d6tUMFC1

1C:\Users\tyeva\PycharmProjects\podcasting\venv\Scripts\python.exe C:/Users/tyeva/PycharmProjects/podcasting/shared_tree.py
2Article  0
3=====================================
4     Attorney General Jeff Sessions at an event in Reno, Nev., on June 25. (Andy Barron/AP)   by Nick Anderson July 3 at 4:00 PM Email the author    The Trump administration is moving to rescind Obama-era guidance to colleges and universities on how they can use race in admissions decisions to promote diversity, according to an administration official. The action, expected Tuesday afternoon, is likely to signal a push to emphasize admissions that are race-blind. The Supreme Court has upheld race-conscious admission practices as recently as 2016, but affirmative action in higher education remains a contentious issue. In 2011 and 2016, the Obama administration’s Justice and Education departments jointly spelled out for colleges their view of the law on the voluntary use of race in admissions. The 2011 statement said the departments “recognize the compelling interest that postsecondary institutions have in obtaining the benefits that flow from achieving a diverse student body.” It went on to assert that schools have flexibility “to take proactive steps, in a manner consistent with principles articulated in Supreme Court opinions, to meet this compelling interest.” The Obama-era documents replaced a 2008 letter on the subject from the Bush administration. Now it appears that the Trump administration is about to assert its own views. A Justice Department spokesman said an announcement was imminent. Opponents of affirmative action said they were heartened.          “It’s a very good development,” said Roger Clegg, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, based in Falls Church, Va. He said it was appropriate for the administration to ditch policies that had encouraged schools to weigh race and ethnicity in deciding where students would be assigned or admitted. “Students should be able to go to a school without regard to their skin color or what country their ancestors came from,” he said. But former Obama officials criticized the move. “Once again, the Trump administration works to create confusion where none exists, needlessly muddying civil rights practices in schools,” said Catherine E. Lhamon, assistant education secretary for civil rights under Obama. “The Supreme Court has been consistent over decades in its rulings on lawful use of race in affirmative action and the guidance the Trump administration rescinds today offered nothing more than a clear and practical statement of the law and how to comply with it. Taking away that guidance undermines the steps toward equity school communities have long been taking.” The policy shift, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, comes at a pivotal moment in the long-running affirmative action debate. The retirement of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who had been a swing vote in key rulings, will allow President Trump to name a successor who could tilt the outcome of future cases. In addition, Harvard University’s use of race in admissions has come under scrutiny in a federal lawsuit that alleges the school has discriminated against Asian Americans. Separately, the Justice Department is conducting its own civil rights investigation of Harvard admissions. The university denies wrongdoing and says its methods — weighing race and ethnicity as one factor among many in a review of an applicant’s background and credentials — conform to decades of settled law. Not all colleges use race in admissions. Some states, including California and Florida, prohibit public universities from considering race and ethnicity. In recent years, admissions deans also have put major emphasis on social, geographic and economic diversity. Some want more first-generation college students. Others are seeking to draw more women into science and engineering programs, or more men into humanities. But for many selective schools, public and private, race remains a factor as they seek to build incoming classes representative of a range of racial and ethnic backgrounds. These schools say racial diversity has a crucial role to play in the education of their students. That is why higher education leaders have argued to the Supreme Court that its precedents on affirmative action should be upheld. It remains to be seen what impact the Trump administration’s action will have on college practices. Peter McDonough, vice president and general counsel of the American Council on Education, which represents college and university presidents, said he doubted schools would change their admission policies based solely on the announcement. He noted that administrative guidance does not carry the legal weight of court rulings or statutes enacted by Congress. “It isn’t shocking that guidance would be withdrawn,” he said. “It happens all the time across administrative units.” But McDonough said the administration’s action could have a “chilling effect” on colleges as they review their admission methods. “The message — but not the law — could be that if you take race into account or ethnicity into account as one of the several factors in your review process, you’re going to be challenged,” he said. Moriah Balingit and Valerie Strauss contributed.    
5    Attorney General Jeff Sessions at an event in Reno, Nev., on June 25. (Andy Barron/AP)   by Nick Anderson July 3 at 4:00 PM Email the author    The Trump administration is moving to rescind Obama-era guidance to colleges and universities on how they can use race in admissions decisions to promote diversity, according to an administration official. The action, expected Tuesday afternoon, is likely to signal a push to emphasize admissions that are race-blind. The Supreme Court has upheld race-conscious admission practices as recently as 2016, but affirmative action in higher education remains a contentious issue. In 2011 and 2016, the Obama administration’s Justice and Education departments jointly spelled out for colleges their view of the law on the voluntary use of race in admissions. The 2011 statement said the departments “recognize the compelling interest that postsecondary institutions have in obtaining the benefits that flow from achieving a diverse student body.” It went on to assert that schools have flexibility “to take proactive steps, in a manner consistent with principles articulated in Supreme Court opinions, to meet this compelling interest.” The Obama-era documents replaced a 2008 letter on the subject from the Bush administration. Now it appears that the Trump administration is about to assert its own views. A Justice Department spokesman said an announcement was imminent. Opponents of affirmative action said they were heartened.          “It’s a very good development,” said Roger Clegg, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, based in Falls Church, Va. He said it was appropriate for the administration to ditch policies that had encouraged schools to weigh race and ethnicity in deciding where students would be assigned or admitted. “Students should be able to go to a school without regard to their skin color or what country their ancestors came from,” he said. But former Obama officials criticized the move. “Once again, the Trump administration works to create confusion where none exists, needlessly muddying civil rights practices in schools,” said Catherine E. Lhamon, assistant education secretary for civil rights under Obama. “The Supreme Court has been consistent over decades in its rulings on lawful use of race in affirmative action and the guidance the Trump administration rescinds today offered nothing more than a clear and practical statement of the law and how to comply with it. Taking away that guidance undermines the steps toward equity school communities have long been taking.” The policy shift, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, comes at a pivotal moment in the long-running affirmative action debate. The retirement of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who had been a swing vote in key rulings, will allow President Trump to name a successor who could tilt the outcome of future cases. In addition, Harvard University’s use of race in admissions has come under scrutiny in a federal lawsuit that alleges the school has discriminated against Asian Americans. Separately, the Justice Department is conducting its own civil rights investigation of Harvard admissions. The university denies wrongdoing and says its methods — weighing race and ethnicity as one factor among many in a review of an applicant’s background and credentials — conform to decades of settled law. Not all colleges use race in admissions. Some states, including California and Florida, prohibit public universities from considering race and ethnicity. In recent years, admissions deans also have put major emphasis on social, geographic and economic diversity. Some want more first-generation college students. Others are seeking to draw more women into science and engineering programs, or more men into humanities. But for many selective schools, public and private, race remains a factor as they seek to build incoming classes representative of a range of racial and ethnic backgrounds. These schools say racial diversity has a crucial role to play in the education of their students. That is why higher education leaders have argued to the Supreme Court that its precedents on affirmative action should be upheld. It remains to be seen what impact the Trump administration’s action will have on college practices. Peter McDonough, vice president and general counsel of the American Council on Education, which represents college and university presidents, said he doubted schools would change their admission policies based solely on the announcement. He noted that administrative guidance does not carry the legal weight of court rulings or statutes enacted by Congress. “It isn’t shocking that guidance would be withdrawn,” he said. “It happens all the time across administrative units.” But McDonough said the administration’s action could have a “chilling effect” on colleges as they review their admission methods. “The message — but not the law — could be that if you take race into account or ethnicity into account as one of the several factors in your review process, you’re going to be challenged,” he said. Moriah Balingit and Valerie Strauss contributed.   
6 The Trump administration is moving to rescind Obama-era guidance to colleges and universities on how they can use race in admissions decisions to promote diversity, according to an administration official. The action, expected Tuesday afternoon, is likely to signal a push to emphasize admissions that are race-blind. The Supreme Court has upheld race-conscious admission practices as recently as 2016, but affirmative action in higher education remains a contentious issue. In 2011 and 2016, the Obama administration’s Justice and Education departments jointly spelled out for colleges their view of the law on the voluntary use of race in admissions. The 2011 statement said the departments “recognize the compelling interest that postsecondary institutions have in obtaining the benefits that flow from achieving a diverse student body.” It went on to assert that schools have flexibility “to take proactive steps, in a manner consistent with principles articulated in Supreme Court opinions, to meet this compelling interest.” The Obama-era documents replaced a 2008 letter on the subject from the Bush administration. Now it appears that the Trump administration is about to assert its own views. A Justice Department spokesman said an announcement was imminent. Opponents of affirmative action said they were heartened.          “It’s a very good development,” said Roger Clegg, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, based in Falls Church, Va. He said it was appropriate for the administration to ditch policies that had encouraged schools to weigh race and ethnicity in deciding where students would be assigned or admitted. “Students should be able to go to a school without regard to their skin color or what country their ancestors came from,” he said. But former Obama officials criticized the move. “Once again, the Trump administration works to create confusion where none exists, needlessly muddying civil rights practices in schools,” said Catherine E. Lhamon, assistant education secretary for civil rights under Obama. “The Supreme Court has been consistent over decades in its rulings on lawful use of race in affirmative action and the guidance the Trump administration rescinds today offered nothing more than a clear and practical statement of the law and how to comply with it. Taking away that guidance undermines the steps toward equity school communities have long been taking.” The policy shift, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, comes at a pivotal moment in the long-running affirmative action debate. The retirement of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who had been a swing vote in key rulings, will allow President Trump to name a successor who could tilt the outcome of future cases. In addition, Harvard University’s use of race in admissions has come under scrutiny in a federal lawsuit that alleges the school has discriminated against Asian Americans. Separately, the Justice Department is conducting its own civil rights investigation of Harvard admissions. The university denies wrongdoing and says its methods — weighing race and ethnicity as one factor among many in a review of an applicant’s background and credentials — conform to decades of settled law. Not all colleges use race in admissions. Some states, including California and Florida, prohibit public universities from considering race and ethnicity. In recent years, admissions deans also have put major emphasis on social, geographic and economic diversity. Some want more first-generation college students. Others are seeking to draw more women into science and engineering programs, or more men into humanities. But for many selective schools, public and private, race remains a factor as they seek to build incoming classes representative of a range of racial and ethnic backgrounds. These schools say racial diversity has a crucial role to play in the education of their students. That is why higher education leaders have argued to the Supreme Court that its precedents on affirmative action should be upheld. It remains to be seen what impact the Trump administration’s action will have on college practices. Peter McDonough, vice president and general counsel of the American Council on Education, which represents college and university presidents, said he doubted schools would change their admission policies based solely on the announcement. He noted that administrative guidance does not carry the legal weight of court rulings or statutes enacted by Congress. “It isn’t shocking that guidance would be withdrawn,” he said. “It happens all the time across administrative units.” But McDonough said the administration’s action could have a “chilling effect” on colleges as they review their admission methods. “The message — but not the law — could be that if you take race into account or ethnicity into account as one of the several factors in your review process, you’re going to be challenged,” he said. Moriah Balingit and Valerie Strauss contributed. 
7 by Nick Anderson July 3 at 4:00 PM Email the author  
8July 3 at 4:00 PM
9by Nick Anderson
10Nick Anderson
11Nick Anderson
12=====================================
13Article  1
14=====================================
15            by Anton Troianovski July 3 at 12:44 PM Email the author     MOSCOW — Republican members of Congress sounded a newly conciliatory tone in meetings with Russian lawmakers and officials here on Tuesday in a rare visit to Moscow and a preview of the looming summit between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.   Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.) told Russia’s foreign minister that while Russia and the United States were competitors, “we don’t necessarily need to be adversaries.” Later on at the State Duma, the lower house of parliament, members attending a plenary session greeted the Americans with applause. “I’m not here today to accuse Russia of this or that or so forth,” Shelby told Duma speaker Vyacheslav Volodin. “I’m saying that we should all strive for a better relationship.”  The Republicans’ meetings in Moscow — coming after the lawmakers visited St. Petersburg and took in the ballet “Sleeping Beauty” — helped set the tone for the July 16 Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki. Their Russian hosts said they hoped the Americans’ newfound willingness to meet marked a turning point after years of almost no direct contact between lawmakers in Washington and Moscow. Lawmakers on both sides said that the more than four hours of meetings covered a wide range of topics on which they continued to disagree but that they remained committed to renewed dialogue. The U.S. delegation, Russian lawmakers said, represented the most significant congressional visit to Russia after about a decade in which such visits were few and generally low-key. For more than a year, Russian officials have been voicing frustration that the improvement in U.S.-Russian ties that Trump promised in his presidential campaign had yet to materialize. With this week’s congressional trip, last week’s visit by White House national security adviser John Bolton and the upcoming Helsinki summit, Russians now hope that change is finally near.     Members of a U.S. congressional delegation, left, meet Tuesday with members of the Russian Federation Council in Moscow. (Yuri Kadobnov/AFP/Getty Images)  Among the Russians meeting with the Republicans on Tuesday was Sergey Kislyak — the former Russian ambassador to Washington whose communications with Michael Flynn led to the former national security adviser’s downfall. Kislyak, now a member of the upper house of parliament, noted in an interview after the meeting that many of the Republicans sitting across the table were already known to him from Washington.  “The main thing about all this is that our guests traveled here in order to talk,” Kislyak said. “This is probably good confirmation of a readiness to start a dialogue — something that we lacked for a long time.”  Participants offered conflicting accounts of the degree to which they aired U.S.-Russian disagreements. Sen. John Neely Kennedy (R-La.) described the meetings as “damn frank, very, very, very frank, no holds barred.”  “I asked our friends in Russia not to interfere in our elections this year,” Kennedy said. “I asked them to exit Ukraine and allow Ukraine to self-determine. I asked for the same thing in Crimea. I asked for their help in bringing peace to Syria. And I asked them not to allow Iran to gain a foothold in Syria.”  Duma member Vyacheslav Nikonov, on the other hand, said he had met with many American lawmakers in years past and that this meeting “was one of the easiest ones in my life.” The question of election interference, he said, was resolved quickly because “the question was raised in a general form.”  “One shouldn’t interfere in elections — well, we don’t interfere,” Nikonov said.  U.S. intelligence officials have stated unequivocally that they believe that Russian agents sought to influence the 2016 presidential election. Trump has continued to cast doubt on those conclusions. The American lawmakers discussed the upcoming Helsinki summit and other matters with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, his ministry said. At the meeting at the Federation Council — the upper house of parliament — Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Konstantin Kosachev raised Russia’s grievances about new American sanctions and the U.S. seizure of Russian diplomatic properties. While some members of the U.S. delegation speculated before the trip that they might see Putin himself, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Tuesday that the president had no time for the visitors.  “We are delighted by the fact that this visit is taking place and that intensive contacts are taking place in Moscow now,” Peskov said.  In December, two Republicans canceled a planned trip to Russia after Moscow denied a visa to Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.), an outspoken critic of Russia. This time, only Republicans were in attendance, including Sen. John Thune (S.D.), the third-ranking Republican in the Senate. The fact that the American delegation was not bipartisan was not lost on the Russians.  “Since the Democrats actively accuse the Republicans of selling out to the Russians, it would naturally be strange if Democrats here were part of the group,” Nikonov said.   Natalia Abbakumova contributed to this report.  Read more: Bolton: No one should have ‘a case of the vapors’ over Trump’s summit with Putin White House, Kremlin, agree on time and place for Trump-Putin summit After a year of Trump, Russians are still waiting for a thaw Today’s coverage from Post correspondents around the world Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign news    
16           by Anton Troianovski July 3 at 12:44 PM Email the author     MOSCOW — Republican members of Congress sounded a newly conciliatory tone in meetings with Russian lawmakers and officials here on Tuesday in a rare visit to Moscow and a preview of the looming summit between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.   Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.) told Russia’s foreign minister that while Russia and the United States were competitors, “we don’t necessarily need to be adversaries.” Later on at the State Duma, the lower house of parliament, members attending a plenary session greeted the Americans with applause. “I’m not here today to accuse Russia of this or that or so forth,” Shelby told Duma speaker Vyacheslav Volodin. “I’m saying that we should all strive for a better relationship.”  The Republicans’ meetings in Moscow — coming after the lawmakers visited St. Petersburg and took in the ballet “Sleeping Beauty” — helped set the tone for the July 16 Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki. Their Russian hosts said they hoped the Americans’ newfound willingness to meet marked a turning point after years of almost no direct contact between lawmakers in Washington and Moscow. Lawmakers on both sides said that the more than four hours of meetings covered a wide range of topics on which they continued to disagree but that they remained committed to renewed dialogue. The U.S. delegation, Russian lawmakers said, represented the most significant congressional visit to Russia after about a decade in which such visits were few and generally low-key. For more than a year, Russian officials have been voicing frustration that the improvement in U.S.-Russian ties that Trump promised in his presidential campaign had yet to materialize. With this week’s congressional trip, last week’s visit by White House national security adviser John Bolton and the upcoming Helsinki summit, Russians now hope that change is finally near.     Members of a U.S. congressional delegation, left, meet Tuesday with members of the Russian Federation Council in Moscow. (Yuri Kadobnov/AFP/Getty Images)  Among the Russians meeting with the Republicans on Tuesday was Sergey Kislyak — the former Russian ambassador to Washington whose communications with Michael Flynn led to the former national security adviser’s downfall. Kislyak, now a member of the upper house of parliament, noted in an interview after the meeting that many of the Republicans sitting across the table were already known to him from Washington.  “The main thing about all this is that our guests traveled here in order to talk,” Kislyak said. “This is probably good confirmation of a readiness to start a dialogue — something that we lacked for a long time.”  Participants offered conflicting accounts of the degree to which they aired U.S.-Russian disagreements. Sen. John Neely Kennedy (R-La.) described the meetings as “damn frank, very, very, very frank, no holds barred.”  “I asked our friends in Russia not to interfere in our elections this year,” Kennedy said. “I asked them to exit Ukraine and allow Ukraine to self-determine. I asked for the same thing in Crimea. I asked for their help in bringing peace to Syria. And I asked them not to allow Iran to gain a foothold in Syria.”  Duma member Vyacheslav Nikonov, on the other hand, said he had met with many American lawmakers in years past and that this meeting “was one of the easiest ones in my life.” The question of election interference, he said, was resolved quickly because “the question was raised in a general form.”  “One shouldn’t interfere in elections — well, we don’t interfere,” Nikonov said.  U.S. intelligence officials have stated unequivocally that they believe that Russian agents sought to influence the 2016 presidential election. Trump has continued to cast doubt on those conclusions. The American lawmakers discussed the upcoming Helsinki summit and other matters with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, his ministry said. At the meeting at the Federation Council — the upper house of parliament — Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Konstantin Kosachev raised Russia’s grievances about new American sanctions and the U.S. seizure of Russian diplomatic properties. While some members of the U.S. delegation speculated before the trip that they might see Putin himself, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Tuesday that the president had no time for the visitors.  “We are delighted by the fact that this visit is taking place and that intensive contacts are taking place in Moscow now,” Peskov said.  In December, two Republicans canceled a planned trip to Russia after Moscow denied a visa to Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.), an outspoken critic of Russia. This time, only Republicans were in attendance, including Sen. John Thune (S.D.), the third-ranking Republican in the Senate. The fact that the American delegation was not bipartisan was not lost on the Russians.  “Since the Democrats actively accuse the Republicans of selling out to the Russians, it would naturally be strange if Democrats here were part of the group,” Nikonov said.   Natalia Abbakumova contributed to this report.  Read more: Bolton: No one should have ‘a case of the vapors’ over Trump’s summit with Putin White House, Kremlin, agree on time and place for Trump-Putin summit After a year of Trump, Russians are still waiting for a thaw Today’s coverage from Post correspondents around the world Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign news   
17  MOSCOW — Republican members of Congress sounded a newly conciliatory tone in meetings with Russian lawmakers and officials here on Tuesday in a rare visit to Moscow and a preview of the looming summit between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.   Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.) told Russia’s foreign minister that while Russia and the United States were competitors, “we don’t necessarily need to be adversaries.” Later on at the State Duma, the lower house of parliament, members attending a plenary session greeted the Americans with applause. “I’m not here today to accuse Russia of this or that or so forth,” Shelby told Duma speaker Vyacheslav Volodin. “I’m saying that we should all strive for a better relationship.”  The Republicans’ meetings in Moscow — coming after the lawmakers visited St. Petersburg and took in the ballet “Sleeping Beauty” — helped set the tone for the July 16 Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki. Their Russian hosts said they hoped the Americans’ newfound willingness to meet marked a turning point after years of almost no direct contact between lawmakers in Washington and Moscow. Lawmakers on both sides said that the more than four hours of meetings covered a wide range of topics on which they continued to disagree but that they remained committed to renewed dialogue. The U.S. delegation, Russian lawmakers said, represented the most significant congressional visit to Russia after about a decade in which such visits were few and generally low-key. For more than a year, Russian officials have been voicing frustration that the improvement in U.S.-Russian ties that Trump promised in his presidential campaign had yet to materialize. With this week’s congressional trip, last week’s visit by White House national security adviser John Bolton and the upcoming Helsinki summit, Russians now hope that change is finally near.     Members of a U.S. congressional delegation, left, meet Tuesday with members of the Russian Federation Council in Moscow. (Yuri Kadobnov/AFP/Getty Images)  Among the Russians meeting with the Republicans on Tuesday was Sergey Kislyak — the former Russian ambassador to Washington whose communications with Michael Flynn led to the former national security adviser’s downfall. Kislyak, now a member of the upper house of parliament, noted in an interview after the meeting that many of the Republicans sitting across the table were already known to him from Washington.  “The main thing about all this is that our guests traveled here in order to talk,” Kislyak said. “This is probably good confirmation of a readiness to start a dialogue — something that we lacked for a long time.”  Participants offered conflicting accounts of the degree to which they aired U.S.-Russian disagreements. Sen. John Neely Kennedy (R-La.) described the meetings as “damn frank, very, very, very frank, no holds barred.”  “I asked our friends in Russia not to interfere in our elections this year,” Kennedy said. “I asked them to exit Ukraine and allow Ukraine to self-determine. I asked for the same thing in Crimea. I asked for their help in bringing peace to Syria. And I asked them not to allow Iran to gain a foothold in Syria.”  Duma member Vyacheslav Nikonov, on the other hand, said he had met with many American lawmakers in years past and that this meeting “was one of the easiest ones in my life.” The question of election interference, he said, was resolved quickly because “the question was raised in a general form.”  “One shouldn’t interfere in elections — well, we don’t interfere,” Nikonov said.  U.S. intelligence officials have stated unequivocally that they believe that Russian agents sought to influence the 2016 presidential election. Trump has continued to cast doubt on those conclusions. The American lawmakers discussed the upcoming Helsinki summit and other matters with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, his ministry said. At the meeting at the Federation Council — the upper house of parliament — Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Konstantin Kosachev raised Russia’s grievances about new American sanctions and the U.S. seizure of Russian diplomatic properties. While some members of the U.S. delegation speculated before the trip that they might see Putin himself, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Tuesday that the president had no time for the visitors.  “We are delighted by the fact that this visit is taking place and that intensive contacts are taking place in Moscow now,” Peskov said.  In December, two Republicans canceled a planned trip to Russia after Moscow denied a visa to Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.), an outspoken critic of Russia. This time, only Republicans were in attendance, including Sen. John Thune (S.D.), the third-ranking Republican in the Senate. The fact that the American delegation was not bipartisan was not lost on the Russians.  “Since the Democrats actively accuse the Republicans of selling out to the Russians, it would naturally be strange if Democrats here were part of the group,” Nikonov said.   Natalia Abbakumova contributed to this report.  Read more: Bolton: No one should have ‘a case of the vapors’ over Trump’s summit with Putin White House, Kremlin, agree on time and place for Trump-Putin summit After a year of Trump, Russians are still waiting for a thaw Today’s coverage from Post correspondents around the world Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign news 
18 by Anton Troianovski July 3 at 12:44 PM Email the author  
19July 3 at 12:44 PM
20by Anton Troianovski
21Anton Troianovski
22Anton Troianovski
23=====================================
24Article  2
25=====================================
26   by David Nakamura July 1 Email the author             BRIDGEWATER, N.J. — National security adviser John Bolton on Sunday defended President Trump's decision to hold a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki this month as a way to get beyond the “political noise” that has consumed Washington over the ongoing investigation of Russian election interference. Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Bolton said the summit would be “somewhat unstructured,” especially during the leaders' one-on-one time, to avoid “the pressure of immediate deadlines or crises.” “He wants to understand the Russian position, but, more importantly, he wants Putin to understand our position,” Bolton said. “Let them discuss these issues and see exactly where there might be room for progress or where we find there is no room at all.” [Trump hopes he and Putin will get along. Russia experts worry they will.] Trump is scheduled to meet with Putin on July 16, several days after he stops in Brussels for a NATO summit. The president has been critical of NATO, suggesting other member nations do not contribute enough to the alliance and the United States carries too much of the burden. Bolton dismissed a question about whether Trump has been more willing to criticize U.S. allies than authoritarian leaders of rival nations, including Putin and North Korea's Kim Jong Un. Trump feuded with Group of Seven leaders during a summit in Canada last month over trade, abruptly dropping support for a routine joint statement. The president also suggested Russia, which was kicked out of the group after it annexed Crimea in 2014, be invited back into the organization. “I don't read the way he conducted these meetings the same way,” Bolton told “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace. “I don't think anybody ought to have a case of the vapors over discussions we have in NATO or the G-7 versus discussions we have with Putin or Kim Jong Un. They're very, very different; the president treats them differently. He understands what the strategic interests are, and that's what he's trying to pursue.” Although U.S. intelligence officials have stated unequivocally that Russian agents sought to influence the 2016 presidential election, Trump has continued to cast doubt on those conclusions. Last summer, during his first one-on-one meeting with Putin, in Hamburg, Trump said that he questioned him about the interference accusations and that the Russian leader denied it. Last week, Trump suggested in a tweet that he believed Putin's denials.   Russia continues to say they had nothing to do with Meddling in our Election! Where is the DNC Server, and why didn’t Shady James Comey and the now disgraced FBI agents take and closely examine it? Why isn’t Hillary/Russia being looked at? So many questions, so much corruption!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 28, 2018    Bolton, who before joining the White House said on television that Putin lied to Trump, said he hasn't changed his mind about Russia's involvement. In a meeting last week to plan the summit, Bolton said, Putin told him that “there was no meddling in the 2016 election by the Russian state. So I think it still raises the question. I think the president will have a conversation about this and say, 'We don't want to see meddling in the 2018 election.'” Bolton added: “It's something we're concerned about. That's why the president is going to talk to him about it again.” [After ‘diplomatic equivalent of a multiple-car pileup,’ U.S. allies brace for NATO summit] But in an interview that aired Sunday on Fox News, Trump did not answer a question from Maria Bartiromo, host of “Sunday Morning Futures,” about whether he would confront Putin over the interference allegations. Instead, Trump reiterated his attacks on Hillary Clinton for using a private email server when she was secretary of state. Of the ongoing investigation from special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, Trump said: “If Russia was looking to sow discord or chaos, they’ve got to be saying, 'This is the greatest thing we’ve ever done.' There was no collusion with me. Honestly, it’s a disgrace.” In a separate interview on CBS's “Face the Nation,” Bolton also attempted to add new context to Trump's remarks to reporters on Air Force One last week that appeared to raise the possibility that his administration would formally recognize Russia's annexation of Crimea. “We're going to have to see,” Trump said. Bolton ruled out such a possibility. “That's not the position of the United States,” he said. “I think the president often says we'll see to show that he's willing to talk to foreign leaders about a range of issues and hear their perspective. President Putin was pretty clear with me about it and my response was we're going to have to agree to disagree on Ukraine.” On reports that U.S. intelligence agencies believe North Korea has sought to conceal its nuclear program just weeks after Trump and Kim met in Singapore to talk about disarmament, Bolton insisted that “there's nobody involved in this discussion with North Korea in the administration who is overburdened by naivete. We've seen how the North Koreans have behaved before. … We're going to pursue this, and we'll see what happens.” Bolton, who previously served in the George W. Bush administration, has long been skeptical that Pyongyang would give up its nuclear program, prompting North Korea's state media to denounce him as “human scum.” During the Singapore summit, however, “Kim Jong Un said to me: The two of us have to get a picture together. I want to take it home to show my hard-liners that you're not such a bad guy,” Bolton said. Wallace asked Bolton how he felt about that? “Wonderful,” Bolton replied.    
27  by David Nakamura July 1 Email the author             BRIDGEWATER, N.J. — National security adviser John Bolton on Sunday defended President Trump's decision to hold a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki this month as a way to get beyond the “political noise” that has consumed Washington over the ongoing investigation of Russian election interference. Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Bolton said the summit would be “somewhat unstructured,” especially during the leaders' one-on-one time, to avoid “the pressure of immediate deadlines or crises.” “He wants to understand the Russian position, but, more importantly, he wants Putin to understand our position,” Bolton said. “Let them discuss these issues and see exactly where there might be room for progress or where we find there is no room at all.” [Trump hopes he and Putin will get along. Russia experts worry they will.] Trump is scheduled to meet with Putin on July 16, several days after he stops in Brussels for a NATO summit. The president has been critical of NATO, suggesting other member nations do not contribute enough to the alliance and the United States carries too much of the burden. Bolton dismissed a question about whether Trump has been more willing to criticize U.S. allies than authoritarian leaders of rival nations, including Putin and North Korea's Kim Jong Un. Trump feuded with Group of Seven leaders during a summit in Canada last month over trade, abruptly dropping support for a routine joint statement. The president also suggested Russia, which was kicked out of the group after it annexed Crimea in 2014, be invited back into the organization. “I don't read the way he conducted these meetings the same way,” Bolton told “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace. “I don't think anybody ought to have a case of the vapors over discussions we have in NATO or the G-7 versus discussions we have with Putin or Kim Jong Un. They're very, very different; the president treats them differently. He understands what the strategic interests are, and that's what he's trying to pursue.” Although U.S. intelligence officials have stated unequivocally that Russian agents sought to influence the 2016 presidential election, Trump has continued to cast doubt on those conclusions. Last summer, during his first one-on-one meeting with Putin, in Hamburg, Trump said that he questioned him about the interference accusations and that the Russian leader denied it. Last week, Trump suggested in a tweet that he believed Putin's denials.   Russia continues to say they had nothing to do with Meddling in our Election! Where is the DNC Server, and why didn’t Shady James Comey and the now disgraced FBI agents take and closely examine it? Why isn’t Hillary/Russia being looked at? So many questions, so much corruption!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 28, 2018    Bolton, who before joining the White House said on television that Putin lied to Trump, said he hasn't changed his mind about Russia's involvement. In a meeting last week to plan the summit, Bolton said, Putin told him that “there was no meddling in the 2016 election by the Russian state. So I think it still raises the question. I think the president will have a conversation about this and say, 'We don't want to see meddling in the 2018 election.'” Bolton added: “It's something we're concerned about. That's why the president is going to talk to him about it again.” [After ‘diplomatic equivalent of a multiple-car pileup,’ U.S. allies brace for NATO summit] But in an interview that aired Sunday on Fox News, Trump did not answer a question from Maria Bartiromo, host of “Sunday Morning Futures,” about whether he would confront Putin over the interference allegations. Instead, Trump reiterated his attacks on Hillary Clinton for using a private email server when she was secretary of state. Of the ongoing investigation from special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, Trump said: “If Russia was looking to sow discord or chaos, they’ve got to be saying, 'This is the greatest thing we’ve ever done.' There was no collusion with me. Honestly, it’s a disgrace.” In a separate interview on CBS's “Face the Nation,” Bolton also attempted to add new context to Trump's remarks to reporters on Air Force One last week that appeared to raise the possibility that his administration would formally recognize Russia's annexation of Crimea. “We're going to have to see,” Trump said. Bolton ruled out such a possibility. “That's not the position of the United States,” he said. “I think the president often says we'll see to show that he's willing to talk to foreign leaders about a range of issues and hear their perspective. President Putin was pretty clear with me about it and my response was we're going to have to agree to disagree on Ukraine.” On reports that U.S. intelligence agencies believe North Korea has sought to conceal its nuclear program just weeks after Trump and Kim met in Singapore to talk about disarmament, Bolton insisted that “there's nobody involved in this discussion with North Korea in the administration who is overburdened by naivete. We've seen how the North Koreans have behaved before. … We're going to pursue this, and we'll see what happens.” Bolton, who previously served in the George W. Bush administration, has long been skeptical that Pyongyang would give up its nuclear program, prompting North Korea's state media to denounce him as “human scum.” During the Singapore summit, however, “Kim Jong Un said to me: The two of us have to get a picture together. I want to take it home to show my hard-liners that you're not such a bad guy,” Bolton said. Wallace asked Bolton how he felt about that? “Wonderful,” Bolton replied.   
28          BRIDGEWATER, N.J. — National security adviser John Bolton on Sunday defended President Trump's decision to hold a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki this month as a way to get beyond the “political noise” that has consumed Washington over the ongoing investigation of Russian election interference. Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Bolton said the summit would be “somewhat unstructured,” especially during the leaders' one-on-one time, to avoid “the pressure of immediate deadlines or crises.” “He wants to understand the Russian position, but, more importantly, he wants Putin to understand our position,” Bolton said. “Let them discuss these issues and see exactly where there might be room for progress or where we find there is no room at all.” [Trump hopes he and Putin will get along. Russia experts worry they will.] Trump is scheduled to meet with Putin on July 16, several days after he stops in Brussels for a NATO summit. The president has been critical of NATO, suggesting other member nations do not contribute enough to the alliance and the United States carries too much of the burden. Bolton dismissed a question about whether Trump has been more willing to criticize U.S. allies than authoritarian leaders of rival nations, including Putin and North Korea's Kim Jong Un. Trump feuded with Group of Seven leaders during a summit in Canada last month over trade, abruptly dropping support for a routine joint statement. The president also suggested Russia, which was kicked out of the group after it annexed Crimea in 2014, be invited back into the organization. “I don't read the way he conducted these meetings the same way,” Bolton told “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace. “I don't think anybody ought to have a case of the vapors over discussions we have in NATO or the G-7 versus discussions we have with Putin or Kim Jong Un. They're very, very different; the president treats them differently. He understands what the strategic interests are, and that's what he's trying to pursue.” Although U.S. intelligence officials have stated unequivocally that Russian agents sought to influence the 2016 presidential election, Trump has continued to cast doubt on those conclusions. Last summer, during his first one-on-one meeting with Putin, in Hamburg, Trump said that he questioned him about the interference accusations and that the Russian leader denied it. Last week, Trump suggested in a tweet that he believed Putin's denials.   Russia continues to say they had nothing to do with Meddling in our Election! Where is the DNC Server, and why didn’t Shady James Comey and the now disgraced FBI agents take and closely examine it? Why isn’t Hillary/Russia being looked at? So many questions, so much corruption!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 28, 2018    Bolton, who before joining the White House said on television that Putin lied to Trump, said he hasn't changed his mind about Russia's involvement. In a meeting last week to plan the summit, Bolton said, Putin told him that “there was no meddling in the 2016 election by the Russian state. So I think it still raises the question. I think the president will have a conversation about this and say, 'We don't want to see meddling in the 2018 election.'” Bolton added: “It's something we're concerned about. That's why the president is going to talk to him about it again.” [After ‘diplomatic equivalent of a multiple-car pileup,’ U.S. allies brace for NATO summit] But in an interview that aired Sunday on Fox News, Trump did not answer a question from Maria Bartiromo, host of “Sunday Morning Futures,” about whether he would confront Putin over the interference allegations. Instead, Trump reiterated his attacks on Hillary Clinton for using a private email server when she was secretary of state. Of the ongoing investigation from special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, Trump said: “If Russia was looking to sow discord or chaos, they’ve got to be saying, 'This is the greatest thing we’ve ever done.' There was no collusion with me. Honestly, it’s a disgrace.” In a separate interview on CBS's “Face the Nation,” Bolton also attempted to add new context to Trump's remarks to reporters on Air Force One last week that appeared to raise the possibility that his administration would formally recognize Russia's annexation of Crimea. “We're going to have to see,” Trump said. Bolton ruled out such a possibility. “That's not the position of the United States,” he said. “I think the president often says we'll see to show that he's willing to talk to foreign leaders about a range of issues and hear their perspective. President Putin was pretty clear with me about it and my response was we're going to have to agree to disagree on Ukraine.” On reports that U.S. intelligence agencies believe North Korea has sought to conceal its nuclear program just weeks after Trump and Kim met in Singapore to talk about disarmament, Bolton insisted that “there's nobody involved in this discussion with North Korea in the administration who is overburdened by naivete. We've seen how the North Koreans have behaved before. … We're going to pursue this, and we'll see what happens.” Bolton, who previously served in the George W. Bush administration, has long been skeptical that Pyongyang would give up its nuclear program, prompting North Korea's state media to denounce him as “human scum.” During the Singapore summit, however, “Kim Jong Un said to me: The two of us have to get a picture together. I want to take it home to show my hard-liners that you're not such a bad guy,” Bolton said. Wallace asked Bolton how he felt about that? “Wonderful,” Bolton replied. 
29 by David Nakamura July 1 Email the author  
30July 1
31by David Nakamura
32David Nakamura
33David Nakamura
34=====================================
35
36Process finished with exit code 0