join us in the depths ah, or remain in the shallows. ah, ah, ah, useful meeting with a candidate exchange of opinions at a critical moment starts how the russia u. s. foreign policy? she described their talks in geneva. they come, i made the rising tensions over ukraine and nato expansion. we recently notified congress of our intention to lever and 17 helicopters, the white house anal says it's sending military helicopters to ukraine just hours after the escalation talks with russia. other nathan members are also ramping up weapon supplies to key if it is enough to scroll through

a couple of random pages to be sure, none of the provisions stand up to any critical analysis. in many cases, it is simply alive. well, at the news conference off to the talk, so a lot of lashes out at u. s. officials on mainstream media, pushing fresh unproven claims against moscow will examine those claims later the south with life from moscow. thanks so much for joining us tonight. archie international and daniel hawkins were over. you are so welcome to the program. now the yet top diplomat, so russia and the u. s. are finished, their security talks in switzerland to have tensions over ukraine remain high. washington is expected to provide rosco with a written response to the gremlins concerns next week. parties b to all a reports from geneva. it's all wrapped up here in geneva, and we've now got a much clearer picture of exactly how both the us and russian side see these talks

having gone. we heard from said again after all, the russian foreign minister who described them as useful and constructive. we heard from anthony blanket, the u. s. secretary of state, who said that they were frank and substances. we'll start with the russian foreign minister said gail afro flow. he was 1st to give his press conference after the meeting wrapped up. he said that washington had promised to provide an answer in writing to security concerns that had been presented by moscow to their u. s. partners. now he said that these weren't just security concerns focusing on ukraine. they were for the white, a european area. he said that the future of these talks would depend on the response from the united states there. but he said that the diplomatic door was pretty much remained open. it's worth pointing out. there was no major movement on any of the, the big sticking point steering. and these talk certainly what the representatives

thief, a foreign minister in the secretary state, had to say, there was no major tectonic shifts in where the risk respective countries stand. what we did here though, from the russian foreign minister, as he addressed questions from the u. s. media with him say that there was no intention from moscow for them to invade ukraine at any time. why is russia doing this now? why do you feel that you need to make these troop deployments? now, when really the security posture of the u. s. a. nato really hasn't changed over the past couple of years. my store sued to program on yoda because i think the u. s . state department should analyze the methods of cnn in regards to accuracy. you say we're going to attack ukraine despite our multiple explanations that we won't. but saying this will happen. you then ask why now, when do we not attack? it's a strange question. so we've caused repeated all fundamental point that never ending nato expansion to the east should be stopped. anthony, blinking repeated his position on the right to choose alliances, asked him how the us plans to follow its obligation not to strengthen someone

security at the expense of the security of others. he promised to explain the u. s . position on that also de la for all press conference with follow up with one from us secretary of state anthony blinkin b. u. s. chief diplomat, saying that the diplomatic route remained open to finding a solution to the tensions between russia and the west. right now. he said that he received assurances from said de la, for all the router has no intention of invading ukraine at this moment. he said he'd received those assurances in the past as well, but that if the actions of russia didn't match up to that, then there would be a response from the united states and its allies and not response would be swift, severe, and united. he said that there will be a response from washington to those concerns that were voiced by moscow, and that response will be coming in the next week. he also said that there's ways and means available to take the heat out of the current situation. transparency,

confidence, building measures, military exercises, arms control agreements. these are all things that we've actually done in the past . and that if the address seriously can, i believe reduce tensions and address some of some of the concerns. well, the us secretary of state also sketched out a potential timeline of where we could be going next. he said that once they've responded to moscow, he would expect that they would be further meetings at the foreign ministerial level, perhaps here in geneva. and if those meetings went well, that that could be another meeting between president putin and president biden, perhaps face to face, perhaps here in geneva, repeat of what we saw last year, which took place in this with city. what we have seen though, is a continuation of willingness to continue the dialogue over these ongoing tensions between russia on the west leave us will now provide,

am i 17 military helicopters to kill? if announcement comes just hours off the top level security talks with russia, where the us secretary of state claim they wanted to de escalate tension the ukraine. i would note that the united states has delivered more security assistance to ukraine in the last year than any point in history. these deliveries are ongoing, including today there's more deliveries coming. we recently notified congress of our 10 to deliver and 17 helicopters, just hours after this high level meeting. and already we have the united states increasing military aid to ukraine. and let's remember that if this meeting, we heard russia basically be urged by the united states to withdraw troops from its own soil. quite a situation now the helicopter is that the u. s. a is providing these helicopters are actually already in ukraine for maintenance. they're from the now defunct afghan army,

and apparently the united states is going ahead and providing these military helicopters to ukraine. now it's also important to be aware of the fact that 3 baltic states is donia, latvia and lithuania. have announced that they will be supplying lethal weapons to ukraine. this includes javelin, anti tank guided missiles. they're going to be providing those to the ukraine. they'll be providing them with us support us approval. sonya nazi and the few ania and the allies of working together expeditiously to handle the security assistance to ukraine. this aid will further enhance ukraine's capability to defend its territory and population in case of possible russian aggression. but there is quite a rare among the united states and its allies. here we have germany, a long time important nato ally of the united states saying that they will not be allowing permits for the transport of weapons. there are estonian weapons based in

germany, and they won't allow them to be transported to ukraine. and we actually have the chancellor of germany speaking up and saying germany does not approve of the sending of lethal weapons to ukraine. the federal government has had a clear stance regarding arms exports in recent years. we have not supported the export of lethal weapons from germany. now moscow still expects that the security concerns that they raised with washington should be addressed. but these current moves from the united states, increasing military escalation, are certainly not using tensions. a former us marine corps intelligence officer that says the white house is bombing to domestic political by ramping up rush attentions. if you don't, said lethal weapons in the united states, that opens up joe biden to criticism from congress at a time when he needs rational support for domestic programs. so, you know what we're seeing here is the consequences of allowing your foreign policy, your national security policy to be hijacked,

by domestic looking for the fact that tony blanket is meeting with a lab rob to discuss a diplomatic off ramp for the current crisis at the same time, the united states is green lighting of the delivery of weapons for the sole purpose of killing russians, because you don't have deterrence unless you have a real capability, it's totally counterproductive and it undermines the american position when they say, hey, you know, we won't allow nato to join for, for years, you don't need to worry about what's the difference between a ukraine that is a member of nato, receiving western military aid, and a ukraine who's not a member of nato receiving western military or from the russian perspective. there's no difference of those folks. the state department has outlined what it's science as examples of russian disinformation and a report the presents it's opinions as solid facts. it was published just a couple of hours before the talks rush. his foreign minister was critical of both the content and his timing. it's you my, you thought it was the person,

these documents which the u. s. state department has of course prepared deliberately for today's meeting. a simply impossible to read. it's enough to scroll through a couple of random pages to be sure none of the provision stand up to any critical analysis. in many cases, it is simply a lie among a dubious claims in the report that night owes not encircling russia with its military bases. it argues that the real problem is that russia is just such a big country with more on the story here is more aggressive. well, over the past 24 hours, washington has launch something of a, of a p r offensive, or they, they've come out. and they've said that virtually are all the security concerns that russia has talked and talked about for dead years for even longer than a decade. that all of that ease ease, fix it. they've come up with a list. the various things that russia has said that russia feels uncomfortable about all concerned about and explain why those points shouldn't be taken seriously

. fiction rushes, deployment of combat forces is a mirror position of troops on his own territory. fact deploying more than a $100000.00 russian troops, including battle hardened corporate forces and offensive weaponry. with no plausible innocuous explanation to the borders of a country that russia has previously invaded and still occupied, in places is no mere troop rotation. it is a clear renew to russia, threats to ukraine sovereignty and territorial integrity. there is, of course, no mention of the fact that the russian troop buildup happens concurrently with the ukrainian to build up with the vase convoys of tags of artillery pieces, making their way towards the russian border towards easton ukraine, and the conflict lines. the conflict lines there, and the gist of that statement, for example, is that the united states is concerned with the russian troops moving inside russia . whereas, russia's concerned with troop from florida, from march,

canada being sent half the world away, and stationed near russia, says who you can understand where rushes coming from here. but there's a, there's a whole lot more where that came from. there are passages full of inhuman falls, heat, and stupidity. for example, they call fake moscow statement that the repositioning of russian troops and russian territory means repositioning of russian troops on russian territory. brilliant. what is there more hair lies or illiteracy? i did not even want to deal with it. i know one thing for sure. this could only be published by the ministry of truth. similar situation would be russia coming out and hysterically condemning a united states to build up in texas. for example, there was, there were many other points such as another one, a fiction, or russian fiction, is that nato is surrounding washer. and here they argue that,

that, no, it isn't russia's a huge country with, with $1414.00 neighbors that a chairs, landlord, the women, and only 5 of those a native states. well, if we look back 20 years, there was only one, then there were 3, then there were 5. and now with the essential potential ascension of, of george and ukraine in the future. right, about half of russia's land book neighbors would be nato member states. so how can, how can you argue that nato isn't surrounding russia when, when you have the numbers right there, there was also another, another russian fiction, the new wouldn't promised russia that nater wouldn't expand it eastwards. this is, this is an outright lie. this is an in cia state department in european archives that yes they did. it's, it's in writing and a cia archives, for example. then director of the cia director robert gates said the gorbachev's had been promised, had been led to believe that nathan wouldn't expect this,

but you had the james bake of the state department, the head of the state department, secretary of state back then a 3 times telling gorbachev's that they wouldn't move one inch eastward you had. then the, the then west german foreign minister asked either ginger, saying that nato shouldn't expand eastward, given assurances to russia. then the usaa, the, in the event of germany, re unifying that neither would movies. you have this in writing in rising lisa, archived memos, cables. nevertheless, there's this, as i say, much more in that least of russian fictions which a lot of questions about lot itself has also become a target of washington's accusations. will be us state department alleging that the channel and fellow news outlets. sputnik use this information to determine his foreign policy reaction from monte host on former british and p jewels got away.

the timing on the launch of this report is naked lay sign that it's part of our new propaganda offensive. but i have had the unpleasant task of reading all 33 pages of it, of the people that have lied to us over and over again. i'm now lying to us about ukraine and russia. those market for it. there is an audience for it, but fewer and fewer people are believing these lies than ever before. thanks to the existence of our teeth, the existence of social media. people can find out the truth just with letting their fingers do the walking. more and more of them are us how speak and nancy pelosi has been accused of a cynical utah the issue backs

a bad on stock market trading by lawmakers. this bought a family topping the list of democrats, profiting from the much criticized proxies. critic, so note she's hoping to divert growing angered officials profiting from inside information by the monuments supreme court. my moves are also banned from trading stocks. to give a blanket attitude, if we can't do this and we can't do that because we can't be trusted, i just don't buy into that. but if members want to do that, i'm ok with that. if we're saying everybody should be living by the same standard, then let so be it. that's okay with me. but i don't think that the court should be let off the hook. so i say when we go forward with anything, let's take the supreme court with us to have disclosure and policies. as one poll will get it more than $5000000.00 from a tommy back on giggles parent company just before. how so? just lation seen as soft on big tech was passed. nancy pelosi spokesperson insisted she had no knowledge of the transactions, but her husband's investment judgment has proven so uncanny over the years that

many traders simply copy his pigs to maximize profits. or now to senate democrats or propose the bill to ban soothing members of congress from making stock trades while an office. well, let's go live now to works. kaiser host of ortiz tries reports for thought broker and co founder of the hollywood stock exchange. mike, thanks for joining us today. the program good with us funded mentally big question is should law, mike is be allowed to trade stocks right fundamentally, lawmaker should not be allowed to trade. stocks are we already have a problem of too much corporate money in politics and america and making a lot of corporate money from their donors isn't enough for these politicians. they also want to use the information that they glean from these corporations to trade on inside information and make even more money. so it's a, it's quite a,

a accumulation of fraud and malfeasance in one body of political class in the united states. and it's, it's an unbelievably tragic circumstance because the average person in america is suffering badly because of the lack of a political will to solve problems that would help the average american. and when you look at what's happening in d. c, you can understand why politicians like nancy pelosi have made tens of millions, some estimate, $100000000.00 trading stocks with her husband. and she's essentially abandoned her constituency in san francisco. and they're living in human ways. they're living in human fecal matter. the entire city is wasting away, the infrastructure is dilapidated, and this is the same in chicago. it's the same in cities all over america because the politicians are too busy, a lot law,

rubbing elbows with their corporate donors and trading on insight information and, and padding their retirement accounts. so it's, it's, it's a, it's an insidious oligarchy in america, that is praying on the population and essentially making normalizing looting that that's the message that nancy pelosi was trying to make her. she's trying to say, well, look, looting is, and fraud is the de facto business model of america. we do in the senate. let's, let's talk about the supreme court. they're dealing it to their trading and in some insight information to why you're blaming us. so they're really a tragic shame and i think they should replace the, that the monument in north dakota, you know, with the, for additional hands of states, it should be burning, made off of mount rushmore should be a new mount rushmore. mary made off. charles pansy,

nancy pelosi and one of these other fraudsters will change using because back in december pelosi drew scrutiny. didn't she? because she said like a should be allowed to trade as part of a free market economy. what's changed? well, this is just a essentially playing with semantics. so a free market economy would suggest that information is not evenly distributed to the marketplace and you have price discovery in the markets that is fair and balanced. but she's not talking about free market trading. she's talking about a market that slanted in the favor of those who are accessing inside information, but cloaking it in the, in what would appear to be, you know, the words of free market enterprise. that's just a public relations comments. he's making this not free market enterprise. when you have oligarchs draining the system of cash and leaving the population homeless,

dying from drug overdoses, you know, the biggest cause of death in the u. s. last year. was either oxycontin overdose or sick or suicide. you know, the pfizer is a great example danielle because pfizer is, is a company that would rush to market their, their, their cobra vax. they bypass a lot of federal regulations. it was not even approved when it was rolled out. i guess who owns all of us and lots of stock and pfizer, members of congress, members of senate. so there's an incestuous relationship between corporations, the senate, and then owner involves something like a jab or an experimental gene therapy as, as we see with the, the pfizer product. they're putting literally millions of lives at risk. so they can make another payment on a yacht. it's pretty gross, i mean, i have, i, historically, we have to go back to empires from hundreds of years ago to find the elite in such contempt of their,

of the population and just looting wholesale like this is disgusting. that big to be honest. so what extent do you think that us lawmakers all profiting from inside information gained through the jobs to one profits i and if it is such of issue, is there prospect perhaps of a corruption inquiry? so people are held accountable? well, the, as she mentioned this, the courts are also infected with insider trading. so who's going to conduct this inquiry if they're all in the game? right? so that's the, that's the nature of an oligarchy. is that every single aspect of the system is corrupt in the u. s. is massively corrupt across all institutions and insider trading and fraud is the primary business model of america. if you remove fraud from the american business model, there would be virtually nothing left. and this is the model when you see it on the streets, people are stopping freight trains full of cargo and ripping them apart and littering, train tracks. we've seen the images and that looting and people walking into drug

stores and they can loot up to a $1000.00 per customer and not be charged. so they've normalized looting at the bottom which causes social unrest and chaos so that nancy pelosi and her friends can benefit in the hundreds of millions and billions of dollars with looting at the very top. and so they're basically saying, we're going to throw everyone who's under a certain threshold of wealth, let's say $50000000.00 or $20000000.00. anyone under the $20000000.00 threshold of wealth, they can be disposed of. we get rid of them. we don't need them, we're going to fill them with experimental drugs. we're going to have them thrown in jail for looting. but we're going to be able to loot at the much higher level and pat ourselves on the back and cover for each other since on the judiciary on the supreme court, all along the line. so it, it's the, the america is breaking into 2 societies. there's the elite looters, and then there's the, the low grade looters,

and they're just going to keep building jails and putting a low grade, looters in jail and keeping all the cream on the top. is there an argument? do you think also to buy and stock trades while all mike is families because always see there are, you know, the spouses that are ceo's of public companies or employees of, of traded companies. if they just by lawmakers, they could somehow get around not right by just doing the same thing through their family members. insider trading. it is very difficult to detect. it's very difficult to prosecute. and we know i know from covering wall street for many years, there are many elaborate schemes that traitors used to pass inside information to each other to evade detection. and we live in an age with encrypted apps that are not being monitored by regulators. and a lot of inside information is passed on those encrypted apps. and once these trades are put into place, it's, or it's easy, relatively easy for someone who is engaged in insider trading to us,

to claim that they, that they simply saw the price of the stock. going to look cheap to them on that day. and that's, that's, that's an excuse that they give that it's hard to refute. it's very difficult to prove it. and the regulators themselves are the s, c. c is constantly involved in situations where they themselves appear to be turning a blind eye inside information. so the fcc to see if t c and these other regulators also are implicated in these massive insider trading schemes. you know, i, i started wall street 19 eighties and there was a famous a case of the wall street journal, anna trader and wall street engaged in some insider trading. but compared to those days it's insider trading has become industrial in size. is literally one of the biggest industries of america is insider trading on the stock market by congress, by regulators, a by corporations themselves corp, corporate executives who sit on each other's board of directors,

are constantly trading on insight information. and there's no will to prosecute, because they've glorify this as somehow how the privilege of the elite that they said simply by virtue of being in the elite class, they should be able to trade inside information. and those games are there because there are special people. so the idea in america, of their being certain level of the gal terrorism has been completely destroyed. it's really a free for all. it's who can grab the most, the fastest wins. and you see that on the street, you see that in congress. and it's really define the american culture is defined now by looting america as the biggest looters in the world. and even look at america's foreign policy. that's been there for a policy for decades, looting whether it's oil in the mid east, whether it's agricultural products here in latin america where i am right now. looting is always been a part of the american experience, but it was never necessarily defined the domestic experience. but now that's what we, that's what you could define american now as a nation of looters as being

a short term, you know, you can pass laws, you can post bands. isn't the real issue though about trust, building and faith in elected officials. i mean, policy has said she's got no confidence in the integrity of lawmakers, if she doesn't know how to expect the average voters avenue. well, danielle, it's an excellent point right now. she's saying herself that there's a trust issue and, but she's in the business of creating trust in these institutions. and she's saying that exact thing that she herself is questioning who's trustworthy in the system. and that is a point that will resonate down in history at the moment when everybody in the us lost trust in all of the major institutions, the political institutions and the other is the journalistic institutions. you know, journalism in america, the faith and journalists has probably never been lower in the u. s. so you have no

faith in the media or journalism. you have no faith in the political institution. thank you ma'am. and it will go right down the list. and so what you're left with is a sense of desperation, either people overdose or kill themselves, which are the leading causes of death because they've completely lost faith in all the american institutions. or they decide they're going to be the make a shark in the shark tank and out loot the other looters and be king of the looters . and he have the guys like jeff bezos and others worth $200300000000000.00 or the king of the looters. and they're out there on their yacht somewhere selling around the world. and having been the best looter of anybody else. so those are the 2 choices, either be the king of the looters, or kill yourself. i don't, that's the american dream. i never adult a in the american politics. so max casa, thanks so much for your time, you know, not t good savion as always. okay, danielle, well that's it from of the team on my so for this hour they shoot for dennis miller

plus one next. the sean thomas will be right here in the hot seats in 30 minutes to bring you the nightly global use update to join us again than here on our team. and asked to join me every thursday on the alex salmon. sure. and i'll be speaking to guess in the world politics sport business, i'm show business. i'll see you then. mm. so called enhanced interrogation techniques used by the u. s. officials were basically designed as techniques to break down the human mind. if you force a human being to stay in a certain position doesn't take very long to the pain involved to become absolutely excruciating, but nobody's lean finger on you. you are doing it to yourself. we started adopting

those techniques when i was stationed in mosul. among them were stress, possession, sleep deprivation, and using hypothermia. there's already beginning to be evidence that these old techniques are now being used on immigrants and children, whatever you do or more comes home. nobody has been held accountable for the torture that happened in the past and the moral authority, the made america awarded or sacrifice the shimmer of effective interrogation. there may or may we, sir, all may or may, we should all be angry because i was more all right. can't understand united states history and the role that slavery play already a very formal institution at a time united states became

a nation. it actually defined the nation.