bugs out is not substantiated but was presented in the report well i would also take issue with sweeping we know that the miller probe indicted thirteen russian nationals on conspiracy charges that's in relation to social media campaign and twelve on hacking and dumping charges can twenty five people realistically even try to sweep the election in a country of three hundred twenty seven million can be really do it in the quote systematic way though of course if we're looking at is are key and practical terms in the hypothetical way and setting aside for a moment the question as to whether there was a winning strategy no. you know american politics. and intensity and the notion that somebody playing games at the margins of the election could dictate or even influence the outcome is

frankly frankly absurd. food to compare russia with you know it states the united states has been fall or effect in influencing of the domestic politics of other countries. in russia. i mean where during the day and how the overt ways and venezuela and mystery of doing that in russia reach our whole weekend discussed but before we go there you sound a little bit skeptical about the scale of russian interference but i personally am it's important to point out that the crime and denies any connection to both ways off. the operations that miller pointed out the social media can be an end to hacking but i personally find the hacking in the dumping story believe it will because this is something that intelligence services around the world do you teach

other they find vulnerabilities and they exploited them what i don't understand is why would the americans expect to be treated with the kid gloves particularly by the russians because americans believe we will leave there were exceptional. or we prue augur to. nobody knows how. to word our position and the have some kind of obligation and act to set the rules on to applause. from our own perspective and all this tendency which is really reserved in you know in the country sort of history and so definition center has become much more pronounced and so far was international affairs as concerned. with the end of the cold war and most especially the last few years as you know under mr mr trump you know in terms of hacking or so they'll as

electronic surveillance don't forget we know know that they enter as a. you know applying electronic surveillance to national leaders. or on the world including the chancellor merkel in germany it was made evident substantiated in the wiki leaks release is five five years ago and i assume eve the american intel had stumbled upon evidence of putin's wrongdoing they would not hesitate to release it would they know ordered i would simply be a practical calculation of whether it was seen to be the advantage of you know of washington i said may want to. point all the. personal and all woods of was of cause is limited when they do have some indirect knowledge in fact this has been made public and there are very technically conversant people

experts who have worked in the national security agency including a former technical director of the national security security agency who are version that the forensic evidence makes it clear that there was no hacking that instead someone within their agency downloaded those files and pass pass them on and that has never been refuted and this is also that we kill leaks also alleges now the military port specifically states that in the view of the investigators russia perceived it would benefit from a trump presidency and that's why it worked to secure that outcome do you agree with that assessment that. russia would be counting on trauma more than it would be hoping to discount mrs clinton were let's let's be down to hours of this you have

two people running for the presidency and. one mrs clinton has called mr putin the new hitler the other is making considered dettori noises of his ability to cooperate or at least to engage with with mr putin for whatever reason it wasn't based in on mr trump sort of serious systematic assessment but who many case that's what he was say so if that's the choice is. that it's evident the do whatever profer and any reasonable rational person would have. for folks what you do about it or don't do and what effect you might lose a surfer questions well i think there's also a very specific russian context here because for the russians the clintons have

come to you a pizza mob actually interference i mean it's not a secret that bill clinton worked very hard to get boris yeltsin elected as russian president in ninety nine to six sending his aides to moscow pressuring the i'm asked for a ten billion dollar loan hillary clinton also made her preferences known they had of the two thousand and twelve elections when you consider all that clinton's history with russia didn't they legitimize a luxury all interference long ago by the only example where yes you said a president. has something more. political elite tends to ignore and goes back to this notion which is very deeply rooted and ever can psyche you know to states being exceptional and having the right true true things and judge of those.

not here to understand they have to produce fully to their merkin psyche and it becomes more a matter of psychology an ounce of all of. the politics but it is a fact that a lot of the north united states behave sets precedence for other country and legitimate was a is not a motion the problem of it and the thinking of let's call it the political class in a row and washington that is an unfortunate reality of the situation but it's not only about the american public opinion it's also about. what people in other parts of the world think because. i mean it is the paradox of the american power that the american president has a much broader foreign policy discretion to a fact lives. of people in other countries than in his own country

mrs clinton if elected she would her actions would have a much greater bearing on my life or people in syria than dan merrick ends and i just wonder what is the you know of the appropriate the legitimate way all for you know voicing the concern about these kind of flitter because she does have a very very long and i would say very destructive track record it's very rare of a foreign policy issue war determine a national presidential election it's almost always domestic issues of one kind or another. shape the debate and influence how people vote second there tends to be a ted there is a tendency. to give the president a free. to do what he wishes to do internationally the

domestically some of this is legal constitutional some of it is institutional. some of it has to do with the fact simply that there is more consensus generally speaking on foreign policy about as than there is on on domestic matter no that's certainly true today and most specifically in regard true true russia and always this image of russia as a hostile power is pervasive in the states again for a river ride ever of a sort of complex reasons well professor brown and we have to take a short break now but we will be back in just a few moments stay tuned. if

we could only be done to just sit through the fall to do. all sounds simple but just remove you know particular. measure defense and let that play if they don't play well. they are among the group was. to belittle them if you did what you except your then he says and pulls for folks like me to go for the security just hold it where you both put up. with all psycho. closure we're going to produce a. monkey

is the. way to the pacific that this was the last stop that the pollution i was fulfill says. just have to get to class as i live eat he did feel confident. find. need. ruhani need. i d. . be done. beyond. a lot of worship. we have other things in this world this is. why some peoples also take our thing all the paul or just for themselves.

welcome back to worlds apart with michael brown and professor emeritus of international affairs at the university of pittsburgh professor brennan just before the break we were talking about how. i think there were legitimate upper hand ssion about the kind of flip issue of the secretary clinton could have presented to the

world not to that americans but to the world especially dealing with her policy record in libya and syria but i think we may never know the full details of how those decisions were made because the clinton camp intentionally destroyed a lot of electronic records without ever facing the obstruction of justice charges do you think she has anything to worry about now that mr trump has been cleared. no no she does. at this point. you know should bear in mind the. true it's a conclusion. zamora report was a dead been no collusion between mr trump and his immediate associates on the russian government you know most of those meetings and to do with trump's real

estate dealings and of a business activities involve involving russia. but what he's been cleared of blood in effect concluded that there probably was instructed obstruction of justice there was a good deal of evidence the love her but the frame for pressing the muddle the lay on the grounds that you can indict a sitting american president no we should say that's not constitutional it is not in the law or it is simply customary practice all policy or or or understanding that means it's up to the congress whether it wants to take that evidence and make it the basis for impeachment that's not going to occur of oh

there's no appetite for the tenseness republicans control the senate. it's a closed question what it would i don't understand is that how you keep you how you can accuse somebody of obstructing justice when there is no underlying crime because it's very clear from the miller reported that chomped and people around him received what was going on be the probe as a great injustice to him and in retrospect i wonder you should actually be credited for exercising restraint rather than trying to obstruct what seems to be a political injustice i mean there is no underlying crime how can he abstract or you can you can obstruct the process the legal process whatever its outcome. in other words the obstruction of justice bill interfering with an investigation is a crime. and so though could be legal but if if mr

trump or an ordinary citizen. would be a legitimate legal basis for suing him. prosecuting him the seeking in and for obstruction of justice now that issue has been raised by some other republicans but i believe from what i understand that's really a specious issue and rudy doesn't have any legal standing but if the concern is really so much with the with the process we know from n.b.c. reports that the clinton camp did everything they accuse trump all they relied on the for in their it's you against compromising information on him they handed out compromising in fraudulent material to the media and to the intelligence agencies they destroyed records i mean they destroyed their phones and their e-mail records isn't dr worth looking into for the sake of democracy and equal equal treatment

before a lawyer if nothing else there is but that's politics that's not law or potential is sort of criminality in other words the points the moeller may under the heading of obstruction of justice refer to his investigation and other. in other words a sump law it's simply a question of the games you play or the dubious actions you take to to influence. the political process and that's was very often as was the case with richard nixon forty five years ago it's what happens once a. legal process has begun and that often leads to acts of criminality and sends people to jail rather than the original action of

initiated the process in the first place the u.s. attorney general william barr already pledged to investigate the the origins of the f.b.i. counterintelligence investigation into russia. there is a suspicion that they may be another collusion the collusion between the democrats and the intelligence services if true and how big of a deal it's going to be you for a democrat public it's a big deal but if there were any truth to it but this is a propaganda campaign mr ball i don't think is just. an agent of mr trump he was just a point to a few months ago after a long interviews with mr trump and an effect he has so well with this process in a quite disgraceful fashion as a spokesman for for the white house he has no credibility in the minds of anyone but republican partisan but i suppose it's well it's not going to be him personally

looking into that if he were to appoint somebody like let's say robert miller again to investigate another killer collusion do you think that would have more credence in your eyes no i think at the end of the day. highly doubtful that he'll do. just making political points you know the american electoral campaign has already begun we're going to have to suffer through it for the next eighteen months and so everything becomes khaled you know including foreign policy but professor brennan help me understand here because for the last two years did democrats have been making political points about the miller invest. nation why is it not ok to lead the republicans do the same and settle die suspicions through the investigative process because there are real issues about the the provenance of the still dos

here and whether or not it was used to get fives or warrants etc why those issues are not serious enough to be looked into given that the last two years respond in two investigating as likes to say and nothing burger or more nothing burger. actually trumps from francis or mcdonald's cheeseburgers. consumers. or all day long but seriously it's not the democrats who appointed mr it was it was the federal gov a. republican president with a republican attorney general with a career office in the justice department many prosecutors who have a track record of benefiting the democratic and contributing to the democratic

campaign i mean i think the republicans have also made a point that they would be had certain parts leanings no that's unfortunate i don't believe correct mr moeller him so as or always classified him so as not just a republican but a conservative republican mr khomeini has always. called him so conservative republican mr all sting has no political allegiance whatsoever of which we know so if these people have such stellar reputations why not asking them to look into issues that a significant part of them elec american electorate is concerned about i mean i know many people on the republican side. and they do believe that it was a political hit job to appoint these pro and they do have issues with hillary clinton and her destruction of records and the use of the steel dos here and how it

was procured how it was used by the intelligence services why is that not enough to look into by somebody who you all can trust well this was looked into by the f.b.i. by and by they call me a comber is a loyal republican he's not a is not a democrat. and so this was looked and true and then the let's bear in mind we come to this dubious field those are it's over. it's a very intricate background. and that there were people who were in both the russian saw eye and their merkins who were hustling who were trying to sort of promote them so and were offering material to both sides to the republicans on that and the democrats. and. with regard to the steel goes.

this war was involved. six in britain is mushers a did anyone in washington and this aspect of the affair like as really not gotten much attention just as the script paul if there is only a concoction of m i five and six was the systems well i think many russians were they grieve you on the letter characterization now we have only a few minutes left let me ask you one thing that many here in moscow are hoping for there is a hope that the miller probe and the clearing of trump will allow him to be more flexible in his relations with russia and allow him to work with moscow on issues of global importance do you think that's likely no. i think that's exaggerated. i don't see any change of any consequence whatsoever

in terms of washington's thinking of attitudes towards or policies and rigo true true russia let's bear in mind too saying there's a very strong consensus throughout the american political establishment rusher is a dangerous hostile power which is shared by republicans and democrats on the media. and second look at mr trump's actions it's knowledge that he simply been hesitant it engaging with the mr putin he has confronted rush for across the board whether it has to do with nato expansion military exercises and the ploy months and. in europe whether it has to do with the breaking of all control agreements whether it has to do was syria

another words of mr mr trump as been have been has been. not at all considered jory we were there we go through russia and mr putin and i think that's one of the real harms of the last two year is that a pathologist any efforts to improve the relations between our countries despite them being nuclear powers anyway professor brennan we have to leave it there we are out of time but i really appreciate you being with us today and sharing your perspective thank you very much for that well you're very welcome much appreciated the opportunity i encourage our viewers to keep this conversation going in our social media pages and hope to see you again same place same time here on the part . of.

facebook and google started with a great idea and great ideals unfortunately it was also a very dark so. they are constructing a profile of you and that profile is real it's detailed and it never goes away turns out that google is manipulating your opinions from the very first character that you type into the search bar it will always favor one dog food over another one comparative shopping service over another and one candidate over another they can suppress certain types of results. on what they think you should be seen if they have this kind of power then democracy is an illusion the free and fair

election besan exist the more we give them the sooner we are all. when lawmakers manufacture consent to instant of public wealth. when the ruling classes protect themselves. when the financial merry go round lifts and be the one percent. we can all middle of the room sick. to. be relieved.

they can come and blow our brains out at any given time if we can't really do anything actually america is the only country in the world where you can kill people. war illegally get away with. all the fire crawls still berea all the trouble here street fail the point it's hollow flying to k.k.k. exists because america wants it to exist they are the biggest terrorist group to ever operate in this country and they're dead to me they're worse all than the people who destroyed the world trade centers are those growth why. why. why. after the previous stage of my career was over everyone wondered what i was going

to do next the pope the ball different clubs on one hand it is logical to signal from fields where everything is familiar on the other i wanted a new challenge and a fresh. specter i'm used to surprising. you. i'm going to talk about football not the. just think i was going to go. by the way ways and punch line here. see.

i. in the stories those shape the week the first ever between vladimir putin and north korea's kim jong. il relations with the focus also on breaking the nuclear deadlock on the korean peninsula. russian national. jailed in the u.s. for failing to register as a foreign agent but her lawyer and says she's a victim of washington's current political climate. his activities in the us were illegal. in and of themselves but she got caught up in this. hysteria. coming up on the program sunday.