6 Burst results for "Mr. Mcfaul"

"mr. mcfaul" Discussed on MSNBC Rachel Maddow (audio)

MSNBC Rachel Maddow (audio)

06:39 min | 3 months ago

"mr. mcfaul" Discussed on MSNBC Rachel Maddow (audio)

"Mcfaul was tapped by president obama to be the us ambassador to russia president putin his government decided that they would make michael mcfaul a boogeyman mcfaul details. The whole thing book that he wrote called from cold war too hot piece in the book. He explains that basically as soon as he was named to be the. Us ambassador state run. Russian tv started denouncing him saying he had no business being an ambassador that he was some kind of operative who was an expert in destabilizing governments and starting revolutions. They also denounced him telling me as a really really really close friend of russian. Opposition leader alexei navalny. Now michael mcfaul. At that point had met alexei navalny precisely once and while ambassador. Mcfaul is a very nice guy who makes fast friends. He's not that fast as ambassador to russia not only did mr mcfaul continue to meet with russian opposition leaders and independent media He went out of his way to be seen doing it as a sort of unbowed message about the. Us government support for democracy and for free expression and for a free press in the united states in russia all over the world and russians. Russian state media treated that like it was the crime of the century. They would do stakeouts and released video montages of every russian political figure and an independent journalists. Who ever visited the us embassy. They put the footage up on screen over titles like obtaining abs in obtaining instructions from the us embassy like they'd caught these people being spies or traitors president biden's summit meeting with president putin today was of course behind closed doors but when talking to the press afterwards president biden spoke at length about how much discussions of russian opposition leader alexei navalny and independent media outlets like radio for europe Were at the core of his conversations today with president putin even when out of his way to take a question from a radio free europe reporter what the consequences of that be. What will that mean for. Russian opposition leaders and independent media outlets in russia to have an american president standing up for them. So bluntly and confronting president putin's so bluntly over his fear of opposition and his fear of a free press we know from experience. It's the kind of thing that drives the kremlin nuts. What will happen inside. Russia based in as a consequence of how president biden push those issues today. I feel like nobody's in a better position to talk about that then our former. Us ambassador to russia. michael mcfaul. i should also note. He was involved in briefing president biden before this summit today michael befall former us ambassador to russia under president. Obama joins us live now. Mr ambassador. it's great to see. Thank you for staying up till the middle of nowhere. The middle of the night to be with me. Great to be with you as always rachel. What are likely to be the consequences. If any of today's events four russian opposition figures for independent media in russia. It feels like the kremlin has felt untrammelled totally unconstrained in the way that it's been going after the opposition and the media lately. What will today do to affect that if anything i you're absolutely right. Twenty twenty one. We'll on an russian history as one of the most autocratic years we've had since the collapse of the soviet union in fact. I think you have to go deep into the soviet union to remember a time that has been so oppressive. And so i was delighted. I have to say honestly to hear. The president of the united states again talk about democracy and human rights like traditionally we used to but it was very important. I think what. Mr president biden said today. Any name all. He didn't shy away from them. I don't know if you remember. Our previous president. Wouldn't use his name either. Just like vladimir. Putin and i can tell you. I spoke to some navalny supporters after that press conference. They heard that voice of support. It doesn't mean things are going to change overnight but it does mean that they are hearing that people who believe in democracy outside of their own country are thinking about them. And there's a there's a kind of feeling of solidarity that i would say ideas are shared between russians and americans in terms of how things went today. What you know about how the closed door meetings went and what. We all saw in terms of the press conferences. Do you have any regrets or worries are things that you really wish had gone a different way. you know. Once they set the meeting that put a lot of pressure on president biden and his team We are we're all here. I'm here in geneva because we want to cover this summit even the word summit is a dangerous word in my view but once the meeting was set i think it was orchestrated pretty. Well actually incredibly well. The build up was right meet with your democratic allies. First in a series of meetings come here. The orchestration in terms of the protocol was perfect. Biden showed up second. That's important there. Were no takers in the room. That's important and they didn't do a joint press conference that was fantastic by the way then tastic because great journalists like an simmons got to ask president putin some pretty tough questions. That would not have happened. Had there been a joint presser with just two or three questions on each side. So that was good and i would say on the substance. Let's be honest. There was not that much accomplished baby steps towards strategic stability talks Sending our bassett's back but remember putin was the one who removed his ambassador. He's just restoring him on his own. We didn't have anything to do with that but it was important. You need to engage with putin. I think that's right. And now they have to go home and do their homework to have a strategy of containing putin as well mr mcfaul. Do you believe that it is of significance either domestically in russia or domestically in the united states that putin keeps bringing up january sixth as if the people who attacked the us capital to try to stop the certifying of the election as if those people are should be seen as political prisoners or that that russia's on their side in some way is this just a diversion a sort of deliberate verbal provocation. Or do you see that as potentially consequential either there or here.

Obama Putin alexei navalny michael Mcfaul michael mcfaul january sixth vladimir mcfaul Biden First two geneva rachel cold war three questions today each side american second
"mr. mcfaul" Discussed on WGN Radio

WGN Radio

06:58 min | 9 months ago

"mr. mcfaul" Discussed on WGN Radio

"John Williams tonight It's seven W T. Chicago's a very, very, very difficult place to understand that always has been. But if you are seeking seeking some enlightenment, I would pick up murder in Canary Ville the true story behind a cold case. And in Chicago cover up. It is Jeff Cones remarkable book about a specific cold case of poor teenager named John, who's who was pronounced dead at 1:20 A.m. on May 15th 1976, But it is also about a Culture and a two specific neighborhoods, Canary Ville and Bridgeport. And about what can go wrong. And about one stunningly heroic guy named Jim. Sherlock. Who is you tell in the book was when this happened to John. He was he was 1/6 grader. Had seen Adrian Grammar school, Jeff in marshaling all of this material and trying to make it. There are a lot of names in this book in trying to make it as you do. Clear and precise and moving like a novel. This must have been an organizational, not nightmare, but an organizational challenge for you, was it not Yeah, I think is a writer it presented to the unique challenges u just out there. I think it was important to me to kind of camp out on Sherlock's work, though, and tell it least part of it. Through his eyes and then part of it through my own In the interviews where I think it kind of stands out, it becomes obvious that The writer is speaking to the witness himself. No question, but, yeah, I think First of all, I think that was important to me to start it like I did with the prologue area where Jim Sherlock is sitting across the street from the House of Someone who was a teenager. One of the principals believed to have been in the car when the shot was fired. Um, because that just happened to Jim Sherlock was just out in the far Western suburbs, basically on a one man stakeout, and so I wanted to bring a case that was very, very old. Into the president hears of Chicago police detective on loan to the FBI, working a cold case sitting in the suburbs in a Jeep Cherokee, watching a house and watching the curtains move and watching right to solve a murder that happened more than 40 years ago. I wanted to make that part of it live, and then there's also there's a natural art to it a little bit. That goes down a lot, and I like the way that it builds into the dick the carol murder because the person is believed to have been They're suspected of being the shooter used murder goes on to possibly shoot his girlfriend, which we've mentioned. And he apparently gets off on that case, Possibly because the bribes paid to the judge, you know? Well, your work too. I don't want to leave without you talking about that too. No. Oh, no. We're gonna leave without me telling you about that I want to. I want to have you in when you can come in the studio because I This is a remarkable book on any any number of levels and you have to be. I hope you are incredibly proud of this book. And the fact that I just toss this out is just another thing. You're going to the book, Jim sure, like at one point was like a Security Guard for the Jerry Springer Show. I mean, there's surprise on every other page. I gotta you are married to the delightful colleague of mine, Tracey Swartz. And you had during this you write in the book. Particularly would like to thank my wife, Tracy. Work like this usually takes usually places stress on other parts from an author's life both at home and at work, and this was no different. That situation was not helped by the fact that as the writing was coming together Tracy was preparing to give birth to our daughter Sloan. Uh, I cannot even imagine Thies sort of emotional stress going on while you wrote this book. And I you thank to you think your daughter Sloan for taking naps during the the arduous tour of taking naps during this thing? They must be clear foretold. You are now an editor of the paper. Jeff is in a distinguished career, the paper covering crime and criminal justice, and he is now What is called the crime justice editor stories like this. Just don't. I'm so glad you jumped onto this because it would have been really easy to even sit there with Sherlock and say. Well, you know, it's kind of an interesting story, and I am so glad you chose artfully to give it the kind of context of that it needed to make it a such a real Chicago book. Yeah, well, you know what? I am proud of it. And especially because I feel like to be perfectly honest that I'm continuing the legacy of work that guys like you have done. Oh, um, you know, if you wanna Mike, you're one of my personal heroes. Is he Well known I, um, you know, mentioned Your book, which scrapes up against this with more repos Lee, and there's a lot of overlap for more repos. Lee and I wrote a book called Everybody Pays 20 Years ago. The Cold Book as they call it these days, But I'm glad if I in any part of this even small these kind of stories, and I'll tell you another interesting connection. The reporter who upon which the 1948 filmed calm or side. 777 was based wound up in the last years of his career, working as my father's assistant. On book week and showcase, which was the art section at the time, and Jack was a just A remarkable guy would sit once I saw that movie. My father told me about Jack. He was not very forthcoming about about the case or anything else, and I would go. What was it like Mr McFaul to have Jimmy Stewart play you? Inject would say Hey, didn't know kid job. He didn't don't get job s O s. Oh, there is that there is that string through and you do such a wonderful job? Canary Ville is much in many ways much like can reveal Woz 40 years ago. Bridgeport not so much anymore, but that's those are two of Chicago's ever ever Most interesting, interesting neighborhoods, Jeff congratulations. This is quite a book. And let's do this again because we could talk about Crime and justice and mobsters and crooked judges and good cops forever Think. Yeah, I'd love to do it in person, too. Me too. Me too. I miss you and Tracy and I've yet to see Sloane I've taken run is like one of my One of my younger girlfriends. I've yet to meet ER, uh, Jeff love to the love to the family. I don't know what the bears games doing, but go enjoy the rest of it. And congratulations. This is quite a book, man. Quite thank you. My pleasure. My pleasure. We're gonna get a commercial break. And then we're gonna talk about a movie about Martin Luther King. Not exactly about King, the man. King the streets. There are more than 900 in this country..

Jim Sherlock Jeff Cones Chicago Canary Ville murder Tracy John Williams Bridgeport Martin Luther King writer Sloan Lee Adrian Grammar school Jack Jerry Springer editor Tracey Swartz FBI Thies
"mr. mcfaul" Discussed on The Beat with Ari Melber

The Beat with Ari Melber

12:09 min | 1 year ago

"mr. mcfaul" Discussed on The Beat with Ari Melber

"Heard of non denial denials. That's that's just no denial whatsoever. Meanwhile trump energy secretary Perry did go on Fox News. He's making a different claim. And we WANNA play this because there's always if there it is a claim if there is a denial there is something. Well we gotta hear it. You gotta here. We'll play it for you but I have to know what you're about to hear was already contradicted under oath breath not once not once was the name. Barack Obama are the Biden mentioned to me not by the president. President not by Rudy Giuliani and not by Gordon. Silent Mr Giuliani conveyed to secretary. Perry Ambassador Volker and others that president trump wanted a public statement from presidents Alinsky committing to investigations of Barista and the two thousand sixteen election. We should know. Mr Perry was not sworn in under oath before his Fox News interview. Then of course you have number one chief-of-staff Mulvaney the top of the ORG chart who who has bobbed and weaved so much that here at the beat we have named a whole new raft when you go full Mulvaney well. After first admitting to the bribery plot quid pro quo. We'll do it all the time. Get over it. He walked back but here you go today. His attorney says Mulvaney has no idea why impeachment witness field and a hill believes Mulvaney was heavily involved. DOC maybe it's because Mulvaney said he was involved. Let's roll it. I was I was involved with the process. Says by which the money was held up temporarily tonight we do not have yet a public timeline from the congress for the impeachment. Vote in the next step so the Senate trial but we do know that there are questions that are not going away for Donald Trump or these top people and that their interests may continue to diverge. We'll get into it right now. Very very special Friday night guests. Josh Marshall is the founder and editor of talking points memo he's a longtime journalist publisher and he doesn't do as much as we would like so. We're thrilled these coming in on a Friday night night and then Former US ambassador to Russia under president. Obama Michael mcfaul. We are grateful as an analyst has been tracking a lot of this all week. You and I have been pulling some similar long shifts. Sir I appreciate you making time as our kickoff expert guests tonight on the beat with that Mr mcfaul your view of the type the person in the role you used to report to the secretary of state not so much as lifting a sentence of denial very very striking like you said if you have nothing to hide then just come testify. Just make a statement and I think you know we're at this moment where there are lots of other people and you just named two of them pay Mulvaney who we know. We're involved in this. They set it. We should hear from them. We should know what their involvement was and and yet I also want to say that none of them are actually taking on any of the facts that you and I and several others have been listening for now two weeks not a single one of them has disputed the basic facts here and I think as we come to the end of a long week that is. What's most striking to me Josh? You follow follow this closely. As a journalist looking at the big picture substantively and on the evidence what jumps out to you about the whole week and the evidence has come out. We learned the evidence if you were listening to the evidence. The evidence is overwhelming. They're just it's so locked tight but it's a funny scandal handle it's almost like an inverted scandal almost every other scandal you and I've ever watched it starts with the little people and the investigators are trying to push it up to the person in the center. And are they going to be able to do that. Or they can tie it to the president or the senator whoever the you know the primary person is and this one was weird since it started with a people call it a not exactly transcripts. Sort of a transcript notes in notes of the president saying it we didn't we started at the top right while and so it's almost it's it's business weird thing of of not. How high will it go? But how low will it goes so in a way that the best you can say for the president after the course of this week is do we know does a story look dramatically different. Not exactly because at the very beginning he admitted to everything and said it was awesome. I would would push you on that and say it looks exhaustively the worse because he is so unreliable as a narrator. Is such an exaggerated right that you could do the defense that they did in the John Edwards case were you say you may hate this guy and he's terrible right but it doesn't actually add up the way it might have looked. That's no longer available. We John Malcolm who was actually a Republican witness on the obstruction in hearings the judiciary last night and part of the defense that he made which is a good faith valid type defense. If it were true was well this was all about a legitimate juden investigation. Not going after the Biden's if true whether you like Donald Trump or not if true that might be a decent defense but to your point that does make it. Worse trump marched down the White House lawn and said I was hoping they would go. After the Biden's he didn't say domestic Ukrainian corruption he also never mentioned corruption in any of these calls falls one of the one of the things to your point that has come out in the last couple of weeks. Is that it's clear they didn't really care whether you investigated or not. They just wanted to say it on camera right which obviously means it was not actually about corruption or anything substantive it was it was a political move so I agree with you. We know more but at at the same time we basically knew that we knew the thirty thousand foot view almost on day one scandal and now we just know all the details I will say it was certainly plausible up until quite recently really up until Wednesday when ambassador sudden spoke it was plausible well. Maybe POMPEO POMPEO didn't really know about this right. Or maybe John Bolton or whatever but he was it was a funny thing because a lot of people were saying well sudden Sunlen to everyone anyone under the bus not really because his memory got shaky whenever he started talking about things were there didn't seem to be other fact witnesses conversations with the president. But what what he did was to chain everyone to his body base absolutely. Oh that's under the bus. Everybody gets dragged with and I WANNA show this email that he brought which is new evidence to to to the ambassador. Because we've we're all familiar ambassador with the bad apples. Defense Right Sir. Yes and you know you you could also call it in my book. The Bad Bananas Defense you have one or two rotten bananas you take them out of the bunch and you keep moving right but anyone who is an. It's Friday night so let's think about you recipes this week and anyone who's good at making banana bread knows you want a little bit more of a rotten banana. There's at least Brown and this is I would call call it the banana bread phase of the theory. Because it's all rotten bananas. It's all rotten apples. The whole thing is rotten and he brought the emails to prove it. And I'll show you just the simple one again. I hate to be so simple but I'm going to ask you. Have you ever in your work. Seen in the national security policy will read from this song into Mulvaney Perry and Pompeo so Linski will assure trump on the call that he intends to run this Biden investigation. And you get the response. I've asked the the council to set up the call from Vini. Tom Pao's on there. Have you ever seen a policy planning process like that and all of your government service. No of course not And I think that's important to remember because one of the arguments we heard over the last couple of weeks. He's the president he gets decide foreign policy and all all these career people they should get in line or get out of the way well. Let's be clear this had nothing to do with foreign policy. Nothing to do with national security or the interests of the American people by the President is also a public servant. This was all about his private interests. So public office used for private that interest. But there's one more part that I think is important that was not in the original call that also came out just clear as day especially in the last couple of days. He withheld military assistance to get his quid pro quo get his help to win the election. Twenty twenty with a country at war right right now think about that. I was thinking about what would be the analogy being like FDR saying Winston Churchill in one thousand nine fourteen. Hey Winston I really want to help you out here while you're fighting that that war but can you do me this favor and once you do me this favor. I'll lift the military assistance. We're providing you. It's such a national. Just do the Mike Bag. But what you're saying for folks is that extortion works. Donald trump might not be skilled at everything but his business career life shows. He does find the weakness. He found the the weakness that Ukraine needed. And that's where he focused it. Well that's right. And it's with both. By the way remember the Oval Office visit some people. Think well what's that's the big deal. Who Cares about that? The LINSKI is our brand new president of Ukraine. He's a comedian. He needs that meeting. So there's leverage there then the military assistance. He's fighting a war he needs that. And that's why this peach men hearing is about national security. Not just about some small little thing that what happened on the side. Let me let me turn you both to who the evidence is moving. This is pretty interesting to put the House of course as gathering it. And we're GONNA play tonight where you have experts and thought leaders in the public that we'll continue to hear and maybe make their minds. I want to dig into something that happened actually on this show take Reagan White House veteran. Peggy Noonan. She has a following as a regular columnist in the opinion section of the a well known to be conservative editorial section of the Wall Street Journal and actually she joined us two weeks ago tonight on the eve of this hearing of this set of hearings with great skepticism for for the shift pro. You can't help but wonder if in this case somebody isn't being set up for a fall for instance it's Adam Schiff looks like a partisan guy he is partisan. Okay well he is. He's a democrat. Well I understand understand that by. Don't think it does any good to make believe that that the president is the only only one hundred ever does some wrong here so on the eve of the hearings that's where Miss Noonan like many other visible conservative started with skepticism but does has the evidence make any difference. Well here's how it has moved here. Let me read to you. Her new piece in the Wall Street Journal. The headline trump's defenders have no defense almost everything thing in the hearings. She writes backed up the charge. That trump muscle Ukraine for political gain pointing out. No one is really making the serious case. That trump wouldn't do something like this bribery. Because trump himself has as we discussed made so many of these comments in public she writes. The case is so clear that you wonder what exactly the Senate will be left doing throughout a trial. How about that? It's fun. It's a very weird situation because and this gets into this question of should they do more witnesses. Do they have enough so they move forward if you were just looking at did president trump do this. The evidence is truly overwhelming. There is no no affirmative defense the people who could conceivably exonerate the president. He refuses to let them talk. It is sort of hard to I mean. If you're actually review politically what does it mean when people who read that. That's a conservative play. That's the Fox News of the print world and that's their headline. And you can't impune this Reagan aide. Who has we just showed very recently was was not looking to come to this? But that's true and I think it's clear that the the solidity of Fox News of the Journal editorial page various as as you say Conservative opinion leaders has a massive effect here. But we've also seen how one day you're a conservative opinion leader and the next day. You're never trump. I'm from you're showing up on. MSNBC people get read out of that mean. It's trump's right now. Probably feels like you've got about a million.

Donald Trump Mulvaney Perry Biden Fox News Barack Obama bribery Josh Marshall POMPEO POMPEO Perry Ambassador Volker Senate Peggy Noonan Reagan Rudy Giuliani Ukraine congress John Edwards Wall Street Journal
"mr. mcfaul" Discussed on The Lead with Jake Tapper

The Lead with Jake Tapper

12:59 min | 3 years ago

"mr. mcfaul" Discussed on The Lead with Jake Tapper

"Understand. Senator plate. Thank you. Mr Chairman. Thank you, secretary for your testimony. I wanted to commend the State Department you in particular for quick statements with regard to the nature of the conversation as it was between President Putin and President Trump regarding. Certain individuals like Mr. McFaul, Anne McFall, and others traveling to Russia to be interrogated by the Russians. State Department came out and said that was inappropriate despite the the president's statement that there was an incredible offer at took the White House a full two days or three days to to, you know, to contradict that statement that of. President Putin had made, but the State Department quickly said that that was inappropriate. And so thank you for doing that. But flaky give me a little bit too much credit. I'm I'm doing my level best every day to implement the president's policies. Oh, that statement was from the United States presidents State Department. Okay. But the United States president said that it was an incredible offer. And so that's why I'm pointing out the difference in commending you. Please take it. With regard to what else was said during that meeting. I know you've given some indication of what was discussed. Let me just give a sense of how Russia is characterizing that meeting, and this is the problem with a private meeting like this. Many of us voiced strong concerns about having a private meeting like this with no readout officially for what happened in in. Here's what happens when a private meeting like that is held. A lot of Putin's meeting with Donald Trump was quote better than super Russia's. Top diplomat has said the leaders summit in Helsinki was fabulous. I think that was Laverov who also said that. The remarks reported by Russian news agencies summed up the mood that Mr. Trump sided with the Kremlin over his own intelligence agency. So they're reporting that as well. Here's how one paper in Russia characterize it. Trump has failed to dominate Putin. Another tabloid said a quiet, modest Trump has paled in comparison with Ladimir Putin. It's clear that Putin has outmaneuvered the US president. That's the Russian media characterizing a meeting, and we have no readout to dispute any of it. All we have are the statements made by the president to the made a incredible offer, for example, to have former US diplomats, shipped off to Russia to be interrogated. I I'm glad to hear that at one they're a little more time will be had before a new meeting takes place between the two principals. By the way. I think that it's good that our president and the Russian president speak. And meet together. That's a good thing. I don't think it's a good thing to meet in private with only an interpreter present with no readout so that whatever is characterized is only characterized by the Russian side. So haven't even response for thoughts on that. So have a personal experience. I had a private conversation with North Koreans. We didn't issue a readout on the conversations quite intentionally and the North Korean press chose to characterize it. We, we thought it was in America's best interest not to respond tit for tat about the nature of that conversation. We, we knew the truth. We knew what had taken place there, and you know, it's the North Korean press. And so I assume that most reasonable people will discount it fairly significant in the same way that one might the Russian press. These are important decisions about how much disclose about private conversations where it had because everyone knows that you may have an expectation that you'll have another private conversation one day and the absence of their belief that that private conversation has the capacity to remain in that space reduces the freedom to have those conversations. And I know you've had this in your life to Senator. I, I know you've had private conversations and you've valued them. It was just you and someone else in that room and it was important and you didn't give anyone read out from it because you wanted to have the chance to do that again because you thought you could make real progress with that person. Let's talk about North Korea. You wrote it up. You mentioned that you travel the core North Korea to continue on as you put it, I guess, to follow up on commitments made in Singapore. Let's talk about those commitments for minute. You mentioned that they have committed to denuclearization. They may have a different readout than we do on what that entails. But but so far they seem to be walking back any commitment, real commitment that was made there, what commitment, firm, commitment, other than discussion of returning remains. I'm not discounting that, but, but in terms of denuclearization what real commitments were made, I'm not going to get into the private commitments that have been shared. I, I don't think it's fair to characterize them walking back from commitments, remember where we were. Right? So it all depends what you draw as the projected line to say. Are we in a better place or worse. Place than we would have been absent. The Singapore summit one can draw counterfactual rep will never know where we might have been, but I will concede there is an awful long way to go. I'm not trying to oversell the accomplishments that we've had towards the path of denuclearization today. There remains a great deal of work to do that will it will be highly contested. That is the modalities. The means the timing of this will we think that I'm confident we'll be discussing for a period of time. There there have been public reports and, and I know the United States is tracking the disassembly of missile engine test site. Something that chairman, Kim committed orally wasn't in the written agreements out, but chairman, German, Kim committed in his conversation with President Trump to do they're beginning to dismantle that it has to do with their missile program. It's a good thing. Steps forward. Thank you quickly for the time is out something completely different. The country of Rwanda right now, and you may be may with this because of this week's focus on religious freedom as indicated a move toward severe restrictions on religious freedom, particularly from outside groups. What are the plans of the State Department to to let them know that that is not that is not in their own interest or ours center. I share your concerns. I, I'll need to get back to in terms of what actions we think we take. I know we'll call it out and we'll will label it for what it is. We do need to see what we it. It is tragic and anyway, I share your concern Senator. It's a huge for us. Thank you. Thank you Senator Kaine. Thank you Mr. chair. Thank you, mister secretary mister secretary. Just a couple of thoughts. I was very discouraged at the Helsinki summit when the president basically was off. Offered a choice in some of the questions that he believe US Intel, or did you believe Latimer Putin's product stations that he had engaged in hacking the election, and he basically said my own people have made a great case to me. Vladimir Putin has made a great case to me. I don't see why Russia would have done this. He came back and corrected it the next day in the United States. But at the end he said, I believe my Intel community, but there's a lot of people out there could have been someone else, and then this dragged on for a couple of days. You know where I live. I have a lot of constituents who used to be your employs at the CIA. People come up to me all the time in Virginia and say, I'm with the IC and they are very demoralized by this. They're very demoralized that when standing next to Vladimir Putin, the president's words were to suggest that he trust Vladimir Putin over them. There was the suggestion when President Trump said it was an incredible offer about embassador McFaul that he was also potentially willing to throw not. Just Intel folks under the bus, but State Department diplomats under the bus. They live in Virginia to they feel the demoralization of at your comments today that we're gonna go to bat for current or former. That's very, very helpful. But what I want to ask you about is, is our military and our military leadership. There was an article yesterday in the Washington Post. General, Joseph Dunn for chairman of the joint chiefs of staff as of Monday done for it still hadn't been briefed on Helsinki even though it directly affects more than one million troops done for overseas. You know why there would have been no briefing of general Dunford about the discussions that took place at Helsinki. It's how you have to ask the department of defense or German Dunford, but you don't dispute that that was you. You have no knowledge that there was a briefing of general done for today about the Helsinki discussion to you Senator. You just read me a piece from the Washington Post, but I'm asking your knowledge. Do you have any knowledge that the administration has shared discussions about US Russia, military issues with the head of the United States, joint chiefs of staff. I've actually spoken with German Dunford about I was with him yesterday in a series of meetings and we had a chance to have a conversation about it. Yes. Okay. So about our plan? Absolutely. Okay. So yesterday may have been the first time he was briefed about it. I wanna ask about Ross. Yes, I was gonna ask about Jenner rotel the the information that Jeanne Shaheen Senator Shaheen mentioned earlier, he expressed wariness about working with Russia and the Russian defense ministry. I, this is an interesting statement they went after general VO tell the head of Centcom who oversees as you know, US military operations in the Middle East, including Syria quote with his statements, general hotel not only discredited the official position of his supreme commander in chief. Are you aware what the official position is that as being referenced in that statement after speak with the Russian ministry of defense to know what it was he was referring to, but you can understand why we're concerned if it's being reported in Russian presses secretary flake and a Senator flake and Senator Shaheen said that they're talking about official positions that the president is outlined as as far as you know, general VO tells statements did not violate any official position. The United States that they seem to be giving a great deal of credit to the Russian minister. Three of defense. Let me ask you about John bowtie might not share that same. Let me ask you about general hotel as far have great credit great belief in his truthfulness. So you do not believe that any of the statements that he's made including those that I read violate any official position, the United States to you if you would, that's best approach to General Department offense. I mean, I'm not out thirty three orders removed up if I could introduce for the record. There's an interesting article in BuzzFeed news just recently today that just lists a whole series of headlines. And I think these are instructive Mr. Trump's announcement that he will in US create drills catches Pentagon offguard Pentagon and sold surprised by Trump pledge to halt military exercises. Pentagon caught off guard by space force announcement, Trump signals, withdraw, very soon of US troops from Syria, surprising, Pentagon, and State Department. Pentagon caught by surprise by Trump's travel ban pushes for some Iraqis to get special consideration US joint chiefs blindsided by Trump's transgender ban north com. Caught off guard is Trump orders, troops to US Mexico border. If I could introduced this for the record Mr. chair objection, I worry about an administration that would take the Putin position over our Intel community. I worry about the administration that would suggest it might be a great deal to consider handing over a former diplomat for questioning. I worry about it administration that is catching the Pentagon offguard that is not consulting with general Dunford a briefing him for a week after a summit of this importance to our military mister secretary. You're aware of the NDA prohibition, the current prohibition on Russian and military, Russian in US joint military operations. Are you not? I'm aware of the existence of that provision? Yes. The provision prohibits any use of funds. It's in the NBA any use of funds to support joint Russia and US military operations. And it also gives the secretary of defense, the ability to undertake a national security waiver. If he thinks. That's the right idea. Does the administration except the legality and binding nature of that provision of law.

President Putin President Trump United States Russia president Senator State Department secretary Helsinki Trump Intel general Dunford Mr Chairman Virginia White House Pentagon North Korea
"mr. mcfaul" Discussed on MSNBC Rachel Maddow (audio)

MSNBC Rachel Maddow (audio)

04:02 min | 3 years ago

"mr. mcfaul" Discussed on MSNBC Rachel Maddow (audio)

"To stop your will to fight or to even believe in anything important, it's information warfare. It has a point supposed to make you feel bad. And right now it's cranking back up to what it was like a head of the two thousand sixteen election. And so tonight, a special edition of the Rachel Maddow show a special augmented in brainpower edition of this show because I feel like it is my job every night to do my best to explain what's happening in the news and what's happening in the country and what's important about what we may be should expect to happen next in order to do that in this kind of a deliberate, unreal, unreality environment. I feel like there's some specialist information that I don't have in that I wanna get what resources do we have as a country to fight this kind of thing who is fighting this fight right now? Are they any good at it? Are we better at this than Russia is house our defense when they're playing this kind of offense and what can we all do as citizens to avoid being roadkill in this kind of race, particularly if some of our government isn't trying to help defend us. We're about to bring some serious brain power to bear on this matter right here. Next. So as I mentioned at the top of the show, we're doing something a little special tonight. We have gathered together three people, three gigantic brains who can help us understand this moment that we're in right now in the news and politics because these guys have served and top government jobs. Some of the key players in this, what what is now the ongoing Russia scandal and it's -tendance and its attendant mini-scandals. I wanted to bring them all here tonight because it's kind of remarkable that we've all got them right here in one place at the same time. And because I feel like there's almost nobody better for me to talk to in terms of trying to make my way through some of the unreality we're seeing right now from the administration. And in the news I Michael McFaul he's the former ambassador to Russia during the Obama administration is the author of the new book from Cold War too hot piece in American ambassador and Putin's Russia. I should tell you that Mr. McFaul is here tonight fresh from a meeting at the White House. This White House after president. Trump publicly considered, handing him over to flat near Putin Putin for questioning. We'll get to that in a moment. Our also joined tonight by Chuck Rosenberg who worked at the FBI with Robert Muller. He was chief of staff at the FBI to James. Comey also served as US attorney for the eastern district of Virginia. That's job. He was appointed by President Bush. We're also joined tonight by Matthew Axelrod, former senior federal prosecutor. He was number two at the Justice department to deputy attorney, general of former acting attorney general Sally Yates gentlemen, thank you all very, very much for being here tonight. This is an unusual format for me. We never do this unusual for me. I'm rarely in New York. So yes, you can all be here. And before I start talking about the things I meant to start talking to you about, we have a little bit of breaking news that I need to get your immediate response to just because it is just become known. This is. The tape that became known to the public just a few days ago. It is a recording reportedly made by Michael Cohen who's the president's longtime personal attorney. Although the president had previously denied that he had any knowledge of any payment having been made to and Karen McDougal a sort of hush money payment to keep her talking about her alleged affair with President Trump. This is a tape recording that was apparently seized by the FBI. Of Mr. Cohen. Apparently unknowing unbeknownst to Mr. Trump tape recording an in-person conversation. They had about that payment. We've had reporting about this for few days. It is now just been released. I'm going to hear it right here with you guys. For the first time I am told that there's one swear word in this that we are not able to bleep in. So if you are particularly sensitive to that, you may want to go in the middle of it. But here's the tape. We just got this in. I'm going to get your reaction after here. God. Okay..

President Trump Russia Putin Putin FBI Michael McFaul president White House Matthew Axelrod Michael Cohen Robert Muller Rachel Maddow attorney President Bush Karen McDougal Comey New York US attorney Chuck Rosenberg Virginia acting attorney general
"mr. mcfaul" Discussed on MSNBC Rachel Maddow (audio)

MSNBC Rachel Maddow (audio)

01:41 min | 3 years ago

"mr. mcfaul" Discussed on MSNBC Rachel Maddow (audio)

"Congratulations on on this scoop today thank you for joining us tonight really appreciate it thanks rachel all right much more come tonight we're going to be talking actually with a veteran of the national security council who knows john bolton then i think give us a little more insight into why people are so wigged out about this appointment of bolton tonight also it is should not be we should not allow this new news to undercut the other big shakeup at the white house today in the president's legal team which is one that i think is very very very significant that's ahead tonight stay with us at sleep dot com their longtime national security correspondent it's the very good fred kaplan if you're looking for a representative sample of the response and the national security world to the breaking news tonight that hr mcmaster has been fired as national security advisor to be replaced by former un ambassador john bolton well fred kaplan's take at slate dot com serves pretty well i think kaplan's reaction to this news tonight is this quote it's time to panic now john bolton's rise to power puts us on a path to war and since trump appointed him while knowing bolton's views it means trump wants to be on that path i saw that actually in wondered if mr kaplan might be taking this sort of worse than your average bear but then i saw that his tape was re tweeted by mike mcfaul former us ambassador to russia and former senior director for russian in your asian affairs at the national security council that got me thinking ambassador mcfaul joins us now live mr mcfaul thank you very much for.

john bolton white house president fred kaplan mcmaster advisor trump mike mcfaul russia senior director representative un us russian