The US President told reporters he could meet his Russian counterpart around his trip to the UK in just two weeks’ time
Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin during their last meeting at the G20 (Image: AFP)
Details of Donald Trump’s planned summit with Vladimir Putin have been confirmed this morning, as fears grow in Britain that the US President will strike a ‘peace deal’ with the Russian strongman.
The two leaders will meet in Helsinki on July 16, the Kremlin and White House revealed this afternoon.
“The two leaders will discuss relations between the United States and Russia and a range of national security issues,” the White House said in a statement.
The deal was struck after a trip to the Kremlin by National Security Advisor John Bolton, who held a meeting with President Putin.
President Trump said last night: “It would look like we will probably be meeting some time in the not too distant future.
“We will probably be meeting some time around my trip to Europe.” The trip was later confirmed.
According to The Times, Britain fears Trump will undermine Nato by striking a ‘peace deal’ with the Russian President.
A Cabinet minister told the Times: “What we’re nervous of is some kind of Putin-Trump ‘peace deal’ suddenly being announced.
“We could all see Trump and Putin saying, ‘why do we have all this military hardware in Europe?’ and agreeing to jointly remove that.”
The sources feared the President could hand the Kremlin a propaganda victory with an agreement like that signed by North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un.
Nearly 2,000 British troops have led a Nato deployment in Estonia as part of a heavy military presence in the Baltic states, near the Russian frontier.
The US leader is due at the Nato summit in Brussels on July 11-12, followed by a working visit to Britain on July 13 to see the Queen and Theresa May.
Where is the collusion investigation on Christopher Steele a spy from Britain?
The former British spy who wrote the infamous dossier has been ordered to appear for a deposition in a lawsuit over the salacious document filed in the U.S.
A British court ordered Christopher Steele to testify about his role in compiling the dossier, which alleges that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government during the 2016 presidential campaign.
Steele’s report was funded by the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee. BuzzFeed News published the 35-page document in Jan. 2017.
Aleksej Gubarev, a Russian businessman named in the dossier, is suing BuzzFeed in Florida and Steele in London. The dossier claims that Gubarev was recruited as a Russian spy and that his web hosting companies were used to infiltrate the DNC’s computer systems.
Gubarev’s lawyers have tried for months to force the London-based Steele to provide a deposition for the lawsuit against BuzzFeed, which is being heard in federal court in Florida.
Steele has resisted the efforts to provide a deposition, arguing that Gubarev’s lawyers are attempting to use his deposition in the BuzzFeed case in order to collect information for use in the lawsuit pending against him in the U.K.
But a British judge sided against that argument.
A judge on the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court in London ruled, “it is obvious that the author of the paragraph complained of in the Florida proceedings would be a relevant witness in defamation proceedings which are entirely based on the allegations in that paragraph, in a jurisdiction where the plaintiffs have to prove that the allegations are false,” Fox News reported.
Evan Fray-Witzer, a lawyer for Gubarev, praised the decision.
“We’re thrilled that the English Court has ordered Mr. Steele to sit for his deposition,” Fray-Witzer said. “It was always amazing to us that he could talk as freely as he has to reporters around the world about the dossier, yet refuse to sit for a deposition about the same topics.”
Fray-Witzer told The Daily Caller News Foundation a date has not been set for the deposition, but will likely be held within the next 4-6 weeks.
Fray-Witzer says that his team recently narrowed the scope of the information it sought from Steele. The former MI6 officer has asserted that his deposition could put dossier sources in danger.
Fray-Witzer says that his team has agreed not to ask Steele about his sources. He also says that Steele has chosen not to appeal the decision. “Buzzfeed published information about Mr. Gubarev and his companies that was unverified and untrue and they seem to be hoping to scuttle the deposition of the person most positioned to testify to those facts,” he told TheDCNF.
CNN asked Caitlyn Jenner, a biological male, to supply a quote for its celebration of “International Women’s Day.”
For its March 8th International Women’s Day discussion, CNN asked women around the world: “What single thing would you change to improve gender equality where you are?” One of those asked to contribute was former Olympic champion, Kardashian TV cast member, and, biological man, Caitlyn Jenner.
The cabler invited celebrities, athletes, politicians, businesswomen, and activists to offer their pearls of wisdom about the day meant to praise the contribution of women across the world.
Jenner’s contribution was featured prominently as the third entry in the list.
“My path to womanhood was very different and through that process I feel like I learned a lot about women,” Jenner wrote. “Women are brought up to kind of be a second-class citizen. Emotionally weaker. Physically weaker. I’ve always been inspired by strong women. And in particular, both by daughters: Kendall and Kylie.”
The former Olympian has been controversial for transitioning from a male to a female, less for the transitioning than for being highly celebrated for the decision. In 2015, for instance, ESPN awarded Jenner its “Arthur Ashe Courage Award,” despite the fact that Jenner’s transition had little to do with sports.
Other contributors who are featured in CNN’s celebration include Namita Gokhale, a writer and publisher from India, plus-size model Ashley Graham, fashion designer Diane Von Furstenberg, Olympic gold medalist Jessie Diggins, left-wing comedienne Margaret Cho, along with a member of the Iraqi Parliament, the mayor of San Juan, Puerto Rico, and many others.
She is such a dumb “NIE”. Arming the teachers makes them less safe. What a freaking genius.
On February 26, MSNBC Terror Analyst Malcolm Nance suggested that teachers are not ready to carry guns and that they would most likely be shot as police entered a building in the case of an attack.
Nance made these suggestions while being questioned by host Stephanie Ruhle.
Ruhle asked Nance what armed teachers would face. He responded by talking about military and police training, then shifted to teachers, saying, “It’s not like the movies. The movies have nothing to do with reality. You are putting yourself where you could be killed.”
Ruhle then asked what it would be like if an attacker brought an AR-15 and all the teacher had was a handgun.
Nance responded:
That’s really a matter of understanding and training. We have a lot of people who are going on what they think they see in the movies. If you’ve got a handgun and that’s all the tool you have, you have to be extremely well-trained to go out and engage someone who has a fully automatic or semiautomatic weapon … and to be quit honest, depending on the distance that you’re away, civilians don’t understand [that] in close quarters the first thing you are going to have to experience is the explosive sound of the weapon going off, not yours but the shooters.
He went on to say that it is only after all these first obstacles that a teacher will actually get into a gun fight.
Missing from Nance’s assessment is any acknowledgment that teachers are already hearing the sound of the attacker’s gun, but they are doing it in an unarmed, defenseless posture. In other words, they are hearing it while trying to hold the door closed, while hiding under the desk at the shooter’s feet, while throwing books and erasers at the attacker, or while selflessly charging him as did Sandy Hook principal Dawn Hochsprung.
Right now, they are hearing the “explosive sound” of the gun and then dying, being injured, or psychologically traumatized. Why not let them hear it while they are holding a gun and at least have a fighting chance?
Nance continued by claiming arming teachers is a “ludicrous idea.” He said it is “the worst idea” he has ever heard. He said that when SWAT enters a school building after a 911 shooting call, they are checking hands and they are going to shoot if they see a handgun in a teacher’s hand.
He did not mention that schools know which teachers are and are not armed, and that information can be provided to SWAT teams beforehand. Moreover, he overlooked the fact that, in our current scenario, SWAT teams that come into rooms where mass shooters have been are often stepping over a teacher’s body: the body of a teacher that had no means of self-defense.
It should be noted that President Donald Trump is not just calling for armed teachers, but for teachers who undergo training to carry and use a gun in reaction to an attack on a school. Such training can be extremely intense, as with the FASTER program that prepares armed teachers in what must be done should a horrific attack occur.
MSNBC: Teachers Not Ready to Carry Guns, Would Just Get Shot by Police
Sunday on CNN’s “Reliable Sources,” host Brian Stelter said President Donald Trump’s tweet saying the FBI missed the warning on Florida shooter because they are working on the Russia investigation was more evidence that “questions” about his fitness for office are so urgent.”
Stelter said Trump sounded “deeply trouble” and “unhinged.”
Very sad that the FBI missed all of the many signals sent out by the Florida school shooter. This is not acceptable. They are spending too much time trying to prove Russian collusion with the Trump campaign – there is no collusion. Get back to the basics and make us all proud!
Stelter said “This has been a talking point from pro-Trump media ever since Friday that there is a link between the FBI’s failure and the ongoing Russia probes. This is nonsensical.”
He added, “Here are just some of the tweets from the president. You look at what he is doing here. He is undercutting his own national security adviser, he is ranting and raving about the fake media, he has got tweets riddled with misspellings and profanity. Maybe in person, President Trump is cool, calm, and collected. But on Twitter, he sounds deeply troubled. He sounds unhinged. This is why questions about his fitness for office are so urgent. This is the biggest story that I see happening right now.”
I thought the Russians were suppose to be in Collusion with Donald Trump.
Russian internet trolls not only used social media accounts to promote President Donald Trump’s election bid, they also operated accounts supporting the candidacies of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller issued an indictment for 13 Russian nationals affiliated with three Russian companies suspected of interfering in the 2016 election. The goal of their campaign was to sow discord in the U.S. political process.
The indicted Russians operated both pro- and anti-Trump social media accounts, and accounts were also used to support Democratic presidential candidate Sanders and Green Party candidate Stein.
Russians named in the indictment also set up a “Blacktivists” Instagram account that promoted the message: “Choose Peace and Vote for Jill Stein. Trust me, it’s not a wasted vote.” They also used the Instagram account “Woke Blacks” to encourage people not to vote.
“A federal grand jury in the District of Columbia returned an indictment on Feb. 16, 2018, against 13 Russian nationals and three Russian entities accused of violating U.S. criminal laws in order to interfere with U.S. elections and political processes,” special counsel spokesman Peter Carr said in a statement.
“The indictment charges all of the defendants with conspiracy to defraud the United States, three defendants with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud, and five defendants with aggravated identity theft,” Carr said.
Mueller’s indictment, however, does not allege any of the Russian online activities in any way altered the outcome of the 2016 election.
