Russian television shows what the Kremlin thinks of Clinton

[webfact]

Russian television shows what the Kremlin thinks of Clinton

By LYNN BERRY

MOSCOW (AP) — To understand what the Kremlin thinks about the prospect of Hillary Clinton becoming the U.S. president, it was enough to watch Russian state television coverage of her accepting the Democratic nomination.

Viewers were told that Clinton sees Russia as an enemy and cannot be trusted, while the Democratic Party convention was portrayed as further proof that American democracy is a sham.

In her acceptance speech, Clinton reaffirmed a commitment to NATO, saying she was "proud to stand by our allies in NATO against any threat they face, including from Russia."

In doing so, she was implicitly rebuking her rival, Republican nominee Donald Trump, who has questioned the need for the Western alliance and suggested that if he is elected president, the United States might not honor its NATO military commitments, in particular regarding former Soviet republics in the Baltics.

While Trump's position on NATO has delighted the Kremlin, Clinton's statement clearly stung.

"She mentioned Russia only once, but it was enough to see that the era of the reset is over," Channel One said in its report.

As U.S. secretary of state, Clinton in 2009 presented her Russian counterpart with a red button intended to symbolize a "reset" in relations between the two countries, one of U.S. President Barack Obama's initiatives. In Russia, the gesture is best remembered for the misspelling of the word in Russian, while the reset itself failed in the face of Putin's return as Russian president in 2012 and Russia's seizure of Crimea from Ukraine two years later.

Clinton once compared the annexation of Crimea to Adolf Hitler's moves into Eastern Europe at the start of World War II, a comparison that was deeply offensive in Russia, where the country's victory over Nazi Germany remains a prime source of national pride.

Trump, on the other hand, told ABC's "This Week" in a broadcast Sunday that he wants to take a look at whether the U.S. should recognize Crimea as part of Russia. "You know, the people of Crimea, from what I've heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were," Trump said.

This runs counter to the position of the Obama administration and the European Union, which have imposed punishing sanctions on Russia in response to the annexation.

"And as far as the Ukraine is concerned, it's a mess. And that's under the Obama's administration with his strong ties to NATO. So with all of these strong ties to NATO, Ukraine is a mess," Trump said. "Crimea has been taken. Don't blame Donald Trump for that."

Putin was outraged by U.S. support for Ukraine and by U.S. military intervention around the world, particularly in Libya, on Clinton's watch. But it was what he saw as interference in Russia that really rankled.

When Clinton described Russia's 2011 parliamentary elections as rigged, Putin said she was "sending a signal" to his critics. He then accused the U.S. State Department of financially supporting the protests that drew tens of thousands of people to the streets of Moscow to demand free elections and an end to Putin's rule.

In the years since, the Kremlin has defended Russian elections in part by implying they are no different than in the United States, a country it says promotes democracy around the world while allowing its business and political elite to determine who wins at home.

The Democratic Convention, which ended Friday morning Moscow time, was given wide coverage throughout the day on the nearly hourly news reports on state television, the Kremlin's most powerful tool for shaping public opinion.

Channel One began its report by introducing Clinton as "a politician who puts herself above the law, who is ready to win at any cost and who is ready to change her principles depending on the political situation." The anchorwoman couched the description by saying that was how Clinton is seen by Trump's supporters — but it was a nuance viewers could easily miss.

The reports ran excerpts of Clinton's speech, but the camera swung repeatedly to a sullen Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, her Democratic challenger, and his disappointed supporters. The Rossiya channel also showed anti-Clinton protesters outside the convention hall who it said "felt they have been betrayed after the email leak that showed Bernie Sanders was pushed out of the race."

Russia is a prime suspect in the hacking of Democratic National Committee computers, which led to the release of emails showing that party officials favored Clinton over Sanders for the presidential nomination.

The Kremlin has denied interfering in the U.S. election. A columnist at Russia's best-selling newspaper, however, said it would have been a smart move.

"I would welcome the Kremlin helping those forces in the United States that stand for peace with Russia and democracy in America," Israel Shamir wrote in Komsomolskaya Pravda.

Trump, meanwhile, has encouraged Russia to seek and release more than 30,000 other missing emails deleted by Clinton. Democrats accused him of trying to get a foreign adversary to conduct espionage that could affect this November's election, but Trump later said he was merely being sarcastic.

___

Nataliya Vasilyeva in Moscow and Deb Riechmann in Washington contributed to this report.

-- AP 2016-08-01

[Srikcir]

You know, the people of Crimea, from what I've heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were

When Trump says from what he hears, it's often from his own earlier statements. He likes to be his own source of information.

[Kiwiken]

I feel sorry for the american Voters with two buckets of Horse Pucky to choose from. But sadly should they choose the One following the Isolationist path. They may find America great again on its own. 

[slipperylobster]

• Unfortunately....Russia has Hillary and her Democratic sham Party all figured out.
• Trump was just pulling her strings when he told Russia to release her emails, if they had them.  Nothing wrong with that...and no espionage as there was no government server and (according to HRC) nothing was classified. (LOL).

As far as Russia is concerned, Hillary has not done a good job, for the US Government. The only good job she had was outsourced to Monica Lewinsky.

 

 

Edited August 1, 2016 by slipperylobster

[smotherb]

3 hours ago, Srikcir said:

You know, the people of Crimea, from what I've heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were

When Trump says from what he hears, it's often from his own earlier statements. He likes to be his own source of information.

Been listening to Colbert, I see.

[smotherb]

30 minutes ago, slipperylobster said:

• Unfortunately....Russia has Hillary and her Democratic sham Party all figured out.
• Trump was just pulling her strings when he told Russia to release her emails, if they had them.  Nothing wrong with that...and no espionage as there was no government server and (according to HRC) nothing was classified. (LOL).

As far as Russia is concerned, Hillary has not done a good job, for the US Government. The only good job she had was outsourced to Monica Lewinsky.

 

 

I never cease being amazed at your comments. So, you are saying you agree with Russia and you know Trump's intents. How quaint. And, it's not the Democratic party.

[Ulysses G.]

I could care less what Russia thinks of our politicians, but I do agree with them about Hillary in general terms. She is not to be trusted - by ANYONE.

[Baerboxer]

5 hours ago, Srikcir said:

You know, the people of Crimea, from what I've heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were

When Trump says from what he hears, it's often from his own earlier statements. He likes to be his own source of information.

But he's right. The people of Crimea voted to be with Russia and not remain as a Ukrainian province. Stalin forcibly moved the Crimean Tartars and exiled them. Crimea was never part of Ukraine until the Ukrainian Kruschev decided to give it to them when he was the Soviet Union's dictator. He didn't bother asking let alone with a vote. Or do you consider votes undemocratic?

[Srikcir]

 The invasion and occupation by the Russian naval and army forces of a country's sovereign lands and dismantling of elected leadership  does bring the question of legitimacy of a referendum of those affected citizens to agree to annexation by a foreign power. This pattern of soviet absorption follows suspiciously similar to the soviet occupation of eastern europe following WW2 wherein those citizens agreed to join the Warsaw Pact in partnership with their soviet overlords. In fact Crimea before Russian occuption already enjoyed substantial independent governance from Ukraine as an Autonomous Region. 

[JHolmesJr]

So we have to believe russia hacked the dnc emails just because dnc says so?

what else can they say to deflect attention?

[evadgib]

Mods: Any chance of a single pinned thread for anything containing the words 'Trump' or 'Clinton'? 50% of topics on page 1 fall into that category, causing events elsewhere that might be of interest to this board to not be seen.

[slipperylobster]

As in any election. It would be hard for Russia not to prefer one candidate over another. Even England has expressed their opinions. BTW,  I quite agree that you cannot speak of only one candidate without mentioning the other. Yin and Yang.   Oof and doof, Homer and Maggie....etc.   

The reasoning is that the actions of one seem to motivate (for better or worse) the other.

 

 

Edited August 1, 2016 by slipperylobster

[Jingthing]

5 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

But he's right. The people of Crimea voted to be with Russia and not remain as a Ukrainian province. Stalin forcibly moved the Crimean Tartars and exiled them. Crimea was never part of Ukraine until the Ukrainian Kruschev decided to give it to them when he was the Soviet Union's dictator. He didn't bother asking let alone with a vote. Or do you consider votes undemocratic?

Crimea was part of the sovereign nation of Ukraine when Putin's Russia interfered. The people in Crimea didn't have the right to vote themselves out of Ukraine. That would only be legitimate if it was done at a national level coming from the entirety of Ukraine. 

 

 

[boomerangutang]

10 hours ago, Kiwiken said:

I feel sorry for the american Voters with two buckets of Horse Pucky to choose from. But sadly should they choose the One following the Isolationist path. They may find America great again on its own. 

You don't have to feel sorry for Americans.  One is a decent candidate, the other is a dangerous moron.  One has had a career initiating programs to assist disadvantaged people, including single moms and kids.  The other has only focused on his self-enrichment, while cheating tens of thousands of workers out of wages for work they did.

8 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

I could care less what Russia thinks of our politicians, but I do agree with them about Hillary in general terms. She is not to be trusted - by ANYONE.

It is important; what Russian leaders think of the US leaders, and vice versa.  Those are the two countries, out of roughly 200 in the world, which have the most nukes, and they're adversaries.  I trust Putin as being more responsible with nukes than Trump. 

Neither Russian nor Chinese leaders like HRC because they know she's tough.  She says what she means and means what she says.  Trump is a relative unknown to Russian and Chinese leaders, because T has no public record of doing anything, and he's never been elected to anything.  He is known, however, for being a blohard and a flip-flopper, so Russian & Chinese think they can mold him to their side.  They're gambling with a loose cannon.  Trump can love you one moment and hate you the next.   Russians and Chinese would be smart to hope HRC becomes the next US prez.  At least she's the adversary they know, and they can count on her to be at least somewhat dependable behind what she says.

Trump is a dependable as a fireworks factory with a maintenance man who uses a blow torch to light candles.  

It's understandable Russia likes Trump, because he's wishy washy on NATO, and that gives Russia hope of re-owning some its former USSR real estate.  HRC, on the other hand, is tight with NATO and would not tolerate Russian expansionism.   The Chinese probably think Trump will be similarly lily-livered about the SCS (stepping aside while China commandeers other countries' territories).  If so, that would endear him to China.

6 hours ago, JHolmesJr said:

So we have to believe russia hacked the dnc emails just because dnc says so? what else can they say to deflect attention?

There is plausible evidence.  Look it up, if you dare.

[Kiwiken]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Crimea was part of the sovereign nation of Ukraine when Putin's Russia interfered. The people in Crimea didn't have the right to vote themselves out of Ukraine. That would only be legitimate if it was done at a national level coming from the entirety of Ukraine. 

 

 

Trouble is if you follow that view then south Sudan had no right to secede from Sudan. Kosovo had no right to secede from Serbia. Politics are always complicated. 

[neverdie]

9 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

I could care less what Russia thinks of our politicians, but I do agree with them about Hillary in general terms. She is not to be trusted - by ANYONE.

You might say so old dad, but the fact is the world could possibly feel like you do about both the front running morons.  It effects the way the world does business with the USA.  Let's face it, it's already a daily struggle.  The USA and the world needs a competent leader for the states and presently it's obvious there's just simply nobody for the job.

For a while now, the good folks of the USA have been on a downwards slide and it looks like either which way the vote goes you could be swimming in the dung at the bottom of the slide.

It looks like there's no hope from here forward.  RIP USA.

[Srikcir]

30 minutes ago, Kiwiken said:

Trouble is if you follow that view then south Sudan had no right to secede from Sudan. Kosovo had no right to secede from Serbia. Politics are always complicated. 

Internal politics are complicated but more so when a foreign power sponsors political opposition by means of force.

Kosovo’s and South Sudan’s secessions were entirely an internal action, ie., civil war, with the former secession actually sanctioned by the UN. In the case of the Crimea, Russia interjected itself militarily into the sovereignty of Ukraine (aka invasion) to overthrow the autonomous government of Crimea, sponsor a referendum towards secession of Crimea from the Ukraine and coincidentally annex the newly formed Crimea sovereign to Russia as part of Putin's recreation of the old USSR. The secession of Kosovo and South Sudan are hardly comparable to the events in the Crimea.

 

 

 

[boomerangutang]

30 minutes ago, neverdie said:

You might say so old dad, but the fact is the world could possibly feel like you do about both the front running morons.  It effects the way the world does business with the USA.  Let's face it, it's already a daily struggle.  The USA and the world needs a competent leader for the states and presently it's obvious there's just simply nobody for the job.

For a while now, the good folks of the USA have been on a downwards slide and it looks like either which way the vote goes you could be swimming in the dung at the bottom of the slide.

It looks like there's no hope from here forward.  RIP USA.

Sorry you're so cynical that you think there are no Americans qualified for chief exec.  Besides HRC and Sanders, there are many others.   Just because one large political party picked a moron, doesn't mean the other party's pick is of the same ilk.   If you want to get a refreshingly liberal spin on the current political circus, tune in to any of the talk shows on Youtube, or (one of my faves) the 'Young Turks.'

Don't despair, HRC will win in Nov and the US will lope along as well as can be reasonably expected.  It's a flawed ship.  There are leaks, rusty spots, dirty grease on the deck, nut cases in the hull, but the USS US will sail on.  Just one of a plethora of challenges the US faces is opioid addiction - both pharma and street-supplied.   BIG PROBLEM.   If Russia wants to see many Americans self destruct, all they have to do is grab a box of popcorn, sit back, and watch great swaths of Americans go to Hades in handbaskets.   It also sucks mega amounts of money and human resources - almost more than Trump, with the many handouts he receives from government grants and non-payment of loans and non-payment of worker's wages - while he cheats/avoids paying taxes.  Indeed, that's why he desperately wants his tax statements to remain hidden forever.

 

[Scott]

9 hours ago, evadgib said:

Mods: Any chance of a single pinned thread for anything containing the words 'Trump' or 'Clinton'? 50% of topics on page 1 fall into that category, causing events elsewhere that might be of interest to this board to not be seen.

Nope, not at this time and if you have comments on moderation, please PM a moderator rather than put them on the open forum.   It disrupts the thread.  

Your comment will be passed on to the powers-that-be for consideration, though, but as a general rule News Threads aren't closed for a variety of reasons.  

[neverdie]

2 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

Sorry you're so cynical that you think there are no Americans qualified for chief exec.  Besides HRC and Sanders, there are many others.   Just because one large political party picked a moron, doesn't mean the other party's pick is of the same ilk.   If you want to get a refreshingly liberal spin on the current political circus, tune in to any of the talk shows on Youtube, or (one of my faves) the 'Young Turks.'

Don't despair, HRC will win in Nov and the US will lope along as well as can be reasonably expected.  It's a flawed ship.  There are leaks, rusty spots, dirty grease on the deck, nut cases in the hull, but the USS US will sail on.  Just one of a plethora of challenges the US faces is opioid addiction - both pharma and street-supplied.   BIG PROBLEM.   If Russia wants to see many Americans self destruct, all they have to do is grab a box of popcorn, sit back, and watch great swaths of Americans go to Hades in handbaskets.   It also sucks mega amounts of money and human resources - almost more than Trump, with the many handouts he receives from government grants and non-payment of loans and non-payment of worker's wages - while he cheats/avoids paying taxes.  Indeed, that's why he desperately wants his tax statements to remain hidden forever.

 

Mate, I wouldn't be as bold to suggest that, I should choose my words more carefully.

 

I dont think either Clinton or trump are suitable for the position, that is where I stand.

 

i fear, one of these two imbeciles is going to land the job.

 

now if only the American system wasn't so corrupted in the sense that money seems to really control how far along folk get with their campaign.  I have no doubt there's some excellent people from the states who could smash the job, only problem is........where are they, why arnt they at the front of this.

 

Do you think Sanders can get there from here?

 

id personally would love to see a fantastic American president.......ITS LONG LONG OVERDUE!

[Skywalker69]

3 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

You don't have to feel sorry for Americans.  One is a decent candidate, the other is a dangerous moron.  One has had a career initiating programs to assist disadvantaged people, including single moms and kids.  The other has only focused on his self-enrichment, while cheating tens of thousands of workers out of wages for work they did.

It is important; what Russian leaders think of the US leaders, and vice versa.  Those are the two countries, out of roughly 200 in the world, which have the most nukes, and they're adversaries.  I trust Putin as being more responsible with nukes than Trump. 

Neither Russian nor Chinese leaders like HRC because they know she's tough.  She says what she means and means what she says.  Trump is a relative unknown to Russian and Chinese leaders, because T has no public record of doing anything, and he's never been elected to anything.  He is known, however, for being a blohard and a flip-flopper, so Russian & Chinese think they can mold him to their side.  They're gambling with a loose cannon.  Trump can love you one moment and hate you the next.   Russians and Chinese would be smart to hope HRC becomes the next US prez.  At least she's the adversary they know, and they can count on her to be at least somewhat dependable behind what she says.

Trump is a dependable as a fireworks factory with a maintenance man who uses a blow torch to light candles.  

It's understandable Russia likes Trump, because he's wishy washy on NATO, and that gives Russia hope of re-owning some its former USSR real estate.  HRC, on the other hand, is tight with NATO and would not tolerate Russian expansionism.   The Chinese probably think Trump will be similarly lily-livered about the SCS (stepping aside while China commandeers other countries' territories).  If so, that would endear him to China.

There is plausible evidence.  Look it up, if you dare.

The controversy over Donald Trump's ties to Russia, explained.

http://www.vox.com/2016/7/27/12271042/donald-trump-russia-putin-hack-explained

[JHolmesJr]

6 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

There is plausible evidence (that russia hacked the dmc servers).  Look it up, if you dare.

Of course, it couldn't be some honest dnc employee who was aghast by DWS despicable (and possibly illegal) treatment of bernie sanders…and wanted the world to know.

[Baerboxer]

9 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Crimea was part of the sovereign nation of Ukraine when Putin's Russia interfered. The people in Crimea didn't have the right to vote themselves out of Ukraine. That would only be legitimate if it was done at a national level coming from the entirety of Ukraine. 

 

 

Crimea had previously been given to Ukraine by the Ukrainian Soviet dictator Kruschev. No historical connection, he simply decided to do it, and consulted no one. How is that legitimate in your view?

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, neverdie said:

Mate, I wouldn't be as bold to suggest that, I should choose my words more carefully.

 

I dont think either Clinton or trump are suitable for the position, that is where I stand.

 

i fear, one of these two imbeciles is going to land the job.

 

now if only the American system wasn't so corrupted in the sense that money seems to really control how far along folk get with their campaign.  I have no doubt there's some excellent people from the states who could smash the job, only problem is........where are they, why arnt they at the front of this.

 

Do you think Sanders can get there from here?

 

id personally would love to see a fantastic American president.......ITS LONG LONG OVERDUE!

I agree with you. Clinton has far far too much baggage and quite frankly is seedy to say the least. Trump says some completely insane things, occasionally brilliant things that hit the mark and then spoils it by coming out with the loony again.

Clinton remains the Wall Street, Establishment, choice so will likely prevail. Sure she'll have some pet policies but if she wins watch the rich get richer, the wealth gap increase and civil unrest continue.

[Srikcir]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

Crimea had previously been given to Ukraine by the Ukrainian Soviet dictator Kruschev. No historical connection, he simply decided to do it, and consulted no one. How is that legitimate in your view?

Mr. K didn't just one day wake up and decide to gift Crimea to the Ukraine. He gave up USSR sovereignty over Crimea in exchange for the Ukraine to give up all its USSR-supplied nuclear arsenal that could be used against the USSR with a guarantee that Russia would henceforth respect Ukraine's sovereignty. The Ukraine, UK, USA and USSR made a formal agreement of such transfer. In conjunction with this agreement the USSR then had the excuse to drive the Tartars out of Russia and into Crimea as a form of national cleansing.

[Usernames]

Everyone who is ready to go to nuclear war over Estonia, Lithuania, or Latvia, please raise your hand and get in line behind the Clintons.  They've started five wars already, and the only way to add on to their score effectively is to launch worldwide Armageddon. 

[MZurf]

18 hours ago, slipperylobster said:

• Unfortunately....Russia has Hillary and her Democratic sham Party all figured out.
• Trump was just pulling her strings when he told Russia to release her emails, if they had them.  Nothing wrong with that...and no espionage as there was no government server and (according to HRC) nothing was classified. (LOL).

As far as Russia is concerned, Hillary has not done a good job, for the US Government. The only good job she had was outsourced to Monica Lewinsky.

 

 

I think anyone who supports a traitor is a traitor himself. It's clear that when Russia supports Trump it's in the certain belief that in Trump they will have a grown baby easy to manipulate.

That's not the case with Hillary. Anyone who think it's great that Russia and KKK etc. support Trump are <deleted>.

[Usernames]

The Russians after all are fighting ISIS on the ground in Syria.  And, thanks to Assange, we know that Hillary was instrumental in creating ISIS, a terror group responsible for killing Russians and Americans.  

So, for example, the disastrous, absolutely disastrous intervention in Libya, the destruction of the Gaddafi government, which led to the occupation of ISIS of large segments of that country, weapons flows going over to Syria, being pushed by Hillary Clinton, into jihadists within Syria, including ISIS, that’s there in those emails. There’s more than 1,700 emails in Hillary Clinton’s collection, that we have released, just about Libya alone.

 http://www.democracynow.org/2016/7/25/assange_why_i_created_wikileaks_searchable

[slipperylobster]

2 hours ago, MZurf said:

I think anyone who supports a traitor is a traitor himself. It's clear that when Russia supports Trump it's in the certain belief that in Trump they will have a grown baby easy to manipulate.

That's not the case with Hillary. Anyone who think it's great that Russia and KKK etc. support Trump are <deleted>.

pretty presumptive of you....but then again, you are entitled to an opinion...whether right or wrong.

nobody I know, is a traitor.  if you are pointing fingers at me, you should know that I served 22 years in the USMC honorably.  

would sure hate to put troops in harm's way with Hillary at the helm.  She would never pickup the phone, when help was needed.

Among those that I would consider traitors are the people that fail to safeguard classified information (Hillary and Snow...for example).  And those that fail to support our military. (Hillary).

 

That is real treachery, my friend.

 

 

Edited August 2, 2016 by slipperylobster

[slipperylobster]

in harms way