Thread: Russian Opposition Leader Alexei Navalny

^It's a "TACTICAL UNIT"...

Whooohoooo it seems even the Chinkies are fed up with the murdering, thieving c u n t.

China’s state publication, Global Times, published an analysis Thursday suggesting that Russians should reconsider granting President Vladimir Putin perpetual rule over their country, a query that may indicate some doubt regarding Putin’s rule in Chinese communist circles.

Chinese State Publication Questions Whether 'Russia Should Only Be Ruled by Putin'

Get off. The chinkies are fed up with him.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Are you retarded? What do you not understand about "he made the number up" you fucking simpleton? If you want to know whatever the real number is then get off your fat beetroot-munching arse and go fucking find out and try not to rape and/or murder any Muslim women on the way, there's a good chap.

Munching beetroot could lower your blood pressure.
https://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/superfoods/Pages/is-beetroot-a-superfood.aspx

mmm... isn't your mouth watering?


get your dibber out, odd lad...

Putin says Washington is trying to ‘promote’ Navalny into Russia's political leadership


Vladimir Putin told a gathering of journalists on Thursday that the U.S. government would like to see Alexey Navalny claim a leadership position in Russia.


Asked about the Central Election Commission’s rejection of Navalny’s presidential candidacy application and Washington’s reaction, Putin said, “That individual you mentioned [Navalny] — he’s not the only person whose candidacy wasn’t allowed. For some reason, they’re not talking about anyone else. This apparently speaks to the American administration’s preferences [...] and suggests whom they’d like to promote in Russia’s political sphere and whom they’d like to see in the country’s leadership.”


Following the federal election officials’ refusal to accept Navalny’s presidential candidacy application, a spokesperson for the U.S. State Department expressed concern about the Russian government’s measures against independent voices, including reporters, activists, and opposition politicians.
On December 25, federal election officials refused to register Alexey Navalny’s presidential candidacy nomination on the grounds that he is still serving a felony probation sentence. According to election laws, Navalny is ineligible for elected office until at least 2028.


Navalny is appealing the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the Central Election Commission’s rejection of his presidential candidacy application. If the court rules against Navalny again, the politician’s lawyers say he will take the matter to the European Court of Human Rights.

Throughout 2017, Navalny conducted a rigorous nationwide presidential campaign, traveling the country and opening campaign offices in dozens of cities. He financed the effort with donations from supporters and volunteer labor.

In 2016, the pro-Kremlin network TV program “Vesti Nedeli” aired a segment claiming that Navalny has cooperated with British and American intelligence agencies. Navalny challenged federal police to investigate his supposedly “subversive activities,” but no charges have been filed. Navalny tried to sue the television network for defamation, but his lawsuit was thrown out.


Russia’s next presidential election takes place on March 18, 2018, when Vladimir Putin is expected to win re-election easily.

https://meduza.io/en/news/2018/01/11...cal-leadership

Originally Posted by OhOh

Yet you sneer at Zerohedge.

You brought up the validity of particular types of "sources" so I assumed you had a method of determining the good ones and the bad ones. Seems I was wrong.

So you have no idea who is behind the place, funding it and deciding the editorial direction, but continue to post their propaganda. Any idea as to how many of their "professionally written and researched pieces of aggregated news" have been proven wrong/fictitious?

Should we assume all your "sources" are similarly possible fake news, regardless of type, blog, news aggregator or "respected" MSM ?

All wrong here. I do know who is behind Meduza. I’ve already checked them out. Every one of my sources I check.

Believe me, I read a couple of “crank” sites everyday, but wouldn’t dare post them to the board because they are crank/blog sites and mostly good for a giggle.

It’s up to you to prove my sources are not legit, but you are a lazy git and want me to do all the work to prove you are right. Really now.

Putin says Washington is trying to ‘promote’ Navalny into Russia's political leadership

and he is probably right. Stepping away from the lamestream media, KITT, you might have a look at who this nobody is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexei_Navalny

A Ukrainian. Studied under scholarship in the US of A. The scholarship was the Maurice R. Greenberg Yale World Fellows Program. Maurice R. Greenberg is the former chairman and CEO of American International Group - AIG. AIG works hand in hand with the CIA. (Henry Kissinger -- chair of AIG's international advisory committee after all). Same as Slick Willy being a Rhodes scholar (only the inherently evil and utterly corrupt can apply) you don't get onto the Yale World Fellows Program unless you are going to be useful to the CIA / Merkin Propaganda machine.

Every Election he has been in he has lost massively... because he is a nobody and clearly a western stooge. Russian public see this.... but flag wavers in the west prefer to believe the corporate and state owned western media.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

A Ukrainian.

No he ain’t. He is a Russian. Ethnic Ukrainian. Besides, you have something against Ukrainians?

You really stretch reality when you start putting Navalny in the same paragraph with CIA, Kissinger, and “Slick Willy” just because Navalny attended Yale. A trick for suckers or else your fantasies run wild again, pseudo.

As far as him being a nobody, then why would Putin even utter his name?

I’m glad Navalny is there to make old Puttie squirm a bit.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Every Election he has been in he has lost massively... because he is a nobody and clearly a western stooge. Russian public see this.... but flag wavers in the west prefer to believe the corporate and state owned western media.

Putin is shit scared of him not because of his own chances, but because he's a lightning rod for a people who are starting to realise that their leader is a murdering, thieving c u n t.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Putin is shit scared of him not because of his own chances, but because he's a lightning rod for a people who are starting to realise that their leader is a murdering, thieving c u n t.

Nah he's not scared at all because everyone in Russia knows hes a murdering thieving cvnt, but he is a Russian murdering thieving cvnt who is looking after Russias interests on the world stage. Russians have seen what western puppet leaders do to Russia in Boris, and won't risk another one. I bet the ukrainian western stooge is openly laughed at in russia.... despite being Washingtons big hope.

Lightening rod haha.

Originally Posted by misskit

Besides, you have something against Ukrainians?

been to the nativity again, Kit? YATS IS OUR GUY.

Originally Posted by misskit

You really stretch reality when you start putting Navalny in the same paragraph with CIA, Kissinger, and “Slick Willy” just because Navalny attended Yale.

Did you actually read what I wrote or did you filter it through your Old Glory spectacles which only show words that proclaim the USA as benevolent world police.

He's a no one. Same as that guy the merkins killed and then made a big song and dance about it pretending putin had done it.... a man with less than 0.05% of the popular vote being labelled "Office Opposition" in Politico Billionaires Bulletin board

Running a democracy isn't easy. But imagine how challenging it must be to imitate one! Sets must be constantly rearranged and political roles must be assigned. The lighting has to be perfect and everybody needs to know their lines. Most importantly, though, the script must be well thought out far into the future, because the performance has no end.


The way in which Russia elects its president is an example of this form of simulated democracy. Just recently, the Central Election Commission excluded Alexei Navalny, the only opposition politician who had run a serious campaign, from running in this year's election. The candidate, the commission noted, has a criminal record, which disqualifies him from challenging the incumbent, Vladimir Putin.

As is typical of imitated democracies, the decision to prohibit Navalny from running is formally correct. He does indeed have a criminal record. But the logic, in this case, is reversed: In order to prevent Navalny from running for office, he was convicted several years ago in a bizarre trial for alleged embezzlement, proceedings that were criticized by the European Court of Human Rights. Just as Russia has no separation of powers, it also lacks an independent judiciary -- with the upshot being that Putin will once again run against handpicked opponents in March.

The exclusion of Navalny marks the end of an interesting experiment. Navalny's daring plan was to act as a real politician in a simulated election campaign. Like a member of the audience who suddenly jumps onto the stage, he wanted to force his way into official Russian politics. He was the only one to run a campaign worthy of the name, with trips across the country filled with passionate appearances, a permanent staff and rallies. His calculation was that if the Kremlin were to exclude the only real challenger, it would expose the election charade as a fraud, a scenario the Russian leadership would surely like to avoid.


But the Kremlin took a different tack and prevented real politics from intruding on its simulated democracy. On a stage filled with fake props and actors posing as politicians, it is too dangerous to allow a real politician to be seen.
Imitated democracy is a complex political entity. It comes without free and fair elections, an independent parliament and an independent judiciary. But neither does it come with the mass mobilization and mass repression characteristic of dictatorships. Imitated democracy relies more on deception than on violence.

The best place to observe the day-to-day functioning of such a system is the Russian parliament. The Duma in Moscow is the set before which the rivalry of political ideas is emulated. It is subordinate to the Kremlin, yet plays a critical role in Russian power structures. Opposition, debates, arguments: It's all there, and it all looks like it could almost be real.


One of the advantages of imitated democracy is obvious: It is faster than real democracy. Indeed, the Duma set another speed record just recently. From one plenary session to the next, essentially over the weekend, it overhauled the country's treatment of foreign media. It began on a Friday in November. In a gray building located on Ochotny Rjad in the heart of the city, where the Soviet State Planning Committee once had its headquarters, Russian parliamentarians gathered for a plenary session.

An Aging Singer with a Toupee

It is a colorful group, one that includes the first woman to have traveled to space, a chess world champion and a heavyweight boxer, for whom an extra-wide chair has been installed. There's a polar explorer who planted a Russian flag on the floor of the Arctic Ocean beneath the North Pole and an aging singer with a toupee who is widely referred to as the Russian Frank Sinatra. And one shouldn't forget the man who poisoned the renegade FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko with polonium in London and was rewarded with a seat in the Duma for his efforts.
On that Friday in November, the mood in the plenary hall was agitated; the issue of the day was a dispute with Washington. The U.S. Department of Justice had just requested that Russian foreign broadcaster RT (formerly known as Russia Today) register as a foreign agent.

The lawmakers in the Duma were furious, with the body demanding that the attack on press freedoms be met with a "symmetric" reply. During the lunch break, that reply was agreed on by the floor leaders of the parties represented in the Duma and three workdays later, a completed draft law was passed by the parliament. There were no votes against the law. There were no abstentions. Attendance that day was 91 percent, with 411 of 450 lawmakers present.


Thanks to this new law, every foreign media outlet, including DER SPIEGEL, can be declared a "foreign agent." In its haste, however, the Duma neglected to clarify which agency can make such a designation, the criteria it will consider and the consequences for the media outlet in question.

The speed with which the law was passed, of course, is a consequence of the Duma not being what it claims to be. According to the Russian constitution, it has similar powers to France's National Assembly -- like France, Russia is a presidential republic. The reality, however, is that Russian lawmakers have little influence over the government and none at all over the president, who is elected directly by voters. The Kremlin controls the Duma much like a puppeteer animates his puppets.

The Duma hasn't always been this docile. In the 1990s, it threatened then-President Boris Yeltsin with impeachment, rejected his nominee for prime minister and made sweeping changes to the budget. The majorities in the body were thin and every third law that was passed was challenged by the upper house of parliament, the Federation Council. Those times, however, ended long ago. Under Putin, the Duma has become little more than a simulation of parliament.

Battered Reputation

Currently, though, Vyacheslav Volodin, who has been chairman of the Duma for the last year, is doing what he can to refurbish the lawmaking body's battered reputation. But he isn't doing so out of a desire to strengthen democracy in the country. Rather, he used to be a key member of the Kremlin administration, and the appointment to head the Duma is a demotion in present-day Russia. The ambitious Volodin is doing what he can to increase the influence of his new position, and the only way he can do that is to increase the influence of the Duma in its entirety.
Volodin brought an authoritarian leadership style with him when he transferred from the Kremlin to parliament. The first thing he sought to do was to eliminate the most ridiculous draft laws before they made it to the floor and to reduce the speed with which draft laws speed through the lawmaking body. Furthermore, Volodin has increased attendance in the plenary, threatening those who miss a session without an excuse with salary deduction of 60.000 rubles (870 euros).

Valery Rashkin, a parliamentarian representing the Communist Party, is disdainful of the new attendance requirement. "We're counting butt-hours," he says. "People say Volodin has finally given the Duma a face just because we are now all in the plenary. But whether you are there or not, it has no effect on the laws. Either way, it's just a United Russia assembly line," he adds, referring to Putin's political party.

And he's not wrong. The party occupies 343 of 450 seats in parliament, three times as many as all three opposition parties put together.
Rashkin is a prominent member of his party: He keeps a bust of Felix Dzerzhinsky, the founder of the Soviet secret police, in his office. When Rashkin was first elected to the Duma in 1999, shortly before the beginning of the Putin era, the Communist Party was still powerful and controlled the Duma chairmanship as the largest party in parliament.

Since then, however, it has all been downhill -- for both the Communists and parliamentary democracy. In 2010, a video was made public which showed a few representatives running through an empty plenary hall pushing voting buttons. The law in question was the zero-tolerance limit for driving under the influence. According to the electronic vote-counting device used in the Duma, 449 of 450 lawmakers had been present.
The situation further deteriorated during the 6th Duma, which got its start in 2011. At lightning speed, the Russian parliament passed repressive laws allowing the Kremlin to suppress anti-Putin protests. The opposition at the time had many more seats in the Duma than today, but the concept carries little meaning in Russia. The real opposition never even makes it into the Duma because they are not allowed to participate in elections or numerous hurdles are placed in their paths. It is almost impossible to establish a new party in Russia without the Kremlin's acquiescence -- as was demonstrated when Navalny supporters tried in vain to register a new party called the Progress Party.

An Absence of Real Political Debate

The opposition within the Duma, by contrast, is under de facto Kremlin control. That's true of all three opposition fractions: the Communist Party (42 seats), the nationalist LDPR led by Vladimir Zhirinovsky (40 seats) and the A Just Russia party (23 seats), which the Kremlin founded as a left-wing alternative to United Russia.

"There isn't a single real opposition lawmaker in the Duma anymore," says Dmitry Gudkov. The 37-year-old knows what he's talking about, too. He used to be a parliamentarian for A Just Russia before gettting thrown out of the fraction in 2013 for disobedience. He remained in parliament as a lone rebel until 2016, when he failed to get re-elected. Now, he's part of the "non-systemic opposition" and has to begin anew as a local politician in Moscow.

Gudkov misses several of his former Duma colleagues, but says that real political debate is virtually absent from the lawmaking body. "Those at the top aren't just afraid of a revolution, they are even afraid of lively discussion." And because the Kremlin keeps a tight leash on the opposition parties in parliament, controlling their access to television and approving their candidate lists, they are extremely tame.


The limits of acceptable behavior were on full display last April -- and it is hardly surprising that Alexei Navalny was involved, if only tangentially.
During the annual report provided to the Duma by Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev, the Communists dared to ask him about the corruption accusations Navalny had levelled against him in a YouTube video posted in March of last year.
Some 16 million Russians had seen the video, which focused on Medvedev's collection of villas and other properties. And it wasn't even really a complete question, more of a shyly mumbled utterance. But criticizing the prime minister is taboo, as is any positive mention of Navalny. The Duma chairman instantly rebuked the lawmaker.

The fact that anything at all happens on the plenary floor despite the tight controls is largely thanks to people like Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Imitated democracy, after all, requires an imitated opposition and Zhirinovsky is a gifted actor. He is constantly deluding people into thinking that real debate takes place in the Duma. But the fact of the matter is that he is absolutely loyal to the Kremlin, as his voting record proves.


"Next March, I will be moving into the Kremlin and then I will shoot and hang you, you reprobates and scoundrels," he once yelled from the podium, pointing his finger at United Russia lawmakers. Later, he insisted he didn't mean the insults personally. It was just like in the theater, he explained: When an actor insults the audience, nobody in the crowd feels insulted.


Zhirinovsky has a spacious corner office in parliament. Signs hanging on the walls point to an obsession with hygiene. "Please no hugs, handshakes or kisses."

When asked what exactly he is engaged in, opposition politics or theater acting, he says: "Of course we behave tactically ahead of votes. But we stand opposed to the government and to the president. We're a little bit like the flu. Do you want us to turn into tuberculosis?" The opposition as a contagious disease -- it's an interesting metaphor.

In June, a serious mishap occured on the stage of the Russian political theater -- one which provides an insight into the role played by the Duma.

Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin had developed a plan to tear down all of the five-story residential buildings erected from the 1950s to the 1970s and rehouse 1.5 million Muscovites in modern residential towers. The 47-billion-euro project was conceived as a gift to the electorate -- and to the construction lobby. The parliament was to quickly pass a law giving the mayor a free hand for resettlement and construction. But things turned out differently when furious apartment owners began protesting the attempt to expropriate them.

Nobody inside Russia's patriarchic bureaucracy had apparently foreseen such a reaction. In response, Duma Chairman Volodin invited a handpicked group of those affected by the plan to a "parliamentary hearing." Some of those opposed to the planned demolitions were also allowed to have their say and the mayor politely responded to them. The leaders of the protests, though, weren't allowed in, left instead to demonstrate outside.

The hearing was broadcast live on television and was the liveliest event that had taken place in the Duma for quite some time. It was like a successful theater production: It presented the Duma as a place where those in power listened to common citizens. Yet the opposite was true: If representatives of the people must be replaced by the people themselves before those in power are willing to listen, then something has gone badly wrong in a representational democracy.


The renovation law bore all the hallmarks of the construction lobby, which has joined forces with municipal housing companies to create one of the most powerful interest groups in Russian politics, says political scientist Yekaterina Schulman. "They don't care about elections. They don't think about Putin. They crush everybody who gets in their way."

Other interest groups -- retail, agriculture, defense or competing secret service agencies -- have their own representatives in parliament. For them, the Duma is more than just decoration. "It is reminiscent of the lobbyism practiced in democracies," Schulman says, "with one important distinction: Among the interests represented by parliamentarians, those of the voters themselves are missing." Everyone has a lobby -- except for the citizens of Russia.

Waking Up from a Slumber

The Duma is therefore best imagined as a stock exchange, a place where Russia's bureaucratic class negotiates how to apply the instructions coming from the Kremlin, who should be allowed to profit and to what degree. Only a tiny portion of these negotiations is visible on the plenary floor. The amount of leeway is entirely dependent on who stands behind a particular draft bill. It takes courage to stand up to the government,
but it takes even more courage to stand up to the secret services. And opposing the president is unthinkable.


But if the Duma is more than just decoration and does represent a kind of stock exchange, then there exists within the system of imitated democracy the embryo of real politics, of an open conflict of interests worthy of the name. That, in any case, is what Schulman believes. The fact that this version of the Duma has an ambitious chairman in the form of Vyacheslav Volodin reinforces this trajectory, she says. "I wouldn't rule out him having aspirations for the presidency."

It would be good for the country if the Duma were to wake up from its slumber and finally fulfill its constitutional role. This would give Russia a
place where political conflict is visible.


But if nothing happens, then the fight for power will continue to be carried out elsewhere -- either hidden behind the walls of the Kremlin, or amid the potential chaos of street protests and clashes between protesters and police. The chances for renewed protests have risen with Navalny's exclusion from the presidential election; the opposition politician has already called for a "voters' strike" and nationwide protests on Jan. 28 in response.


"A vote without competition is no vote at all," Navalny has said. Indeed, it looks as though Russians will have to tolerate their imitated democracy for a bit longer.

Allowing the People to Speak - SPIEGEL ONLINE

The Russian people are not that stupid. They see how the country has been flourishing within the last 20 years, in contrast what they had been through the previous 80 years. And that despite the obstacles by Western powers, despite their treacherous leaders in past, despite the loss of the many separating republics with many Russians living there lost as well.

And they see where such "orange revolutions" around them led to, initiated by people under Western "advice"...

Originally Posted by Klondyke

The Russian people are not that stupid.

No, but you are.

Ignore this idiot harryknob - his brain has rotted away with the syphilis.

Originally Posted by Klondyke

The Russian people are not that stupid. They see how the country has been flourishing within the last 20 years, in contrast what they had been through the previous 80 years. And that despite the obstacles by Western powers, despite their treacherous leaders in past, despite the loss of the many separating republics with many Russians living there lost as well.

And they see where such "orange revolutions" around them led to, initiated by people under Western "advice"...

About the size of it. The west went to town on Russia, and as I said before, even though they know putin is a turd, he is a turd who is doing well for the country hence why the west is so desperate to destabilise him. However, he is likely to be on the payroll of the same people funding trump and clinton etc and just playing his part of bogeyman for the west to keep dribblers like harrycockring rattling the bars on his cell.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Ignore this idiot harryknob - his brain has rotted away with the syphilis.



About the size of it. The west went to town on Russia, and as I said before, even though they know putin is a turd, he is a turd who is doing well for the country hence why the west is so desperate to destabilise him. However, he is likely to be on the payroll of the same people funding trump and clinton etc and just playing his part of bogeyman for the west to keep dribblers like harrycockring rattling the bars on his cell.

Another putin-loving cumguzzler. How has he "done well for the country" when he's handed most of the states most valuable assets to criminal oligarchs (who presumably are topping up his meagre salary with a few billion here and there).

You gullible twat.

RUSSIAN PRIVATIZATION AND OLIGARCHS | Facts and Details

Harrythecock regurgitating bollocks as usual. Your IQ and grasp of facts is the same as your penis size....MEDIUM.

Bellend.

^ Doncha just love the sources used for that site? Rags with agendas.



I have used mostly print sources such as the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Daily Yomiuri (a Japanese newspaper), Times of London, International Herald Tribune, National Geographic, Smithsonian magazine, The New Yorker, Time, Newsweek, U.S. News and World Report, Sports Illustrated, Atlantic Monthly, Natural History, Archeology magazine, Reuters, AP, Kyodo News, AFP, information from national tourist offices, tourist brochures I have picked up from places I have visited, Lonely Planet Guides, other travel guides, Compton’s Encyclopedia and various books and other publications.

indeed - thing is KittKat, your sort will only accept information from these places, so sometimes I'll resort to them. Of course, the narrative is changing now to suit the new bogeyman putin.

Daily Yomiuri

Have you had your Daily Yomiuri yet? Should do.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

RUSSIAN PRIVATIZATION AND OLIGARCHS | Facts and Details

Harrythecock regurgitating bollocks as usual. Your IQ and grasp of facts is the same as your penis size....MEDIUM.

Bellend.

And who do you think was pulling all the strings while the drunk Yeltsin was in charge?

Your ignorance is painful.

But all the oligarchs residing in UK surely had worked very hard to bring their modest assets with them. That is nothing against the (UK) law otherwise they would be surely indicted like the Assange (who did not work so hard and brought no assets with him).

Some fugitives (however not from Russia) even go easily for shipping at Harrod's.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

And who do you think was pulling all the strings while the drunk Yeltsin was in charge?

Your ignorance is painful.

The Merkins.

You ignorance is legendary swingerboy

UP the thread we had from MK, a "report" from one of her "trusted" sources of information. Unfortunately this "trusted source" failed the test of factual reporting by being "selective" on what it published. To make a point who knows, to mold opinion who knows. MK took the bait and amazed us with her skills of keeping us, here in the jungle, up to speed with world "news"

Here is the link to the official report. From the Russians? Of course, they print what goes out in the name of Russia and it's leader The LORD (Leader Of Russian Democracy). Some countries actually place a copy of record of what it's government officials say in public. Others of course do not, purposely to avoid taking any responsibility to what is "published" in their name and thus it is deniable.

Meeting with heads of[at]Russian print media and[at]news agencies ? President of[at]Russia

Of course one has to accept the publication is a factual one. Presumably those that quote selectively do.

The Title is:

Meeting with heads of Russian print media and news agencies

Ahead of Russian Press Day marked on January 13, Vladimir Putin met with heads of Russian print media and news agencies in the editorial office of the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper. The discussion focused on current professional issues. The President congratulated media representatives on their professional holiday.





For those that know the people in the photo they will be able to confirm the photo matches their alleged names and titles.

This thread focusses on a particular person. The, alleged, main opponent to the current Russian President in the upcoming Russian Presidential election. The thread alleges dubious actions have been undertaken by Russians, without any facts to substantiate the allegations. During the meeting, allegedly, the alleged people of the Russian press asked The LORD questions. Not being present I cannot vouch for the accuracy, but I am happy to read the unfounded allegations posted here for amusement.

In the attached link The LORD does not introduce any of the candidates, he does not focus or accept their is only one. He answers questions as put to him, allegedly.

1. The person of interest to the OP is, allegedly one of many candidates.
2. The OP fails to acknowledge that fact.
3. The LORD is asked a question:

"Vladimir Sungorkin: Mr President, thank you for coming to Komsomolskaya Pravda.

I have a question for you not as the President, but as a presidential candidate. This year, we will have, I think, a record number of those who wish to lead our dear mother Russia. What are your thoughts on the large number of potential candidates? Do they motivate you, or just the opposite? What are your feelings on going up against 15 rivals, I believe?"

4. He replies?

"Vladimir Putin: I think it is normal and good. To some degree, the pre-election period always strains society, because, unfortunately, there is also a lot of “foam” bubbling up, but still it is good because it gives people a chance and a reason to speak out, to discuss how different people approach these problems.


In general, I think it’s useful. It keeps the discussion fresh and sharpens it. The main thing is to do everything according to the law, as well as certain ethical and moral values. This is the most important element; and on the whole these campaigns I have just mentioned, while they have downsides, they still benefit society. This is why I welcome it. I will be glad to see and to hear interesting, elegant and useful proposals for the country’s development."

As others have said it is not the publisher whose integrity is to be questioned it is the, alleged, statements the named individual which can be questioned. The alleged statements are matters of fact, if the participants fail to publish their own records of the event. This is why the agreed statements, as recorded at the meeting are generally distributed to all attendees for their comments. In business, in politics and in legal disputes.The acceptance of selected snippets as illustrated in MK's OP illustrates the use of fake news to support an agenda only those who utilise such an approach can live with.
The news statement published above continues with other topics including interference in foreign elections, the situation in the Ukraine and the use of taxpayers money in educating Russians, if any are interested in reading the official version, as published by the official voice of Russia. Unless of course it has been hacked


So let's all stop suggesting one news publisher is any better than another. Find the named source. Is that named source in a position to make the statements. Has the person a track record of honesty and delivering their utterances or not.

Finally, does that source's statements fit your own agenda