which information then was leaked. to the to the media so brennan was the political boy working for the expected hillary clinton. presidency so let's let's expand this investigation let's forget about the russians because this was and what the russians did and let's look at what john brown a did ok steve what we have i agree with that i think feel is absolutely right let me and say on this because mr brown was there with the torture the enhanced interrogation programs the destruction of video interrogation tapes. all under his watch and he should be also investigated for authorizing a participating in a virtual assassination program that is endowing the president authorizing the president to kill american citizens that he unilaterally decides were implicated in national security danger based upon unsubstantiated evidence mr brennan should be

under investigation for assassinations and i would drink to that ok let me go to steve here were given a peculiar situation here do believe jim comi or interim a cave. that's a dilemma that's a really sad sad state of affairs which when you get to believe go ahead you know what i'm getting at steve go ahead well here's what yeah well of course called he's got the book coming out and he's been tweeting that oh i'm going to tell my story who cares but here's the deal colby testified under oath that he never authorized anyone to talk to the media about the sensitive information that mccabe reportedly or allegedly talked to the media about and mccabe said that you know he was authorized to do it so and they both said this on their oath so one of them committed perjury apparently this is so outrageous and really i mean if we had an honest media in this country. the new york times will be putting this story on its

front page every single day documenting every single thing we're talking about adding more but they couldn't ok let me go to guys you have stormy daniels out there and whatever else i'm going to go to a philip before we go to the break here philip. i'm sure general flynn is watching all of this with great interest so we have a number of people that have lied under oath and lied to the f.b.i. so why should there be a prosecution of the general flynn if there are going to be prosecutions against other people that lied to the f.b.i. the f.b.i. lying to the f.b.i. go ahead philip you know this is this is really the interesting aspect of the investigations people are being gotten gotten by virtue of the fact that they lied about something and nobody's really looking at what they actually did if we look at what flynn actually accomplished or did there's there's something there but the fact that he lied his way the reason he's being hung out to dry and this seems to

be the process that's being followed by the investigation when you think about it that's pretty scary and it is very very all right gentlemen to jump in here we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on exposing the deep states with r.t. . his. words about do you suppose you took in such a situation to ninety five to ninety eight percent was incredible it's all approaches a very serious that is. the mechanisms to. do chemical weapons is a concern should leave their home in quincy mediation then i think we have to look at the facts and. so you just for the for me the most most here are.

the most expensive fish in the world each one selling for tens of thousands of euros it continues to grow its entire life if it was thirty years old you might have a two ton fish out there and yet they don't get that big today because we're way too good. it's only women and so much larger mission was once there was much more widely distributed we have politicians that are in office for a few years they have to get reelected everything is very very short term our system is not suited and it's not clear where the long term survival and that's why we have the catastrophes. welcome back to crossfire where all things considered i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing exposing the deep state.

ok let me go back to bruce in washington which is killing me give you a hypothetical let's say in two or three months the wraps up his investigation and let's say hypothetically there is a damning findings that the report reveals to the public how how will it be received if so much of the things that we've been talking about in this program and on what i've been talking about on cross talk for months now when we don't hear or have any investigation into the clinton foundation about how the f.b.i. was politicized during the campaign how they manipulated the campaign tried to influence it and we have one report that we will probably get we could hypothetically again like i go into finances or something about his son in law but they don't go through all of a myriad of other things that we've been hearing about the hour about people that.

or people could actively search out information like people watching this program in the sense of balance and hypocrisy will be so apparent bruce go ahead well i don't know whether that can be large that a report that would be filed by mr mole or his not charter doesn't include investigating the clinton foundation or that he went and do anything he won't sessions' can investigate on his own he could know it had he not through his charter is quite limited that is not true even if you haven't looked at the charter peter it's quite narrow and in fact if you can't afford it challenging it is easy it is indictment on certain counts ok all right you're a leon test telling you you're a lawyer and foundation i have read i've read the charter numerous occasions even under the wildest delusionary given interpretation of language it cannot include the clinton foundation that doesn't mean the department on its own can investigate crime that's how it ordinarily happens the special prosecutor is an exception and there's no reason why mr sessions couldn't on his own through the criminal division

i do the criminal division i work with the criminal division began an investigation of that sort the statute of limitations has not run now how should a report be handled there is unlike in the independent counsel era which had lapsed after the clinton impeachment and acquittal at the senate we don't have an obligation of a special prosecutor report to be published moreover unlike in the independent counsel era there's no requirement that anybody who is accused by a special prosecutor port be given an opportunity to file a response to the accusation so the public can hear and see both sides of the of the investigative report so here the department itself could however implement some regulations that kind of open book approach to any report so somebody accused has an answer as an opportunity to state and. a response sent in public then can

evaluate it then we will have an ability to provide some measure of credibility to the accuracy of the assertions well well said your honor and we go to philip right now but my question stands is that if there is an investigation into these other activities that we have discussed that ad nauseum on this program here. or maybe i should ask why wouldn't sessions not appoint a new counsel because i think it's imperative right now because as you said earlier in the program in russia gate so flimsy you can make it in anything you want but a lot of other things are very factual people lying under under oath unmasking leaking all of these things have legal. implications here you know talking to george papadopoulos in a bar you know i don't see the legal jeopardy but i would peter struck talking to

his girlfriend looking for insurance i think we should perk up our ears and look at it more closely go ahead philip. well i hear what you're saying peter but the problem is i think that the the corruption is so broad yeah the united states government that everybody has an interest in not letting it be investigated and we probably need something go like you remember the church commission in the seventy's right basically looking into the intelligence community we need something maybe that has a broader brush but. as bruce has has has correctly said the mandate for from ruler is fairly strictly and narrowly defined and that of course was deliberate to add to to make sure that it doesn't really get into other issues that would expand this this investigation so broadly that it would be. a ten year job to investigate corruption in the u.s. government which we all know is pervasive you know that you're going to see that would be a career but i that would be

a thread this is go ahead and i had to rush now go ahead right now right now that the the there's nothing that prevents the house dominated by republicans and the senate dominated by republicans sieve fifty one forty nine forming a church committee i mean they have the majority so why have the white roosted why don't they do this why is there sessions why will they do it because we have a weak and cowardly we have a cowardly system where people do not step up for their own responsibility and we talk about lies as well i'll tell you one the department of justice our prosecutor right now mr james clapper then yes director of national intelligence yes tells a lie to the senate intelligence committee that he is not gathering data on millions of americans i guess there were hundreds of millions of his statutes of limitation have been retired that needs to be prosecuted the statute of limitations and all he was promoted you know he got a pay i would actually be hazardous is tension here steve let me go to steve here

could say you know bruce brings up a really good point and i think steve and i agree. on this point here where is the will power i mean the i mean we don't know what's going to happen after the midterms but between now and the midterms just exactly what breaux said is true you know we could get a church committee together but why don't the republicans get their act together go ahead steve the republican the republican leadership is feckless now and it's always been feckless they're the worst of group i've ever seen at communicating there should be a press conference held every day with every revelation that comes out ryan and mcconnell should be there with the chairman of the various committees say this is outrageous where are you mr attorney general appoint a special prosecutor i don't know what's up with sessions i've got on many shows on i think even on that last time i was on with you peter and said by the way as anybody seen jeff sessions there very well may be an investigation going on behind the scenes into the whole f.b.i. investigation process into hillary's e-mails and the clinton foundation but you

know what i don't care about behind the scenes say this deserves a special prosecutor and do it now and if it doesn't happen i have to wonder what sessions has to fear because maybe someone's got something on him and he knows it you got it and all these things pop into your head it's that no brainer give us a special prosecutor you know you know philip you know. a really good point here if there isn't transparency you know we're going to continue down this path what i really worry about is that you know we will go through additional election cycles we won't learn from the mistakes of the two thousand and sixteen and will get more and more politicized and then you get a banana republic you know i mean we cia and the f.b.i. were never set up to to work inside of domestic politics in it and there's ample evidence that that's happened in least in the last election here and if there isn't a church a committee like thing i don't see that will be able to avoid it will just keep getting repeated probably even intensify go ahead philip. you know i absolutely

agree i mean we're you know we're kind of looking at the minutia of what's going on and there's something really big behind it that we're afraid to touch because too many special interests and and too many people in power would be affected by this and again i mean to me the horrific thing that that has has been emerging from all of this is that the fact that our national security institutions and organs have been corrupted by this process where essentially they become part of the political system that is this is the kind of thing that occurs in a tyranny or an autocracy where the national security is basically there to protect the party in power and that's essentially where we're heading. you know you know bruce wayne you know we have a remedy here though i did for peter let me tell you we go to bruce right now cedar point here and i want to insist yes what the remedy is right in the oval office

mr trump in the next five minutes could tell mr sessions you appoint a special prosecutor to investigate clinton foundation or i'm firing you if there's nothing that impede to me has that power under article two if his team isn't doing the right thing he can fire them why doesn't that he could also release mr sessions is not going to look at all and really kind of fire the gary somebody who will go ahead steve steve that he could declassify it get all that right on the precipice fives on his own can declassify he can declassify it right nice any information he wishes. and that's for sure but i just saw point out here as harry truman said rockwell lighthouse steve go ahead if you look at don't forget the rubber duck don't forget the road talk about the deep state the state department the f.b.i. the cia they're still full of people who don't like trust never like trump and are loyal to the democrats and obama and they're still in there and obama has theirs in

my opinion this sort of shadow government working where strings are being polled there is week after week after week of the most confidential conversations the president has and information from the white house and here and there and don't think that's not orchestrated so when we talk about deep state it's holdovers and again yes that's could be trouble small too you can fire them all and really drain the swamp but it's not been done ok philip you know one of the things you think is you've served in government. former spook yourself do you think that there will ever we'll ever find out. specifically who did all of the leaking in the first hundred days of trump's administration because that's illegal those are felonies people go to jail for that do you think there will be a follow up on that go ahead philip. well i'd like to hope that there will be a follow up on that. the thing that. is notable in all these cases that there's always kind of a paper trail or there are people that are sitting in the room that basically hear

what's going on and later on come out with it we have to hope for that kind of shall we say integrity in the process where the we're picking up on the things that occurred that have been carefully hidden i'm somewhat optimistic these things have a tendency to come out of ten chile and i think it would be good for the country it would be good for our democracy well also and we're going to finish on this side we have been there on what peter i want to correct one thing really when we don't have an official secrets act in the united states it's not automatically a crime to leak information even classified information there is an effort to get a statute like that but it has to have certain elements of aiding the enemy sabotaging the national day out and it will be an ugly enemy can you enemy and say they give you a single lead the enemy is a minute we've got to quit they are gentlemen the enemies the media many thanks to my guests and want to do new york and leesburg and thanks to our viewers for

watching us here r.t.c. unix on remember across. well you know there are things we kind of adopted because we were called tired. of being there in the small ball and if you don't harp along she needs. to be told already ninety percent of the dot dot and it won't become the. fifty. coupes seventy tons they do it several times a day with a big fleet oh you get an idea on why. we have to

understand we can not stay still and just. be with them this will be is the deal for you. i'm doing this because i want the future world to the future generations to have and enjoy the ocean we have. the far right. isn't just on the march it's taken violent my daughter's action i don't like it. i see those organizations which are all usually split into which we feel different names how do you view that. complex web of british fascism.

welcome to the part of a type developed by russia that's the crux of the u.k.'s allegations against the kremlin in this case presupposition that if a nerve agent originated in a country it bears responsibility for its use decades later will these. formulation of a type developed and long practiced by the u.k. to be supported by the chemical analysis to discuss that i'm now joined by john pascals on theirs they had of the trench research initiative dedicated to the

future of disarmament mr sanders is great to have you on the show thank you very much for your time thank you now correct me if i'm wrong you fully bagged the british authorities in their version of events you called the russian foreign ministry is response to the allegations absolutely pathetic the response that included the call on london to initiate formal or p c w procedures and yet when the british authorities did just that you said that this was exactly what these to be done putting aside your clear political preferences do you find it encouraging that both sides are now seeking international expertise. or point in the british allegation is the nature of the chemical weapon the name of the movie choke. type of nerve agent that was developed and produced in the soviet union during the nine hundred eighty s.

. the program went on into the early one nine hundred ninety. the soviet union had broken out this is. the british me it's unusual in the sense that to the best of our knowledge was never put into delivery systems this is what we call being. had with her because of its. nature and the fact that only one country actually developed. is the foundation for the type of allegation. now after all of these political wrangling and the mutual expulsion of diplomats the u.k. actually did what russia requested it to do the pursued the formal channel the o.p.c. experts have already visited salisbury to collect the samples and we are now being told that they need about two weeks to run the tests what's your best guess as to

what we can expect from their analysis. well my guests in terms of the results will be either that we have confirmation of the british assertion that the agent used india to hutto was no view check one of its variations or the results will be that it is something else the good point in the discussion so far is that the authority is in do you know to those who have invited the expertise of the o.p.c. dobby and the organisation for the prohibition of chemical weapons to verify their own conclusions these results will be tested in a laboratory is certified by d o p c the view in different countries and that process is the bond that takes of a number of days perhaps up to two weeks now i know that you again fully support

the british authorities did do you find it responsible to accuse another country of such major crime of using military grade to act chemical weapons on a foreign territory before running although staff well this is a political question the for which the british government must have its a reason some of us have its intelligence and so will i have no information as to the bedroom what type of information they have it was a very strong and a rather precise a geisha and they have made with respect to the chemical agent that was used. other dicom a crude weapons convention there are a number of processes for c. of course the british government can always go through the process of purely its own diplomatic means for the for the o.p.c. w.

however the point is right now a lot of them. has decided to involve d o p c w and now there are a number of procedures that will have to be followed should after the results through d o p c w laboratories have been returned to london should britain decide to go through the process or third g.o.p. c w at the same time we have also heard that russian authorities have denied the particular of the gay sions they have also in response made a number of statements implicating all number of other countries as possible sources of. agent you know this is a political discussion that will have no end until we get the facts i agree with you on that point for sure you said just a moment ago ago that the soviet union was the only country to have developed this

agent does it mean in your view that this historical record of having of doing this work in the past should be equated to the capability of russia to produce these type of agent in the present. this. go that far because there are different scenarios possible we have actually very few facts right now as to what happened in the british town of bree for me as a member of the public that is a river what we know from history is that because we're the revelations were first made about a new feature by members of the russian. chemical weapons program in october of ninety two that was of

a several weeks of to do conclusion of the negotiations of the chemical weapons convention now the consequence of that is that no wieczorek as an agent or at least as a family of agents together with a possible precursors have not been included in lists of chemicals that are un. convention so there has been no declarations by russia to the effect of the possession the manufacture or the chemical structures of those agents and this is what is now creating a sphere of uncertainty sphere all for many of the stuff you write here because i think it's a very interesting point and it is often made in the western media first of all i want those revelations were made russia was not the full signature in not a full member to the chemical weapons convention and second of all correct me if i'm wrong but the convention actually allows all the participants to him gauge and

develop nerve agents in small quantities for scientific medical even defense of purposes as long as the quantity east under one hundred grams you actually allowed to do that am i wrong the. he says all of what you're saying is correct. it is misleading the way you put it first and foremost russia as a state party to the chemical weapons convention the treaty in december of ninety ninety seven its first obligation was to declare all activities and. information concerning those activities. weapons after the first of each of the hundred forty six the point i was making is russia as never made such a declaration with respect to agents and the russian state and says that it has

never actually preceded that with that program because at that time it was the soviet union rather than russia as a member of the international community in carrying out a dot work just over a particular point you're saying russia is officially the success of state to the soviet union it was assumed all the responsibilities of the previous state under international law the soviet negotiated the treaty the final months of that it was actually russia that from the as those negotiations if you any of collapsed in one thousand nine hundred one if it wasn't that the soviet union that was negotiating there be accessing to that treaty it was russia but anyway even if there were some lack of transparency on the soviet union part i honestly don't know the history of that to argue about that even if that was the case is that enough to advance the very serious allegations that the british government is advancing because at the end of the day we have two nuclear powers accusing each other or at

least one accusing another of using chemical weapons on its territory in so subjecting the general population to the very very damaging in fact of this agent. the very point is that. the programs were conducted the russia as the successor state to do so here union was responsible to destroy all the facilities where chemical weapons were destroyed where they were struck by how they have received quite a bit of western assistance in terms of achieving the program that everything russia has declared has been destroyed in september of last year that has been certified by d o p c w. that is not of central to the accusation that's being made against russia is that it consoles an agent that was declared by a muslim in me mr sanderson to tell due respect not declaring an agent is

a different claim from the president of the country ordering the assassination on a foreign soil and this is the letter claimed that the foreign secretary of boris johnson is advancing against russia if russia is found in or at the soviet union was found in violation of that treaty that would be something different and the consequences for that would be totally different than accusing a country or a country's president of ordering assassinations of foreign citizens do you see the difference or priest what they're trying to explain in this situation is that because it was what they cleared and because no future can its precursors are not listed in the weapons convention there is no way that the international community has been able to verify what the agents are how much for was produced and where it comes from now one of the things the investigation that's now being carried out by. inspectors at two hundred fifty.