Video News Review - 4:59 AM 3/8/2019
- Get link
- Other Apps
Lawrence's Last Word: The Company You Keep | The Last Word | MSNBC
The Left's anti-semetic problem
Trump Has Been Living A Double Life
Dilanian: Some Intel Experts Think Manafort Was Essentially A Russian Asset | The 11th Hour | MSNBC
Jon Meacham: We May Have A President Who Is Enthralled To A Foreign Power | The 11th Hour | MSNBC
Hardball with Chris Matthews 3/7/19 | MSNBC Breaking News Today March 7, 2019
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 2
Hardball with Chris Matthews 3/7/19 | MSNBC Breaking News Today March 7, 2019
House Judiciary Chair Warns DOJ: Don’t 'Cover-Up' Trump Crimes | The Beat With Ari Melber | MSNBC
Paul Manafort Sentenced To 47 Months In Prison | Hardball | MSNBC
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 3
Век-волкодав
- Google Books Result
https://books.google.com.pr/books?isbn=5457056597
- Translate this page
Андрей Валентинов - 2017 - Fiction
Дико воет Эренбург Одобряет Инбер дичь его Ни Москва, ни Петербург Не заменятим Бердичева. – И вы туда же?Удружил Койранский, сволочь, выдалГАЛКОВСКИЙ БЕСКОНЕЧНЕЙШИЙ ТУПИЧОК, РЕЦЕНЗИЯ, ч ...
https://harmfulgrumpy.livejournal.com/177426.html
Translate this page
Nov 26, 2015 - Дико воет Эренбург,. Одобряет Инбер дичь его. Ни Москва, ни Петербург. Незаменят им Бердичева. И ведь везде так происходило.
On Tuesday, March 5, Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov attacked what he described as an “overabundance” of investigations regarding Russia’s attempts to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential elections and alleged attempts to influence President Donald Trump.
“There are so many of these investigations their importance has certainly been devalued,” Peskov said.
He said investigative efforts have become increasingly less serious, adding that not one of the probes has resulted in anything but “laughable results.”
“We have neither the opportunity nor the desire to comment on every new investigation initiated by one or another group of U.S. lawmakers,” he said, adding that it is “probably not our business; it’s the business of the U.S.”
On May 17, 2017, U.S. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced the appointment of former Department of Justice official and FBI Director Robert Mueller to “serve as Special Counsel to oversee the previously-confirmed FBI investigation of Russian government efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and related matters.”
Mueller was tasked, among other things, with investigating “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump.”
Since then, the Mueller investigation has resulted in more than three dozen criminal indictments, as well as guilty pleas and four prison sentences.
Among those indicted were 12 Russian military intelligence officers charged with hacking the Democratic Party’s computers, stealing their data and publishing that information to impact the 2016 election.
In addition, three entities and 13 Russian individuals, including “Putin’s Chef,” Yevgeny Prigozhin, and his Internet Research Agency, a so-called “troll factory,” were indicted for interfering in the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign in order to “sow discord in the U.S. political system,” support the presidential campaign of then-candidate Donald Trump and disparage then-candidate Hillary Clinton.
The indictment also stated that some of the defendants “posing as U.S. persons and without revealing their Russian association, communicated with unwitting individuals associated with the Trump campaign and with other political activists to seek to coordinate political activities.”
Former Trump campaign head Paul Manafort pleaded guilty to conspiracy against the United States and conspiracy to obstruct justice. Prior to his guilty pleas, Manafort was found guilty on eight counts of financial crimes in a trial in federal court in Virginia.
On March 7, Manafort was sentenced to 47 months in prison -- just short of four years -- for the Virginia convictions. The former campaign chief will face sentencing later in other guilty pleas.
Long-time Manafort associate and Trump campaign official Rick Gates pleaded guilty to lying to investigators.
Another Manafort associate, alleged former GRU operative Konstantin Kilimnik was charged with witness tampering, conspiracy and obstruction of justice. In an improperly redacted court filing, defense lawyers for Manafort accidentally revealed that Mueller had accused Manafort of discussing a "Ukraine peace plan" with Kilimnik "on more than one occasion."
None of the criminal charges against Manafort, Gates or Kilimnik directly involve Donald Trump or his 2016 presidential campaign.
Former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with former Russian ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kislyak.
Former Trump foreign policy aide George Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to making materially false statements to the FBI regarding conversations with an allegedly Kremlin-linked Maltese professor who claimed to have “dirt” on Hillary Clinton.
Amid reports that Mueller’s investigation might be coming to an end, various scenarios are still possible, including the possibility that his final report will not be made public.
Whatever the outcome, the Mueller investigation’s efforts to determine the nature of the Kremlin’s influence campaign, as demonstrated by the number of Mueller indictments, suggests the probe has been efficacious.
Polygraph.info therefore finds Peskov’s comment to be false.
Read the whole story
· · ·
House passes anti-Semitism resolution in wake of Omar controversy
For President Trump, the era of congressional oversight is shaping up to be a family affair, with his three eldest children — Donald Jr., Ivanka and Eric — at risk of getting swept up in multiple investigations. But none of the Trump clan may face a more thorough going-over than Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and top White House adviser.
Mr. Kushner this week was among a long list of Trumpworld intimates asked to provide documents to the House Judiciary Committee as it looks into possible presidential misdeeds.
This request landed just as the continuing tussle was heating up between Mr. Kushner and the House Oversight and Reform Committee, which is examining claims that Mr. Trump arranged to have his son-in-law granted top-secret security clearance over the objections of intelligence officials.
In both cases, the White House has signaled its intent to defy Congress, arguing executive privilege and legislative overreach. On Monday, the White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, sent a letter to the oversight committee chairman, Elijah Cummings, rebuffing his request and effectively daring him to start issuing subpoenas. Mr. Cummings said he would confer with colleagues to determine what comes next.
However Democrats proceed, Mr. Kushner’s peculiar role in his father-in-law’s White House has prompted widespread concern that is both broader and more specific than the generic questions of accountability and competence often raised by raw nepotism.
Unease about Mr. Kushner’s access to secret information appears to go beyond politics. Mr. Trump’s own intelligence officials are said to have balked at the idea of giving his son-in-law such access, as did Donald McGahn during his stint as White House counsel.
Mr. Trump overrode such advice and ordered Mr. Kushner’s clearance granted, which it was last May.
These were not casual, offhand objections. After the president made his decision, Mr. McGahn was reportedly so troubled that he wrote an internal memo detailing the concerns about Mr. Kushner — including from the C.I.A. — and making clear that he had recommended against the move.
John Kelly, at that time the White House chief of staff, is said to have felt similarly moved to write a memo stating that he had been explicitly “ordered” by the president to grant Mr. Kushner’s clearance.
If true, this is yet another point on which Mr. Trump has misled the public, insisting in January that he had played no role in arranging his son-in-law’s clearance. Just last month, Ivanka Trump made a similar claim, asserting that her father “had no involvement pertaining to my clearance or my husband’s clearance, zero.”
Those untruths are nowhere near as troubling as the fact that intelligence and administration officials were reportedly loath to grant Mr. Kushner access to the government’s deepest secrets.
What was the C.I.A.’s specific hesitation concerning Mr. Kushner and top-secret information? Why does the agency continue to deny him access to “sensitive compartmentalized information”? Why did the F.B.I. raise questions about foreign influence over Mr. Kushner?
As The Times reported last month:
“The full scope of intelligence officials’ concerns about Mr. Kushner is not known. But the clearance had been held up in part over questions from the F.B.I. and the C.I.A. about his foreign and business contacts, including those related to Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Russia, according to multiple people familiar with the events.”
Mr. Kushner’s inaccurate statements to the F.B.I. about his foreign interactions are cause for additional concern.
And many, many eyebrows have been raised over Mr. Kushner’s special friendship with Mohammed bin Salman, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia — a coziness strategically and aggressively cultivated by the Saudis. Out of fear that Mr. Kushner, naïve in the ways of diplomacy and foreign affairs, was susceptible to manipulation by the prince, Mr. Kelly attempted to curtail the two men’s private talks by reinstating a requirement that National Security Council officials participate in calls with foreign leaders.
No matter: Mr. Kushner and Prince Mohammed’s bond grew, even withstanding the conclusion by American intelligence agencies that the prince ordered the torture and murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Amid global outrage over the killing, Mr. Kushner has been among the prince’s fiercest defenders.
Mr. Kushner is not a low-level White House functionary. He has been charged with bringing peace to the Middle East, and he is the president’s star emissary to the Saudi government. The public has a compelling interest in knowing what made the intelligence community so nervous about him.
Putting a member of the president’s family in the investigatory hot seat is a delicate business. Voters can get squeamish watching a politician’s wife or daughter or son-in-law field tough questions. That’s no excuse for letting them avoid accountability.
Read the whole story
· · ·
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 4
Comments
Post a Comment