Wednesday 20th of February 2019

a kiss is just a kiss...

a kiss...

Russia Investigation: It's beginning to look as if claims of monstrous collusion between Russian officials and U.S. political operatives were true. But it wasn't Donald Trump who was guilty of Russian collusion. It was Hillary Clinton and U.S. intelligence officials who worked with Russians and others to entrap Trump.

That's the stunning conclusion of a RealClear Investigations report by Lee Smith, who looked in-depth at the controversial June 2016 Trump Tower meeting between officials of then-candidate Donald Trump's campaign staff and a Russian lawyer known to have ties with high-level officials in Vladimir Putin's government.

The media have spun a tale of Trump selling his soul to the Russians for campaign dirt to use against Hillary, beginning with the now-infamous Trump Tower meeting.

But "a growing body of evidence ... indicates that the meeting may have been a setup — part of a broad effort to tarnish the Trump campaign involving Hillary Clinton operatives employed by Kremlin-linked figures and Department of Justice officials," wrote Smith.

Smith painstakingly weaves together the evidence that's already out there but has been largely ignored by the mainstream media, which have become so seized with Trump-hatred that their reporting even on routine matters can no longer be trusted.

But he adds in more evidence that the Justice Department only recently handed over to Congress. And It's damning.

Memos, emails and texts now in Congress' possession show that the Justice Department and the FBI worked together both before and after the election with Fusion GPS and their main link to the scandal, former British spy and longtime FBI informant Chris Steele.

As a former British spook in Moscow, Steele had extensive ties to Russia. That's why he was picked as the primary researcher to compile the "unverified and salacious" Trump dossier, as former FBI Director James Comey once described it.

Steele's dossier, for which Fusion reportedly received $1 million, was largely based on interviews with Russian officials. And who paid that $1 million? As we and others have reported, it was Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee, then under Hillary's control.

The media knew all this, of course, but largely ignored it.

The great irony here is that, after more than two years of investigating, the only real evidence of collusion with Russians at all points to Hillary Clinton. It was she who hired Steele to dig up dirt on Trump using Russian sources.

But now, it turns out, it goes even deeper than that.

Events surrounding that now-famous June 2016 Trump meeting suggest it, too, was a concoction of Hillary Clinton and her deep-state allies. And that meeting was the basis for much of the later Russian collusion "investigation," if it can even be called that.

Read more:

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/russian-collusion-hillary-...

when missiles aren't missiles because they are re-usable...

The US military has rejected Russian accusations of violating the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, arguing that its drones can’t be seen as missiles and Tomahawk-compatible ‘defensive’ launchers can’t be used offensively.

The lengthy statement, drawn up to refute Russian accusations, was issued by the US mission to NATO on Friday. The US argued that the controversial ‘target’ missiles were in compliance with the treaty, while Aegis Ashore was capable of launching solely ‘defensive’ missiles. While the US military admitted that its missile defense system was largely based on naval MK.41 vertical launchers –capable of firing cruise missiles– it claimed the land-based versions were totally different.

“The Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System does not have an offensive ground-launched ballistic or cruise missile capability. Specifically, the system lacks the software, fire control hardware, support equipment, and other infrastructure needed to launch offensive ballistic or cruise missiles such as the Tomahawk,” the statement reads.

It remains unclear, however, whether –and how fast– the supposedly lacking components can be added to modify Aegis-Ashore to be offensive.

The massive US fleet of attack drones currently in service also does not violate the treaty, the Pentagon claimed, arguing that unmanned aerial vehicles do not fit the definition of a cruise missile – because the latter is a “one-way”vehicle, while a drone is supposed to return back to base.

But what does the INF treaty itself say? “The term ‘cruise missile’ means an unmanned, self-propelled vehicle that sustains flight through the use of aerodynamic lift over most of its flight path. The term ‘ground-launched cruise missile (GLCM)’ means a ground-launched cruise missile that is a weapon-delivery vehicle,” the treaty reads.

The description appears to fit the modern strike drones quite well, and it does note state anything about the missile being a “one-way system.”

Early in February, Washington unilaterally withdrew from the 1987 INF deal, accusing Russia of building prohibited missiles, but said it might consider returning to the accord if Moscow eliminates the ‘violation’ within the next 180 days. Moscow, for its part, argued that it sticks to the deal, with the Russian military urging the Pentagon to destroy its attack drones, Aegis-Ashore systems and target-missiles, stating that the systems violate the agreement.

 

 

Read more:

https://www.rt.com/usa/451032-drones-inf-treaty-violations-us/

 

no collusion...

US President Donald Trump has praised media nemesis MSNBC for airing a report on the results of the Senate Intel Committee's investigation, which found no evidence of collusion between his campaign and Russia during the election.

The president tweeted a clip of Ken Dilanian reporting that both Democratic and Republican senators agreed no direct evidence of the dread "Russian collusion" had turned up during the two-year investigation.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, however, Democrats and Republicans disagreed on what the absence of direct evidence of collusion meant. Sen. Richard Burr (R-North Carolina), chairman of the committee, was ready to put the theory to bed, telling CBS on Thursday that "based on the facts that we have, then we don't have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia."

On Tuesday, Burr confirmed his statement to NBC: "There is no factual evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia."

 

Read more:

https://www.rt.com/usa/451329-trump-msnbc-no-collusion-senate/

 

 

Read from top.