SEOUL, South Korea -- At the tail end of his 90 minute meeting with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev Monday, President Obama said that he would have "more flexibility" to deal with controversial issues such as missile defense, but incoming Russian President Vladimir Putin needs to give him "space."
This is why Champ has to go...
The exchange was picked up by microphones as reporters were let into the room for remarks by the two leaders. The exchange:
President Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it's important for him to give me space.
President Medvedev: Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you...
President Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.
President Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.
When asked to explain what President Obama meant, deputy national security adviser for strategic communications Ben Rhodes told ABC News that there is room for the U.S. and Russia to reach an accommodation, but "there is a lot of rhetoric around this issue -- there always is -- in both countries.
A senior administration official tells ABC News: "this is a political year in which the Russians just had an election, we're about to have a presidential and congressional elections -- this is not the kind of year in which we're going to resolve incredibly complicated issue like this. So there's an advantage to pulling back and letting the technical experts work on this as the president has been saying."
And then in 2013 he can bow to Vlad and give away our national defense.
Addendum at 11:50 CT: William Jacobson at the excellent Legal Insurrection puts this in terms that I find even more interesting: "Why does Obama feel the President of Russia is entitled to know more about Obama's plans than the American public?"
As Frank G said this is a BFD. The President is telling the Russians that he will be more willing to do something after the American people have judged his actions and determined he was worthy of re-election. What is it he would do that he must defer until after that judgement?
Obviously it is something that would be detrimental to his prospects of re-election, and hence cannot be considered beneficial to those whom he serves.
Gee, can you get any more clear evidence, out of his own mouth in an unguarded moment, of what a liar, and disingenuous man we have in the office?
Personally, I'm more interested in the Bammer inference that post-2016 OWG Mighty USSA = OWG Weak USRoA may still be dealing wid VLADVEDEV-IAN RUSSIA.
* "Detrimental to his re-election" > IOW, the state of the tote US Economy leading up to November.
No US-Iran ground war = Iran will get its Nukes = POTUS Obama will likely have to "Spend Spend Spend" on GMD-TMD during his second term + NOT make any serious compromise wid Russia. IFF ANYTHING, NUCLEAR IRAN + by extension poten NUCLEAR RADICAL ISLAM/TERROR = IT'LL BE RUSSIA WHOM ACCEDE TO THE US ARGUMENT.
nice thing about that, Pappy is the Filibuster. While he and the Dems haven't felt restrained in the past by constitutional limited powers, they would then. What I find extremely interesting is a "Pardon Pool". Perhaps I'll start one up. First on the list? Holder
Posted by: Frank G ||
Question is, if nobody brings charges against Holder until after Obama leaves office, can he still be pardoned ahead of time?