-
Saved Stories - None  | ||
|---|---|---|
| South China Sea: Philippines Moves Troops To Island Claimed By China | ||
The Philippines has begun moving troops and equipment to a disputed island in the South China Sea which is claimed by both Manila and Beijing, a Philippines general said. It comes ahead of construction, including lengthening an airstrip on the island. The troops and initial supplies arrived at Pag-asa Island last week, Lt. Gen. Raul del Rosario, head of the Philippine military’s Western Command, said as quoted by AP. Some 1.6 billion pesos (US$32 million) has been set aside for construction on the island, which will include reinforcing and lengthening and airstrip and building dock, according to the official. Solar power, a desalination plant and refurbishment of military housing, as well as sites for marine research and tourists, are set to be built on the island. Earlier this month, Chinese Ambassador Zhao Jianhua warned that any construction on the island, known internationally as Thitu, would be illegal. We view the occupation by the Philippine side of those islands as illegal. And so the building on it are also illegal, he said, as quoted by the Manila Times. Zhao added that China would give warning to any intruding aircraft in the island’s airspace, as well as any unwelcome planes which may fly in the airspace of the larger Kalayaan Island Group. The Philippines’ Department of Foreign Affairs shrugged off Zhao’s statements, with spokesman Robespierre Bolivar stating that the island and the Kalayaan Island Group are a municipality of Palawan, a province of the Philippines. China protested a visit to the island by Philippines defense and military chiefs last month, weeks after Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte vowed to occupy and fortify islands in the South China Sea in order to make a strong point amid its territorial dispute with Beijing. Pag-asa is the second-largest island in the Spratly archipelago, which is also claimed by Taiwan and Vietnam. The Spratly Islands have long been a point of contention between the Philippines and China, as Beijing lays claim to virtually all of the South China Sea. It has tried to stake its claim by transforming seven mostly submerged reefs into island outposts some of which have runways, radars and weapons systems. The Hague Tribunal ruled last year that China has caused irreparable harm to the ecosystem of the Spratlys, and that its actions have breached the sovereign rights of the Philippines. Beijing rejected the verdict, with state media calling it ill-founded and naturally null and void. | ||
| " Sunni Muslim NATO Alliance Commanded By Former Pak Army Chief Analysis | ||
By Dr Subhash Kapila* The Islamic Military Alliance to Fight Terrorism (IMAFT) sponsored by Saudi Arabia which is a misnomer as it is essentially a Sunni Muslim NATO Alliance has finally emerged in May 2017 commanded by former Pak Army Chief, General Raheel Sharif. It would be fair to designate IMAFT as Sunni Muslim NATO Alliance as its 34 Muslim nations membership when reviewed comprises only Sunni Muslim nations. Shia majority nations like Iran and Iraq stand excluded from this Alliance. By its very exclusivity of being a sectarian Islamic Sunni military alliance it carries the portents of emerging as one more additional disruptive factor in the severe turbulence that plagues the Middle East and Greater South West Asia. The above fact negates the very intent of IMAFT being brought into existence for a concerted effort by Muslim nations to fight terrorism. In effect Sunni NATO as better abbreviated, seems to have been the brainchild of Saudi Arabia as a combat instrument to fight Saudi Arabias proxy wars with its main Gulf rival and contender for regional power, namely, Iran. Western media reports indicate that the US Trump Administration along with Israel have encouraged Saudi Arabia to go ahead with this project viewing it as another instrument to fight and destroy the ISIS. Saudi Arabia has been toying with this proposal from 2015 onwards but it found traction for forward movement in early 2017 when controversies broke out in Pakistans domestic politics of the wisdom of the Pakistan Government giving permission to recently retired Pakistan Army Chief, General Raheel Sharif to head the Sunni NATO Alliance on demands by Saudi Arabia. The Headquarters of Sunni NATO Alliance is to be located at Riyadh in Saudi Arabia. No further details of Sunni NATO Alliance in terms of its command and staff structure have yet surfaced in the public domain. It would be fair to assume that these would now be planned, worked out and put into place by Pakistani General Raheel Sharif as the C-in-C of this Alliance. Similarly there have been no firm details about the Charter of the Alliances or on the contribution of troop strengths for this Alliance by its Sunni Member nations. Reviewing the Sunni NATO Alliance three major aspects need to be examined in relation to the underlying intent for the formation of this Alliance, its impact on Middle East dynamics and more importantly its implications for Indias national security interests. The first aspect of the intention for formation of Sunni NATO Alliance has been indicated above in that it is primarily a geopolitical move by Saudi Arabia for a containment of Iran in concert with major Sunni nations. It has nothing to do with its lofty designation of an Islamic Military Alliance to Fight Terrorism even though it would be projected that the Alliances immediate task would be to counter the spreading tentacles of the ISIS in the Muslim world. Could not the existing Organisation of Islamic Countries served the same purpose by crafting a military arm for this purpose? That would however not have facilitated the exclusion of Iran and the Shia Muslim countries. The second aspect of the impact of Sunni NATO Alliance on Middle East dynamics has many complicated facets. Firstly, it sharpens the cleavages between the Sunni Muslim nations and the Shia Muslim nations. This by itself creates additional challenges for any concerted moves within the region to find solutions for combatting the ISIS or conflict resolution in the Middle East. Secondly, the United States putting its weight behind a Saudi Arabia sponsored Alliance commanded by a former Pak Army General positons the United States as not being an honest broker of Middle East peace processes. Thirdly, a perceptional Saudi Arabia-United States combine to isolate Iran in the Middle East robs the United States of co-opting Iran as the leading regional power in the Gulf Region for a better and stable security environment in the Middle East. This by itself would expectedly lead to hardening of Irans positions in the Northern Tier of the Middle East and possibly spur Iran towards nuclear weaponisation. The third aspect and the most disconcerting one, in terms of implications for Indian national security interest are worrisome. A host of questions strike ones mind when reviewing the Sunni NATO Alliance character and its intent. The first and foremost is the Pakistan Factor that dominates the command structure of the Sunni NATO Alliance. Then is the aspect of the possible interventions of this Alliance in Indias neighbourhood. Lastly, how does the backing by the United States for this Alliance affect Indo-US relations? Pakistans centrality in terms of command of Sunni NATO Alliance by a former Pak Army Chief positions Pakistan in an advantageous position to distort the intended role of this Alliance. It follows that General Raheel Sharif will get his way in having the Staff of this Alliance predominantly from the Pakistan Army whose implications are obvious. It carries a host of connotations which can be addressed as a subject of a separate Paper. In terms of Sunni NATO Alliance possible military interventions in Indias neighbourhood for so-called purpose of fighting terrorism in Muslim countries extends from Afghanistan to Bangladesh and possibly the Maldives. India has legitimate national security interest in these countries. Would the Indian Government of the day be in a position to forestall Sunni NATO Alliance military interventions on Indias doorsteps or be able to neutralise them once they take place? Indian contingency planning should commence even if the chances presently are remote. India has all the right to be perturbed by United States history of past pro-Pakistan tilts which kept the worlds two prominent democracies estranged. The Sunni NATO Alliance inherently carries the seeds of estrangement once again not only because of geopolitical factors but more importantly because India has always abhorred Islam-centric military alliances or even multilateral alliances with predominant Islamic membership. That the Sunni NATO Alliance is not only exclusively Islamic but two steps ahead in terms of being Islamic-sectarian in composition aggravates the situation. Before concluding two more questions need to be addressed and these are as to why Saudi Arabia specifically preferred to have Pakistani former Army Chief, General Raheel Sharif to head the Sunni NATO Alliance? Why did Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif buckle under Saudi pressure to be a prominent factor in this Alliance conscious that this would seriously impact Pakistans relations with its giant neighbour, Iran? Pakistan it seems becomes a logical choice in term of Saudi Arabias preferential choices because of the IOUs that Pakistan and PM Nawaz Sharif personally owe to Saudi Arabia. In the same vein, it can be analytically expected that the Sunni NATO Alliance would be fleshed out in a major way by standing major troop contributions from the Pakistan Army with only token contributions by other major Sunni nations. It is within the realms of possibility that the Sunni NATO Alliance could possibly have a standing reserve of a Pakistan Army Brigade as a nucleus for any expeditionary intervention force at the command of the Sunni NATO Alliance. Pakistans relations with Iran can be severely tested by not only Pakistans participation in a US-sponsored/backed Sunni NATO Alliance ostensibly aimed at Iran but also that it is headed by the recently retired Pakistan Army Chief, General Raheel Sharif noted for his hard-line attitudes not only towards India and Afghanistan but also towards Iran. Stiff opposition is being offered in Pakistani domestic politics as to how the Government deviated from established procedures to grant a no Objection Certificate to General Raheel Sharif to assume command of the Sunni NATO Alliance. Pakistan has resorted to feverish damage-control initiatives with Iran by a flurry of high level visits of Pakistani top officials. But this cannot make headway until Saudi Arabia agrees to shed the Sunni Tag of this Alliance and welcomes Iran and other major Shia nations in its fold. This is highly unlikely and places Pakistan in a policy cleft-stick. In conclusion, as a first attempt of solely analysing the inherent contradictions that could surface in the Sunni NATO Alliance to affect its military effectiveness in the near future as a potent Islamic military force, one cannot however rule out that the very concept of a Sunni NATO Alliance has the potential of being a disruptive element in the already severely turbulent Middle East and Greater South West Asia region. *Dr Subhash Kapila is a graduate of the Royal British Army Staff College, Camberley and combines a rich experience of Indian Army, Cabinet Secretariat, and diplomatic assignments in Bhutan, Japan, South Korea and USA. Currently, Consultant International Relations & Strategic Affairs with South Asia Analysis Group. He can be reached at drsubhashkapila.007@gmail.com | ||
| Firing Comey May Set Trump on Collision Course With US National Security State - Sputnik International | ||
| ||
| Drug Used For Alcohol Dependence Might Also Treat Stuttering | ||
Baclofen, a drug that has recently been used to treat alcohol dependence despite not officially being licensed for this condition, might also help stop stuttering, suggest researchers in the journal BMJ Case Reports. But the findings, which are based on one person, would need to be confirmed in much larger clinical studies in people who are not alcohol dependent, before any firm conclusions could be drawn, they caution. Baclofen is a muscle relaxant which is widely used for the treatment of stiff or heavy muscles caused by conditions such as multiple sclerosis and spinal cord diseases. It has recently been used to treat alcohol dependence because it is thought to target the nerve centres in the brain involved in reward and addiction. As yet, the evidence for baclofen’s impact on curbing alcohol craving and improving abstinence has been mixed. But it seemed to work for a 61 year old man who regularly drank 2-3 litres of wine every day and admitted to having had a problematic relationship with alcohol for 20 years. The man had gone through several detox and rehab programmes, but afterwards had only managed to keep off the booze for a couple of years before resuming his excess alcohol intake. As well as sleep problems and a history of depression, he also stuttered, which he attributed to difficulties finding the right words to express himself in Dutch, as this wasn’t his native tongue. The potential impact of baclofen on stuttering came to light when the man agreed to take part in a clinical trial looking at treating alcohol dependence with the drug. As part of the trial he ended up taking 120 mg of baclofen every day for 10 weeks. But once a daily dose of 90 mg had been reached, his doctors noticed that he had stopped stuttering. Nevertheless, the man complained of sleepiness, stiff muscles and heavy legs on this dose, prompting his doctors to gradually taper down the dose to zero. However, once he had stopped taking baclofen, he returned to his former level of drinking and his stutter re-emerged. He was therefore advised to continue taking the drug at a daily dose of 90 mg after which he stopped drinking for a prolonged period and his stutter disappeared. “This case illustrates the potential efficacy of a high-dose baclofen treatment for patients with [alcohol dependency],” write the authors, adding that the drug may offer a new treatment option for stuttering. But they point out that as the man’s stuttering always accompanied excess drinking, alcohol might have directly affected his speech patterns. Nevertheless, they suggest that there are potentially plausible biological explanations for their finding, one of which is that muscle tension is a factor in stuttering, and therefore the muscle relaxant properties of baclofen could be acting on the respiratory muscles and/or those in the neck and face. Secondly, some studies suggest that baclofen reduces anxiety in people who are alcohol dependent: anxiety is also associated with stuttering. Another possibility is that baclofen may indirectly reduce production of the neurotransmitter dopamine: higher levels of this chemical are associated with the speech impediment. | ||
| Changing Geopolitics Of Natural Gas In Black Sea Region Analysis | ||
By Anna Mikulska* (FPRI) — Russian dominance over natural gas deliveries into Europe has been weakening, thanks in large part to the new ways in which natural gas can be transported as well as new sources of supply. These developments are transforming the geopolitics of natural gas in the Black Sea region. Turkey hopes to exploit its geographic position to become a natural gas hub for Europe. New natural gas pipelines running from Russia and Azerbaijan towards the Black Sea region will certainly remodel the geopolitics of natural gas in Europe. Also, relations between Black Sea states will undergo important changes as Turkey grows in geopolitical importance for both the region and Russia, while Ukraine will lose prominence as a designated transit country for natural gas. Notably, Russia stands to lose some of its political influence in the region as new non-Russian sources of natural gas come online. The Current Situation: Russias Role ReducedHistorically, Europe has depended on Russia for its natural gas supply, much of it shipped via the Black Sea region. European imports from Russia oscillated between 20% and 30%. And until the last decade, these deliveries were relatively stable and uneventful. Even during the Cold War, the Soviet Union refrained from deriving political benefits from Western Europes dependence on its natural gas.But this stable relationship began to change as the iron curtain fell and Russia lost its grip on Eastern Europe. Reduced control over transit countries such as Belarus and Ukraine has disrupted stable deliveries of natural gas to Europe. Consecutive breaks in Russian gas supplies to Europe via Ukraine (2005/2006, 2007/2008, and 2008/2009) culminated in the total shutoff of natural gas supplies for Ukraine after Russia invaded and annexed Crimea in 2014. These actions amplified European concerns about the security of the gas supply and encouraged Europe to reduce dependence on Russian gas. If unchecked, this dependence gives Russia too much influence over domestic policies, especially in Eastern and Central Europe, where some countries rely completely on Russian natural gas supplies. Consequently, Europe has diversified its natural gas supply. The changing natural gas market has allowed Europe to diversify. Discoveries of natural gas in the U.S., Australia, and Azerbaijan, together with the advent of commercialized liquefied natural gas (LNG), gave natural gas a global reach. LNG reduced regional dependencies because gas no longer needed to be shipped via pipeline. Today, U.S. or Australian natural gas can flow freely to any place in the world in the form of LNG and can compete with the regional suppliers like Russia or Norway, which deliver gas via traditional pipeline infrastructure. Thus, today, the natural gas market is beginning to resemble the oil market, where pricerather than locationdetermines transactions. Natural Gas Sources Expanding and DiversifyingEastern European countries see these new conditions as an opportunity to reduce their dependence on Russian natural gas. Many of these countries, which have relied on Russia for much, if not all, of their supply, support diversifying away from Russia, including by increasing LNG imports. Lithuania and Poland have recently completed LNG import terminals and are planning to expand them. Poland aims to build another terminal by 2020. Estonia has two facilities slated for completion by 2020. Western Europe, which consumes less Russian gas, focuses more on guaranteeing dependable supply rather than limiting Russian influence. Western Europeans generally tolerate diversification away from Ukrainian transit routes. For example Germany, which has strong economic ties to Russia, sees Nord Stream 1 and the planned Nord Stream 2 as a solution. These two pipelines would deliver Russian natural gas directly to Germany via a route under the Baltic Sea. This plan is in line with Russias strategy to avoid using Ukraine as a transit country. This strategy also entails resurrecting Russias plans for South Stream, a pipeline that first intended to enter Europe via Bulgaria and Romania, but faced regulatory issues within the European Union. The new plans avoid the EUs regulatory and compliance issues by re-routing the new pipeline through Turkey. The Consequences: A Change in Roles for Russia, Ukraine and TurkeyThe changing natural gas trade in Europe is re-shaping the Black Sea region. One consequence is that Russias position will weaken, creating a new role for Turkey as an intermediary between Russia and Europe. Another consequence is that Turkey will become a country where two major natural gas pipelines meet: TANAP and the Turkish Stream.Russia. With new supplies of natural gas to Europe coming either via TANAP or in the form of foreign LNG, Russias dominance over Europes energy supply will weaken. As existing long-term contracts expire, Russia may have to cut prices if it is to remain competitive with LNG. Russia, eager to keep its reputation as a dependable natural gas supplier, will diversify its transit routes away from Ukraine. This plan includes swapping the South Stream for the Turkish stream. The move is important not only for Russias trade with Europe, but also for its future ventures. Lack of dependability and Europes move to reduce its dependency on Russian gas has already put Russia in a weaker position vis-à-vis China. According to analysts, the 10 year long negotiations that ended in a Sino-Russian gas deal in 2014 included more concessions from Russia than from China. Beijing realizes that Russias expansion into Asia is a necessary step given Europes move away from Russian gas. Russias reputation for dependability is crucial as it enters other markets where no direct pipeline connection is possible. Russian operators Novatek and Gazprom plan new LNG export terminals, including Arctic LNG 2, three LNG trains in Yamal, two LNG trains on the Baltic Sea, and a Shtokman-Teriberka terminal on the Barents Sea. Ukraine. Russia hoped that Kyivs long-term reliance on artificially low-priced Russian gas would help build Russian political influence. As Ukraines drifted toward the EU and NATO, Russia hiked gas prices in retaliation. At first, Russia demanded higher gas prices and prompt payment of old debts accumulated over previous gas supplies. Then, in 2014, Russia took it one step further when it attacked Ukraine and seized Crimea. Ukraine is trying to wean itself from Russian gas by importing gas from the EU. And while the country still remains a transit route for some gas destined for Europe, Russia has reduced the volume there in favor of the Nord Stream 1 or the Opal pipeline in Central Europe. This change has hit Ukraines finances, with estimates suggesting that Ukraine will lose $2bn in transit fees each year. Ukraine must rethink its strategy, especially given pipeline developments and new LNG deliveries. The government has plans to restructure the countrys energy sector. Ukraine is eager to hop on the LNG train and is planning new onshore and floating facilities in the Odessa area, which should open by the end of this decade. The current instability, however, has a highly negative impact on all these efforts, especially as Turkey positions itself as a potential contender to take over Ukraines place on the market. Turkey. Turkey has the most to gain as it becomes the new natural gas corridor to Europe. With confidence in dependability of supplies from Russia and Ukraine dwindling, Turkey is becoming a major transit country for Russian gas as well as for Azerbaijani gas. The massive Shah Daniz natural gas and oil fields in Azerbaijan may become a staple of the European energy diet. But how Turkey plays its cards will be crucial for its future relations with both Europe and Russia. Most importantly, the country must be vigilant not to fall into Russias sphere of political influence. Russia has already provided Turkey with lower natural gas prices and promised further discounts when the Turkish Stream becomes operational. But this seemingly beneficial deal may have far reaching consequences in terms of Turkeys dependence on Russia for low priced gas and on transit fees as a source of revenues. The Regional ImpactTurkey is moving in the right direction by diversifying beyond Russia via TANAP and investing in LNG import terminals. At the same time, an agreement to build Turkish Stream, an expensive and long-term infrastructure project, signals that Russia and Turkey hope for more friendly relations and stronger economic ties going forward.Beyond the Russian-Turkish relationship, the move towards Turkeys role as an energy hub will redefine the countrys position towards other Black Sea nations. It may be a sign of better relations between Turkey and Greece, engaged for years in a conflict over Cyprus. Because both the TANAP and the Turkish stream will resurface at the Greek border, the countries will have strong incentive to put animosity aside in order to benefit from energy cooperation. On the other hand, Romania and Bulgaria will be on the losing part of the equation as they fail to receive the benefits of hosting the cancelled South Stream pipeline. The energy landscape of the Black Sea is changing rapidly. The traditional balance of power is changing as Russia loses some of its grip on natural gas supply, and as new transit routes are being drawn via Turkey. But it will take time before the pipelines are built and gas starts flowing. Until then, we should expect the geopolitical games to continue. About the author: *Anna Mikulska, Ph.D., is a fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute and nonresident fellow in energy studies at the Baker Institute. Source: This article was published by FPRI | ||
| Duterte follows Xi's lead with military build-up in South China Sea - CNN | ||
| ||
| Tillerson says US won't be rushed on climate change policies | ||
Arctic nations have renewed calls for the world to address climate warming, but U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson says the United States will not rush to make a decision on its policies.       | ||
| Paratrooper killed in Iraq comes home to Fort Benning on Friday | ||
First Lt. Weston Lee, 25, of Bluffton, Ga., will be escorted home by a procession of law enforcement officers led by the Georgia State Patrol.    | ||
| PROCUREMENT: Arabia Rescues MiG | ||
| Acting FBI director undercuts White House on Comey firing | ||
Acting FBI director tells a different story than White House on significance of Russia investigation, agents' views of Comey | ||
| Comey Testimony on Clintons Intent in Email Case Triggered Firing | ||
The surprise firing of James Comey was triggered by the ousted FBI director's recent comments on why he chose not to seek the prosecution of Hillary Clinton for using an unsecure email server, according to White House and Trump administration officials. President Trump was angered by Comey's assertion that Clinton had no criminal intent when she mishandled highly classified information on her private server, said officials familiar with the president's thinking. The Comey firing took center stage at a hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee Thursday where the acting FBI director fielded questions from Democrats who suggested the dismissal was aimed at hampering an ongoing FBI counterintelligence probe into whether Russian intelligence secretly cooperated with the Trump presidential campaign last year. In the nine months since the Russia-Trump campaign investigation has been underway, no evidence of criminal wrongdoing has been disclosed, either by officials or in unofficial leaks. A White House official said the fact that no evidence has emerged from the probe shows there is no basis for Democrats' allegations of covert collusion between Moscow and the Trump campaign. Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe denied during Senate testimony that the FBI had asked for additional resources for the Russia probe, contradicting a widely quoted New York Times report Thursday. "I strongly believe that the Russian investigation is adequately resourced," McCabe said, adding that the investigation is continuing "vigorously." The Times, quoting unnamed congressional officials, reported that Comey had asked the Justice Department for more prosecutors days before his firing. The Justice Department also denied the story. Trump told NBC the FBI was in "virtual turmoil" as a result of Comey's mishandling of the Clinton investigation into the use of a private email server that compromised highly classified information. "I was going to fire Comey; there's no good time to do it, by the way," Trump said. "He's a showboat. He's a grandstander. The FBI has been in turmoil. You know that. I know that. Everybody knows that. You take a look at the FBI a year ago. It was in virtual turmoil less than a year ago. It hasn't recovered from that," he said. The president said the recommendation to dismiss the FBI chief was outlined in a memo from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and was not the sole reason he made the decision. Rosenstein "made a recommendation, but regardless of recommendation, I was going to fire Comey," he said. White House Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders confirmed the Senate testimony last week was a trigger for the dismissal. She said the president had "lost confidence" in Comey over the past several months. "After watching Director Comey's testimony last Wednesday, the president was strongly inclined to remove him," she said. During the Senate hearing, Sen. Mark Warner (D., Va.) called the firing "a shocking development." "For many people, including myself, it's hard to avoid the conclusion that the president's decision to remove Director Comey was related to this [Russia] investigation and that is truly unacceptable," Warner said. Added another Democrat, Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.): "Gentlemen, it's fair to say I disagreed with Director Comey as much as anyone in this room but the timing of this firing is wrong to anyone with a semblance of ethics." McCabe declined to comment when asked if Comey had informed Trump three times that he was not under investigation, as Trump stated in his dismissal letter to Comey. Trump said in the NBC interview that he was told by Comey he was not under investigation during a dinner meeting and in two telephone calls. "I think he asked for the dinner, and he wanted to stay on as the FBI head, and I said ‘I'll consider it, we'll see what happens,'" Trump said. "But we had a very nice dinner, and at that time he told me, ‘You are not under investigation.'" During May 3 Senate testimony, Comey said one reason he recommended against a Justice Department prosecution of Clinton was that she lacked criminal "intent" when setting up the private email server that was used to transmit some classified information. "Federal law is clear regarding classified materials: intent is not relevant [to mishandling classified information]," the White House official said. The probe into Clinton's emails revealed that "top secret" information, including some of the nation's most closely guarded information held in what are called Special Access Programs, was transmitted on her private email server. The information included secrets on North Korea's nuclear programs and how the U.S. government targets terrorists for drone strikes. The president was said to be upset that Comey had granted concessions to witnesses in the email probe that undermined its integrity, the officials said. For example, two key witnesses, Clinton aides Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, were granted immunity from prosecution. The immunity deals limited searches for evidence and required the FBI to destroy their laptop computers after the computers were searched, potentially eliminating evidence. Also, FBI questioning of Clinton took place without her being placed under oath and without being recorded, preventing a transcript of the interview from being produced. Lenient handling of witnesses and evidence in the case was a key factor leading Trump to fire Comey, the officials said. FBI agents investigating the Clinton email server were upset by Comey's intervention in the probe. "They were seething with anger [at Comey]," said an administration source with direct knowledge of some case agents' views. In addition to Comey's comments on Clinton's intentions, "the sheer number of immunities granted during the case and destruction of laptops made it clear that his position was untenable," said the White House official. "Add the low morale inside the FBI and the firing was unavoidable." McCabe, the acting FBI chief, challenged reports that FBI agents were angry at Comey. He said the "vast majority" of FBI employees felt positively toward the director. In a letter to FBI employees sent Thursday, Comey said he has "long believed that a president can fire an FBI Director for any reason, or for no reason at all." "I'm not going to spend time on the decision or the way it was executed," he stated. "I hope you won't either. It is done, and I will be fine, although I will miss you and the mission deeply." "I have said to you before that, in times of turbulence, the American people should see the FBI as a rock of competence, honesty, and independence," he added. Comey also came under fire from some FBI agents for not pursuing Clinton's motive in setting up the private email server in 2009, apparently to avoid federal records guidelines used to preserve official communications. "FBI agents were seething with resentment at Comey's meddling" in the Clinton email investigation, the administration source said. "They were up in arms." Comey told the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 3 that he was "nauseous" at the thought his public discussion of the probe may have impacted the 2016 election. In early July, Comey announced he was recommending against prosecuting Clinton while issuing harsh criticism of her mishandling of classified information. He then reopened the probe 11 days before the election. On Oct. 28, Comey sent a letter to Congress saying newly discovered emails relevant to the case had been found on the computer of Anthony Weiner, husband of Clinton aide Huma Abedin. "We did not find anything that changes our view of her intent," Comey said of the October emails. Later in the hearing, Comey stated regarding Abedin that "we didn't have any indication that she had a sense that what she was doing was in violation of the law. Couldn't prove any sort of criminal intent." "Really, the central problem we have with the whole email investigation was proving that the secretary and others knew that they were doing, that they were communicating about classified information in a way that they shouldn't be and proving that they had some sense of their doing something unlawful. That was our burden and we weren't able to meet it," Comey testified. Federal law regarding the handling of classified information makes it a crime to knowingly and willfully communicate, furnish, or transmit classified information. The FBI concluded that hackers from Russia tried to break in to Clinton's private email server, although the cyber intrusions did not appear to be successful. Intelligence officials have said Clinton's use of the private email server almost certainly means that sophisticated foreign electronic intelligence services gained access to the emails. Comey disclosed in March that the FBI was investigating any Russian ties to the Trump campaign. "The FBI, as part of our counterintelligence mission, is investigating the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia's efforts," Comey said. The post Comey Testimony on Clinton’s ‘Intent’ in Email Case Triggered Firing appeared first on Washington Free Beacon. | ||
| Trumps Brand Is Crisis | ||
You hear it all the time: President Trump hasn't been tested, hasn't faced a real crisis. The events of the last few weeks, however, have made me want to turn that formulation around. Trump doesn't face crises so much as manufacture them. In a way he is the crisis, and his presidency is in danger of being defined not by any legislative or diplomatic achievement but by his handling of the multiplying and daunting obstacles he creates for himself. I do not mean that we are in the midst of a constitutional crisis. Nor are we in a crisis of democracy. Trump was fairly elected, the mechanisms of representative government continue to function, the judiciary and bureaucracy and Congress and media constrain the office of the president. What Trump did in firing James Comey accorded with the powers of the chief executive. Indeed, how this political survivalist had managed to last so long was something of a mystery to me. Throughout his time in Washington Comey had managed to annoy no less than three presidentsBush on surveillance, Obama on law enforcement, Trump on Russia. Bush and Obama must have worried about the backlash that would ensue if they derailed Comey and appeared to interfere in the workings of the Department of Justice. Trump has no such hang ups. Violating norms is what he does. The rules that govern public speech, public conductwhat you are allowed to say about your opponents, judges, Islam, immigration, women, how you separate yourself from your company, where you spend your weekendsdo not make Trump flinch. His flippancy was part of his appeal. He was the middle finger of the American electorate, a protest against two decades of establishment missteps. He was going to shake things up, drain the swamp, expose that there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between the parties, and if he offended his adversaries along the way, well, so be it. Elite consensus had become so petrified, the beneficiaries of globalization so powerful and entrenched, the institutions of the administrative state so disconnected from the sentiments of the people that only a brash tycoon with no political experience could break the deadlock. Trump brought to his campaign an improvisational and unstructured managerial style, a flair for publicity, a savant-like understanding of social media, and the insight that confrontation and polarization are keys to building a brand. He'd follow one outrageous statement with another, hold strident rallies from which cable television could not look away, announce policies so novel and controversial that they seized immediately the imagination of the electorate. The persistent atmosphere of crisis, of emergency and mess, the sense that it could fall apart at any moment heightened the drama, amped us up, kept us watching. McCain, Graham, Megyn Kelley, Carly Fiorina, David Duke, Heidi Cruz, Judge Curiel, Manafort, WikiLeaks, the Access Hollywood videonone of it was planned, none of it was reasoned. It was the same word-salad, the same tweets, jokes, insults, and poses that had carried Trump from relative anonymity as the son of Fred to global fame as a hotel and casino developer, business icon and bestselling author, television star, golf course owner and licensing king, nascent president. The Trump persona and its endless cycles of deals, failures, and comebacks had carried him this far. Why stop? There has always been a self-destructive element to Donald Trump, a tendency to undermine the foundation of his life just as it appears to be settling. Perhaps this is the restlessness of a great man, the constant drive of the lionhearted for something better, greater, richer, higher; he'd probably say so. Whatever the cause, it was foolish to imagine that this aspect of his personality would vanish upon his taking the oath of office. He has had trouble translating the style of leadership that brought him financial and campaign success to governing from the White House. His support is deep but not wide, and is attached to him personally, not to the party he leads and its business-friendly program. His desire not to employ anyone who criticized him during the campaign has hampered his ability to recruit. His assumption that the tools that brought him to power will suffice to enact his agenda seems unfounded: It takes more than tweets and interviews and the occasional set piece rally to mobilize public support for a reform of Obamacare or a tax cut or an infrastructure bill or an immigration overhaul. The circus did not end on January 20; the ringmaster did not pause. He rushes from one end of the arena to the other at a whim, picking fights, commenting on the scene, introducing the lion-tamer and stuntmen, hamming it up with the clowns. "Donald Trump is an ad hoc president," wrote Michael Warren. "The decisions he makes are by and of the moment, with his aides and staffers and supporters racing to fit them into a message and a policy." It is his desire to rebut the idea that victory was the result of collusion with Russia that has had the most explosive effects in Washington, has done the most to unsettle the city and its residents, has catalyzed institutional resistance to his presidency. Every one of his forty-four predecessors would have kept their distance from the subjects of intelligence or criminal investigations, would have focused on domestic and foreign policy, would have delivered anodyne messages of confidence in the intelligence community and Department of Justice, would have trusted allies in Congress and media to be their advocates. Not Trump. Even before Inauguration Day he was lambasting the CIA and DNI. By the time he was implicating former acting attorney general Sally Yates in the leak of classified information to the press, official Washington had become so inured to his behavior that it more or less ignored his Twitter account. Firing Comey when he did, and in the manner he did, could not be evaded, written off, easily rationalized, otherwise ignored. Trump can add the FBI to his enemies list. And after a few slow news days, the crisis resumed. Still, one can't help noticing the ease with which the president has been able to compartmentalize, separate the controversy of the day from the business of government. His achievements are real enough. The economy appears healthy, illegal immigration has plummeted, Neil Gorsuch was confirmed, regulations are being undone, the American Health Care Act made it through the House, foreign policy is far more conventional than many had anticipated. Perhaps Trump keeps pouring fuel on the fire because he wouldn't have it any other way, because he thrives in crisis, revels in it, loves the risk and danger and thrill, wants to struggle, does not know what to do if he isn't fighting, attacking, insulting, offending, agitating, summoning followers to his side and repelling his adversaries. Meanwhile life goes on. What works for Trump may not work for the Republican Party, however. And if Trump's presidency is to have positive and durable consequences on the border, on the courts, on the markets, on the law, he will need Congress. It's a relationship strained by the feeling of crisis. The Democrats have calculated that their path to the majority depends on outright opposition to anything associated with Trump, and the GOP majority is relatively thin. Senators have power. They are not moved as easily as the House, which as Trump has learned is not exactly intimidated by him either. Does Trump understand that the strength of his presidency rests on the strength of the Republican Congress, that this strength depends on legislative achievement, that the Democrats will move to impeach him the minute they have the House? Weird as it sounds, the best case scenario may be the one in which we live, where a president defined by crisis, consumed by scandal, presides over a humming economy and a relatively stable international scene, where angry tweets and sarcastic letters of termination and eyebrow-raising asides are the price of a center-right presidency that enforces immigration law, puts constitutionalists on the bench, reduces taxes and regulations, spends a little more on the military, incentivizes capital investment, and tightens labor markets to induce wage hikes. The best-case scenario is that the crisis is limited to Trump, who is defined by it, needs it. And the worst-case scenario? I leave that to your imagination. The post Trump’s Brand Is Crisis appeared first on Washington Free Beacon. | ||
| GOP: FBI firing won't slow agenda - The Hill | ||
| ||
| Don't worry, the FBI won't give up the Russia investigation - Los Angeles Times | ||
| ||
| Sessions issues sweeping new criminal charging policy | ||
The attorney general directs prosecutors to charge defendants with the most serious crimes.    | ||
| Syrian Kurdish forces to push on ISIS capital this summer | ||
U.S.-backed Syrian Kurdish fighters say they expect to push on and capture the Islamic State group's de facto capital of Raqqa in northern Syria this summer, after receiving heavy weapons from the U.S. military.    | ||
| Get Ready, Russia and China: Anti-Ship Missile Target Destroyed by U.S. Navy SeaRam System | ||
Kris Osborn Security,  Why Moscow and Beijing should worry.The firing on-board the USS LCS Jackson tested the ship's ability to track and disable high-speed maneuvering surface targets and defeat long range anti-shipping air threats.The Navy's SeaRAM ship-based defensive missile succeeded in attacking and destroying an aerial drone designed to mirror an anti-ship missile target as part of a Littoral Combat Ship's Combat System Qualification Trials, service officials said. The test, which took place aboard the Navy's USS Jackson LCS off the coast of California, was designed to test the ship's ability to track and disable high-speed maneuvering surface targets and defeat long range anti-shipping air threats, a Navy statement said. The assessment also included the firing of the LCS' 57mm gun against fast attack craft. Arming the Surface Fleet With SeaRam The qualification testing was intended to fortify a broader Navy effort to further arm its surface fleet with SeaRam missiles, defensive weapons engineered to fire from the MK-49 Guided Missile Launching System, or GMLS. In recent months, the Navy has begun arming forward-deployed destroyers with the emerging SeaRam ship-defense weapon able to track and destroy attacking enemy missiles, drones, aircraft, small boats and other threats, officials said. The SeaRAM weapons system, designed to fire Rolling Airframe Missiles out of a Close-in-Weapons System, is planned to operate on the USS Porter, USS Carney, USS Ross and USS Donald Cook, Navy officials have said. SeaRAM combines two highly successful U.S. Navy systems: the MK 15 Close-In Weapon System (CIWS) and the MK 31 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) launching system, the Navy official said. The SeaRAM system builds upon the infrastructure and radar of the Close-in-Weapons-System, or CIWS. CIWS' Phalanx weapon fires a 20mm cannon at close-in threats such as small boats. The SeaRAM is part of a layered ship-defense system designed to identify and destroy longer-range approaching enemy threats, such as anti-ship missiles, drones, small boats and helicopters. Read full article | ||
| Iraqi's Shiite militias launch anti-ISIS push west of Mosul | ||
An Iraqi official says the country's Shiite-led militia force has launched an operation to retake a small village held by the Islamic State group west of the embattled city of Mosul.    | ||
| Crime a battleground for German parties ahead of key vote | ||
Recently released figures on crime showing a sharp rise in violent offenses by migrants have propelled the topic to the forefront again, with nationalist parties seeking to capitalize on German voters' fears.    | ||
| Trump speaks out about James Comey firing | ||
The president acknowledged in an interview he was thinking about the FBI's Russian investigation when he fired Comey and insisted he never asked the former FBI director to end the investigation. | ||
| Assault rifles, pistol stolen from German military vehicle | ||
BERLIN (AP) - The German Defense Ministry says two assault rifles and a pistol have been stolen from inside an armored vehicle at a military facility in northern Germany, in another embarrassment for the armed forces. The news comes as the military investigates an alleged far-right plot by two soldiers ... | ||
| Lester Holt: Trump Handed Me Five Pages of Democratic Quotes Criticizing Comey, It Makes a Fair Point | ||
NBC News anchor Lester Holt revealed what was on the paper President Trump handed to him at the outset of their interview on Thursday: a list of 20 Democratic quotes ripping FBI Director James Comey that Holt called a "fair point."On Friday's "Today" show, Holt reviewed his interview with Trump that delved into the president's surprising firing of Comey. Host Savannah Guthrie relayed that viewers noticed Trump hand Holt a document of some sort before they sat down.
Holt brought the document to the studio, saying it was "five pages of quotes of Democrats who have been critical of Comey." "A few calling for his resignation, calling for his firing, being critical," he said. "There were about 20 quotes on here, but the president wanted me to have that. And it makes a fair point that a lot of Democrats were not happy with Comey either, many believing that he torpedoed Hillary Clinton's chances." Holt said he got the sense that the White House did not Mirroring Trump, White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders reeled off a list of Democrats who previously blasted Comey during Thursday's press briefing. The Washington Free Beacon produced a video Thursday showing the changing Democratic views of Comey after the Hillary Clinton email press conference he gave last summer, his late-October letter about the investigation, Trump made considerable news during his interview with Holt, including contradicting his own White House's explanation on why he fired Comey by saying he planned to terminate him regardless of any Justice Department recommendation. The post Lester Holt: Trump Handed Me Five Pages of Democratic Quotes Criticizing Comey, It Makes a Fair Point appeared first on Washington Free Beacon. | ||
| The Note: Russia on Trump's Mind | ||
null | ||
| America's 'emotional obsession' with Russia will end soon, Kremlin says | ||
null | ||
| Pentagon says $2bn sale of missiles to UAE will 'contribute to US national security' - RT | ||
|
Shared NewsLinks Review
-
No comments:
Post a Comment