OPINION - Brooks and Capehart 2/25/2022

"Brooks and Capehart on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Biden’s Supreme Court nomination" PBS NewsHour 2/25/2022

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  New York Times columnist David Brooks and Washington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart join Judy Woodruff to discuss the week in politics, including Russia's invasion of Ukraine and President Biden’s selection for the U.S. Supreme Court.

Judy Woodruff (NewsHour):  With the world's eyes on Ukraine, and President Biden moving forward on his pick for the U.S. Supreme Court, we turn to the analysis of Brooks and Capehart.

That's New York Times columnist David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart, columnist for The Washington Post.

Very good to see both of you.  Thank you for being here on this Friday night.

We're going to talk about Ukraine in just a minute.

But, David, I want to start with President Biden's choice of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson for the court.  What did you make of his choice of her?

David Brooks, New York Times:  She seems great.

What you want on the court is someone with a lot of intellectual firepower, but without intellectual arrogance.  And she seems to have that.  As Marcia and others mentioned before, she has the defender.  She was a regular old judge on — with real trials, not just a fancy appellate judge.

So, she has been in the trenches.  She seems like just a wonderful person.

I read a very good story in The 19th about four friends — or three friends she had starting at freshman year in Harvard.  These were four Black women who entered Harvard together.  They roomed together.  They were sisters together.  All four of them went to Harvard Law together.  And, since then, they have been in each other's weddings, they have been at each other's childbirths.

And what they describe, her three friends describe about her, is someone who's the social organizer, someone who early on said, I'm going to take up a lot of space.  I'm going to make my point of view known.

And I think one of them early in college said, you know, you're going to be on the Supreme Court one day.

So, if she could see it that early, maybe she's fit to be there.

Judy Woodruff:  Jonathan, what's your take on her?

Jonathan Capehart, Washington Post:  Well, she's definitely fit to be there.

I didn't read the story you read David, in The 19th.  I read this big profile of her online in The Washington Post.  And what came — the four women were also featured in that profile.  But what I got from that was a woman and a lawyer and now a judge who is and has been pragmatic on the bench.  Sure, she follows the law and she's grounded in her belief in the law and belief that the law should be meted out equally.

And throughout her career at Harvard, both undergrad and law school, when she — there were moments when other Black students were looking to protest X, Y, or Z, sometimes, she participated.  Other times, she didn't.  And the reason why she didn't was because she thought it was more important that she be in class and prove folks wrong.

And I'm thinking about a situation where, at Harvard, someone in her dorm unfurled a Confederate Battle Flag out the window.  And, initially, she did protest, but she told her friends, look, one of the things they want us to do is to not focus on our classes.  And if we don't focus on our classes, we flunk out, thereby proving to them, at least, that we don't belong here.

So, I think what President Biden has done was nominate someone who is coming to the bench, as David said, with intellectual firepower, but also someone who's going to be somebody who tries to bring the liberal and the overwhelming conservative majority together on some of the key issues that are coming up before the court even after she's confirmed.

Judy Woodruff:  And, David, how do you see her potential effect on the court?

We're starting to hear some Republicans raise objections, questions about her.  Mitch McConnell is one of them.  But what do you think lies ahead, if she's confirmed?

David Brooks:  Well, she's — there are nine personalities on the court.  And so each personality adds something to the little family drama there, they have there.

My impression of the court has always been, they find ways to get along.  And — but bringing in a new personality will widen the perspective of the court, will bring a new set of perspectives, a new lived set of experiences.  It can't help but have a humanizing aspect.

Ideologically, there are all these rating systems that rate judges on how liberal or how conservative they are.  She's pretty much in the mainstream of Democratic nominees.  One of the rating systems I saw put her slightly to the right of Elena Kagan.  Another put her a bit to the left.  But she's very much in the mainstream of a Democratic nominee.

And she's obviously replacing a Democratic nominee, so, as Marcia Clark said earlier today, that it's probably not going to alter the ideological balance, but it'll widen the human aperture.

Judy Woodruff:  And, Jonathan, how do you see her fitting in?  And how do you read the coming Republican opposition?

Jonathan Capehart:  Well, I think she will fit in just fine, considering she's been on the bench for a few years now, and folks love her.

When it comes to the Republican opposition, the idea — I can't remember which Republican member of Congress said this — that she's some left-wing radical, it's just sort of — that would have been branded on to any — whoever the President named.  It just now happens to be Judge Jackson.

I think that, if Republicans stick to substantive criticisms of Judge Jackson, either her record or rulings or cases, they will be fine.

But the moment they stray into the territory that Senator Kennedy of Louisiana did by saying he hoped the President would choose someone who could tell the difference between a J. Crew Catalog and a law book; or another member of Congress who said before even a person was named that, no matter what, that the President was making an affirmative action hire, if they go down that route, they should be prepared for withering criticism.

And, also, Republican leaders, those who say that they're Republican leaders, should be prepared to condemn those folks, because there is no question that Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson is qualified to be on the court, should be on the court, and is not some radical, but, as David said, is in the mainstream of American political thought and life.

Judy Woodruff:  So, now we turn to the thing that we have all been, I guess, fixated on for the last several days.

The last time I talked to the two of you, last Friday, the Russians hadn't begun their attack, their assault on Ukraine.

But, David, now they have.  This, I think, is the first time in modern memory that we have been able to watch a war unfold, one country attacking another in real time on television and social media and the rest of it.

But what do you make of what Russia has done and is doing so far?

David Brooks:  Well, I'm just impressed by the Ukrainian people.  I'm impressed by the Russian people who are on the streets protesting.

But the Ukrainian people are facing very long odds.  And they seem to be facing them with resolve and sometimes heroic self-sacrifice.  And I'm just — my hat is off, and my eyes of admiration are for them.

I think we're entering another era.  We were blessed to live for many years, probably all of our lives so far, in this era of rules.  We may be ending that era and reentering an era of great power rivalries, such as we saw in the 17th century and the 18th century and the 16th century and the 15th century.

And it's just not pleasant to live in those eras, because nobody is secure.  Vladimir Putin only thrives in areas where nobody is secure.  And so we may be, with Russia, with China, defending Taiwan, we may be one great power forever after, or least for a long time after, engaged in constant struggles to head off authoritarian tyranny.

And that will involve different defense budgets.  It will involve electing different sorts of people to be our leaders.  It will involve a much more bloody and much less pleasant way to live in a set of mutual democracies.

Judy Woodruff:  It's hard to watch, isn't it, Jonathan?

Jonathan Capehart:  It is, again, the first major land war on the European continent in more than 70 years.

As David said, this is now — this is a battle of ideas.  But, as Hillary Clinton and Dan Schwerin write in "The Atlantic" today, this is — what's happening now in Ukraine is much bigger than that.  They write:  "Ukraine is one flash point in a larger global struggle between democracy and autocracy."

And they point out that the day that Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin met in Beijing, which was February 4, on Friday, was the same day that the Republicans said that the January 6 insurrection was — quote — "legitimate political discourse."

The battle between autocracy and democracy is — has — was a factor in President Biden's presidential campaign, but there on the streets in Ukraine, in the air, where — in terms of the war that Russia is waging on Ukraine, we are seeing right there the battle between democracy and autocracy.

And the fact that the United States and President Biden is leading the alliance to, at a minimum, defend the NATO alliance, but also help the Ukrainian people, shows that everyone takes this seriously.

There was a lot of talk about whether the NATO alliance was going to wither on the vine, whether it could be — could hold together.  And in the face of this war, before the impending war with Vladimir Putin, they have rallied, and they're stronger.  But that battle between democracy and autocracy and having democracy win is not assured, especially because democracy here in the United States is the weakest it's been in memory.

Judy Woodruff:  David, a lot of people watching President Biden very closely because of what happened in Afghanistan.

But what's your assessment of how he has managed this, handled this so far?

David Brooks:  I think quite well.

He's organized the alliance.  For once, we won the information war.  He really leaked all the intelligence.  And it was all vindicated.  Our intelligence community was excellent in predicting what the Russians were going to do.  And they went ahead and did it.  So he did that part well.

He is playing with an extremely weak hand.  Putin is willing to commit troops.  We, wisely, are not — unwilling to commit troops.  That's one disadvantage.

Second, we're unwilling and our European allies are unwilling to impose sanctions that would impose any costs on Putin.  To do this right, we have to go after the Russian economy, which is essentially going after the energy sector.  We're not going to do that because European and American economies don't want to impose any costs on themselves.

So, I think the sanctions are weak.  I think the alliance between Russia and China, which seems to be reasonably strong, is extremely troubling.

The hope I have, and I think the place to focus our efforts and our attention, is on the Ukrainian resistance.  If the Ukrainian resistance, with the help of the west, can make the occupation of Ukraine very costly, then this whole thing does backfire on Putin.

But I would focus on that, rather than, say, the sanctions, which have been symbolic and not nothing, but clearly not strong enough to impose any real costs on the Russians.

Judy Woodruff:  Jonathan, how do you size up the reaction here and in Europe?

Jonathan Capehart:  Well, I would say that, late this afternoon, the United States, United Kingdom and the European Union announced sanctions on Putin and his foreign minister, Lavrov, personally.  So that is a ratcheting up of the pressure on Putin, on Russia.

This is the — I think the third — second round of sanctions.  And there are plenty more things that the United States can do.

I think one thing that everyone should do is to sort of remind — we should remind ourselves that, in a culture that we have, where everything is instantaneous, you order something online, it can be — depending on which service you use, could be at your house in a few hours, but definitely by the next day.

We are talking about war.  And we're talking about responding to war.  And some of the things that have to be done and should be done, the impacts that they have don't — the impacts don't reveal themselves in an hour, in 10 hours, in a day.  They take time.

And I think the more people sort of reorient themselves and realize that some of the things that the United States and the West are doing to put pressure on Putin, to bring this war to a close whenever that can happen, that this takes time, the better off we will be.

Judy Woodruff:  Well, one thing is for sure.  We're going to have a lot of — we're going to be watching a lot of painful scenes in Ukraine, as we watch the Ukrainian people deal with this in the hours and the days to come.

Jonathan Capehart, David Brooks, thank you both.

Jonathan Capehart:  Thanks, Judy.

David Brooks:  Thank you, Judy.

UKRAINE - NATO & U.S. vs Russia

"U.S., Russia begin tense talks amid stark disagreements over Ukraine" PBS NewsHour 1/10/2022

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  It is one of the most significant crises with Russia since the end of the Cold War: 100,000 Russian troops on Ukraine’s border that the U.S. says could invade within weeks.  Meanwhile, American and Russian diplomats have kicked off intense talks.  Debra Cagan, a former American diplomat, and Dmitri Trenin, of the Carnegie Moscow Center, join Nick Schifrin to discuss.

 

 

"U.S., NATO meet with Russia over massive troop buildup at Ukraine border" PBS NewsHour 1/12/2022

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The U.S. and its NATO allies met with Russian officials Wednesday in Brussels as part of a whirlwind week of diplomacy across Europe, sparked by a massive Russian troop buildup on its border with Ukraine.  The crisis comes as questions about NATO cohesion persist.  Nick Schifrin reports, and speaks with Ivo Daalder, former U.S. ambassador to NATO during the Clinton administration, to learn more.

 

 

"Russian military escalation with Ukraine looms as diplomatic efforts make little progress" PBS NewsHour 1/13/2022

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  A week of diplomacy in Europe concluded Thursday, with the U.S. and European countries meeting with Russia over its massive military deployment on the borders of Ukraine.  But the talks did not end well.  Nick Schifrin reports on where the standoff may head moving forward.

RUSSIA - The Russia Investigation

"Who was behind Russia’s ‘information warfare’ campaign" PBS NewsHour 3/25/2019

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  There is no doubt that Russia’s government attempted to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election.  As William Brangham reports, once the U.S. intelligence community reached that consensus, as well as high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin personally ordered the cyber and social media “disinformation” campaigns, a major investigation and dozens of indictments followed.

Declassified ICA Intelligence Report (PDF download)

MEMOIR - “The Back Channel” the Deep Hole in American Diplomacy

"Former deputy secretary of state on ‘a deep hole’ for American diplomacy" PBS NewsHour 3/19/2019

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  William [J.] Burns, former Deputy Secretary of State and Ambassador to Russia, may have spent more time with Vladimir Putin than other American diplomat.  In his book, “The Back Channel,” Burns discusses how a “sense of grievance” underlies Putin's interactions with the U.S.  Judy Woodruff talks to Burns about a "failure of imagination" on Syria and the current state of American diplomacy.

ON STAGE - Kleptocracy

"At Washington’s Arena Stage, a dramatic interpretation of Vladimir Putin’s rise" PBS NewsHour 2/4/2019

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  A new play showing at the Arena Stage in Washington, D.C., chronicles the rise of a young Vladimir Putin to power in Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union.  "Kleptocracy," written by Kenneth Lin, offers a glimpse into Putin’s confrontation with oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky and explores what might have happened if Russian power had fallen into different hands.  Jeffrey Brown reports.

PUTIN - America Give Up, We Control Your Elections

"Putin urges American political elites to ‘calm down’ on Russian election meddling" PBS NewsHour 10/3/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Russian President Vladimir Putin unleashed a pointed verbal attack on the U.S. while speaking with special correspondent Ryan Chilcote in Moscow Wednesday.  He called concerns about Russian meddling in the upcoming 2018 elections “insanity” and he criticized some Trump Administration policies.  Nick Schifrin talks with special correspondent Ryan Chilcote, who spoke at length with Putin.

OPINION - Shields and Salam 7/20/2018

"Shields and Salam on Trump-Putin summit aftershocks" PBS NewsHour 7/20/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and National Review Executive Editor Reihan Salam join Judy Woodruff to discuss the week’s news, including the fallout from President Trump’s summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in U.S. politics and the NATO alliance, plus news that the President has raised almost $90 million toward his re-election.

Judy Woodruff (NewsHour):  We return now to the turbulent aftermath of President Trump’s meeting with Vladimir Putin.

For more, we have the analysis of Shields and Salam.  That’s syndicated columnist Mark Shields and “National Review” executive editor Reihan Salam.  David Brooks is away.

Welcome to both of you.

Mark, it has been a turbulent, turmoilish week, from NATO to Great Britain, to the meeting with Vladimir Putin, back to Washington.

What are we left with?

Mark Shields, syndicated columnist:  We’re left with, Judy, a week of — I think a blow to the United States of America.

I don’t think there’s any question about it, to our leadership, the fraying of the relations with our longtime allies, a dismissal, almost a disparagement by the American President of democratically elected leaders, and the messy problems that democracy requires, an adulation, a flattery, a giant sucking sound in the company of the Russian dictator by the President’s part.

And Dan Balz, perhaps as respected writer as there is on politics in America, wrote:  “When the setting called for a show of strength and resolve, Trump instead offered deference, defensiveness, equivocation and weakness.”

And I think that’s fair.

Judy Woodruff:  Do you have as dark an assessment, Reihan?

Reihan Salam, National Review:  Well, I think it’s helpful to take some perspective.

Consider President Trump’s meeting with Kim Jong-un of North Korea.  Kim Jong-un is an absolutely brutal, awful dictator.  Donald Trump had very warm words for him.

Some weeks later, Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, then met with the North Korean regime.  And then the North Korean regime responded by saying, they’re making gangster-like demands, they’re taking this much more hard-line position.

Donald Trump, when it comes to offering warm words for authoritarian leaders, does a lot, goes a long way in ways that other Republicans feel makes them very uncomfortable.  But he is a minority of one in his own administration when it comes to those warm words.  And when it comes to actual substance, you see a much tougher line.

If you look at Pompeo, if you look at Jim Mattis, if you look at John Bolton, these are all people who have taken a consistently hawkish line.

And the President himself, he reversed himself.  Again, that’s quite unusual, for him to have reversed himself so quickly, because Republicans were foursquare behind this idea that, no, in fact, they also — Republicans in Congress passed legislation, bipartisan legislation, keep in mind, that says that they can impose sanctions that the President of the United States can’t reverse.

That is legislation that Donald Trump signed in 2017.  So that’s important background to keep in mind.

Judy Woodruff:  So, Mark Shields, are we making too much of the — too much of the words of President Trump?

Mark Shields:  No.

I mean, he is the policy-maker.  He is the face and the voice of the United States of America.  Every President has been.  Ronald Reagan was when he said, tear down that wall and called the Soviet Union an evil empire.  Donald Trump is when he stands there and contradicts the unanimous judgment of all the men and women who are professionals in the United States intelligence services, who have concluded unanimously that Russia, Russia was behind the meddling, cyber-attacks, and continues to be at this time, and stands there and says — pays the ultimate compliment.

You can talk about his words.  We know his words.  In his lexicon, the lexicon of Donald Trump, there are no greater compliments than to say strong and powerful.  And what did he — whom did he call?  To call anybody weak is the ultimate insult.

And he paid the ultimate compliment to Mr. Putin, as he stood there, in refusing to endorse and support the work of the American intelligence professionals in public.

We have never seen a situation like that before.  No American President has ever done it.

Reihan Salam:  There was a fascinating moment during that press conference, where President Putin had to say, President Trump continues to say that the annexation of Crimea was illegal.

President Putin actually reminded the global public of this.  Why did he do that?  That’s a really puzzling question.  Right?  You would think that would be President Trump who would be saying that, who would be taking that kind of stern step of reminding the wider global audience of the differences between them.

Judy Woodruff:  I think that got overlooked.

Reihan Salam:  And one of the reasons why President Putin did that is because he recognizes that Donald Trump alone doesn’t represent the American government in its entirety.

What has happened is that Republicans are more unified against Vladimir Putin.  Democrats are far more inclined to take a hard line against Russia than they had been before Donald Trump came into office.

Vladimir Putin knows that, for his purposes, this wasn’t a victory.  It was in fact a defeat, because Donald Trump, his style of negotiating is, regrettably, one in which he says a lot at one point, but then his administration takes very sharply different action.

If anything, we’re going to get a more hawkish line on Russia in the months to come.

Judy Woodruff:  So, Mark, I mean, I will ask it again.

(CROSSTALK)

Judy Woodruff:  Go ahead.

Mark Shields:  Where was the defeat?  Where was the — it was a defeat for Putin?

Reihan Salam:  Absolutely.  Absolutely, because what Vladimir Putin wants is to get some component of the bipartisan establishment reconciled to the idea of a warmer relation with Russia.

In fact, we got the exact opposite.  Donald Trump himself on the flight on Air Force One back home from Helsinki realized that this didn’t play especially well with the people he depends on to shield him from investigations and much else.

He understood the tremendous vulnerability.  He understands that there are people in his own administration who may well leave that administration and leave him in a more vulnerable position if he moves in that direction.

And, again, look to North Korea.

Judy Woodruff:  That says — but what you’re saying is that — is that there was a mass created that required a lot of cleaning up.

Reihan Salam:  And, also, remember the North Korea precedent.

Remember the fact that these — we’re talking about this as though it’s unprecedented.  Donald Trump praised the North Korean dictator.  And then North Korea suddenly realized, wait a second, that doesn’t amount to us getting everything we want.

Mark Shields:  Donald Trump has told us that nuclear arms are gone from the Korean Peninsula.

Reihan Salam:  Which is nonsensical.

Mark Shields:  Nonsensical, nonsensical.

Reihan Salam:  But, of course, that’s not what he said, right?  He didn’t say the weapons are gone.

What he says, I’m committed to denuclearization.  Now, that doesn’t mean what the North Koreans believe it means, right?  There’s room for interpretation.  And what we have seen is actually a more hawkish posture in the weeks since then.

So it’s very important to keep these precedents in mind before we claim that this is going to be some grand breakthrough.

Mark Shields:  At what point do we get this seismograph or this magic detector that — with two box tops and a coupon, that allows us to tell when he’s telling the truth?

When he stands there and says Kim Jong-un loves his people, loves his people, this is a man who has killed thousands of Koreans, who has starved…

(CROSSTALK)

Reihan Salam:  It’s absolutely appalling.

And it’s also the case that the U.S. government and the Trump administration didn’t, in fact, give away the store.

This is absolutely rattling.  It is wrong for the President of the United States to appear to the be kowtowing to the Russian president.  It’s also important to recognize, however, that Donald Trump styles himself as an unconventional figure, someone who is actually seeking diplomatic break breakthroughs, diplomatic breakthroughs that I do not believe are going to materialize.

Judy Woodruff:  But, Reihan, you’re saying, for all the fuss we’re making over the behavior, the words of President Trump, in the end, the policy is going to turn out all right?  Is that what you’re saying?

Reihan Salam:  What I’m saying is that the words are dangerous.  It is wrong.  It is disorienting.  And it’s something that is actually sapping some of the trust that people have in him.

I think that that’s not a good thing.  But the policy is moving in a different direction.

Mark Shields:  There’s no question that he was overmatched with Putin.  I mean, there’s no question who was the supplicant in that relationship.

There’s no question who was the big dog and who was the puppy seeking the approval.  And the reality, when you come back — and I don’t know when this epiphany occurred, that he realized things hadn’t worked out, because it didn’t occur — they had to sit down with him.  They had to confront him in his own administration before he would even acknowledge, begrudgingly, two letters.

That didn’t change that the United States was at fault, that he blamed his own country, that he blamed America first.  No American President has ever done that before.

But when you get verbs like revise, revamp, contradict, change, modify, those are not the words of a thoughtful leader or a strong leader, or a principled leader.

Those are the words of somebody who really is overmatched in a public situation.

Reihan Salam:  What they might also be, however, are the words of someone who has promised diplomatic breakthroughs and change.

Now, this something that is very rattling for those of us, myself very much included, who believe that the architecture of our existing alliances is enormously valuable.  But, again, Donald Trump believes that, by shaking things up, he is going to bring us to a better place.

Now, it happens that members of his own administration are deeply skeptical about that posture.  And that is actually the substance of what we’re getting.

President Trump doesn’t have the power to reverse sanctions.  That is exactly what Putin wants.  And he’s not going to get it.  And he’s less likely to get it now than two weeks ago.

Mark Shields:  Let me just ask one question.

Reihan Salam:  Please.

Mark Shields:  Do you think that, after 9/11, when Dan Coats was the United States Ambassador to Germany, and he stood with Gerhard Schroeder, the chancellor of Germany, at the Brandenburg Gate, and thanked 200,000 Germans for their supporting the United States in its hour of need after the 9/11 attack, and invoked — in voting to invoke Article 5 of NATO to support United States and its attack, do you think Donald Trump has any idea that happened?

Reihan Salam:  I think…

Mark Shields:  Do you think he any idea that Dan Coats even was there?

I mean, this is a man who…

Reihan Salam:  I believe it’s worth mentioning that Gerhard Schroeder ran an explicitly anti-American political campaign that, during that time, members of the NATO alliance, including Turkey, said that we will not allow the United States to enter Iraq via our territory.

That was a period of enormous fractiousness within the NATO alliance.  And NATO survived and proved resilient.  That is also important to remember.

Dan Coats is a loyal public servant who deserves a great deal of credit, but let’s not forget history.

Mark Shields:  Do you think Donald Trump is aware of any of this?

Reihan Salam:  I can’t say, Mark.

(CROSSTALK)

Mark Shields:  You’re an informed person, Reihan.

Reihan Salam:  What I can say is that the NATO alliance has survived much worse than that.

Judy Woodruff:  I think — I think temperatures are rising all around this week.

Mark Shields:  OK.  All right.

TRUMP AGENDA - Bad-Mouthing Allies

"Can Trump’s reversal soften damage of Helsinki comments?" PBS NewsHour 7/17/2018

ANSWER:  No.

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Home from Helsinki, President Trump is backtracking on his comments from a joint news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin after facing blistering, bipartisan critiques.  In damage-control mode, he read from a prepared statement and insisted he has "great" confidence in the intelligence community.  Judy Woodruff talks with the Washington Post’s Carol Leonnig.

"Putin driving a wedge between U.S. and allies, Hurd says" PBS NewsHour 7/17/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Texas (R) Rep. Will Hurd says he is convinced that the events in Helsinki were part of a disinformation campaign by Russian President Vladimir Putin.  Hurd, a CIA veteran and one of the Republicans quick to distance themselves from President Trump amid fallout over the controversial meeting, tells Judy Woodruff that Congress needs to make sure it’s supporting the work of U.S. intelligence and allies.

TRUMP - Betraying America, Putin Summit

"Trump’s siding with Russia draws condemnation and concern from both parties" PBS NewsHour 7/16/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  In a stunning moment in Helsinki, the president of the United States again dismissed American intelligence findings that Vladimir Putin ordered Russian meddling in the 2016 election, while Putin acknowledged he wanted President Trump to win.  Fallout from the news conference came swiftly, as Washington reacted to the historic summit.  Yamiche Alcindor and Ryan Chilcote join Judy Woodruff.

"Paul: Trump has ‘healthy dose of skepticism’ for U.S. intelligence on Russian interference" PBS NewsHour 7/16/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  As President Trump returns from a Helsinki summit with Vladimir Putin, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky) says the U.S. and Russia “won't have any progress if we don't have any conversations.”  While acknowledging that it’s likely that Russia meddled in the 2016 election, the senator says the U.S. also intervenes in foreign politics.  Paul joins Judy Woodruff to share his reaction.

"Menendez: Putin must be thinking his 2016 investment paid off" PBS NewsHour 7/16/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) says President Trump acted more like “a supplicant than the leader of the free world” at a news conference with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki.  Menendez joins Judy Woodruff to share his reaction to what might transpire after the summit.

"The consequences of Trump turning against his intelligence community" PBS NewsHour 7/16/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  When President Trump dismisses U.S. intelligence and says he takes Vladimir Putin at his word that Russia did not meddle in the 2016 election, what’s the long-lasting effect?  Judy Woodruff gets analysis from former CIA officer John Sipher, who says Trump’s comments about Putin were “very troubling.”

"Trump playing into Putin’s plan ‘either on purpose or by accident,’ Albright says" PBS NewsHour 7/17/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Russian President Vladimir Putin has a plan to divide the U.S. from its allies, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said Tuesday, and President Donald Trump is “playing into that plan either on purpose or by accident.”

In an interview with PBS NewsHour anchor and managing editor Judy Woodruff, Albright said that “President Putin is a KGB agent and he’s very smart and he has played a weak hand well.”

“There are a number of things that were said that I think really make us wonder what [Trump’s] role is with the Russians and frankly what the Russians expect out of him,” Albright said.  To Putin, she added, “Trump is the gift that keeps on giving.”

"How Russia is trying to disrupt the 2018 election" PBS NewsHour 7/18/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  U.S. intelligence agencies are unanimous in their assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election, and senior officials warn of ongoing efforts to do it again in 2018.  Judy Woodruff talks with former Department of Homeland Security official Juliette Kayyem and Laura Rosenberger of the German Marshall Fund of the United States, to examine the threat.

"Trump says Russia summit was ‘great success,’ leaving U.S. officials in the dark" PBS NewsHour 7/19/2018

aka Trump, "Didn't I look great at the press conference.  Yuge success." (it's all about ME)

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  President Vladimir Putin received a warm reception from Russian lawmakers as he celebrated the results of the Helsinki summit.  What exactly are the results?  There's been no formal announcement, and the U.S. Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats says he's not sure.  Yamiche Alcindor and Nick Schifrin discuss the day’s developments with Judy Woodruff.

"Michael McFaul: Calling Putin ‘sincere’ suggests White House equating Americans with criminals" PBS NewsHour 7/19/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  President Trump called it an "incredible offer" from Vladimir Putin: The U.S. could question 12 Russians indicted for 2016 election interference in exchange for specific Americans being interrogated by Moscow.  Now White House officials say they reject the idea.  Judy Woodruff talks with former Ambassador Michael McFaul, one of Russia’s targets, and former Acting Director of the CIA John McLaughlin.

"How will the Trump-Putin summit affect U.S.-Russian relations?" PBS NewsHour 7/20/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Beyond the uproar over President Trump's comments about Russian election meddling, what are the global policy implications of his Helsinki summit with Vladimir Putin?  Nick Schifrin examines what's at stake, from Eastern Ukraine to NATO to Syria, and Judy Woodruff talks with Dimitri Simes of the Center for the National Interest, and Andrew Weiss of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

"What did Russians think of the Trump-Putin summit?" PBS NewsHour 7/21/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  New threats from U.S. politicians to hit Russia with sanctions for meddling in U.S. elections has Russians unsure whether President Donald Trump’s summit with Russian President Vladmir Putin was really a success.  As reality sets in, Kimberly Marten, the director of a program on U.S.-Russia relations at Columbia University, says now, Russians are concerned.  Marten joins Hari Sreenivasan.

OPINION - Shields and Salam 7/13/2018

"Shields and Salam on new Russian election meddling charges, Trump’s Putin meeting" PBS NewsHour 7/13/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and the National Review’s Reihan Salam join Judy Woodruff the discuss the week’s news, including the Justice Department indictment of 12 Russian military officers for conspiring to hack the Democratic Party and state election officials, President Trump’s posture toward Russia President Vladimir Putin, tensions with NATO allies and criticism of Theresa May.

JUDY WOODRUFF (NewsHour):  It has been a busy week in politics, here at home and abroad.

For more on that, we turn to the analysis of Shields and Salam.  That is syndicated columnist Mark Shields and National Review Executive Editor Reihan Salam.  And David Brooks is away.

We welcome both of you.

What a week, Mark.

Let’s start with the special counsel returning these indictments today, sweeping indictment, saying that the Russians were behind a conspiracy to not only tap into — hack into the computers of Hillary Clinton’s campaign, the Democratic National Committee, but to go into state voting systems.

How significant is this?

MARK SHIELDS, syndicated columnist:  It’s quite significant, Judy, and traces it right back to the Russian government.

I know we’re talking about 12 intelligence agents from — on Russian espionage associated with the military, with GRU, their official agency.  And I think it’s — any talk about a witch-hunt or anything of the sort, it turns out that Monday in Helsinki will be a campaign reunion of sorts for Donald Trump and his favorite absentee voter [Putin].

I don’t think there is any question that Russian involvement has grown as a real likelihood, just not a possibility.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  Reihan, how seriously should the American people take all this?

REIHAN SALAM, National Review:  I think the American people should it very seriously.

One problem, however, is that what we really need to get to the bottom of this is an independent commission.  After the 9/11 terror attacks, after you had a spate of urban rioting in this country, we had serious independent commissions that had bipartisan credibility that tried to get to the bottom of our vulnerabilities, what went wrong, which systems were vulnerable, and then tried to find solutions for those problems.

The problem now is that we are not treating this as a national emergency.  We’re treating this as a partisan investigation.  And I think that’s been a problem from the start.  We really need an independent commission to understand our vulnerabilities.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  Mark, is this investigation credible and partisan?

(CROSSTALK)

MARK SHIELDS:  The partisan angle on this is solely on the part of the administration and Republicans in Congress.

There is not a partisan corpuscle in Bob Mueller’s system.  There really isn’t.  This is a man who has been a Republican, appointed by a Republican President, whose appointment was widely lauded from Republicans, including Newt Gingrich, across the board.

Any lack of credibility or erosion of confidence is solely as a part of the concentrated effort from the administration.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  By, Reihan, you’re saying you see it differently?

REIHAN SALAM:  I do, because part of the issue is, there aren’t necessarily prosecutable crimes at work.

What we’re dealing with is a larger systemic failure.  And when that is the case, when you’re seeing this solely through the lens of who can and cannot be prosecuted, you might actually wind up missing some of those vulnerabilities.

And if you treat it purely as a matter of criminal prosecution, you are actually not seeing that this is an attack on our democratic system that necessitates potentially new legislation, new tools that go well beyond a prosecutor’s case.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  Well, that may grow from this, but, in the beginning, Robert Mueller, the people he was appointed by, as Mark just said, they’re saying this is somebody who’s independent.  He’s…

(CROSSTALK)

REIHAN SALAM:  Oh, I think that Robert Mueller deserves a great deal of respect.  I think that’s absolutely true.

But that doesn’t change the fact that he’s working in a process that itself may well be a broken process.  I do not question his integrity.  I question whether this was the right approach to dealing with an attack on our national democracy.

MARK SHIELDS:  Just one quick point.

Those independent commissions that Reihan mentioned, the great urban investigations that occurred after national riots, after — 9/11 was after a national catastrophe, when our country was attacked.  And there wasn’t a consensus, there was unanimity in the country, and it was led by the administration in both cases, the Democrats in the first and the Republicans under George W. Bush in the second.

So, the idea that a President who has denied anything, has refuted the conclusions of the intelligence agencies and the Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Republican Richard Burr of North Carolina…

JUDY WOODRUFF:  Right.

MARK SHIELDS:  … is not going to be plausible as someone who would lead such a commission or appoint such a commission.

REIHAN SALAM:  Well, I really do think that the perception that this is about basically hunting down potential perpetrators within the Trump campaign and what have you, that has taken us away from thinking of this as a general attack on our democracy, on our institutions.  And I think that, had we taken a different approach, had we seen it that way from the get-go, then you might have gotten more buy-in from people who are supporters of the President who don’t necessarily think that this is fair and square.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  Well, right…

MARK SHIELDS:  Nobody knows what Bob Mueller is doing.  He has been the soul of fastidiousness and secrecy.

REIHAN SALAM:  He deserves a great deal of credit.

MARK SHIELDS:  He does.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  But in terms of what’s going on now right now, this comes just a couple of days before the President is due to be in Helsinki meeting one on one with President Putin, Mark.  What should the President say to Vladimir Putin in this meeting, and is this something — should this meeting go ahead?  Some Democrats are saying it should be canceled now.

MARK SHIELDS:  I think it should go ahead.  I think there should be no one-on-one private meetings with the two off the record.

I think what we have right now is a President who needs to confront the Soviet leader, adversary, and say to him, 12 of your own agents in a government that you control, that you lead have been indicted.  I want them extradited to the United States to stand trial.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  Are you — what do you think the President should say, and are you comfortable with the President meeting with President Putin one on one?

REIHAN SALAM:  Look, I’m not comfortable with the fact that we’re having this summit meeting without the months and sometimes years of preparation that you typically have before such a meeting.

But what we do know is that Donald Trump promised diplomatic breakthroughs.  He promised to be a different kind of President.  And that’s why he’s pursuing this very different path.

I’m, frankly, a bit concerned about one thing in particular.  Vladimir Putin is going to want to offer a big diplomatic breakthrough to Donald Trump.  The question is, is it going to be something that is going to be consummate with the long-term interests of the United States, particularly if you look at Syria?

President Trump and President Putin did actually manage to broker deals in Syria that looked promising.  Let’s de-escalate the conflict.  The Russians have not delivered on their end of the bargain.

So if the Russians now make big promises, the President needs to be sure that the Russians are verifiably going to deliver.  He shouldn’t make promises that the Russians are not going to be willing to take up their end of the bargain on.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  And, Mark, are you confident he is going to handle this?

(CROSSTALK)

MARK SHIELDS:  No, I’m not.

We did get, of course, nuclear disarmament of North Korea.  The President told us that had happened, and I guess it just hasn’t been verified yet [sarcasm].

But, no, he does.  He likes the big moment.  He likes the spotlight.  This is a man, I think, Donald Trump, it’s fair to say that, if you remove the first-person singular from his vocabulary (I, me, mine) would be Calvin Coolidge.

It’s all about Donald Trump.  We saw that, Judy, in the NATO meeting, when he goes in and cuts the knees at — off of Prime Minister Theresa May, who’s under assault and siege at home, and lauds her principal competitor, Boris Johnson, and recommends him for Prime Minister by saying what?  He likes me.  He says good things about me.  And that’s the recommendation.

REIHAN SALAM:  Forgive me for just turning to Russia for one moment.

MARK SHIELDS:  Sure.  OK.

REIHAN SALAM:  One thing that we shouldn’t forget is that, for the last 18 months, the United States government and the Trump administration has actually put in place sanctions against Russian oligarchs, has actually hardened NATO’s eastern flank, has taken many steps that are, in fact, very tough on the Russians, when you look at the substance of his agenda.

So we can’t lose sight of the fact that, when it comes to actual policies, the Trump administration has actually been very tough on Russia.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  So you think that is more important than the words which are often praising Vladimir Putin coming from the President?

REIHAN SALAM:  What I think is going on is that Donald Trump believes that you need to be tough with one hand, and, on the other hand, you need to create some opening, some possibility for a diplomatic breakthrough.

What I’m suggesting is that, with President Putin, he needs to be a lot more cautious.  But I think the substance of what he’s done over the last 18 months has, in fact, been pretty hawkish.

MARK SHIELDS:  That substance includes saying Crimea is primarily Russian ethnic country, which is exactly the talking points made by Putin and the Russian government after the invasion and occupation of Crimea.

He’s been…

(CROSSTALK)

REIHAN SALAM:  He’s also provided Ukraine with anti-tank weapons.  That’s a very serious deal.

MARK SHIELDS:  But the reality is that Russia is still very much in Eastern Ukraine.  Let’s be very blunt about that.

And the fact is that the bulwark against Russian Soviet imperialism, interventionism has been NATO.  And he has weakened NATO.  He [Trump] has sabotaged his own partners.

TRUMP DIPLOMACY - Putin, 'Got Him'

"How Trump’s turbulent Europe trip affects his Putin meeting" PBS NewsHour 7/13/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  What does President Trump's visit to the United Kingdom mean for the transatlantic relationship and his meeting with Russia's President Vladimir Putin?  Former ambassador to NATO Nick Burns tells John Yang that if the president is going to retain political support, the respect of our allies, and even the respect of Putin, Trump will have to be tougher on the Russian leader.

TRUMP WHITE HOUSE - The Spin Factory

"At White House, talk of China tariffs, Russian sanctions, and Pruitt under fire" PBS NewsHour 4/6/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  On a day when President Trump ordered the U.S. trade representative to consider an additional $100 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods, and the administration announced sanctions against Russian government officials and tycoons, the President also seems to be pondering the fate of embattled EPA administrator Scott Pruitt.  Yamiche Alcindor joins Judy Woodruff for a recap.

"New round of U.S. sanctions target Putin-connected oligarchs, officials" PBS NewsHour 4/6/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The Trump administration announced new sanctions to punish Russia for "malign activity" around the world, targeting 24 Russian government officials and tycoons.  John Yang speaks to special correspondent Ryan Chilcote about what makes the latest round different from previous actions and whether they will put pressure on President Vladimir Putin.

TRUMP AGENDA - Mexico/Amazon/Putin/Syria

#OurFakePresident

"Analyzing Trump’s statements on Mexico, Amazon, and Putin" PBS NewsHour 4/3/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The U.S. military may soon be guarding the nation's border with Mexico.  That's according to President Trump, who also warned he could tear up the North American Free Trade Agreement if the Mexican government doesn't cooperate.  Lisa Desjardins joins Judy Woodruff to discuss revelations and questions that came out of the President’s news conference.

"Trump, top U.S. general strike different tones on stabilizing post-ISIS Syria" PBS NewsHour 4/3/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  President Trump said Tuesday that the end is in sight for the U.S. military mission in Syria, yet military leaders have said the U.S. should remain until the Islamic State is wiped out.  American reinforcements have arrived in Manbij in recent days, a sign that they will remain a counterweight in the conflict.  John Yang talks to former USAID official Mona Yacoubian, and Amberin Zaman of Al Monitor.

RUSSIA - Limits of Putin's Control

"Feud with the West bolsters Putin’s image, as tragic Siberian fire shows limits of his control" PBS NewsHour 3/30/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  American diplomats packed up at the U.S. consulate in St. Petersburg on Friday, another escalation in the current diplomatic crisis making Russia-U.S. relations more cloudy and dangerous than any point since the Cold War.  But while international tensions may strengthen President Vladimir Putin, Russia is also facing an internal crisis after a fire engulfed a shopping center.  Nick Schifrin reports.

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION - Trump's One Man Show

aka "Trump Listens Only to Trump"

"Trump call to Putin draws condemnation as leaked details show widening rift with staff" PBS NewsHour 3/21/2018

Trump had to thank his benefactor.  After all, Putin got Trump elected.

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  President Trump's phone call congratulating Russian President Vladimir Putin on his landslide re-election drew criticism on Wednesday from lawmakers and former national security officials.  On Tuesday, the Washington Post reported that Trump had ignored instructions from advisors not to congratulate the Russian leader, widening the rift between him and his staff.  Yamiche Alcindor reports.

"Sen. King: 2018 elections are ‘vulnerable’ and U.S.  is failing to deter our adversaries" PBS NewsHour 3/21/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) says King joins Hari Sreenivasan to discuss the ongoing Russia investigation, failures by Facebook to regulate the use of its own data, President Trump’s congratulatory call to Russian President Vladimir Putin, and securing state election systems.

BLACK TUESDAY - Trump Cleans House

"After months of tension, Tillerson's State Department tenure comes to abrupt end" PBS NewsHour 3/13/2018

"Abrupt" is an understatement.  Tillerson gets notification via Tweet and word of mouth AFTER being fired.  Forget being respectful of the office or being courteous.

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Rex Tillerson was sacked Tuesday after 14 months of rocky relations and a long list of policy disputes with President Trump, who announced the Secretary of State's firing in a tweet.  Judy Woodruff looks back at the many points of contention between Tillerson and Trump, and the circumstances potential successor Mike Pompeo would face at 'Foggy Bottom.'

"Tillerson is one of a wave of departures.  Why is Trump cleaning house?" PBS NewsHour 3/13/2018

Answer, YES.  He's attempting to do the same in the FBI.  Trump wants ONLY people who will massage his ego and kiss his 'ring.'

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  What led President Trump to shake up his national security team and dismiss Secretary of State Rex Tillerson?  Judy Woodruff gets insights into the firing from Robert Costa of the Washington Post and Josh Lederman of the Associated Press.

"Will Mike Pompeo succeed where Rex Tillerson failed?" PBS NewsHour 3/13/2018

aka "Will Mike Pompeo bow down to Putin and kiss Putin's ring?"

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  What was Rex Tillerson’s impact on the State Department and American diplomacy, and what will global ripple effects will his successor, current CIA Director Mike Pompeo, face?  Judy Woodruff gets reaction and analysis from Nicholas Burns former U.S. Ambassador to NATO, David Ignatius from The Washington Post, and David Shedd former acting director of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

TRUMP AGENDA - His Black Government

Humm..... Putin needed to give Trump his marching orders in private?! 🤔

"Why Trump and Putin's undisclosed conversation is noteworthy" PBS NewsHour 7/19/2017

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  After President Trump sat down with Russian President Vladimir Putin on July 7 for a highly anticipated meeting at the G20 summit in Hamburg, he met with Putin a second time for a lengthy meeting, that was unattended by advisors and previously undisclosed.  Nick Schifrin reports.

RUSSIA - Putin's Playbook

"What we know about Russian meddling and Putin's playbook" PBS NewsHour 2/27/2017

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  U.S. intelligence agencies believe Russia attempted to sway the U.S. election through DNC email hacking and an influence campaign.  But to what degree were President Trump's campaign advisers in contact with Russians?  And what made Americans susceptible to influence?  William Brangham examines what we know with Evan Osnos of The New Yorker and former CIA official John Sipher.

"U.S. and Russia relations are very strained.  Here's what's at stake" PBS NewsHour 3/3/2017

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The latest reports on repeated contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian officials have strained the potential for improved ties between Moscow and Washington.  Chief foreign correspondent Margaret Warner reports, then Judy Woodruff gets views on what's at stake from Andrew Weiss of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Paul Saunders of the Center for the National Interest.

JOHN KERRY - On Syria, Russia, and More

"Kerry:  Syrian conflict is ‘the worst human catastrophe since World War II'" PBS NewsHour 1/6/2017

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  In our most recent interview with a top Obama administration official, Judy Woodruff sits down with Secretary of State John Kerry as the presidential transition nears.  They discuss Secretary Kerry's assessment of the U.S.-Russia relationship, now that intelligence has confirmed hacking; the administration's legacy in Syria and Israel; challenges for his successor, Rex Tillerson and more.

JUDY WOODRUFF (NewsHour):  And now to my interview with Secretary of State John Kerry.

I sat down with him earlier today at the State Department, before the public release of that intelligence report on Russia.

But I began by asking, now that we have confirmation Russia interfered in the election, does that fundamentally change Washington's relationship with Moscow?

Secretary of State John Kerry, thank you very much for talking with us.

JOHN KERRY, Secretary of State:  My pleasure.  Thank you.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  So, now that it has been confirmed that the Russians interfered aggressively in the U.S. election, does this represent a fundamental change in the United States' relationship with Russia?

JOHN KERRY:  Well, that remains to be determined.

It certainly represents a major challenge in that relationship.  It's a hostile act.  It has serious consequences, and we're going to have to work that through.

And I say we.  I mean the United States, the next administration is going to have to approach Russia very clearly understanding what has happened.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  Do you think more needs to be done to retaliate as of now?

JOHN KERRY:  Well, I think that President Obama made it clear that we would retaliate at a time of our choosing and ways of our choosing.

And that means some of them, the public will know about, some of them, they will not know about.  Obviously, with two weeks left, I think that the administration coming in is going to have to make some judgments of its own about what the next steps will be.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  So, it's reported the Russians were celebrating the election of Donald Trump.  Why would they be celebrating?  What do you think?

JOHN KERRY:  I'm not going to speculate.  I really think it's too important.  And I just am not going to speculate.

I think there has been a lot of news articles.  You all have been covering this for some period of time.  People are going to draw their own judgments, but I'm not going to add to that speculation.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  What do you think Vladimir Putin wants?  You have been dealing with him for a long time.  What do you think he's after?

JOHN KERRY:  Well, he's after a lot of things.

There are a lot of motivations.  He obviously has agreed with us on some things and disagreed with us on others.  And we managed to find common ground and work together effectively on the Iran nuclear agreement, where Russia assumed major responsibilities to try to get the agreement done and to make it work.

So I can give you a long list of things where Russia and President Putin have found common ground and worked with the United States.  But, on Ukraine, on the implementation of the Minsk agreement, on Syria, we have obviously not been able to find the same kind of common ground, despite good efforts.

And those are problems that are going to continue into the next administration.  My hope is the next administration will approach Russia strategically, with a clear purpose of trying to find more common ground, but without giving up on fundamental values and principles that are at the core of the United States' foreign policy.

ELECTION 2016 - Trump Baby