Biden says Putin a killer, will pay a price for election interference

1. 0

   PrettyPantherposted 3 years ago

   https://www.cnbc.com
   
   President Joe Biden says he believes Russian leader Vladimir Putin is a killer with no soul.
   
   Biden vowed that Putin soon “will pay a price” for interfering in the 2020 U.S. presidential election and trying to boost the reelection chances of then-President Donald Trump.
   
   Trump for years refused to criticize Putin for meddling in his 2016 election campaign against Hillary Clinton, and told Fox News, “You think our country’s so innocent?” when Bill O’Reilly called Putin a killer.
   
   
   President Joe Biden says he believes Russian leader Vladimir Putin is a killer with no soul — and vowed that Putin soon “will pay a price” for interfering in the 2020 U.S. election and trying to boost the reelection chances of then-President Donald Trump.
   
   Biden said he warned Putin last month, in his first call to the Russian president after taking office, that he would retaliate if that meddling was confirmed.
   
   “The conversation started off, ‘I said, I know you and you know me. If I establish this occurred, then be prepared,’” Biden told ABC News in an interview that aired Wednesday on “Good Morning America.”
   
   The interview was conducted Tuesday, the same day that the U.S. National Intelligence Council released a report which concluded that Putin authorized intelligence assets to promote misinformation during the 2020 election cycle about Biden through U.S. media and people close to Trump.
   
   “He will pay a price,” Biden said of Putin.
   
   Asked that price would be, Biden replied, “Well, you’ll see shortly. "
   
   **********
   This is clearly a different position and strategy from the previous administration. Do you see this harder line toward Russia as a good or bad thing? Was Trump's tolerance of Putin's election interference  somehow beneficial to the U.S.? Or, will Biden's harder line be more beneficial?

   replyreport
   1. 79

      Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Your link did not provide a report on the subject. I picked up an article on the subject on CNN.  https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/17/politics … index.html
      
      CNN --- "The President wouldn't provide more details to ABC on what "price" Putin will pay, but the Biden administration is expected to announce sanctions related to election interference as soon as next week, three US State Department officials have told CNN. The officials did not disclose any details related to the expected sanctions but said that they will target multiple countries including Russia, China, and Iran."
      
      IMO Trump took a very hard line on Russia for meddling in the 2016 election as facts indicate. Consider this opinion my individual. opinion, and realize some would not concur with it. I have added a couple of sources that helped me come to my opinion.
      
      "U.S. imposes fresh Russia sanctions for election meddling"
      Dec 2018   https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- … SKCN1OI27F
      
      Trump administration added the most sanctions and actions of any  other president   https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-fr … on-russia/
      
      So, your question  -- "Do you see this harder line toward Russia as a good or bad thing? "
      
      Makes little sense after researching the Trump ad. sanctions on Russia for election meddling. It was very clear Trump did personally take the Russian meddling lightly However, proceeded to do his job for the Nation and sanction Russia for meddling, as well as his administration adding many other actions and sanctions throughout Tump's time in office.  Yes, Biden's words are stiff... But thus far just words. So I have nothing at this point to compare what Biden may or may not do. Cart before the horse.
      
      Hopefully, the Biden administration will keep to his promise to punch Russia for meddling in the election as Trump administration.
      
      Your second question --- Was Trump's tolerance of Putin's election interference somehow beneficial to the U.S.?
      
      IMO again, Trump was not verbally hard on Russia, but his job performance showed he actually was one of the toughest presidents the Russians ever had to deal with.
      
      Last question --- Or, will Biden's harder line be more beneficial? Thus far he has given words... Nothing more. So, I have no idea what line he will take with Russia.  Hopefully, he will add sanctions for their meddling in the 2020 election.
      
      Russia has been meddling for decades in our elections., hopefully, Biden's administration will curb them.

      replyreport
   2. 89

      GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Without comparing Biden's stance to Trump's, I would say that Biden's is dangerous. We, (the public), may good about finally smacking the bully, all we have really done is elevated the conflict to a public level that pushes the bully into a corner that demands a response that will show their strength.
      
      I think Pres. Biden's public declarations will force Putin to more drastic measures. Our best hope is that they will be public measures—like withdrawing their ambassador, rather than stepped-up covert measures—like their 2016 election efforts and their opposition assassinations.
      
      My perception is that Putin would rather go down in a river of blood than suffer public humiliation. He will hit back.
      
      But don't misunderstand my thought. I do agree with Biden's confrontational approach, I just think his audience should have been Putin and the Russian power structure—not the American public.
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         I think the tough talk was purposefully public, not only for Americans but for the world to hear. A signal that the U.S is back and strong on the world stage, to further delineate this administration from the last one. As was pointed out, the previous administration was tough policy-wise despite Trump's obsequious and deferential rhetoric toward Putin.
         
         I think Biden was letting the world know that he doesn't cosy up to murdering dictators and he was basically asserting himself on the world stage. Sort of like saying "there's a new sheriff in town."
         
         But, yeah, as you said, it might cause more trouble. The difference now is that our intelligence people can do their jobs with the support of the president.

         replyreport
         1. 89

            GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            I can see your perspective too. And I wouldn't disagree with those goals.
            
            GA

            replyreport
      2. 76

         Ken Burgessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         This is the intent.
         
         The conflict with Russia was delayed a few years because of Trump... and now the push to destroy Russia will resume.
         
         There was a reason why we took down Libya, turned Syria into a slaughter ground, helped the overthrow of the Ukraine government, during the Obama Administration.
         
         There was a reason why more troops and equipment (tanks, artillery, etc.) were deployed along the Russian border nations than we had assembled for Desert Shield - Desert Storm just prior to the 2016 election, which Clinton was a shoe-in to win.
         
         The ignorance to the truths of what is really going on that is fostered on the American people, the deception and deliberate misinformation spread unendingly and uninterrupted by our "news" sources is almost beyond comprehension.
         
         The return of military hostilities towards Russia and Syria is an absolute certainty now that the "Establishment" has removed the obstacle from their continued efforts against Russia.

         replyreport
         1. 93

            Readmikenowposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Just a small correction...the Ukrainian government was not overthrown.  Russia did annex Crimea and parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk region remain in the control of Russian backed rebels.  The Ukrainians refer to them as the temporarily occupied territories.  The initial surprise attack took over 32 areas, they are now 16 areas that are occupied.  Many people in these areas want to rejoin the Ukraine and many have left there to rejoin the Ukraine.  The Ukrainian is still in the area but a cease fire is in place currently and is working for the moment.

            replyreport
            1. 76

               Ken Burgessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               You have tried in the past to "correct" my perspectives on Ukraine.
               
               Its a personal issue for you.... it doesn't change the fact that the CiA other black ops were present in the Ukraine and fostered the rebellion with their support.

               replyreport
               1. 93

                  Readmikenowposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  I agree. It is personal for me.  The war has touched my family in the Ukraine.
                  
                  However, it is a fact that the Ukrainian government was NOT overthrown.  It doesn't matter what the CIA did...Ukraine remains a free and sovereign nation. It will take time, but the occupied territories will one day again be part of the Ukrainian nation.  There will be a time when Crimea also rejoins the Ukraine.

                  replyreport
      3. 79

         Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

         You make a good point in regards to Putin would rather go down a river of blood rather than be humiliated. I watched the Putin response video. In my view, he almost appeared amused, as if laughing inside. He did offer a stay healthy type sentiment. Which in itself is scary. What I also picked he made a point to mention the call he took with Biden. Here is a big What If --- What if he leaks it? Biden s one hell of a confused man, could not imagine what he could have said.  I would think Putin could get his revenge by offering the phone call to the world.

         replyreport
2. 96

   Peggy Wposted 3 years ago

   We need to be clear-eyed about who our allies and friends are, and the same about those who would like to destroy us.

   replyreport
3. 80

   emgeposted 3 years ago

   Ken, the scenario painted by you is so very true but it has terrible side-effect. It brings out the point that Joe Biden has lost focus and is just about trying to be too clever.   The acts of Joe Biden against Russia is a are clear sign of a giant in the last few throws of dying. Biden has cooked the American goose.

   replyreport
4. 80

   emgeposted 3 years ago

   It will not be Putin who will pay the price but Biden as like Goliath and also Gulliver the end of this giant which is the greatest destabilizer in the world is counting its last days. Should not be forgotten that the USA lost EVERY WAR it fought after 1945 and this "war" against Russia will be its nemesis. It will be China that will side with Russia( they have a pact)  and the American dream is going to end. Electing Joe Biden and likely next president Kamla Harris( She will be president by 2023 as per my Astrological forecast) will mark the end of the American empire. I feel sad.

   replyreport
   1. 79

      Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      China and Russia are a power that we could in no respect deal with. Your point is very valid.

      replyreport
5. 87

   Valeantposted 3 years ago

   NATO.

   replyreport
   1. 79

      Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I must assume your comment is replying to my comment about what a problem could occur if Russia and China joined as a force.
      
      NATO actually could not offer much but diplomatic talks. Due to the lack of military personnel.  Perhaps you were referring to diplomatic talks or sanctions?
      
      https://www.statista.com/statistics/584 … countries/

      replyreport
      1. 87

         Valeantposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         No, I'm talking about the total military personnel of all NATO countries being equal to, or actually a little higher than, China and Russia combined.  It's why having allies is a good thing and not taking an America only approach is actually a good thing.

         replyreport
         1. 79

            Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

            I did not get out my calculator, But the scale numbers plummet after the US and Turkey.  I can't imagine many would get involved in such a war. We can even get many to join us sanctions on China or Russia. Less just hope we never face asking neighbors to aid us in a war against China or Russia or the two combined. I look at NATO as I do the Pairs Climate Accord --- Good Ol Club. That does very little but asks for tons of cash. But it gives the appearance that we play nice, so who cares about the fact these organizations do so little of what they were meant to do.
            
            Nearly 70% of total spending on defense by Nato governments is accounted for by the US.
            
            "We have now agreed to a new formula for sharing costs. The US will pay less. Germany will pay more.
            Jens Stoltenberg
            Nato Secretary-General"   Thank You President TRUMP!
            
            https://www.bbc.com/news/world-44717074

            replyreport
            1. 87

               Valeantposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               Just letting you know that your claim of a lack of military personnel was not accurate.  That NATO combined is on equal footing.
               
               And they do have a military directive should it come to that, regardless of what you think of them.
               
               Your deflection to funding does not offset the inaccuracy of the statement made.

               replyreport
               1. 79

                  Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  Hey, provide you with a very simple chart that gives an accurate assessment of military in the NATO.  Most of those countries could offer little to nothing if a war ever occurred, and most never have. As I said did not get out a calculator the chart pretty much says it all.
                  
                  And beyond the US and  France and Turkey, and the UK  the other countries have an unsophisticated military, that could offer little to a world force. It's on Ol' boys club.
                  
                  https://warontherocks.com/2015/07/nato- … ary-actor/
                  
                  At this point to be realistic --- if China wanted to concur with the US they could do it easily. And if they joined forces with Russia it would only take days... OR maybe just a man-made virus. They need not even destroy infrastructure, just walk on in.
                  
                  The US has become a laughing stock at this point. We had a president that we could trust to be strong on the world stage.. Now we have a feeble man that if not careful falls on a stage. Time to realize Joe is an embarrassment and needs to step down or be impeached.

                  replyreport
                  1. 87

                     Valeantposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                     A President who we could trust to be strong on the world stage?  By bowing down and licking Putin's boots in every public appearance he made?  He is who made us a laughingstock, as evidenced by world leaders laughing directly at him on multiple occasions.  I cannot believe you even made that claim. 
                     
                     You looked over a chart and made an assumption.  Do you even know how many military personnel China and Russia have to make the comparison? 
                     
                     I doubt China could 'conquer' the US easily as you claim just based on the threat of nuclear weapons.

                     replyreport
                     1. 79

                        Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

                        At this point, Trump holds the record for slamming Russia with actions and sanctions.. So not sure one could say he was weak on Russia or actually any adversary.  The only laughing stock IMO at this point is Biden. He is clearly not all there, and anyone can see that, Many here don't want to admit it... But it very clear.
                        
                        Do you know the population of China? 1.398 billion
                        
                        And as I said I would doubt nuclear warfare need be considered. We would quickly fold at the threat.  And then there is chemical warfare... And man-made viruses. Oh well...
                        
                        We are a very weak nation, we have proved that as a people electing a feeble president. Can't even imagine what the world thinks of the US at this point.
                        
                        If I had the bet on who would win a war between China and the US --- That would be China. Hey, just my opinion. And if it were a combo of Russia and China...  as I said a matter of days, maybe hours.
                        
                        I don't even want to think of this scenario. But when I do, I look at it with open realistic eyes. We are no longer the number one military nation in the world if Russia and China joined forces.  https://www.statista.com/chart/20418/most-powerful- The facts are not comforting... We as a people are arrogant, tend to ignore facts when convenient.  As we did elect a man that showed signs of dementia. I will barrow  Rhett Butler's sentiments from Gone With The Wind ---  arrogance does not win wars...
                        
                        militaries/#:~:text=The%20United%20States%20in%20comparison,in%20second%20and%20third%2C%20respectively.
                        
                        I almost felt I was hijacking the subject of the thread. But it all circles back to Biden's arrogant statements in regard to Putin.  So, I did not go far from the subject.

                        replyreport
                        1. 77

                           Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

                           "We are a very weak nation, we have proved that as a people electing a feeble president. Can't even imagine what the world thinks of the US at this point."
                           
                           That's unfair, Trump was a totally unhinged and corrupt man. Honesty and integrity is the marking of any leader. I guess when  you refer to feeble you said the same thing about Reagan during his second term or the same about Gerald Ford?
                           
                           People, the overwhelming majority of the electoral public certainly did not see Biden as ineffectual and weak. Why does the conservative minority think that the majority has poor judgement? I believe that I am as smart as anyone, and I don't see that. You have all these hidden enemies, academia, the press, etc. is it possible that so many oppose the Right simplybecause their policies and objectives have turned off more than they attract?

                           replyreport
                           1. 79

                              Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

                              I must speak honestly --- Yes Trump had many character flaws, which were very apparent personality disorders. He had a  pattern of showing self-centeredness, arrogant thinking, and at times showed a lack of empathy He had the problem of needing excessive need for admiration.  These are all personality disorders. He never showed any signs of confusion or cognitive problems.
                              
                              And yes it was well known in his last two year in the office was failing mentally. There is no denying that.
                              
                              I have no idea what the majority of the electoral public felt about his mentation. I saw problems while he campaigned in the primary, not severe, but problems. I have watched his mentation become worse, I am now witnessed his cognitive skills failing. A few weeks back looking visibly confused in a hardware store, his zoom call with Pelosi, the feed was cut abruptly, and now he falling three times unable to get his footing...  It is a fact the majority of falls on stairs are falling downstairs. falling up stairs point to problems with cognitive skills.
                              
                              I don't think many voters ever considered he would have run if confusion was setting in.   I completely agree you are a smart man, it's apparent you are very intelligent. IMO it would not have mattered who the Dems ran...  Many held their noses, to get Trump out.
                              
                              At this point, I don't care about right or left... I am more concerned that we have a president that is not fit for the job. 
                              
                              It's hard to address left and right policies this soon. Although I can see lots of problems right under our noses. I am more concerned about having this man as president. This country better gets it together, we look so foolish to the world. 
                              
                              Yes, many world leaders disliked Trump for many reasons. But Biden, they are seeing a weak old man that is confused. And laughing at our society as a whole for electing him.

                              replyreport
                              1. 77

                                 Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                 "Yes, many world leaders disliked Trump for many reasons. But Biden, they are seeing a weak old man that is confused. And laughing at our society as a whole for electing him."
                                 
                                 Which is worse? From what I remember, America was considered a laughing stock for having elected Trump. Personality disorders are associated with deliberate maliciousness. I consider that more dangerous than anything Biden has displayed thus far.
                                 
                                 Only conservatives say Biden is unfit. It would have been great if he were 20 years younger, but such is not the case. But we do have a VP in Kamela Harris wh is available to catch him if he falls.
                                 
                                 The debate was most revealing, I see Biden keeping calm with a reasonable demeanor while Trump, was discourteous and obviously unhinged in his accusations throughout.  Demented or Insane, you choose. I know what choice I would take.
                                 
                                 You're right, even if Mickey Mouse were the candidate, Trump had to go.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 79

                                    Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

                                    Which is worse? Someone that is confused... In my book. What would have been great is a candidate that would be a well-rounded well versed, well-educated human being, with sound values, and so much more... We did not have that type of candidate running. We had to choose. I chose sound mind, good job performance. Just was not willing to go with a confused man that did little campaigning, and had 40 years in Washington and did nothing but blend in at best.
                                    
                                    One thing we may agree on, four years will tell us if Joe's our guy. If not we once again will have the chance to cast a vote.

                                    replyreport
6. 60

   Live to Learnposted 3 years ago

   The democrats and their buddies in the arms business are banging the war drums.
   
   Did anyone expect a different outcome to Biden's election?

   replyreport
   1. 89

      GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I thought it was the Republicans that were in bed with the MIC, (Military Industrial Complex, aka "arms business").
      
      GA

      replyreport
7. 87

   Valeantposted 3 years ago

   Considering Biden is well exceeding his goals in terms of vaccinations and just orchestrated the passing of a major piece of legislation that took the previous administration nine months to accomplish, I highly doubt the world sees him as either weak or confused.  I think you trying to sell your own warped views of Biden as those of world leaders is comical.
   
   We looked foolish with a functional illiterate as president who cared more about himself than the country.  One who spilled state secrets to our enemies in the Oval Office, got impeached twice, led us to the highest deficits in a four-year term, highest trade deficits, eroded the relationships with allies, and attacked his own country's intelligence services and military branches repeatedly.
   
   Even with Biden and his flaws, we've still upgraded from this...
   
   ...and that was just a pittance of the Trump clown memes to choose from, there are dozens more.

   replyreport
   1. 96

      wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      You forgot to mention that both impeachments were found to be political posturing, nothing more, and without substance...or that Trump handily beat both allegations of having committed an impeachable offense.  The only president in history to do so, and he did it in the face of a hostile house and a completely hostile media.

      replyreport
      1. 87

         Valeantposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         If they were simply political posturing, there would not be investigations opened in Georgia on Trump's attempts to commit election fraud, nor would the D.C. Attorney General be considering whether Trump can be legally liable for the actions of January 6.
         
         And handily is a reach as that was the most votes a president has ever received from his own party.  Lastly, if there was no substance, I doubt the GOP leaders of both the House and Senate would have publicly stated Trump bears responsibility on the floors of their own chambers.

         replyreport
   2. 79

      Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      The vaccines he received were contracted by the Trump Administration. The Stimulus was a slam dunk, both parties knew it political suicide if they skrewed it up this time around. Although he has only been in office a few months, I have little confidence he can make it through his term, due to his weakening mental state. Time will tell.
      
      
      

      replyreport
      1. 77

         Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Slam dunk, Sharlee? So, why was there not an iota of support from Republican legislators?

         replyreport
         1. 79

            Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

            I can answer that without needing to write a book...
            
            Both parties are ultimately working to keep power, an upper hand, a base tagging behind them.  It's not about "We The People" It's about "We The Party".  Same old same old.  I would think more citizens would notice this merry go round, and demand to stop it from spinning.
            
            That stimulus was a slam dunk the Republicans feel they saved face by not supporting the pork, their base approved.   The Dems knew they had the numbers and their base felt the party did accomplish pushing through a bill.  Both Rep and Dems that qualified got a check and were placated with a bit of cash. And the merry-go-round keeps spinning, making we the people dizzy.
            
            In regards to Congress, they walking away with what they fully expected to gain.--- Holding on to their bases.

            replyreport