before i take your business done. before i take your questions, i want to say one last thing. look, this is about how we move from here. this is... i listened to a significant portion of what president putin's conference was. as he pointed out, this is about practical, straightforward, no—nonsense decisions. that we have to make. we'll find out, within the next six months to a year, whether or not we have a dialogue that matters. we'll find out whether we work to deal with everything from release of people in russian prisons. we'll find out whether we have a cybersecurity arrangement that begins order. because, look, the countries that are most likely to be damaged are

the major countries. for simple, when i talked about the pipeline that ransomware hit in the united states, i looked at him, i said, how would you feel if ransomware took on the pipelines from your oilfields? he said it would matter. this is not aboutjust he said it would matter. this is not about just our self—interest, he said it would matter. this is not aboutjust our self—interest, it's aboutjust our self—interest, it's about mutual self—interest. i would take your questions, and as usual, folks, they give me a list of the people i'm going to call on, so jonathan, associated press. people i'm going to call on, so jonathan, associated press. thank ou, sir. jonathan, associated press. thank you. sir. us _ jonathan, associated press. thank you, sir. us intelligence _ jonathan, associated press. thank you, sir. us intelligence has- jonathan, associated press. thank you, sir. us intelligence has said l you, sir. us intelligence has said that russia — you, sir. us intelligence has said that russia try to interfere in the last presidential elections and that russia _ last presidential elections and that russia groups are behind acts like solar— russia groups are behind acts like solar winds and some of the ransomware attacked you just mentioned. putin is a news conference is now excepted no responsibility for any misbehavior. your_ responsibility for any misbehavior. your predecessor opted not to demand that putin _ your predecessor opted not to demand that putin stop these disruptions, so it is— that putin stop these disruptions, so it is something concrete can muster. — so it is something concrete can

muster, but you achieved to date to prevent _ muster, but you achieved to date to prevent that her remitting again and what the _ prevent that her remitting again and what the confidences of your threat? weather _ what the confidences of your threat? weather i _ what the confidences of your threat? weather i stopped it from happening again, he knows i will take action. like we did this last time out. what happened was we in fact made it clear that we were not going to continue to allow this to go on. the end result was we ended up withdrawing, they end up withdrawing ambassadors, we closed some of their facilities in the united states, etc, he knows their consequences. look, one of the consequences that i know, i don't know, i should not say come and that is unfair of me, i suspect you may all think does not matter, but i'm confident matters to him, and other world leaders of big nations, his credibility worldwide shrinks. let's get this straight. how would it be if the united states were viewed by the rest of the world as interfering with the elections rectally of other countries? and

everybody knew —— directly of other countries? what would it be like if we were engaged in the activities he is engaged in? it diminishes the sending of a country that is desperately trying to make sure the -- it —— it maintains its standing as world power. so it is notjust what i do, is the actions other countries take, in this case, russia, that are contrary to international norms. it is the price they pay. they are not, they are not able to dictate what happens in the world. there are other nations of civic and consequence, ie the united states of america, being one of them. you said ou soke america, being one of them. you said you spoke to — america, being one of them. you said you spoke to him _ america, being one of them. you said you spoke to him about _ america, being one of them. you said you spoke to him about human - america, being one of them. you saidj you spoke to him about human rights. what do _ you spoke to him about human rights. what do you _ you spoke to him about human rights. what do you say would happen if opposition leader alexi navalny dies? _ opposition leader alexi navalny dies? |— opposition leader alexi navalny dies? ., opposition leader alexi navalny dies? . . ., ., ., dies? i made it clear to him that i believe the _ dies? i made it clear to him that i believe the consequent _ dies? i made it clear to him that i believe the consequent as - dies? i made it clear to him that i believe the consequent as of- dies? i made it clear to him that i believe the consequent as of that | believe the consequent as of that would be devastating for russia, i will go back to the same point. what you think happens when he is saying

it is not about hurting navalny, all the stuff he says to rationalize the treatment of navalny? and then he dies in prison? i pointed out to him that it matters a great deal when a country, in fact, and he asked me why i thought there was an important to continue to have problems with the president of syria. i said because it's in violation of international norm, it's called chemical weapons treaty for some cannot be trusted. it is about trust, it is about their ability to trust, it is about their ability to trust other nations in a positive way. would you like to trade our economy for russia's economy? and by the way, we talked about trade. i do not have any problem with doing business in russia as long as they do it within international norms. it is in our interest to see the russian people do well economically.

i do not have a problem with that. but if they do not act according to international norms, guess what. that will not happen with us, not on the comet would not happen with other nations. he kind of talked about that, didn't he, today? the need to reach out to other countries to invest in russia. they won't. as long as they are convinced that, in fact, the violations, the american businessman who was in house arrest and i pointed out, you want to get american business to invest, let him go. change the dynamic. because american businessman, they are not ready to show up, they don't want to hang around in moscow. look, guys, i know we make foreign—policy out to be this great, great skill, that somehow it's sort of like a secret code, all foreign—policy is a

logical extension of personal relationship. it is the way human nature functions. and understand that when you run a country, that doesn't abide by international norms and yet you need those international norms to be somehow managed so you can participate in the benefit, it hurt you. that is not a satisfying answer — "biden said he would invade russia", by the way, that was a joke, not true — but my generic point is it is more completed than that. david sanger.— thank you, mr president. in the run-up— thank you, mr president. in the run-up to — thank you, mr president. in the run—up to this discussion, there's been _ run—up to this discussion, there's been a _ run—up to this discussion, there's been a iot— run—up to this discussion, there's been a lot of— run—up to this discussion, there's been a lot of talk about the two countries — been a lot of talk about the two countries spilling down into a cold war _ countries spilling down into a cold war and — countries spilling down into a cold war. and i'm wondering if there was anything _ war. and i'm wondering if there was anything that you emerge from in the discussion— anything that you emerge from in the discussion that made you think that hem _ discussion that made you think that he... ~ , ., discussion that made you think that he... ~ , discussion that made you think that

he... , �* he... with your permission, i'm auoin to he... with your permission, i'm going to take — he... with your permission, i'm going to take my _ he... with your permission, i'm going to take my coat _ he... with your permission, i'm going to take my coat off. - he... with your permission, i'm - going to take my coat off. anything that make using _ going to take my coat off. anything that make using mr _ going to take my coat off. anything that make using mr putin _ going to take my coat off. anything that make using mr putin has - going to take my coat off. anything l that make using mr putin has moved away from _ that make using mr putin has moved away from his fundamental role as a disruptor. _ away from his fundamental role as a disruptor, particularlya away from his fundamental role as a disruptor, particularly a disruptor of nato _ disruptor, particularly a disruptor of nato and the united states, and if he could — of nato and the united states, and if he could also just follow up on your— if he could also just follow up on your description of how you gave him a list _ your description of how you gave him a list of— your description of how you gave him a list of critical infrastructure in the united _ a list of critical infrastructure in the united states? did you lay out terry— the united states? did you lay out terry clearly what it was that the penalty — terry clearly what it was that the penalty would be for interfering in that critical infrastructure? did you leave _ that critical infrastructure? did you leave that vague? did he respond to that _ you leave that vague? did he respond to that in _ you leave that vague? did he respond to that in any way? let you leave that vague? did he respond to that in any way?— to that in any way? let me answer our to that in any way? let me answer your second _ to that in any way? let me answer your second question _ to that in any way? let me answer your second question first. - to that in any way? let me answer your second question first. i - your second question first. i pointed out to him that we have significant cyber capability, and he knows it. he doesn't know exactly what it is, but it is significant. in fact, if they violate those basic norms, we will respond. he knows. within the cyber realm. number two,

i think that the last thing he wants now is a cold war. without quoting him, which i don't think is appropriate, let me ask a rhetorical question — you got a multi—thousand mile border with china, china moving ahead, hell—bent on election come as they say, seeking to be the most powerful economy in the world, the largest and most powerful military in the world. you're in a situation where your economy is struggling, you need to move it at a more aggressive way, in terms of growing it, and i don't begin looking for a cold war with the united states —— think he is looking for. as i said to him, i said your generation and mine were about ten years apart, this is not a kumbaya moment like we used to say in the united states and hug and love each other, but is clearly not in nobody�*s interest,

your country or mine, to be in a new quarter more, and i truly believe he thinks that. he understands that the sub but that does not mean he is ready to securely speaking lay down his arms and say kumbaya. he still is concerned about being... being concerned about our fact that we are looking to take him down, etc. he still has those concerns, but i don't think they are the driving force as to the kind of relationship is looking for with the united states. jenniferjacobs. is looking for with the united states. jenniferjacobs. thank you, mr president _ states. jenniferjacobs. thank you, mr president for _ states. jenniferjacobs. thank you, mr president for some _ states. jenniferjacobs. thank you, mr president for some is _ states. jenniferjacobs. thank you, mr president for some is there - states. jenniferjacobs. thank you, mr president for some is there a i mr president for some is there a particular— mr president for some is there a particular reason why this summit tasted _ particular reason why this summit lasted only about three hours? we know _ lasted only about three hours? we know you — lasted only about three hours? we know you admitted the allotment of four to _ know you admitted the allotment of four to five hours? was there any reason _ four to five hours? was there any reason it— four to five hours? was there any reason it ran _ four to five hours? was there any reason it ran shorter. also president _ reason it ran shorter. also president putin said there were no threats— president putin said there were no threats or— president putin said there were no threats or scare tactics issued. you agree _ threats or scare tactics issued. you agree with — threats or scare tactics issued. you agree with that assessment that there _ agree with that assessment that there were no threats or scare

tactics, — there were no threats or scare tactics, and also did you touch on afghanistan and the safe withdrawal of troops? afghanistan and the safe withdrawal of troo s? , afghanistan and the safe withdrawal of troos? , , , afghanistan and the safe withdrawal oftroos? , , , , ,., afghanistan and the safe withdrawal oftroos? , , , , , , of troops? yes, yes, yes and yes. let me go — of troops? yes, yes, yes and yes. let me go back — of troops? yes, yes, yes and yes. let me go back to _ of troops? yes, yes, yes and yes. let me go back to the _ of troops? yes, yes, yes and yes. let me go back to the first - of troops? yes, yes, yes and yes. let me go back to the first part. l let me go back to the first part. the reason it did not go longer is when the last time two heads of state have spent over two hours in direct conversation across the table undergoing into excruciating detail? you may know a time, i don't, i can't think of one. so we did not need come as we got through, as we brought in the larger group, our defence, intelligent and my foreign minister, my secretary of state, was with me the whole time. our ambassador, etc, brought everybody in. we had covered so much. and so there was a summary done by him and by me of what we covered, sergey lavrov and antony blinken talk about what we covered, we made sure we had no misunderstandings, and so it was

kind of after two hours there, we looked at each other, like, 0k, what next? what is going to happen next? we are going to be able to look back, look ahead in three to six months and say, "did the things we agreed to sit down and try and work out did it work?" do we, are we closer to a major strategic stability talks and progress? are we further along in terms of, going on the line. that is going to be the test. i am not sitting here saying that because we agreed to do these things that all of a sudden it is going to work. —— not standing here for what i'm saying is i think there is a genuine prospect to significantly the relations between our two countries without having a single solitary thing based on principle and our values. noca vinod kamano, there were no threats. as a matter of fact, i heard she quoted

my mum and putting other people today —— no, no, no. it was very, which will shock you coming for me, somewhat colloquial, and we talked about basic fundamental things. and you know how i am, i explain things based on a personal basis for some but happens if, for example, and so there were no threats. discipline assertions made. and no, if you do that, we will do this. it was just letting him know where i stood, what i thought we could accomplish together, and what in fact if there were violations of american sovereignty about what would we do? he asked us about afghanistan stop he said that he hopes that we are able to maintain some piece insecurity, and i said that has a lot to do with you. he indicated that he was prepared to "help" on

afghanistan. i won't go on detail now and help on a rant. and help on come in return, and we said what we wanted to do rather to to bring some civility and economic security of the physical security, to the people of syria and libya —— help on iran. so we had those discussions. of syria and libya -- help on iran. so we had those discussions. thanks so much, so we had those discussions. thanks so much. mr— so we had those discussions. thanks so much, mr president. _ so we had those discussions. thanks so much, mr president. you - so we had those discussions. thanks so much, mr president. you say - so we had those discussions. thanks so much, mr president. you say thatj so much, mr president. you say that you did _ so much, mr president. you say that you did not _ so much, mr president. you say that you did not issue any threats. were there _ you did not issue any threats. were there any— you did not issue any threats. were there any ultimatums made when it comes— there any ultimatums made when it comes to _ there any ultimatums made when it comes to ransomware? and how will you measure — comes to ransomware? and how will you measure success, especially when it comes _ you measure success, especially when it comes to— you measure success, especially when it comes to these working groups on russian _ it comes to these working groups on russian meddling in cyber security? it's russian meddling in cyber security? it's going _ russian meddling in cyber security? it's going to be real easy. on cybersecurity, are we going to work out with a take action to get some ransomware criminals on russian territory? they did not do it, i do nothing they planned it, in this case, and are they going to act? we will find out. will we commit, what

we can commit to come in terms of the violating of international norms that negatively affects russia? what are we going to agree to do? so i thickly have real opportunities to move and i think that one of the things that i noticed when we had the larger meeting is that people who are very, very well—informed started thinking," you know, this could be a real problem. what happens if that ransomware outfit were sitting in florida or maine? and took action, as i said, on the single lifeline to their economy? oil. it will be devastating, and you could see them kind of go, whoa! so it is in everybody�*s interest to see on. we will see, though, what happens from these groups and we put together. the third one, yes. mr

president, when president putin was questioned today about human rights, he said _ questioned today about human rights, he said the _ questioned today about human rights, he said the reason he is cracking down _ he said the reason he is cracking down on — he said the reason he is cracking down on opposition leaders is because — down on opposition leaders is because he does not want something like january 6 to happen in russia, and he _ like january 6 to happen in russia, and he also — like january 6 to happen in russia, and he also said he does not want to see troops— and he also said he does not want to see troops formed like black lives matter _ see troops formed like black lives matter for — see troops formed like black lives matter for what is your response to that, _ matter for what is your response to that, please coachella my response can iikety— that, please coachella my response can likely communicated. -- that, please coachella my response can likely communicated.— can likely communicated. -- my response _ can likely communicated. -- my response is— can likely communicated. -- my response is like _ can likely communicated. -- my response is like i _ can likely communicated. -- my response is like i can _ can likely communicated. -- my response is like i can indicated. | can likely communicated. -- my. response is like i can indicated. it is every dickless comparison. it is one thing for literally criminals to —— a ridiculous comparison. bring to the capital, killie police officer and beheld accountable than it is for people arching on the capital and saying, you are not allowing me to speak freely, you are not allowing me to do but b, c, d. they are very different criteria. steve holman, reuters.— are very different criteria. steve holman, reuters. president putin said he was _ holman, reuters. president putin said he was satisfied _

holman, reuters. president putin said he was satisfied with - holman, reuters. president putin said he was satisfied with the - said he was satisfied with the comment about him being a killer for supper—