demonstrates that he has the "testicles" for it, something that Obama is sadly lacking and there would seem to be very few alternatives, in either party at the moment.

Where in the OP was Obama's name mentioned?

Where in the OP is there any discussion of whether Putin might make a good POTUS?

And where in your post is there any mention of Bill Clinton?

What does your post have to do with the topic of the thread?

[GentlemanJim]

Perhaps the question should be asked in reverse order?

Did US Presidents and military always keep their word? Stick to their promises?

But it is a bad tone to question the Greatest Democracy in the History of Humanity about such things...

But that's not the question.

No reason it should be.

Except mostly to be ornery and contrarian.

The OP notes Clinton and Putin only had several months experience with one another as presidents. I know I couldn't, wouldn't, say much about a person's character after only several months of interaction. I could say more in this respect after 16 months of interactive experience, and could say a whole lot more after 6 years of it.

So it remains unclear why Clinton is running his mouth about Putin and why he should be doing so at this time.

As has been suggested, a million bucks or so could explain it.

Well you seem to have enough to say about many 'persons character' on here and you've never even met them at all.

[Publicus]

Perhaps the question should be asked in reverse order?

Did US Presidents and military always keep their word? Stick to their promises?

But it is a bad tone to question the Greatest Democracy in the History of Humanity about such things...

But that's not the question.

No reason it should be.

Except mostly to be ornery and contrarian.

The OP notes Clinton and Putin only had several months experience with one another as presidents. I know I couldn't, wouldn't, say much about a person's character after only several months of interaction. I could say more in this respect after 16 months of interactive experience, and could say a whole lot more after 6 years of it.

So it remains unclear why Clinton is running his mouth about Putin and why he should be doing so at this time.

As has been suggested, a million bucks or so could explain it.

Well you seem to have enough to say about many 'persons character' on here and you've never even met them at all.

Don't presume to try to tell me whom I have or haven't met.

[Scott]

Please stay on topic.

[Scott]

A rather nasty, off-topic, troll post from yesterday has been deleted and unfortunately a couple of reasonably good replies.

[Scott]

A rather nasty, off-topic, troll post from yesterday has been deleted and unfortunately a couple of reasonably good replies.

[ricklev]

What an enormous pleasure it's going to be in so many ways and on so many levels to have Bill Clinton as America's First Gentleman!

Edited September 27, 2013 by ricklev

[Slickrick]

Its so far out, 3 plus years and so much can happen, now till then.

[Publicus]

Its so far out, 3 plus years and so much can happen, now till then.

Agreed.

However, the reputable Monmouth University poll of July shows Hillary Clinton defeating any Republican party nominee in 2016, to include thrashing Sen Ted Cruz by 16 points.

Three years out is indeed a long time, but it would take a political earthquake to stop Hillary Clinton being elected.

For one thing, she gets the vote of 60% of Republican party women. There's no way the R nominee for prez can win if that holds up, or even if a reasonable approximation of it happens.

Bill's gonna be in a weird situation sitting on the other side of the desk in the Oval Office, saying "Yes sir, Madam President, you absolutely can trust Vlad. Just don't eat or drink anything with polonium in it.".

Edited September 27, 2013 by Publicus