yes well the world of politics sports business i'm show business i'll see you then . do you failed to agree on sanctions against dozens of the russian officials over last month's election despite a plea for action from the country's opposition leader. the personal data of thousands of police officers linked in belarus and an online campaign that opposition leader. says she supports the unrest shows no sign of easing 6 weeks on from the disputed presidential vote. also european countries introduced a new restrictions amid a surge in corona virus cases with both france and spain saying a record numbers over the weekend. and thousands of files are leaked implicating some of the world's largest banks and vast money laundering schemes spanning 2 decades. in just under 60 minutes time my colleague kevin old will be here with

a fresh news update for you crosstalk is up next on our international but in the u.k. and ireland renegade incorporated is next with. a little in welcome to cross talk we're all things are considered i'm peter lobo on this edition of the program we discussed the passing of the 2 towering figures so breme court justice ruth bader ginsburg and america's preeminent russian expert steven cohen will be remembered for good reasons their legacies assures.

to discuss this and more i'm joined by my guest glenda eason and also is an associate professor at the university of south used her norway as well as author of russia's geo economic strategy for a greater eurasia and in budapest we crossed to george samueli he is the author of bombs for peace nato's humanitarian war and he was originally dressed up rules in effect that means in johnny i mean what i don't appreciate what is going to it's going to george in budapest a george of course and be the biggest news right now is the passage job justice ginsburg and what's going to happen next and on this program i really don't want to big or about the procedure of it all of you know it is inappropriate for trying to do this in the past it's been argued that a right before an election you know election year you should do that if there is a bacon say you can go back and forth you know in all sides have changed their mind ok and they're all leaving their words and i believe that aside and talk about the

state of the court because you know not too many years ago i think george and i would probably remember pretty well you know them being bored when judge justice bork was a confirmation and prior to his nomination it was advice and consent is the person a jurist a good jurist it had nothing to do with politics now it has everything to do with politics and that was posed to be the one branch that wasn't supposed to be infected by politics it was about interpretating the constitution as the founders laid it down we're losing them we've even lost and i would argue go ahead george yes you're absolutely right peter but i think the court has itself to blame for that because it waded into politics it waded into politics a long time ago and i mean bob it the blame also rests with the politicians who prefer not to. serious political legislative decisions and is that the

left things to the courts and so all of the major rulings in the process last live past 50 years have been decided by the courts which isn't an unelected body and so therefore the stakes became ever higher when you think of all of the big rulings in the united states you know the school prayer ruling the desegregation ruling the abortion ruling the gay marriage ruling none of them was decided by legislation which is where political decisions should be decided instead the courts weighted in happily. and after all as the years went by the fights over who were stopped the courts became ever more bitter. and so than that and i why we're here and where we are which is here is a liberal justice ruth bader ginsburg consistently votes with the liberals is now

dead has a conservative president and a conservative ruled senate so now because the stakes are very high that's why the fight is going to be extremely better as they were in the case of camelot because there was a swing vote candidate who was replaced by a conservative so you know a game the courts are to blame for this and of course the irresponsible politicians you have landed that this is really in this is about the. the growing illegitimacy of institutions and it's been creeping along george has pointed out here how it's been politicized and i'd like to point out here that's how the left is only this is really neat only the way the left it's got its agenda through is through the courts here and that's what's given conservatives it's almost an existential imperative now because what they see in all of these major social legislation has come into effect through the court not through cause. riskier and this is why conservatives

are up in arms and will definitely vote ok even though i would say gore should or should seek and count how we haven't really met expectations nonetheless this is going to motivate people. will agree with that because this seems very much like a symptom of why they're. moving the country so i think that either country conflicts important because it's not just a course that we see it out a lot of the democratic institutions in the us are coming on the great progress or stress so we see them crossed in to meet us or in the who seems just more all seem more like mouthpiece all the rest a political parties. if you will or and there are no dollars and you have a congress with ridiculous lelo support and most likely will see the presidential election for election someone disputing the legitimacy of outcomes that matter who

wins. the fail to recognize that this 3rd branch of power which is the supreme court. has for a long time been a problem that polarizes so much i think in the last few years there is this is that escalate and then more and more with the conservatives block merrick garland. is you know or the argument that. barack obama was a lame duck president. as a result it's been clear with our viewers there the argument was that if the senate and the president were in different in different parties that was mcconnell's explanation here ok yes and no i mean that's just in his explanation he has the power to do it it's not the law it's not written in the constitution it is basically is rule ok so i keep going to here every month because they belong to karl and this led to a let me let go legitimacy for the old gore search which was put in by chung and then the democrats tried to block. yes i remember brad cavanagh 2 years ago in well

what i would call a very despicable effort to smear him and it the most awful way so is all the conservatives are years now is to change the rules to some extent change the rule of the game and they will push for an out against her back even though the action is promotion around the corner but as you point out as there's no specific rules as they think of the comp the other but again this is just shows us keeps escalating and it is again who knows what happens next summer you are going in with the democrats think power should simply add to more seats to the supreme court or watered down conservative presence so i guess again this is for about well how i see its consequences of the us is usually fragmenting it to go well the 2 major political parties still see each others as are most working for the same team more and more this each other. benami undermining this you know soul of the country and when you are in a war or much everything's permitted which is why i say it is rulebook more and

more being all torn away or are or of this looking for alternative ways of doing it now i just thought oh and one last point which is i think the. supreme court is more vulnerable to police us ation than others because again this is where liberals and conservatives deviate goes for conservatives so you would see that the future has to be informed by the present or the past. and liberals as you know the past and stop struct. what it means to change so that's why conservatives sense to say you have to interpret gold see will excite that was written then we follow this it has to build on this excited writings while the liberals say no you have to interpret it the spirit of it and what the spirit is is of course their whole and most ideology so you see it in the courts very much being logical area or political will even though it's close to being neutral yeah but usually you can't get your agenda across through. george i mean i think one of the most corrupt the elements

which the court allowed was citizens united and and if you look at the the the the implication of them is that you have you have politicians that are appointed by special interests and joe owners and so those politicians will look to the court in keeping in mind they are joe nurse and what they want ok and so they're going to be looking at the political coloration of a of a nominee they're not going to be looking at advice and instead they're not be looking at competence you know they're going to be the donors are going to get what they want because that's why they consider affairs and congressmen there and now you're supposed to you know all the all the regulations and any time you go to the supreme court and in this keep let's keep in mind the supreme court you know well everyone's arguing all the time about you know they're going to resent. versus wade you know it's basically the supreme court is a very friendly to me chamber of commerce always and that doesn't get

a lot of coverage ok and that's why these politicians are very very worried that someone's going to come in and say you know something like citizens united is inherently corrupting of politics go ahead yes well that's the thing that the politicians have found a nice way of avoiding or could pose and this is this is really been the case now or really ever since the days of the warren court. if they could just simply hide behind the supreme court and say well whatever whatever i think that's the way the supreme court has ruled on that said no so i had my vote doesn't have to go on the record and this is a great get out clause for all politicians and so this weekend particularly conservatives i would say ok if we think it's a woman's work i mean yeah. that's it and so also all of these are big decisions

when you think of you know whether of the on the social issues you think of abortion. gay marriage not one of them has ever been decided by a legislature because. the few votes that have taken place in legislature particularly on abortion or of course rolled out by say 8 supreme court those are all row v wade is the law of the land that's a you're either out of luck and now this is this goes on all the time in america where you have judges we don't know necessarily the supreme court but federal judges they don't like trumps all is the only big ration so they are making issue a ruling that saves like an unelected judge just decide for himself that this is unconstitutional and that's excellent decision made by the elected president is then nolen boy as they go up to the circuit court of appeals depending their what the political makeup of the circuit court of appeals is that they will buy the rule for the case but and again people become very shrewd about if they go the 9th

circuit that's generally tends to be liberal let's go do this in the 9th circuit on the 9th circuit rules. against the president not come because. of the legal merits but because of politics then you know then it becomes a breaker or and they claim the decision is largely made on you know well this is the way the conservatives were those who they were the little birds so what you now have and that would be fine if you had your votes by people who are elected to represent the people but these are all unelected judges so the most important questions in america now decided by unelected judges and that really is a very very situation in the last 45 seconds that glenn here is just in we've been talking about how the supreme court decides the most important issues they may decide the election and if there's only 4 justices oh i can't even imagine what's going to happen 30 seconds go. you know

a lot of the problem and if this will be this. election outcome will most likely will be i think they'll go over to me and i'll just start. every side whilst out favorable. more so to say the charges are placed to decide what's said actual outcome. but i would just add one to very quick things a child get excited the same thing with abortion it was all abortion he didn't want to alienate old voters some democratic side in 2016 that is i mean if it was there well it's out of my hands. and it could be you know we're going to go to a short break you know let your bring you know one discussion on a major news. join me every thursday on the alex salmond show and i'll be speaking to guests of the world of politics small business i'm show business i'll see you then.

time after time corporations repeat the same mantra sustainability it's very important to accelerate the transition to sustainable transport sustainability stay were meant to be more equitable and sustainable while. they claim their production is completely harmless followed the. leave. it to congress. it does not apply to companies want us to feel good about buying their products while the damage is being done far away this is something else this must be going down even as i'm skipping least the sun moon and news new me do me man and i'm stunned seemed to be based on just who looks good so when. the world is driven by a dream shaped by one person or those great. dares

thinks. we dare to ask. well about the crossed off were all things considered i'm peter lavelle remind you we're discussing some real news. ok let's go to george and with an budapest the 2nd towering figure that we have lost in the last couple of days the stephen cohen and i don't think there's going

to be a lot of television programs made about him but they should be a towering figure in academia and i went to academia and he was a guiding light he was a bit controversial in his early days because he had to remember the re understood it and mapped out. what we understood about the soviet union russia and communism and so he was an adviser to presidents particular of george bush sr he played a pivotal role in that dimia and i would even say in foreign policy but then everything changed he was basically disappeared by the academy because he disagree with the the consensus. view of russia after the cold war and he was always one that would say engagement because he remembered the cold war and remember how detente for all of us fail.

things works because it kept us out of the major conflict your thoughts about him because united moralists studied the same thing our lives parallel in the go ahead george yes you're absolutely right peter he was a towering figure and he has been for many years i mean don't forget back in the 1970 is the consensus view among analysts of the soviet union was that change was impossible that the soviet system had to reach a kind of bureaucratic equilibrium you know there would be a brashly it would be replaced by another pressure it replaced by another pressure and he broke that he's that now i think that the soviet system can change and and in fact that change is quite likely and when gorbachev and about and whatever else you can say had coverage of he certainly institute that drastic changes he was right and you have to say he was right and those people who criticized him repeatedly in print and on television like richard pipes were wrong i mean they

were absolutely wrong to say no no this is a totalitarian system of totalitarianism by definition chemical change so he was right there and of course in subsequently when he has been an advocate for they don't he has been consistent he was an advocate for they don't in the seventy's in the eighty's ninety's and through the present he basically he's saying that war is the worst possible outcome in relations between the united states and so if you're in and then russia and he's been consistent as all the talk about always an apologist for putin as they were that was always ridiculous it was a very clear cool headed analysts who wanted good relations between the 2 nuclear superpowers and that's what drove his analysis you know glenn it was very interesting i've seen a number i saw a number of interviews with stephen before as. one thing he stressed all of the

time is that during the cold war era there was an attempt to see how the other ballet. the world how the soviet union viewed the united states and that that is that is remarkably missing in our foreign policy right now is try to understand what the other guy thinks and i think that was what the success of cohen's analysis of ending the cold war so a lot of what underpins i deploy a missile if you don't have the clone as it has to be based on having some recognition for the position of the other side and if you can understand and then perhaps you can meet somewhere in the middle as opposed to if you just see them as an inherent evil of count change or if it's a little war and conflict this don't listen lucian. and because of this i think that that was a great part of his success and again dead establishment recognized famous all over

this. but again he recommended and i hear a high state presidential administration here was to go to mass for the media during the cold war when there was this push for the top and reckitt when they recognize that they have security costars as well so it does beg the question of what happened after the cold war well the cold war you have the unit color moment more or less the need to understand russia was more or less gone and again that's why he also disappeared because. his argument is it was no longer attractive because what he effectively did was he contested the main u.s. narrative of what happened after the cold war because if we lose there are alterations in the media what we're told is that the u.s. reached out to russia for friendship you know a guy the russians there is passed to democracy him you know it offered russia this membership in a european sound of nations. couldn't talk over and he is. just you know his thirst

for empire and hatred the moccasin meant as a relationship. you know yeah they are the other we have the ukraine crisis later now go and point out again trying to understand the other side was recognizing that the this is not actually what took place in russia very clear they was not overt in that membership in europe in sally instead we have nato expansion which prevented a truly unification of the continent so there was never a critical a major expansion and then of course the same here is an expression of bombing of yugoslavia without a u.n. mandate so this is all represented the cancellation of any real role for russia in europe after the cold war and also if you go on to have a voice and protect its allies it would need to stand up for itself it could rely on the seat at the table in europe so i think this is all very important if you don't understand how russia reacted again. but we don't want this 4th anymore and again what we were smear them so it's trying to understand other side not you know

doing the ground work of a diplomat no if you are now in apologists and effectively you're shamed outs and he's quite unique because he very clearly said i do not want to mend my war because then i will be the means of our cause and i will be complicit in this way that russia was christened so i. did so being a loss for our economic community community definitely you know you know judgment when the then irony of ironies of all of this is that steven cohen and there were a number of other people like him but primarily steven cohen that he was historically proven right about the end how the end of the cold war we come to an end he had a bet there in his hat ok and then and then we can speed up to the dismal present you know with this ridiculous right to russia gate hoax just like what we heard from glenn i mean he didn't win the case he said this is a hoax. it doesn't make any sense that as we get imperial sense it's an obviously

politically motivated and not only did i admire him when he was an active academic i married him even more in the last part of his life because he was a man of amazing integrity and authenticity he says no i'm not going to go along with this i don't have to i'm a retired academic ok i have nothing to fear and i think that it makes him really stand out as a human being not this is a scholar is that he wouldn't take the need when everybody else did was cowed oh and some of them by the way made a lot of money doing it go ahead george yes yes yes no that is right he was right about how the cold war would end he was also right about the ninety's because throughout the ninety's he was warning that yeltsin is an absolutely calamitous figure for russia and that it will all end extremely badly if it was a calamitous and it did and extremely badly and even pointed out which somehow now

is no longer a missile in western media political circles is that the west has pursued a policy that it was clearly. arouse fear or a legitimate fear on the part of the russians that you know when the over end of the russians were extremely well disposed towards the west. and you know essentially they got the back of the hand from the west and he has pointed this out he pointed this out particularly it over the ukraine crisis i mean and you know that that was a crisis not engineered by bush and google it pretty much pursued a kind of a hands off policy but it was a western expansion it was the promise of nato membership it was the attempt to get nato ukraine into a kind of part of the nato bloc that triggered this crisis and why because you know russians have legitimate security concerns and none of that. ever gets into the

into the western media market i mean you can watch it on you tube i.d.'s they have a lot of money number of his confrontations with max boot with christiane amanpour and you can see here these are just people who are quite disparate will. be left still with this rage that you know what he was saying you know i think what he was saying was a reasonable one you know put yourself in the position of russia you know a country that has been invaded twice in the last 100 or so years yeah they have serious and legitimate security concerns you know glenn who are enduring one of the classic crisis of the of the cold war was the cuban missile crisis and it's well documented that president kennedy wanted it least one person in his inner circle that would push back on everything and everything are we getting this right are we living in group think or are is our vision blurred are we ideologically possessed because he wanted someone that would say hey give me a reality check here that's exactly what steven cohen did from almost all of his

life in looking at politics and particularly the u.s. relationship with russia that's what we're going to miss and we have been miss. well that is the important role that he served here. is career started when he was getting it working with a soviet dissenter so they end up in the gulags and being released so he recognizes this need to descend from the state now what happens is the ninety's he was he had great disagree very much with american policies so he became a dissenter against u.s. policies and then that's also when he happened to drop off the map and so for me here the story of his last 30 years of his life is really one of what happened to these former giant schools suddenly we don't want to hear from him more because he's not the only one cuban mind you had george kennan claiming he was architect of the containment policy is held reduced on a great thinkers in america or what happened after in 1900 he said nato expansion is an assault against russia and it will start

a new cold war it is the worst thing that could possibly do on the father's olds in their graves and oh he has essentially disappeared way we did not want to hear from you know this in a more and you can also say the same of jack matlock he was the last ambassador just soviet union under reagan but also bush and. he said just as a credit for this difficulty go shisha know ending the cold war which was then announced to be over in $1009.00 but then of course where well what he was critical about this when he rewrite the glitter and say you know actually the cold war was won why would we hear from the guy who negotiated the end of the cold war when we actually won it instead so he was also house a little bit away with all this great experience to how to understand your opponent and really lay the groundwork for the poses so if cohen is not. alone in this is we see a lot of these former giants switch to where i'll finish up for us here john mearsheimer at the university of chicago in the amazing geopolitical banker and when he

dissented against the iraq war he wasn't on t.v. again until he was on this program. all right. thank you i want to thank you i'm going to enjoy the olympics our viewers for watching us here r.t.c. in x. i'm remember. you know the stock market as a subset of the economy has undergone a transformation become a plaything for speculators fueled by incredibly egregious money printing by a rogue central bank and this is causing all manner of dislocations mal investments and societal changes.

cash calendar is drawing alfonzo along the darned. change dard. whose 1st words were at long last year a challenging post you've got 2 years to live. i have no doubt that what happened was scriven. let's concentrate market is a $1000000000.00 industry these companies have a huge financial motivation to solve these problems there are numerous talking showing that doctors were keen to chest x. ray concentrate straight infectivity on that patient gives them doctors the wrong wants to play. why they would give me consecutive doses. and people still die i don't.