International Tucker Carlson in Russia to interview Vladimir Putin UPDATE - Also Dugin

[Chad R. Thundercock]

What did you think of the 2014 western backed coup in Ukraine that removed Yanuvich from office?

He was ousted by his own Parliament.

 

[MT7]

@Siver!

Ask and you shall receive:

Partial credit to @Videer for square ideas

Play here: https://bingobaker.com/#65c2cb553b4ed902

This is brilliant.

 

[44nutman]

Now do Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein as filthy rich stock genius'

Lol comparing them to a guy stealing billions from his country, what a fucking leap. Even from a partisan shill, that leap made my jaw drop. Well done.
Pelosi and Feinstein are bad, but you left out MTG and Coach Tommy Tubberville. Coach likes to rail on China all the time but owns a shit load of Chinese stocks.
MTG likes to play the culture war but owns Disney stock. One thing the left and right can agree on is using inside information to make money off the stock market. There is a reason why they will never pass a bill to not be able to buy stocks, too many of them are in on it.

They must make fun of smooth brain Susie Lee, that the fact with inside information, she still lost fucking money.

 

[Squarechoke]

Are you trying to say that duck is surrounding the road?

 

[irish_thug]

Now do Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein as filthy rich stock genius'

Same

 

[Copper Burner]

He was ousted by his own Parliament.

Why are you answering another man's question? He says he is from Russia, lived there his whole life so i want to hear from him.

If I want an answer from an ignorant uneducated person I will ask you next time.

 

[44nutman]

Are you trying to say that duck is surrounding the road?

No that is Putin's actual height. What a tiny little man.

 

[Spounman]

Coach Tommy Tubberville. Coach likes to rail on China all the time but owns a shit load of Chinese stocks.

You can include Republicans as corrupt too. I don't like 99% of the politicians out there

 

[Copper Burner]

Are you trying to say that duck is surrounding the road?

No, you were ranting earlier in the thread about Russia annexing Crimea. I asked if you remember the time period surrounding that decision and you did not answer.

 

[Chad R. Thundercock]

Why are you answering another man's question? He says he is from Russia, lived there his whole life so i want to hear from him.

If I want an answer from an ignorant uneducated person I will ask you next time.

Listen here, holmes. I'll be damned if I were to be called an ignorant, uneducated person from a Flat Earther like you.

 

[44nutman]

Tommy Tubberville is a US Senator that used to be Auburns football coach. Hence Coach Tubberville. Also he trades a shit load of stocks.

 

[irish_thug]

No that is Putin's actual height. What a tiny little man.

I may not have agreed with Obama's policies on some things, but at least he's the correct height for a leader.

 

[SandisLL]

I speak Russian, lived in Russia, my wife is from Russia, I have friends in Russia, I have family in Russia, and I've watched Russian media most of my life. When you keep up with Russian politics (which 99.9% of Americans do not), it becomes even clearer how wrong the invasion of Ukraine was. A lot of contradictions, lies, and slip ups from Russian politicians (including Putin) and propagondoni is not translated for American audiences.

Where are you from and what do you even know about Russian politics?

They will not care. Especially about reality that Zelensky had almost 0 chances to be re elected and Ukr had really 0 chances to be accepted in EU or NATO during next years...if Russia didn't had invaded...

They will not even bother to read EU, IMF, EBRD, IBRD and WB reccomendations for Ukr in english, not alone something else more here.

 

[Spounman]

Tommy Tubberville is a US Senator that used to be Auburns football coach. Hence Coach Tubberville. Also he trades a shit load of stocks.

I had no idea. Sounds like a made up cartoon name

 

[Squarechoke]

No, you were ranting earlier in the thread about Russia annexing Crimea. I asked if you remember the time period surrounding that decision and you did not answer.

I haven't mentioned Crimea a single time, which is simple to get as I've been talking about the current war.

You have either not responded, or responded solely by changing the subject, to several of my posts so I don't know why you're crying about it. Maybe you feel I'm surrounding you? Or maybe you feel like me calling you out means that I'm forbidding you to speak your native language?

 

[LMP]

I may not have agreed with Obama's policies on some things, but at least he's the correct height for a leader.

Even with his lifts Putin is tiny.

 

[Swiftie]

I hope they find drugs on Tucker at the airport.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

This is brilliant.

Since you are from the area..can you explain a little about the following:

2004 and 2010 amendments and 2014 return to 2004 amendments[edit]​

Further information: Imperative mandate (provision in the Constitution of Ukraine)
On 8 December 2004, the parliament passed Law No. 2222-IV amending the constitution.[8] The law was approved with a 90 percent majority (402 voted in favour and 21 against, with 19 abstentions; 300 in favour required for passage) simultaneously with other legislative measures aimed at resolving the 2004 presidential election crisis. It was signed almost immediately in the parliamentary chamber by the outgoing President Leonid Kuchma and promulgated on the same day. These amendments weakened the power of the President of Ukraine, who lost the power to nominate the Prime Minister of Ukraine, which became the task of the parliament solely. The President could only appoint the Minister of Defence and Foreign Minister. The President also lost the right to dismiss members of the Cabinet of Ukraine, but gained the right to dissolve Parliament.[9] If no coalition in parliament could be formed to appoint a Prime Minister, the President would have no choice but to call new parliamentary elections.[10] The 2004 constitutional amendments were passed in the Parliament only with limited consultation and discussion between political forces, in the context of the Orange Revolution. They therefore attracted criticism from several internal (Ukrainian political parties) and external bodies (the Council of Europe, the European Parliament and the Venice Commission).[11]

The amendments took force unconditionally on 1 January 2006.[10] The remaining amendments took force on 25 May 2006, when the new parliament assembled after the 2006 elections. On 1 October 2010, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine overturned the 2004 amendments, considering them unconstitutional.[12][13] The Court had started to consider the case on the political reform in 2004 under a motion from 252 coalition lawmakers regarding the constitutionality of this reform of 14 July 2010.[14][15][16] The 2010 nullification decision was highly controversial. The Council of Europe's Human Rights Commissioner received several reports alleging that the resignation of four judges in the run-up to the decision occurred as a result of extensive pressure by the executive.[17] On 18 November 2010, the Venice Commission published its report titled The Opinion of the Constitutional Situation in Ukraine in Review of the Judgement of Ukraine's Constitutional Court, in which it stated: "It also considers highly unusual that far-reaching constitutional amendments, including the change of the political system of the country – from a parliamentary system to a parliamentary presidential one – are declared unconstitutional by a decision of the Constitutional Court after a period of 6 years. ... As Constitutional Courts are bound by the Constitution and do not stand above it, such decisions raise important questions of democratic legitimacy and the rule of law".[18]

On 21 February 2014, the parliament passed a law that reinstated the 8 December 2004 amendments of the constitution. This was passed under a simplified procedure, without any decision of the relevant committee[clarify], and was passed in the first and the second reading in one vote by 386 deputies. The law was approved by 140 MPs of the Party of Regions, 89 MPs of Batkivshchyna, 40 MPs of UDAR, 32 of the Communist Party, and 50 independent lawmakers.[19] According to Radio Free Europe, the measure was not signed by the then-President Viktor Yanukovych, who was subsequently removed from office.[20] The reinstatement of these amendments was adopted according to the 2014 Agreement on Settlement of Political Crisis in Ukraine. This was followed shortly thereafter by the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation and the 2014 Russian military intervention in Ukraine.

 

[MT7]

What did you think of the 2014 western backed coup in Ukraine that removed Yanuvich from office?

Luckily for you, I can give you a straight answer, considering I was born in Ukraine, lived in Ukraine, have friends in Ukraine, have family in Ukraine, kinda understand Ukrainian (admittedly, need to work on that part), and watch Ukrainian media.

For roughly 70 years, Ukraine was forcibly under the Soviet umbrella where Ukrainian language, culture, and identity were suppressed. Once the Soviet Union fell apart, slowly but surely, Ukraine begin to take a different course. Russia's horrible treatment of Ukrainians played a big part, just like it did with the rest of the European ex-Soviet states (except for occupied Belarus and Serbia). Or you think they want nothing to do with Russia because the EviL weST!!! told them to? This is what the people wanted, they wanted to live like people in the West, because it is better. More rights, better salaries, better quality of life, etc etc. I could talk about this for hours.

Point being, even when I lived in Russia before all this crap happened, I saw Russians trying to live like people in the West, too. Almost everything was copied from the West and many people wanted to either visit or live in the West. So why would it surprise you that Ukrainians, especially, would pick the Western way of life? Especially after being subject to repressions, genocides, etc throughout history? Even during the days of the Russian Empire, Russia meddled in Ukraine's affairs and attempted to destroy their culture, language, and identity. After the Orange Revolution, nationalism and patriotism increased in Ukraine even more, and the more Russia continued to meddle in the affairs of Ukraine, the more the regular people got angry at Russia (mostly just the government at that time). If you have any doubts, I can take you to Ukraine and we can walk around any random unoccupied city in Ukraine and you can ask them for yourself.

Now, let's talk 2014. Or better yet, 2013. I'm sure you already know that Yanukovych had the choice of pursuing stronger ties with Europe or with Russia. And I'm sure you already what he chose. What you probably don't know is that it's not what most of the people of Ukraine wanted. So they took matters in their own hands and overthrew the government, the good ole' American way (seriously, Ukrainians have been living out the wet dream of American Conservatives for the past 10 years, how could you possibly oppose this?) And as soon as they did, video and satelight footage IMMEDIATELY emerged of Russian military tech moving towards Ukraine. And that is when the TRUE war began.

Russia was able to get as far as it did because there were brainwashed Ukrainians who their agents paid and brainwashed. Or do you think that when the Soviet Union fell apart, Russian agents all got on planes and just went back to Russia? All those countries had their governments (and pretty much everything else) infiltrated for 70 years, you think things would instantly change the moment the Soviet Union fell apart? The ethnic Russians living in Ukraine and the pro-Russian Ukrainians were given Russian passports and could've EASILY just moved to Russia and lived there if they liked it so much. Instead, they chose to rip a chunk out of Ukraine and offer it to Russia. Does that make you wonder? What if Texas chose to become a part of Mexico, how would you want the government to react? Ukraine had no reason to bomb itself and mostly avoided doing so, but war is war, and once crap hits the fan, it gets ugly. Civilians WILL get bombed by both sides. But even then, listen to Russian propaganda talk about "Donetsk getting bombed for 8 whole years by Ukrainians" and look at photos of the city now. It's not in good shape, but it's there. Then take a look at Grozny, Chechnya, which was bombed by Russians. How often does Russian propaganda talk about how horrible it was that Grozny got nearly wiped off the face of the earth. Don't believe me? Look at the photos. Why do you think they talk about Donetsk but not Grozny?

And now, let's fast forward to 2022. Where Putin (after previously saying many times that he would never attack Ukraine) decided to invade because UKrainIan naZIs!!!! Tell me this, do you think Russia doesn't have any nazis? Or America? There are nazis everywhere, and there are no more of them in Ukraine than in Russia. Then he started finishing off what was left of opposition in Russia. Why doesn't Tucker interview Maxim Katz, the staff of Dozhd, Ilya Varlamov, the staff of Medusa, Novaya Gazeta (who, alone, had like 7 of their journalists murdered under Putin's regime)? Do you really think the man who murders or jails anyone opposes him (or even comes out with peace signs!) will allow Tucker to ask him any controversial questions? I don't even care about Tucker interviewing him, it's just interesting that people of you expect to hear anything that hasn't been spoon fed to Americans by Russian propaganda for years.

 

[MT7]

Since you are from the area..can you explain a little about the following:

2004 and 2010 amendments and 2014 return to 2004 amendments[edit]​

Further information: Imperative mandate (provision in the Constitution of Ukraine)
On 8 December 2004, the parliament passed Law No. 2222-IV amending the constitution.[8] The law was approved with a 90 percent majority (402 voted in favour and 21 against, with 19 abstentions; 300 in favour required for passage) simultaneously with other legislative measures aimed at resolving the 2004 presidential election crisis. It was signed almost immediately in the parliamentary chamber by the outgoing President Leonid Kuchma and promulgated on the same day. These amendments weakened the power of the President of Ukraine, who lost the power to nominate the Prime Minister of Ukraine, which became the task of the parliament solely. The President could only appoint the Minister of Defence and Foreign Minister. The President also lost the right to dismiss members of the Cabinet of Ukraine, but gained the right to dissolve Parliament.[9] If no coalition in parliament could be formed to appoint a Prime Minister, the President would have no choice but to call new parliamentary elections.[10] The 2004 constitutional amendments were passed in the Parliament only with limited consultation and discussion between political forces, in the context of the Orange Revolution. They therefore attracted criticism from several internal (Ukrainian political parties) and external bodies (the Council of Europe, the European Parliament and the Venice Commission).[11]

The amendments took force unconditionally on 1 January 2006.[10] The remaining amendments took force on 25 May 2006, when the new parliament assembled after the 2006 elections. On 1 October 2010, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine overturned the 2004 amendments, considering them unconstitutional.[12][13] The Court had started to consider the case on the political reform in 2004 under a motion from 252 coalition lawmakers regarding the constitutionality of this reform of 14 July 2010.[14][15][16] The 2010 nullification decision was highly controversial. The Council of Europe's Human Rights Commissioner received several reports alleging that the resignation of four judges in the run-up to the decision occurred as a result of extensive pressure by the executive.[17] On 18 November 2010, the Venice Commission published its report titled The Opinion of the Constitutional Situation in Ukraine in Review of the Judgement of Ukraine's Constitutional Court, in which it stated: "It also considers highly unusual that far-reaching constitutional amendments, including the change of the political system of the country – from a parliamentary system to a parliamentary presidential one – are declared unconstitutional by a decision of the Constitutional Court after a period of 6 years. ... As Constitutional Courts are bound by the Constitution and do not stand above it, such decisions raise important questions of democratic legitimacy and the rule of law".[18]

On 21 February 2014, the parliament passed a law that reinstated the 8 December 2004 amendments of the constitution. This was passed under a simplified procedure, without any decision of the relevant committee[clarify], and was passed in the first and the second reading in one vote by 386 deputies. The law was approved by 140 MPs of the Party of Regions, 89 MPs of Batkivshchyna, 40 MPs of UDAR, 32 of the Communist Party, and 50 independent lawmakers.[19] According to Radio Free Europe, the measure was not signed by the then-President Viktor Yanukovych, who was subsequently removed from office.[20] The reinstatement of these amendments was adopted according to the 2014 Agreement on Settlement of Political Crisis in Ukraine. This was followed shortly thereafter by the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation and the 2014 Russian military intervention in Ukraine.

Why didn't you mention the elections, the accusations of electoral fraud from Yanukovych's side (which in turn led to the Orange revolution), and the poisoning of Yushchenko? Or do you guys just want to discredit Ukraine? And that's easy, since being under the Soviet umbrella for 70 years (initially) made the government very similar to Russia's (and all the bad stuff that comes with that territory). Except unlike Russians, Ukrainians have been fighting it pretty much since the Soviet Union fell apart. I'm not going to pretend like Ukraine is some angel, the country was (and still is) very corrupt and there were plenty of human rights violations, etc (although the whole suppression of Russian language and culture was a nothingburger, my family in Ukraine all speak Russian even today and nobody bothers them). But, again, it's been changing. Progress has been made and will continue to be made. And Russia? They've done the opposite. In the 90's, for the first time in its entire history, its people could actually protest, criticize the government, etc. And where did that all go? Gone. The country is slowly drifting back to what it was when it was the Soviet Union, I won't be surprised if vouchers and long lines for bread and toilet paper make their return.