but more awkward moments were to call donald trump stressed that his country would not intervene in other nations affairs and basically said that washington will stop telling other countries what to do we reject the ideology of globalism and we embraced a doctrine of patriotism and almost immediately after that the american president got to doing just that. germany will become totally dependent on russian energy if it does not immediately change course. all nations of the world should resist socialism. and the misery that it brings us to everyone. opec. and opec nations are as usual ripping off the rest of the world we want them to start lowering

prices and they most contribute substantially to military protection from now on we had very strong words about patriotism almost so strong that it could be perhaps qualified as a kind of a new rise of you know he's calling for nationalism extreme nationalism and that is unfortunate because that moves the world towards a more a more difficult place to actually manage in a peaceful way from the united nations and if he had very strong words towards the i.c.c. if so it's also another contradiction because he talks about the rule of law and at the same time he attacks the international criminal court i'm not sure that his speech on on an ideological level on a strategic level holds all together it has a lot of contradictions and weaknesses the issue with iran is perhaps one of the most complicated quite a few people really scratch their heads when the american president said that a lot of countries supported his exit from the iran nuclear deal whereas in fact

none of the signatories besides the u.s. russia china and the major european powers supported it and in fact the e.u. top diplomat federica mog arena he came out on monday and said that the european countries came out with a special financial mechanism to keep trading with iran in defiance of u.s. sanctions but. iran's leaders so. death. and destruction the corrupt dictatorship in iran plunder the nation's resources. to enrich them. build nuclear capable missiles increase internal repression spread mayhem. across the middle east and far beyond finance terrorism and find havoc and slaughter iran's neighbors have paid

a heavy toll for the region's agenda. of aggression and expansion. iranian president took the stage several hours later in responding to trump's speech with similarly strong rhetoric. because the u.s. also pressures other countries to violate the nuclear agreement and even more dangerously the u.s. is threatening to punish all countries and international organizations we invite you to return to the u.n. security council resolution we are inviting you to return to the negotiations table that you left. in a room we condemn all acts of terrorism without equivocation we fought the book party even before kuwait was it wrong for to games taliban terrorism and gave up martyrs in this struggle we fought the taliban before the attacks on new york and washington d.c. it wrong foot against still a fake distorted representative of islam we were engaged in the fight against

before the attacks in paris london and brussels appreciate this historical reality about iran trump acid actually start realizing that he has been and stead of bringing making america great again he has been isolating the united states of america even the european union and his allies and her are not happy with his attitude towards iran which has proved on and on and on again are about to be that it has abided by that deal which of course that you up for a dollar and still approves of iran has been showing on and on and that it's being credible it's sticking to the to the deal in terms of military expenditure iran is the nineteenth country worldwide in terms of military expenditure which means that the israeli regime turkey mentally. other countries the united states itself is ahead in terms of those aspects so i do not see why iran should be concerned and

the iranian officials have over and over repeated that if anyone is to be concerned about the situation and trump himself. authorities in paris are increasing the number of special safe houses for drug addicts but people who live close by say it's made life in the area much more difficult. investigates. behind these and gates stands the sour dish shoot the fixer in france's first illegal venue especially for addicts the idea was to give addicts a safe space to get clear needles to prevent the spread of disease as well as to be able to seek help but since it opened almost two years ago people living and working on this street say it's turned the lives into a nightmare and despite gangs diety about the south to shoot many locals were too afraid to speak directly on camera so that if you see if you see the boy be to see

if we. have the law. of the city where you have been. if if if if. this is. where the boy didn't see the obvious but. if you. see. what locals claim the shooting gallery as it's been dubbed by the media makes the area for more dangerous and even though hundreds of addicts have made use of the facility many also is still choosing to shoot up right here on the street videos taken in recent weeks show drug deals also taking place in broad daylight. the last time marty visit to the street was a week two witnessed an addict getting their fix.

this is the sport where that video was shot and if you come with me now i want you to just get a sense of how close that addict was to the drugs room that has been set up by the authorities here it's just over here it's a stone's throw away and instead of using the facility that was available they decided to get hot you. use violence and aggressive behavior is now being witnessed he almost daily. police statistics show that since the drugs room was opened more than one thousand eight hundred offenses have been reported for the possession of narcotics their consumption and theft despite the outcry from locals erm significant evidence showing that it isn't toughing the desired effect and now looking up to open up for drug rooms along with a move. i think it would be necessary to have four rooms in paris suburbs including

one to do with smoking crack on our balance treatment but meets health needs but if this pilot project is anything to go by these new versions just won't solve the problem in fact they could create even more show that you can ski r.t. paris. and the commissioner has lashed out at british newspapers even suggesting they need tighter regulation comes against a backdrop of souring relations between the e.u. and britain over bragg's it talks with some suitably nasty headlines artie's polyploid has the details. well these comments about so-called smart regulation they are made by any justice. there are zero then four in vienna media build to the culture of dialogue or should build the culture of dialogue on the contrary we see divisions split this information and in each

exclusion the blacks to debate is the best example of that. again do you remember the front page of a popular british daily calling the judges the enemy of the people. just last week the e.u. leaders told. bratz on another front page and i would medical care for a european approach to lead based on quality and smart regulation if needed so you had that juror taking aim at in particular the sun headline from last week that was printed in the wake of to resume a's failed trip to salzburg where she failed to convince each of the merits of her brags it plan and actually the article itself underneath the headline in relation to so called the e.u.

leaders two bit is so that's the sort of things he's clearly not happy with she says it's irresponsible for media outlets to behave in this manner but that word regulation is a bit like waving a red rag to a bull when you're in a room full of journalists and quite a few people concerned especially the journalists in the room they gave the e.u. officials during the q. and a session afterwards a bit of a grilling commissioner you rover gave a speech today where she referred to quote smart regulation for the media could you clarify what she means she refers to all the initiatives that have already been moved and that should be fully implemented member states including the already agreed or divisional media services directive was all over the world. but she didn't refer to the future. pressure she's addressing

a problem she sees with two british newspaper from pages and saying small regulation was not all to if she will what does she mean by smart regulation of newspapers she was speaking about the responsibility of the media which of course he very well aware of the responsibility they. or do you have in informing people and afterwards she said that there might be consideration if smart regulation might be needed she didn't call for a smart regulation not all the e.u. officials criticism was reserved for the press there she took aim at mainstream political parties as well who she said except some of the rhetoric of division and she called on politicians to share responsibility for their words and to show restraint because sadly hatred and cases of hate crime in europe are on the rise. sweden's prime minister will be stripped of

his position after losing a no confidence vote for september's general election when his ruling social democrats one hundred their worst ever result earlier maria discussed the issue with my colleague andrew farmer. well this is a historic moment for sweden first time ever the freshly elected parliament dismisses the sitting prime minister and he lost a confidence vote early. tuesday that is mandatory after general elections he will still be the head of a kerry taker government. until the new government is formed but with no actual power this comes after again historic parliament elections in sweden during which we saw a rise of writing two in sweden democrats while social democrats the ruling party the biggest and historically the most powerful party in sweden i mean was shaking dramatically with the of worst results in decades to now as an outcome we have two major groups in the swedish parliament left sent to block included social democrats

then the opposition alliance blog formed of four parties with one hundred forty three seats in the palm in just one point less than their major rivals so they're very close one forty four against one forty three torpor is that it will be very hard to. to vote on any decision because none of them has the majority the only way for them to have the majority would be to team up with sweden democrats they got sixty two seats in the parliament but the thing is that left center block says the not ready to negotiate to cooperate anyhow with sweden democrats and tea parties of the poor parties for me and the opposition alliance blog also we've used to do that so it's kind of deadlock right now because nobody has the majority from what you explained. caused quite a political sort of earthquake didn't it what caused that well i have to say that the parliament elections came at a very difficult time for sweden and security was the biggest concern with very

high criminality rate gang shootings on the rise cars burned in various cities all across the country you remember those absolutely dramatic pictures from sweden so how did they vote i have to say people felt frustrated scared and of course anger they needed a solution they needed to fix those problems although the connection was never officially established sweden democrats somehow managed to convince people that immigrants are to blame for all the problems anti immigrant or particularly anti non european immigrant feeling with very strong that what's next them for sweden vote for a new head of the government has to place no later than two weeks after the speaker of the parliament is announced which happened yesterday and the parties will be allowed to vote to choose between maximum four candidates and if they fail to do that we're going to see new elections and sweet. divisions arising over donald

trump supreme court nominee with democrats now urging an f.b.i. probe. ramírez claim that brett kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a yale college university university college party in the one nine hundred eighty s. it comes a week after covering his confirmation hearing in the senate was postponed over accusations of an attempted rape thirty six years ago democrats are leading the calls to stop his nomination. this was attempted read i believe professor ford judge kavanaugh has lied multiple times he doesn't count on or have the same presumption of innocence as anyone else in america his credibility is already very questionable in my mind and in the minds of a lot of my fellow judiciary committee members the democrats i would advise lying though i believe her let's put it that way there is credibility to her story it's not just politicians denouncing trump's pick comedian jim carey used

a caricature and explicit language to blast governor meanwhile one of his accusers christine place before it is expected to testify in a senate open hearing on thursday in an interview covena denies the allegations and says he also wants to testify before the committee. process. waters from both sides. to judge. are less discussed this with legal on this list jennifer breeden and andres banal professor of urban studies at queens college in new york thank you both for coming on to the program to talk about this issue firstly i'd like to start with you jennifer how except little do you think it is for some media to trade kavanah in a manner that is so damaging to his reputation before even any court decision is made on the matter. well it's overturning the presumption of innocent until

proven guilty and that's what we've you know really specialize in in the united states judicial system and so because we're now taking that presumption putting it on its head we're convincing people who probably had no idea anything about this case or even that there was a supreme court nominee to suddenly think that brett kavanaugh is a monster based on these these these allegations these paintings of how he's been meanwhile all we have are the words of two people that's not to say that they are lying but we have absolutely no evidence for that and that is simply the complete opposite of what the united states constitution and our judicial system was set up to create and judge it has got a point isn't she nothing has been proven yet you know it goes against that presumption of innocence why do you think there's been such a backlash here. i think that really speaks to the importance of taking into consideration a culture that has been build and develop the united states and the way that it relates to power in this country so i don't think anybody is assuming that

anybody's guilty but that doesn't mean that we don't have a responsibility to take victims of sexual assault and sexual harassment very seriously and i think that's what we're doing right now particularly as it applies to the misuse of power by people in impressive. there are men in power in our institutions in this country so i think right now it's perfectly plausible and important to hear out these women there are two so far and it seems as though more accusations may come along and enter into a process where we can hear those stories out and really put up the front and center what this what this means look at the evidence and see if we really want to appoint someone for a lifetime in a position that is critical in the interpretation and the production of law in this country so i think that it's very very important that's what we're seeing right now and that's what the backlash is about given this this culture in this in this society that has for many many decades completely ignored the stories and the

experiences of women and just general victims of assault is it jennifer as i said so just as made his point he says you know that we should be looking at these cases but is it fair that his reputation has been damaged so much. oh it has been damaged not only his reputation but his family furthermore what we're doing now is that the united states congress and all those who oppose kavin on political grounds only are tending to throw away our legal protest protections that's due process presumption of innocence until proven guilty by destroying a judge that actually has upheld those rights for all americans regardless of race or politics and so we're seeing a very a much more political mindset and political strategy and when we put politics over the long we put politics over evidentiary laws and protections then we're truly undermining the fabric of what makes america so great that whole presumption the fact that we have put this out we blasted it rather than providing privacy to both

parties i did i agree with andreas actually that we cannot allow somebody that is in power to have this kind of power without with impunity but at the same point we actually have leadership we have democratic leadership who has not been called accountable for by the media we have for democrat. at least tom carper we have several others that people have come out saying that they were guilty of sexual harassment the same way but the media has ignored those in favor of projecting anybody who is conservative or republican so it shouldn't matter what your politics are if we truly care about the the infirmity and the sickness the sexual harassment then we should not care about politics but it seems that this is just come down to political slander because somebody opposes a justice who they consider to be conservative rather than looking at its case records history and furthermore the evidence i mean i know that andres mentioned the evidence but again we have seen none of that thus far andre's why why do you think this particular case is embroiled in in politics it does look like

a case of political tribalism doesn't it supporting one tribe no matter what an attack in the enemy or the opposition even without concrete evidence of what jennifer is implying. i mean i think there's a couple points to make number one there is actually evidence there's evidence in the therapist's notes there you know there have been evidence in other people who were very around that situation believe in the case of mr meat is so i think that this is just part of the beginning of having this conversation but more to the point we're seeing right now also i don't i don't know i agree actually that we can't just when it comes to sexual harassment sexual assault focus on one party i don't think anybody's doing that i think we're seeing especially with the me too movement we're seeing a rise in attention and the importance they are looking at to move it absolutely. and honestly for how are all around. sorry jennifer we missed your there's i mean.

to me to move it is. i don't think that's true i think there is there is there's been a lot of people interested for example in revisiting allegations against bill clinton there's been. plenty of interest in al franken was taken out based on this right so i don't think at all this is something that is simply by focused on one political party with that said though in this moment right now given. for women's reproductive justice and roe v wade in the supreme court this is what we're doing now we're dealing with looking at the character the ideology and the politics of a man that has been appointed that is putting a lot of people believe some very important things in danger of being overturned and i think there's a some very serious implications there is not and that i understand the road again general that i hear your. disagreements in the fear that roe v wade is going to be

overturned but again these are more media allegations these are more allegations from from liberal stating that if trump has his people and if conservatives come in that then roe v wade will be overturned and all of this that's simply not due process of the american legal system or of the supreme court they can't just come in and overturn laws there have to be cases there have to be precedent i mean the woman who started roe v wade herself that was roe herself but she she actually came forward the real woman years later trying to overturn that one she could not do it so to say that this is a big thing i mean you just proved right there by stating that roe v wade there are these big things that are coming in the supreme court that this is politically motivated against cavanagh has nothing to do with any evidence that's actually been brought forth besides about besides allegations from two women andres if we look at what's been posted on social media and we've got a high profile we've got a high profile character for example comedian jim carrey's posted an obscene insults of covenant how can you not say that these are not politically motivated in

this case it's a democrat supporter showing his affiliation by using dirty tactics surely. i think it's important here to note that there is in. abstract objective. analysis an interpretation of law existing in the legal system that is a form of interpretation legal process that is that i think is incorrect all all processes that bring about the interpretation the production of law in any society is inherently political trumps appointment of cabinet is political there is an agenda at play here and there is an agenda because the justice who has who is retiring. tilted the balance on the vote for roe v wade and many other very very important. votes which include the power of the president the power of the executive to to make decisions and to receive impunity in certain criminal.

situations and investigations also cavanagh has a history of having the very very pro corporate and anti regulation ideology and perspective so all of this is coming to play this is not just objective neutral situation here where everybody. is taking the allegations by doctor for seriously are just the only ones being political this is a this is a field of deceit are you mentioned that the legal status in america or all of them in america is actually contingent on political ideologies but in fact actually at the code of judicial conduct itself which all judges and all legal process people are supposed to adhere to a code of judicial conduct makes it illegal to vote based on political guidelines it makes it illegal for i'm judges to be politically active and so it's actually there are laws set in place that say that it can't be said of course you can look

at somebodies case record and make an allegation based on that but i mean that's what this comes down to again once again we're talking about the sickness of sexual sexual assault but it's all coming back to politics this guy's politics he was hired because of politics now he's been out because. politics that is not what the united states legal system was supposed to do i mean my goodness why do you think our founders actually passed these things presumption of innocence there is no presumption of innocence right now in the media there's no presumption of minute innocence right now in the us media or amongst american civilians or in any of these n.g.o.s who got a microphone because he is a republican there are five other republicans that they're trying to undermine meanwhile keith ellison who has people watching complains of sexual allegations against him are standing free and so we are seeing this dichotomy we're seeing this we're seeing this double edged sword we're seeing this to sightedness and that has to end right now if we actually care about these women but the actual laws and if you're talking about the legal system i mean i'm glad that you brought that up the actual laws and you can like it or hate it but the law is the united states black

or white actually do state that any allegation of sexual of sexual assault or rape or something like that the person has to come forward and talk about their sexual history they have to prove that it actually happened and we're not seeing that we're seeing now congress that says we don't want this anymore anybody who alleges anything should be believed right when they allege that and i do agree that we need to look at the evidence but right now nobody is saying that they need to do that yes those voices should be heard more but all we're seeing right now is is people coming out and saying that that this is this is happened because she said it she shouldn't have to testify there shouldn't be cameras there should be transparency but the rules of evidence the federal rules of evidence actually state united states of america that people who allege that they were raped yes this is hard yes this is tough but they have to provide evidence of that and their sexual history can be called into question and congress is saying well but if you come against a republican or if you come against the nominee for the supreme court of the united states you don't have to do any of those other things that has no.