trump is going to get even more erratic (and toxic )......Not a good state for a POTUS to be in.
Suspect more shoes will be dropping in sort order..
POTUS (Donald) many legal issues cornering him
- Thread starter Ocean Breeze
- Start date
Suspect more shoes will be dropping in sort order..
Good time to be attending a G20 conference with his big military rival attacking their heighbour.
Hmmmm-hmm-hmm-h-hmm-h-hmmm .....
Trump rage tweets about ‘illegal hoax’ and says Mueller investigation ‘should be ended immediately’
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/tr...ed-immediately/?utm_source=push_notifications
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/tr...ed-immediately/?utm_source=push_notifications
Last edited:
with the Cohen admission today, things could be getting to pivotal. point. Now that Chen will be telling the truth(?)......... wonder how his info will compare to the trump answers to the questions .....that he just completed.
Trump emerges as a central subject of Mueller probe
Investigators have evidence that President Trump was in close contact with his lieutenants as they reached out to Moscow and WikiLeaks �� and that they attempted to conceal their activities.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/
Investigators have evidence that President Trump was in close contact with his lieutenants as they reached out to Moscow and WikiLeaks �� and that they attempted to conceal their activities.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/
Funny how a storm of negative publicity crops up on the prospect that Trump was to meet with Putin at the G20 summit. Was all this timed to undermine Trump in the face of the world leaders?
Trump made his own bed with Putin a long time ago. The Ukranian army is claiming that the Russians are massing tanks along the Ukranian border. That's Putin undermining Trump. Trump has very few options at hand to respond to another Russian invasion ... or threat of an invasion of Ukraine and Putin is 90% certain to make Trump look like a weakling no matter how the dice fall.
The events in Washington have been brewing for two years. Sorry, no instant conspiracy.
If I was Trump, Pukin would be the last person I'd be worrying about - arrogant little dictator in charge of a third world country. All Russia files should be closed.
Yeah OK, but that isn't what the news flurry is about is it, that's the reason why Trump cancelled his Putin meeting.
News Flash: Trumps wants the meetings more that Putin does, Trump gets straight answers that remain the same a week or a month later. Putin gets something that is reversed in full within 24 hours, 48 if it is a weekend.
Lets be clear about who is holding who's leash.
Lets be clear about who is holding who's leash.
Trump already broke the treaty when the drones were sent against the Russia base in Syria.
https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east...with-drones-defense-ministry-claims-1.6593026
U.S. Attacked Russia's Syria Base With Drones, Defense Ministry Claims
'Thirteen drones moved according to common combat battle deployment,' deputy defense minister says, noting that drones switched to manual guidance upon encountering Russian electronic countermeasures
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/INFtreaty
Updated: October 2018
The 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty required the United States and the Soviet Union to eliminate and permanently forswear all of their nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers. The treaty marked the first time the superpowers had agreed to reduce their nuclear arsenals, eliminate an entire category of nuclear weapons, and utilize extensive on-site inspections for verification. As a result of the INF Treaty, the United States and the Soviet Union destroyed a total of 2,692 short-, medium-, and intermediate-range missiles by the treaty's implementation deadline of June 1, 1991.
The United States first alleged in its July 2014 Compliance Report that Russia is in violation of its INF Treaty obligations “not to possess, produce, or flight-test” a ground-launched cruise missile having a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometers or “to possess or produce launchers of such missiles.” Subsequent State Department assessments in 2015, 2016, and 2017 repeated these allegations. In March 2017, a top U.S. official confirmed press reports that Russia had deployed the noncompliant missile. Russia denies that it is in violation of the agreement. On December 8, 2017, the Trump administration released a strategy to counter alleged Russian violations of the Treaty.
https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2017/12/276363.htm
The United States remains firmly committed to the INF Treaty and continues to seek the Russian Federation’s return to compliance. The Administration firmly believes, however, that the United States cannot stand still while the Russian Federation continues to develop military systems in violation of the Treaty. While the United States will continue to pursue a diplomatic solution, we are now pursuing economic and military measures intended to induce the Russian Federation to return to compliance. This includes a review of military concepts and options, including options for conventional, ground-launched, intermediate-range missile systems, which would enable the United States to defend ourselves and our allies, should the Russian Federation not return to compliance. This step will not violate our INF Treaty obligations. We are also prepared to cease such research and development activities if the Russian Federation returns to full and verifiable compliance with its INF Treaty obligations.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...aponised-drones-swarm-civilian-military-syria
Russia responded on 5 January to an attack by a swarm of drones targeting a Russian airbase in north-western Syria and a naval station on the Mediterranean Sea. The multi-drone attack, which is suspected to have been launched by militants, is the first of its kind, representing a new threat from terrorist groups.
The use of a swarm attack demonstrates a militant capability, which was previously limited to states, to simultaneously control and coordinate several commercial drones at one time using a GPS unit. This development may send viewers of the science-fiction series Black Mirror into hiding, but it should prompt professional militaries to double down on countermeasures, specifically the creation of electronic jamming tech.
https://defense-update.com/20171231_inf.html
New Weapons Initiatives Violating Strategic Arms Control Treaties
The United States said it was taking military and economic measures against Moscow in response to this violation. Moscow claims these allegations are ‘absolutely unfounded’. The U.S. state department said their response could include a review of military concepts and options, including options for conventional, ground-launched, intermediate-range missile systems, which would enable the United States to defend itself and its allies, should the Russian Federation not return to compliance.”The treaty does not ban development work on weapon classes banned by the INF until the point that prototypes missiles are built and flight tested, therefore, the technology development would be within the limitations of the treaty. The U.S. response could also impose sanctions against Russian companies that provided the technologies for the new cruise missile. A military response could also include withdrawal from the treaty, that has been in effect for 30 years.
“The Alliance has united in its appreciation that effective arms control agreements remain an essential element to strategic stability and our collective security,” NATO announced, urging Russia to address these concerns in a substantial and transparent way, and actively engage in a technical dialogue with the United States.
Moscow flatly denied the existence of such land-based cruise missile and said the 9M729 refers to a different weapon whose range comply with the INF treaty. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov has warned that “if the US chooses to withdraw from the treaty, we will be forced to give a ‘mirror response’ to that.”
On its side, Moscow denied the accused violation claiming the American MK-41 Vertical Launch Systems (VLS) used with the new AEGIS Ashore sites in Romania, Poland, and Japan in the future, are violating the treaty, in its ability to launch Tomahawk cruise missiles. President Vladimir Putin message was also clear: “Russia is going to comply with its (INF) terms, providing our partners do so. If they decide to abandon it, however, our response will be instant and symmetrical.” Putin said.
The U.S. denied this accusation saying the Aegis Ashore does not have an offensive ground-launched ballistic or cruise missile capability, as the AEGIS Ashore system lacks the software, fire control hardware, support equipment, and other infrastructure needed to launch offensive ballistic or cruise missiles such as the Tomahawk. “Aegis Ashore has never contained, launched, or been tested for launching a missile that is prohibited by the INF Treaty.” the State Department responded, “The U.S. acknowledged the AEGIS Ashore uses some of the structural components as the sea-based Mk-41 VLS, it is not the same launcher and, as a result, the system is not a prohibited launcher.”
Russian analysts claim the VLS launchers used by AEGIS Ashore do not show observable differences from those used on missile destroyers, as required by the INF treaty, just as the alleged Iskander-K does. The Russians also claim that Medium Altitude Long Endurance drones (such as the MQ-9 Reaper) are also in violation of the INF treaty, in their capacity to carry heavy weapon loads over long distances. These arguments are flatly denied by the US, since the treaty relates only to missiles, being ‘one-way’ delivery systems, and not reusable delivery systems such as drones.
https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east...with-drones-defense-ministry-claims-1.6593026
U.S. Attacked Russia's Syria Base With Drones, Defense Ministry Claims
'Thirteen drones moved according to common combat battle deployment,' deputy defense minister says, noting that drones switched to manual guidance upon encountering Russian electronic countermeasures
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/INFtreaty
Updated: October 2018
The 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty required the United States and the Soviet Union to eliminate and permanently forswear all of their nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers. The treaty marked the first time the superpowers had agreed to reduce their nuclear arsenals, eliminate an entire category of nuclear weapons, and utilize extensive on-site inspections for verification. As a result of the INF Treaty, the United States and the Soviet Union destroyed a total of 2,692 short-, medium-, and intermediate-range missiles by the treaty's implementation deadline of June 1, 1991.
The United States first alleged in its July 2014 Compliance Report that Russia is in violation of its INF Treaty obligations “not to possess, produce, or flight-test” a ground-launched cruise missile having a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometers or “to possess or produce launchers of such missiles.” Subsequent State Department assessments in 2015, 2016, and 2017 repeated these allegations. In March 2017, a top U.S. official confirmed press reports that Russia had deployed the noncompliant missile. Russia denies that it is in violation of the agreement. On December 8, 2017, the Trump administration released a strategy to counter alleged Russian violations of the Treaty.
https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2017/12/276363.htm
The United States remains firmly committed to the INF Treaty and continues to seek the Russian Federation’s return to compliance. The Administration firmly believes, however, that the United States cannot stand still while the Russian Federation continues to develop military systems in violation of the Treaty. While the United States will continue to pursue a diplomatic solution, we are now pursuing economic and military measures intended to induce the Russian Federation to return to compliance. This includes a review of military concepts and options, including options for conventional, ground-launched, intermediate-range missile systems, which would enable the United States to defend ourselves and our allies, should the Russian Federation not return to compliance. This step will not violate our INF Treaty obligations. We are also prepared to cease such research and development activities if the Russian Federation returns to full and verifiable compliance with its INF Treaty obligations.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...aponised-drones-swarm-civilian-military-syria
Russia responded on 5 January to an attack by a swarm of drones targeting a Russian airbase in north-western Syria and a naval station on the Mediterranean Sea. The multi-drone attack, which is suspected to have been launched by militants, is the first of its kind, representing a new threat from terrorist groups.
The use of a swarm attack demonstrates a militant capability, which was previously limited to states, to simultaneously control and coordinate several commercial drones at one time using a GPS unit. This development may send viewers of the science-fiction series Black Mirror into hiding, but it should prompt professional militaries to double down on countermeasures, specifically the creation of electronic jamming tech.
https://defense-update.com/20171231_inf.html
New Weapons Initiatives Violating Strategic Arms Control Treaties
The United States said it was taking military and economic measures against Moscow in response to this violation. Moscow claims these allegations are ‘absolutely unfounded’. The U.S. state department said their response could include a review of military concepts and options, including options for conventional, ground-launched, intermediate-range missile systems, which would enable the United States to defend itself and its allies, should the Russian Federation not return to compliance.”The treaty does not ban development work on weapon classes banned by the INF until the point that prototypes missiles are built and flight tested, therefore, the technology development would be within the limitations of the treaty. The U.S. response could also impose sanctions against Russian companies that provided the technologies for the new cruise missile. A military response could also include withdrawal from the treaty, that has been in effect for 30 years.
“The Alliance has united in its appreciation that effective arms control agreements remain an essential element to strategic stability and our collective security,” NATO announced, urging Russia to address these concerns in a substantial and transparent way, and actively engage in a technical dialogue with the United States.
Moscow flatly denied the existence of such land-based cruise missile and said the 9M729 refers to a different weapon whose range comply with the INF treaty. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov has warned that “if the US chooses to withdraw from the treaty, we will be forced to give a ‘mirror response’ to that.”
On its side, Moscow denied the accused violation claiming the American MK-41 Vertical Launch Systems (VLS) used with the new AEGIS Ashore sites in Romania, Poland, and Japan in the future, are violating the treaty, in its ability to launch Tomahawk cruise missiles. President Vladimir Putin message was also clear: “Russia is going to comply with its (INF) terms, providing our partners do so. If they decide to abandon it, however, our response will be instant and symmetrical.” Putin said.
The U.S. denied this accusation saying the Aegis Ashore does not have an offensive ground-launched ballistic or cruise missile capability, as the AEGIS Ashore system lacks the software, fire control hardware, support equipment, and other infrastructure needed to launch offensive ballistic or cruise missiles such as the Tomahawk. “Aegis Ashore has never contained, launched, or been tested for launching a missile that is prohibited by the INF Treaty.” the State Department responded, “The U.S. acknowledged the AEGIS Ashore uses some of the structural components as the sea-based Mk-41 VLS, it is not the same launcher and, as a result, the system is not a prohibited launcher.”
Russian analysts claim the VLS launchers used by AEGIS Ashore do not show observable differences from those used on missile destroyers, as required by the INF treaty, just as the alleged Iskander-K does. The Russians also claim that Medium Altitude Long Endurance drones (such as the MQ-9 Reaper) are also in violation of the INF treaty, in their capacity to carry heavy weapon loads over long distances. These arguments are flatly denied by the US, since the treaty relates only to missiles, being ‘one-way’ delivery systems, and not reusable delivery systems such as drones.
As far as i can tell the Moscow Trump Tower was little more than a branding and marketing scheme that involved no Trump Org. investment. It provided for a fee for the use of the Trump name of something in the order $4 million for investment that would be put up by Russian investors.
It's peanuts for a corporation whose primary business is that of real estate holdings and might be worth $4 billion. It has NOTHING to do with collusion. It got no farther than some nonobligatory letter of intent for a project that had no land, no firm capital, no project details and was subsequently abandoned. It is all an empty pipe dream of some people who were trying to latch on the Trump Presidency. Just like the Trump (NYC) Tower meeting that involved little more than some Russian hacks trying to insinuate themselves into the Trump campaign.
If this is what Mueller is counting on to support a charge of Collusion, it's a joke. Which is why he is so desperate to fabricate an Obstruction of Justice case. It'll go nowhere. It's time to wind up and close the Special Prosecutor's mandate.
It's peanuts for a corporation whose primary business is that of real estate holdings and might be worth $4 billion. It has NOTHING to do with collusion. It got no farther than some nonobligatory letter of intent for a project that had no land, no firm capital, no project details and was subsequently abandoned. It is all an empty pipe dream of some people who were trying to latch on the Trump Presidency. Just like the Trump (NYC) Tower meeting that involved little more than some Russian hacks trying to insinuate themselves into the Trump campaign.
If this is what Mueller is counting on to support a charge of Collusion, it's a joke. Which is why he is so desperate to fabricate an Obstruction of Justice case. It'll go nowhere. It's time to wind up and close the Special Prosecutor's mandate.
Last edited:
What deal did he have? Did he benefit from it when he became POTUS? He put everything in holding and his kids name after he got elected, and before inauguration right?
Time will tell if any of that is true. You sure can't take Trump's word for it. He's a pathological liar. If he tells you that the sun is out, you would be well advised to check it for yourself.