as a minister apparently the washington times says pull manifolds passports show he didn't even visit london in those years the guardian claim and r.t. are the only ones asking for evidence who are the sources if you can see them doubt anonymous source and is dangerous at best striking catalogue of reflexive credulous acceptance of a story that looked shaky from the start and looks more so by the day maybe they've all been duped by russia but what does politico think this fake news operation by russian intelligence actually proves someone is nervous and eager to lay the groundwork for yelling fake news out whatever other stories are about to drop so either what the guardian says is true and there is collusion or it's a fake story planted by the russians which also proves collusion win win situation one thing seems clear someone is feeling the heat the story's almost a parody and next cia agent using

a pen name says that if the guardian's hit piece on assad's in metaphor is false the russians must be behind it anyway you really can't make this up. or for a cup of tea for half an hour from now we've got a great program for breaking the track of the latest from. there the g. twenty underway of course of the more headlines of the coming and all our stories twenty four seven and r.t. dot com for now for me kevin and thanks ever so much for watching our international . financial survival. housing. oh you mean there's a downside to artificial mortgage group don't get carried away that's cause report

. to mainstream american outlets stick to their guns and painting. u.s. russia relations remain on a downward spiral. is there hope for a saw in this new cold war. publisher of the nation magazine. the country's evenly split with the democratic the republican senator good luck partisan squabbling down the road could. become a real alternative to white house decision making how will party politics shape washington's choices abroad and where will the unprecedented left right divide lead

the most powerful country in the world. so great to have you with us again with misty it's been a while thank you very much though things have changed a lot to discuss. the relations between russia and the united states are at its lowest point. one of your articles i think you said that the democratic party instead of containing the fire is actually fanning the flames do you think if trump was super hawkish towards where. that and the democrats would actually want peace with it so here's the here's the paradox. first of all opposition to trump and the nation magazine which i edit opposes trump on many issues particularly domestic issues but opposition to trump should not be opposition to common sense it is common sense that the united states and russia have a working relationship on key areas such as nuclear proliferation on setting up rules of the road around cyber on trying to deescalate the war conflict in syria

so there are a set of issues that it would be valuable for the u.s. and russia to partner on the democratic party with a very few exceptions has chosen a different path to argue that trump is not capable of engaging russia there is a criminalization of diplomacy which i think is very dangerous sophie not just for trump and putin but for. for us russian relations generally the irony is that trump is hawkish he's brought in john bolton as your viewers may know and the leading neo conservative who was the architect of america's withdrawal from the any ballistic missile treaty in two thousand and two the sanctions continue so the relationship is at its lowest most dangerous point and i just think trump doesn't have a team that is capable of moving in a different direction nor is he disciplined enough to actually talk

a little more about and then his new conservative advisers that are surrounding trump but before we get to that what do you think has to happen for the democrats to actually change their approach to its russia so i think there's a new generation of democrats we just had an election as you know a midterm election it's not the presidential it's the off year a new generation of leaders have come in many of them women i'm excited about that but i'm most excited about their politics and some of these women there's a woman named alexandria ocasio cortez who when asked what why can't she says she proposes medicare for all and people say you can't afford that and she says we can't afford endless war she has a peace plan which is about cutting our defense budget so the need to connect the dots between that and not having a new cold war if you have a new cold war i like to say i think it's true through history it's very bad for

democrats and progressives it empowers the war parties in both countries it empowers empowers the nationalists it takes resources from our budget that should go into rebuilding our country not perpetual war so i think there's an opportunity and there are a few democrats who understand this but there will be many investigations in the new congress the house of representatives has subpoena powers they will investigate try. taxes his corruption and i think there is a role for that but i hope that we can move from posturing and escalation to dialogue and deescalation because if democrats really want to achieve their goals to have this crazy relationship with the increasing defense budget and the newest defense strategies sophie this is important which is about ending the global war on terror which is a good thing having spent five point six trillion dollars and now the focus is on

conflict with russia and china i think this is madness i'm just thinking united states own like europe is not failing the economic consequences of the stand of with russia because europe is hurting because of the sanctions you know america isn't that much so for american establishment for american politicians for american media it is just it's all so well to have this anti russian stance i'm just wondering maybe you know it's just going to go on forever because there's so little consequences to pay cannot make legal let me put it a different way the election we just had showed the disconnect between the media political establishment and ordinary people russia gate the scandal alleging that putin put trump in the white house was not an issue in the election it didn't figure the issues were issues like health care like pensions which i think is a big issue in russia too but what we call bread and butter issues in fact

a recent poll a gallup poll showed fifty seven percent of americans want to more cooperative relationship with russia so there's a disconnect that a smart politician democrat would understand needs to be seized because there's not a lot of hunger appetite for this kind of any russian politics is being fanned by a media political establishment which what is the reason for it if if if it's not what the public wants to hear what is or isn't really it's not just russia. really just a conventional confrontation foreign policy on all fronts whether it's china our the european union or iran deal or even nato what did it reason it's i'm very very good question sophie but i would say through history in all countries there is often a disconnect between people and the elite and i think i believe as the nation that changes come when people are in motion when social movements take action and i

think it's time for people to kind of reassert themselves now the problem one of the problems and i know we might discuss this is the demonization of putin plays a very central role russia is an extraordinary country with an extraordinary history and you're going to react history again put bring it when one hundred forty five million three think population of russia to just one couldn't who is like eating babies at breakfast if you ask american media trump is a very divisive figure he has a base but he manipulates fear sofi in our country. and so the opposition to trump has become also opposition to putin putin becomes trump trump becomes putin we need to decide that also so for intertwined and i want to talk about that in detail but before we get to that i want to talk about the and after it because that's the other big story around here so trump wants to pull out of it. his biggest argument actually being that china. arsenal is outside of its scope

wouldn't just be easier to bring china anan actually in large channa well there's also the argument that russia's been violating the terms of the i.n.f. treaty which is i mean you don't withdraw from an arms control treaty you try to expand it you try to improve it but you know i come back to john bolton the neoconservative advisor who tromped brought in he was the architect of withdrawal from i would argue the most important stabilizing arms control agreed. in two thousand and two the a.b.m. the any ballistic missile treaty. the withdrawal from the i.m.f. is part of a larger problem sophie it's part of the unraveling of a stabilizing framework for arms control if this goes down and it was a great achievement as you know of gorbachev and reagan abolishing an entire class of nuclear weapons in one thousand nine hundred seven we could see the unraveling of arms control as we know it and that is war for all i mean that is very very dangerous so i think there may be some common sense but of course you're right

instead of saying we're going to get rid of that because china is not part of it and it's doing this and that there should be an extension to china of this treaty let's bring china in it is one of the great superpowers rising so you actually mentioned withdrawing from the a.b.m. treaty which was for two thousand and two when george bush jr was president also what happened john bolton now possible withdraw from that with the help of john bolton but isn't i now have actually a. treaty that is hat that has to be approved by the senate right this may not i mean it may not there may not be withdrawal i mean it may it's still in process there's still a fight on but i just wonder technically like supreme law of the land right they could state it in the tradition so how come they exactly have brunch every time it feels like you can just like well our democracy democracy isn't our democracy isn't

working as well as it should one tell you one. thing i take hope from is democrats taking back the house there's more involvement now of congress in war making i mean the law of the land is that the congress declares war that hasn't been the case for more than five decades so i think. i think we're at a very perilous moment and there are people as you know like the bulletin of atomic scientists a very important publication who put the risk of nuclear conflict skirmish accidental nuclear conflict at the highest point since one thousand nine hundred eighty nine when the soviet union. first tested its nuclear weapons there are too late but you know sophie there are as there are people on the eve of the helsinki summit the nation published an open letter called for true national security and secure elections it was about securing our elections from interference but it was

also about the need to understand the danger we are in the possibility of accidental conflict which we see now whether it's nato on the borders of the baltics in ukraine or in syria and about twenty six you were heard to think people like you who are outspoken public figures about the reason not about being friends with my ship but about you know reasonable relations with russia that has to stay safe i think we were heard we had eminent people like former ambassador jack matlock who was a bastard during the reagan years we had former senators we had intellectual leaders we had political and social economic leaders it's very hard to be heard these days sophie but if one doesn't try the role of the nation is to be an alternative dissenting voice and to foster not policed debate and i think that's critical in these times because we've had a degradation of debate. you know it's one thing that pains me and i think you followed this is that those who call for better relations with russia are sometimes

called pro russian now or in times always thirty minutes yet and i know you know people and two people one a democrat one republican i recommend to your viewers representative roe conn who represents silicon valley in california he tried to see tries to speak for diplomacy he is called names or senator rand paul who was here a few months ago a republican from kentucky he too believes there should be a working relationship so this is not radical it is now but it should be commonsense sober realism katherina way to take a short break right now when we're back we'll continue to. katherina vander who will the editor and publisher of the nation.

what politicians do you think. they put themselves on the line to get accepted or rejected. so when you want to be president. or somehow want to. have to go right to be close this is what we look for like three in the morning can't be good get. interested always in the water using our. first. you know world of big partisan lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that made stream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for

the truth the time is now for watching closely watching the hawks. and we're back with catherine about an editor and publisher of the nation katherine and getting back to trump's advisers because you brought up john walton and once again the end of trading a lot of experts whether it's experts or professionals from the past from the present day just like you think that they mean i know. for america would be detrimental for its security but trump doesn't really care about what anyone says but his advisors like john bolton navarro pump air there are you know nick new conservative very hawkish. so to say politicians who are and tehran deal and china and you know entire russia sanctions. with this people in

a picture are we in for even more confrontation it's not just the people in the personalities sophie at the beginning of this year as you know that there was a national defense strategy which is now the national defense strategy of the united states which commits the united states to. ongoing. risk that they're creating this willingly pushing the coalition corps good at it powers the new challenges and dangers the strategy says are russia and china and so it's a national defense strategy so even if it is pushing rushing into chinese arms well you know there's a view in the united states that russia has no allies. i think the u.s. the russia china alliance will grow even stronger as a result so yes you have i'm no fan of trump by any measure the nation is one of his leading critics but he is

a hostage in some ways of these larger forces around him whether it's not as sore pompei o or bolton but it's also he's a figure an accidental figure in some way who knew he would be elected president he came into the white house he had no team he has no discipline he has his twitter feed which allows him to speak to some fifty million americans without media interference but he lurches from here to here so it's a dangerous moment but. i think we have to find stabilizing mechanisms as best as we can but i also see the pain. being accidental figure trying to get a grip of it creating a team a stable team finally even though it's a new conservative team and also see the difference in thinking between him and his advisers and his advisors john bolton would probably love him to go into war with iran trump is being very cautious about it. figuring that you know it could be

a war with unpredictable amending consequence absolutely what do you think will prevail at the end he's cautious approach or. i don't know if he's cautious but he has instincts and i will say one thing that is is important you know he's he's undertaken some kind of negotiation with north korea on nuclear issues many democrats criticized him this is crazy of course there should be negotiations with north korea it may not lead to denuclearization right away but his instincts can be for negotiation it's just that he he. has the wrong messenger but you know what we go to negotiations with the governments we have whether it's putin and trump or other leaders i mean i think gorbachev and reagan people didn't anticipate the breakthroughs they were able to make and let's not forget in american history reagan had many neoconservative advisors who told him as you know

don't don't don't don't we should you know level i roll of the president on how strong the president can be because the opposition to making do it with us it's our drink reagan times where he's now but somehow reagan managed to align all of them behind him what it was like no we're making friends with russia but this goes to the demonization of putin listen i think and i said i think in russia today we have a kind of soft soft author terry and system. but in gorbachev reagan found a partner. i don't think it's possible today for putin and trump to negotiate in the same way because. trump is viewed as treasonous when he tries to negotiate with putin but i think it's going to take citizen intervention it's going to take other leaders to say we need for common sense not pro russian not pro trump not pro potent to avert a nuclear peril to avert conflict look at syria if i could syria the

destabilization of syria has led to the destabilization of europe the refugee crisis is destabilizing and where did it emerge from from syria more from other wars so i think it's a very perilous but challenging moment you know i'll really wonder why trump at this point is seen as a put in lover because when you think about it logically it was during. trumpet ministration most of the russian diplomats were expelled it was during trumpeted ministration that legal lethal aid was sent to ukraine it was during a trump administration's syria was bombed not obama not any of those things happened during obama administration and yet trump is called couldn't like why you know trump was a shock to the american system and i think for many americans particularly democrats i'm sad to say instead of looking deeply into themselves and looking at the own pathologies and problems america has the financial crisis the inequality

the dissin from asian the dark money the suppression of the vote it's easier to blame others and so i think there is an attempt to blame russia for putin that in the end is not only dangerous wrongheaded and leads america not to better understand what it needs to do to reform itself and become a more just more democratic country so in that sense. trump also i think wants to get the monkey off his back to you know that expression russia gate so he's ready to do these take these steps and because he's so i'm disciplined and so much about himself he will listen to these advisors who are hawkish as you say and leading to a bad relationship even while he's still attacked as. a putin kugel puppet puppet but i wonder if putin is also you know not

a too to figure out you know and war between the two parties which you know republicans and democrats because one will look at democrats and republicans from out here. we don't really see much difference and i'll tell you why for instance i don't know like the clintons or the obama's who are you know democrats at the end of the day you know they also banned on liberal and to mention those and and that means war at the end. what america needs now and the nation has done several special issues about this we have a discredited bipartisan foreign policy establishment trumps foreign policy is not the answer but nor is the liberal foreign policy of interventionism humanitarian interventionism we need to focus more on what what is next what is next and i think that the expansion of nato which was as much a democratic project as

a republican one is one of the most fateful and ill gotten projects and has led us into part of what we see today so i think you know there's a lot of lament in america about how the two parties can't work together no bipartisanship well there is a bipartisanship when it comes to approving crazy defense budgets or in terms of worsening and escalating bad u.s. russian relations so there needs to be a reset that term has been misused and ill used but there needs to be a real awakening of an alternative approach to engaging the world on the a part of america it's very difficult because america believes it's the sole superpower but in this world today that is not the case you mention nato and you've called it. organization in search of a mission and that actually resonates and how trump called absolute during his

campaign what do you think nato mission is right now is special with america snubbing it. nato is mission appears to be. to cut into. holt the menace of an expansionist russia which i think is. not the case i mean there is a view that russia is this global menace so you have nato on the borders of the baltic countries it's a trip wire for more conflict nato should have been abolished at the end of the soviet union i mean it was there to designed to counter the warsaw pact right now i think what should happen with nato is it should halt its expansion ukraine should become nonaligned the future of ukraine should be as a bridge between east and west that was the hope not as a proxy country for war between civil war between the united states and russia so you know when trump says things like nato attacks nato he's both right but he's the

wrong messenger because people think he's doesn't know what he's talking about but he is so. nato has been brought up recently while some german and french politicians were pondering over the idea of creating a common european army. if that happens and trump wants europeans to take care of their own security with that make nato obsolete i don't think nato will become obsolete nato needs to find a different mission my problem with this idea of independent european military force i do think europe should become and seize this opportunity of the trump era to become more independent from america it saddens me though that it's in the context of militarization well it all comes down to that with it shouldn't because this is a world where the real challenges of our time are not going to be met by military force but i do think that europe should find its own way on

a whole set of issues i mean not just a military force but it maybe it can maintain relations with iran which it should well russia and the e.u. stand together on the issue of iran do you think this could have far reaching consequences this realignment of russia and e.u. for america i do and i think the realignment of relations between russia and china will have major implications i think there's a realignment in the world generally that is not fully understood we're living through history and america as i said is no longer the sole superpower and i think part of the reaction to russia is america believed russia was on its knees as you know in the ninety's and treated it as such and that was part of the expansion of nato this is no longer the case there is a view in the west that russia is weak economically i don't think that's the case i think russia has a major role to play china does europe does latin america going through convulsions of its own so in this period of realignment. i would simply say there's an

expression do no harm try not to escalate try to deescalate and i think moral posturing is not effective dialogue ratcheting down escalation is critical in this time because you know we we talk about nuclear peril but we don't take it seriously enough accidental conflict could happen look at this what's happening in the sea of us off it could escalate and there are groups in the united states by the way the atlantic council there calling for a nato blockade and i guarantee you in the g. twenty meeting there will be talk of how to punish russia instead of how to revive . the minsk accords which have been put by the wayside that's where europe france and germany could play a constructive role in reviving those peace talks. catherine thank you very much for his neck you don't have a rest of the stay here thank you. just

don't. find themselves worlds apart. she still look for common ground.

when customers go. well reduce a lot of work. that's undercutting what's good for the market it's not good for the global economy. to get. twelve euros fifty per month. despite political tensions gripping the g twenty. leaders and. even though donald trump yes much anticipated face to face with the russian.