0 so president biden has shown his willingness to engage putin where he can. and i think if we don't see any reciprocity, if putin doesn't want for play then this mix that president biden has offered is going to have to skew much more heavily towards the confrontation side so he gets the last word. >> stick with us, andrea, as we await president biden, he's set to begin his press conference in a few minutes. we're at the top of the hour. we've been discussing what will president putin said in his press conference. he spent a lot of time doing what about-isms, denying, deflecting any criticism going his way. but trying to create the condition saying, hey, we're creating a stable situation with president biden. let me bring in mike memoli, of course, traveling with the president. mike, i'm curious, i know you've been doing some reporting as putin's press conference was going on. what's your sense of the balance they're going to strike with trying to sort of -- how much they respond directly to some of the outrageous things that putin said? and how much that they plan to sort of embrace that small sort of olive branch that putin offered which is to say, hey, we're starting a predictable relationship? >> well, you used the word "predictable." that was certainly president biden's goal and what the house repeatedly talked about their goal, to bring stability and predictability to this relationship. certainly, listening to your panel there, there's certainly things that they feel president biden needs to respond to. but on the whole it is certainly what putin did, let's say on the acceptable range of predictable. it was not meant to distort the substance of the meeting here but it's the same rhetoric that we're hearing from president putin about what to do, what about-ism, covering trump in the campaign, then asked to respond to president trump. if they sort of follow the same blueprint that they operated with the former president. there are times where you proactively engage in something that trump said. there were times in which they would hold their fire until asked about it. and then there were times that they felt it was best to simply ignore it. based on some of the things we heard from putin, i bet they're weighing the range of responses based on what they think merits response or not. on the balance, look at what putin said about this meeting. >> yeah. >> he was generally, i think, praising it on being a good conversation, constructive talks. eye look at the joint statement that andrea references, it focuses entirely on new s.t.a.r.t. joe biden the former senator on the senate relations committee devoted so much of his time in the '80s on nuclear proliferation. that's the area where there is perhaps the most agreement on cooperation. they're watching this largely favorable term -- >> mike, i've got to -- i mean, the cyberdenials, i mean, it just proved -- >> yeah, yeah. >> -- we're not even at square one yet, right? the first step is to admit you have a problem. and vladimir putin will not admit that russia is the same harbor for these folks? he won't even admit these folks -- it's happening in this country. it sounds like we made zero progress on cyber. i mean, zero. >> reporter: yeah, well, i think the way that you can look at president putin's response there is almost, you know, continued to be defensive and dismissive of the u.s. claims. but think back to the way president biden presented this invitation he extended to putin in april. it was to sanction president putin, based in russia, based on what was known at the time. and he did so by adding that he felt he was acting in a reciprocal fashion, but that he could go farther. you wonder in that meeting, especially in that two-on-two meeting with president biden and the secretary of state, it's very different to see the expectation and how they see the response. and it was shorter than we expected. the balance of the shorter two-on-two, and the large bilateral meeting speaks to, i think, a very lateral pro forma laying outside of the issues on what the u.s. is prepared to do if they don't see a change in behavior. certainly, these are the exact changes that our colleague is posing to the president. if we can get to see what those were like in private. >> mike, stand by for a second. i what to bring in rick stengel, someone who spent a lot of time watching vladimir putin and of course, how he communicates and how we rick with people around the world. rick, can you walk us through, i want to talk about theatrics of this, we're looking at the shot where we see president biden very shortly. it's open space, majestic flags. we just saw, ambassador mcfaul pointed out, vladimir putin, a much smaller room. it looked very different. he clearly demonstrated just how much he loved being in front of those cameras. he seems to revel in it. he took dozens of questions, it seems. what kind of tone and attitude does president biden need to bring to this press conference coming up next? >> well, you're right, the theatrics are lovely. i mean, that's say much better tableau, it's where ronald reagan was concerned about that, where putin looked like he was in the basement of the kawanis club. with putin, the importance of having a meeting and a meeting that didn't blow up. both sides talked about the stability and predictability. and the deliverable was a stable meeting. part of the diplomacy is listening to things that the other guy says and not commenting on it. and choosing the things that you want to comment on. i agree some of the what about-ism has to be refuted. what you heard is a lot of putin's greatest hits. what you're listening for were there any new songs that he sang? well, the new song that he sang, joe biden is a moral man. he brought up these things, these are issues that we need to address. earnest, honest, diplomacy can solve all of these issues, this is the goal that biden and blinken had here. america is on the stage, he doesn't want putin to disrupt the other stuff that america has to do. and by forging a relationship with him, by being a candid relationship, as putin said, he has achieved that goal which is basically, in effect, putting putin in a box. and i think, you know, despite all the what about-ism, and i think he has to say that the january 6th protesters were not exactly like the minutemen in 1776, but i think he needs -- he will concentrate we're going to create a framework to deal with these difficult issues. and russia will not be a bad boy on the world stage. >> let me bring in gary casperoff, obviously, chess grand master most of his life and political activist and putin critic. gary, you and i have had conversations, i'd say, going back a decade now where at times you're frustrated with the american posture dealing with putin. underestimating him at times. what did you see today with putin? what is a pitfall you maybe worry that a president biden needs to avoid? and how much doll you play diplomat joe biden if you're joe biden today, versus pushing back on putin on the world stage? >> well, i've been saying all along that biden didn't have to have the meeting in the first place. so the idea of inviting putin was a mistake. it's a platform a huge platform. but biden was nostalgic, i guess he's been dreaming of the presidency back in the cold war, looking at nixon, carter and reagan. now he got this moment. that's it. the good news, the only good news about the meeting, the summit, it was shorter than expected. there was not much damage done, but putin got the job done. that's why he was beaming when he left, went into the press conference, even when he entered the building before the talks, taking off the attention that he is dreaming of getting during the last years. and everything he said, you know, i don't think we should even take it seriously. and i was surprised to hear the word we put putin in a box. he's been in a box for years. he doesn't care, it's not about wars, it's about action. regarding the press conference, yeah, we've been listening to putin's lies for 21 years. so there were no surprises. >> garry kasparov, it's andrea mitchell in geneva. is there anything that president biden can say now that would make you think this is worth doing? >> i doubt very much, speaking about cyber security. you know, you don't make progress with a thief who robbed your house by talking in geneva. of course, we enjoyed it. but i was pleased to see that the meeting was shorter than expected. now, it's not about biden being tough while putting in an ultimatum. it's an action. so far, biden was failing the test. leading the sanctions. that's a message for putin. now putin believes now that he's been elevated to the level that even boris yeltsin couldn't be there, because america behaved different. now, it's all back to the cold war where russians and americans talked about the future and europeans had to wait in another room. i think with the europeans, the nato allies and then in geneva with all of the bells and whistles it's about the allies and now putin at the diplomatic table. and now biden has to do limited damage and hopefully he can move away from the nostalgia and be constructive. >> garry, it's kasie hunt. i'm curious what you thought when he talked about his mother. when you hear putin talk about that what do you think he's trying to say? >> can i remind you that putin was always have been complementary to american presidents to bush 43. and very complementary to donald trump, probably for different reasons. so, if you look at the last 20 years, you have three u.s. presidents tried to build constructive relations with russia. in the end, the relations are at the lowest point now. and it's all because putin always views it as an opportunity to violate every agreement that he made and grab the territories of neighboring countries or just supporting his cronies around the world like bashir al assad or maduro in venezuela. so, he's trying to look nice, but at the end of the day, it's not about being nice. it's about attacks on the american infrastructure. since receiving this invitation in april and to this day in geneva, putin, i have no doubt, authorized or at least, you know, did not stop attacks on american infrastructure, the pipeline and the meat packing industry. and he stepped up. he's aggressive action on it. and now, putin decides not only to putin but any russian can go to jail for year. with a dictatorship, instead of being punished for that, he was rewarded. again, he has reason to celebrate. hopefully, that will be his last time. >> there have been attacks to the metaphor that i've been using in the last days if you look at putin as a bully, you want to bloody the nose of a bully and maybe that will make him react. we've tried sanctions. we've embarrassed him at the olympic committee. the panama papers, exposed his wealth. none of that has had an impact to change his behavior. what would? >> yeah, i strongly disagree in sanctions. i mean, sanctions are good in paper, in reality, it doesn't prevent russia from selling its natural resources. and as a result, putin's cronies are getting richer and richer. yes, you can have sanctions from the european union, but the fact that germany doubled them on gas buying with the crimea, that's a big deal, but not for putin. he's in charge of the biggest fortune that ever existed in the history. he's probably collected directly $1 trillion or so. again, there's so many words, but no real message. if biden wanted to send a message to putin, he had to go to kiev and zelensky. and thats is the message to putin. follow the money. there's so much money to attack that is not confiscated in the free world. that's how you get putin's attention. now he has aextra pipeline in europe. europe is hostage. whatever biden says, whatever macron says, he doesn't care. he always asks why not. >> garry kasparov, it's a pleasure having your perspective appreciate your time. thank you, sir. let me bring back andrea, andrea mitchell, you know, garry kasparov never holds back. he never hide what is he thinks. it's straightforward there. and i'll tell you, he's not alone in those that believe that the u.s. hasn't done enough to support the russian opposition to really push back on putin here. you know, we've heard it from people close to navalny. i felt like i heard similar frustration out of garry kasparov's voice. >> i know exactly. and there were those moments a couple months ago, where there were thousands of russians all over the streets across the country but it was quickly stamped out after navalny was put in jail. antony blinken, secretary of state, and i want to bring in our white house -- excuse me, "the washington post" white house reporter anne gearan is also here in geneva. anne, you've covered so much of these as a white house and pentagon correspondent. your takeaway? we may have to interrupt you if the president comes in. >> absolutely, andrea. i think the main takeaway, these meetings were too short to get through the long list of things that each side decided they wanted to talk about in any depth. the most they could have done, run through them, air a very brief one side and then the other side and move on to the next thing. it's not a nothing, but it's not a solution to any of the problems. and i think that they'll both restore ambassadors was the lowest of the low-hanging fruit that they got out of the summit. doing that is also not nothing. the embassies have been hollowed out and returning the ambassadors to getting the embassies back on track post-covid will help the relationship in ways that aren't immediately available. but it will be interesting to see what the president says here now that he has a list of things that he needs to respond to from what putin had to say at his own press conference. >> and we just got a two-minute warning to that press conference. so it's now less than a minute and a half. kasie hunt, you have time for a quick question. >> we want to bring in ben rhodes here just to set the stage. again, he's walking out there, ben, forgive us if we cut you off. at this point, i mean, what's your top question for president biden as he walks to this podium? >> the top question is whether he wants to take on things that putin said and demonstrably push back. with press conferences with this, keep in mind, the american people, the russian people, the russian president, it's also the world. i think biden has to recognize what he says, the words he speaks about how he responds to that performance by vladimir putin is very predictable. that's going to be consumed by people who believe in democracies, for people who are concerned about putin and who he represents. and how he combats the message democracy standing up to autocracy, how he frames that while talking about nuclear arms control. it's a tricky balance to strike. but if he can set it up, he can point to the fact that he was with the world democracy, at the g7 in nato and he represented the democracies and the people in that room today become but this is going to be a tricky news conference because the entire world is watching very closely. >> andrea, i get it. we both were sitting here listening to garry kasparov. he was quite skeptical that this summit should have happened. what do you say to that? >> i take to a different position, i think if you go back to the timing when the biden administration offered the summit, you remember russian troops were amassing in and around ukraine. i think if you're sitting in the white house, it's your first 100 days and you're really concerned that a major conflict over ukraine with russia is going to derail your entire administration's priorities. so it was like a time-out. let's take the temperature down. let's give us some space that we can have this dialogue and discussion. i think they were effective in doing that. of course, the attacks, ransomware attacks, all of that has continued. but i do think they are basically looking in the summit and the russia relationship more generally, they're looking to try to prevent russia from disrupting what they want to accomplish on china and covid and climate and everything else that they want to do. to do that you have to put guard rails on the relationship. that's what this summit was about. it was about having the leader-to-leader ties. it was talking about restoring the diplomatic presence. and i don't think we canunder estimate the uncontrolled strategic dialogue. >> if we went into a new s.t.a.r.t. it could be totally a disaster. with that, i think we see the president getting ready to walk out now. there he is. let's turn the podium over. a long day for you all. i know it was easy giving in to the pre-meeting, there was no problem to get through those doors, was it? anyway, hello, everyone. well, i've just finished the last meeting of this week's long trip. the u.s./russian summit. and i there was a lot of hype around this meeting. but it's pretty straightforward to me, the meeting. one, there's no substitute, as those of you who have covered me for a while know for face-to-face dialogue between meetings, none. and president putin and i had a shared and unique responsibility to manage the relationship between two powerful and proud countries. a relationship that has to be stable and predictable. and it should be -- we should be able to cooperate where it's in our mutual interest and where we have difference, i want president putin to understand why i say what i say. and why i do what i do. and how we'll respond to specific kinds of actions that harm america's interest. now, i told president putin my agenda is not against russia or anyone else. it's for the american people. fighting covid-19. rebuilding our economy. re-establishing relationships around the world with allies and friends. and protecting the american people. that's my responsibility as president. i also told that no president of the united states could keep faith with the american people if they did not speak out to defend our democratic values, to stand up for the universal and fundamental freedoms that all men and women have in our view. that's just part of the dna of our country. so, human rights is going to always be on the table, i told him. it's not just about going after russia, when they violate human rights. it's about who we are. how could i be the president of the united states of america, and not speak out against the violation of human rights. i told him. that unlike other countries, including russia, we're uniquely a product of an idea. you've heard me say this before again and again. i'm going to keep saying it. it was that idea. we don't derive our rights from the government. we possess them because we're born -- period. and we yield them to a government. so, the forum, i pointed out to him that's why we're going to raise our concerns about cases like alexei navalny. i made it clear to president putin that we'll continue to raise issues of fundamental human rights. because that's what we are. that's who we are. the idea is we hold these truths self-evident, we haven't lived up to it complete by, but we widen the arc of commitment and i raise the case of paul wellen and trevor reed. i also raised the ability of radio free europe and radio liberty to operate and the importance of freedom of press and freedom of speech. i made it clear we will not violate our dremmatic sovereignty. the bottom line, we need to have basic rules of the road that we can all areas, and one of those areas is strategic stability. you asked me many times what was i going to discuss with putin before i came. i told you i only negotiate with the individual. now, i can tell you what i was intending to do all along. and that is to discuss and raise the issue of strategic stability and try to set up a mechanism worldwide where we dealt with it. we discussed in detail the next steps our co