Trump lost moving on with new year go Biden

for someone to use the church to support the right is just pure bullshit!


My favorite part of the bible is where jesus gives money to the rich and tells the poor to suck it up!

in Early 2016 the republicans were afraid their daughters would be groped in bathrooms.....and yet vote for a man that openly brags about groping!

Now the church is in a movement that wraps it's self around false patriotism, condemning the poor, and idolizing the wealthy......completely against the teaching of Jesus's teaching of tolerance!

amazing how the church supports the republican party....and it's support of cutting programs to help the needy and the poor and help the sick!
 
Gordon Sondland is about to blow a hole in Trump’s Ukraine defense

Ever since former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker handed over those text messages, President Trump’s defenders have pointed to one of them as supposedly exonerating Trump. “Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump’s intentions,” Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, told another diplomat. “The President has been crystal clear no quid pro quo’s [sic] of any kind.”

This text has been a linchpin of the Trump Ukraine defense. But on Saturday night, the linchpin broke.

 
start of the downfall?


Furious Republicans prepare to rebuke Trump on Syria

Congressional Republicans appear poised to hand President Trump a stinging rebuke of his Turkey and Syria policy when lawmakers return to Washington this week.

GOP lawmakers, furious over Trump's decision to withdraw troops to make way for a Turkish offensive against Kurdish allies, are preparing legislation that would ******* the administration to impose sanctions on Turkey.
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin announced Friday that Trump would sign an executive order giving the Treasury Department "very significant" new sanctions authorities against Turkey, but it's unclear whether the move will be enough to placate Republicans on Capitol Hill.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said the administration needs to "up their game."
"We are witnessing ethnic cleansing in Syria by Turkey, the destruction of a reliable ally in the Kurds, and the reemergence of ISIS," Graham tweeted after Friday's announcement.

"The conditional sanctions announced today will be viewed by Turkey as a tepid response and will embolden Erdogan even more," he added, referring to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. "The Turkish government needs to know Congress will take a different path - passing crippling sanctions in a bipartisan fashion."

Graham, alongside Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), is expected to introduce harsh sanctions against Turkey this week as a punishment for its incursion into northern Syria against the Kurds, longtime allies of the U.S.

It's not yet known whether their bill will get a floor vote; a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Friday he had no "updates or guidance on this right now."

But more and more Republicans are coming out in support of sanctions against Turkey, a NATO ally, as it bombs Kurds who were instrumental in the U.S.-led fight against ISIS, raising the possibility that Congress will pass veto-proof legislation rebuffing Trump's foreign policy.
 
Don’t Bet on Republicans Saving Trump — Strategic Culture
...
Oct 06, 2019 · The impeachment of Donald Trump is more likely than a lot of people realize. While the Democrats are over the moon at finally getting something on the President to hang on him, the reality is the Republicans who will ultimately decide Trump



The impeachment of Donald Trump is more likely than a lot of people realize. While the Democrats are over the moon at finally getting something on the President to hang on him, the reality is the Republicans who will ultimately decide Trump’s fate.


Impeachment is a political process, not a legal one. There is no legal standard for ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ as stipulated in the Constitution. That definition will stand on what the nominally Republican-controlled Senate think.


That Trump is facing this attack reflects him doing a few things anathema to his political opposition, and they have all hit nearly at the same time:


  1. He pursued Joe Biden’s own admission of pressuring Ukraine publicly to fire a prosecutor investigating his ******* Hunter Biden.
  2. Trump’s State Dept., for all its faults, was finishing its review of Hillary Clinton’s e-mail trove. The Washington Post tried to get in front of it with this highly quoted report.
  3. Trump fired his incompetent and bloodthirsty National Security Adviser John Bolton in the wake of the Houthi attack on Saudi Aramco’s Abqaiq facility on September 14th.
  4. Trump refuses to give up on diplomacy with North Korea and Iran, steadfastly refusing to go to war.
and now throw in Syria

For these ‘crimes’ and others, Trump is, in my analysis, likely to be impeached. And the reasons have nothing to do with his guilt vis a vis abusing his office.
 
Last edited:
Key US senator calls for hearing on Trump's Syria ...
calls-hearing-trumps-syria-withdrawal
Senior Republican Senator Lindsey Graham has called for immediate US Senate hearings on President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw US troops from Syria, a …

President Trump Spurs Outrage With Snap Decision to ...
https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2019-10-07/president-trump-spurs-outrage...
Oct 07, 2019 · President Trump Spurs Outrage With Snap Decision to Withdraw From Syria Kurdish fighters that were instrumental in the U.S. war against the …
 
Hey....good news....the steele dossier is coming out with a book....I know...most will wait for the movie....but just a few tidbits for those of you dying to know the facts...….oh wait....that leaves the trumptards out!

The Trump Dossier: What We Know and Who Paid for It

WASHINGTON — This article was updated on Dec. 21 with more details about Fusion GPS, the company that compiled the dossier, and who paid for it.

The dossier of research into President Trump’s connections to Russia is the product of a research firm founded by a former journalist, Glenn R. Simpson.

What is the dossier?
It is a 35-page collection of research memos written by Christopher Steele, a respected former British intelligence agent, primarily during the 2016 presidential campaign. The memos, compiled by a research firm called Fusion GPS, allege a multifaceted conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russian government to help Mr. Trump defeat Mrs. Clinton. The memos also detail unsubstantiated accounts of encounters between Mr. Trump and Russian prostitutes, and real estate deals that were intended as bribes, among other claims about Mr. Trump’s businesses.

Mr. Simpson founded Fusion GPS in 2010. The firm is paid to do research by a variety of clients, including political donors, corporations, hedge funds and law firms. During election years, the firm is mostly focused on political opposition research — digging up dirt on a client’s opponent. The firm’s website lists very few details — there is a two-paragraph description of what the firm does and a single email address.

Who paid for it?

During the Republican primaries, a research firm called Fusion GPS was hired by The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website, to unearth potentially damaging information about Mr. Trump. The Free Beacon — which was funded by a major donor supporting Mr. Trump’s rival for the party’s nomination, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida — told Fusion GPS to stop doing research on Mr. Trump in May 2016, as Mr. Trump was clinching the Republican nomination.

After Mr. Trump secured the nomination, Fusion GPS was hired on behalf of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and the D.N.C. by their law firm, Perkins Coie, to compile research about Mr. Trump, his businesses and associates — including possible connections with Russia. It was at that point that Fusion GPS hired Mr. Steele, who has deep sourcing in Russia, to gather information.

In October, Mr. Trump said in a Twitter post that his party was outraged at Mrs. Clinton’s involvement. But nothing of the original sponsor.


Does it matter who paid for it?
That depends on your politics.

Republicans have criticized the dossier since it was first publicly disseminated when BuzzFeed published it in January. Mr. Trump has blasted it as “fake news” and “phony stuff,” and alleged that it is part of a broader witch hunt intended to cast doubt on his victory. His allies now contend that the allegations in the dossier are discredited by the fact that it was funded at least partially by the Clinton campaign and the D.N.C. Mr. Trump asserted in October in an interview with Fox Business Network’s “Lou Dobbs Tonight” that the Democrats’ payments for the research were “the real collusion.”

Democrats argue that who paid for the research is irrelevant to the veracity of its claims, which they say should be thoroughly investigated. Yet some of the Democrats who funded the dossier have been wary of being associated with it. The lead Perkins Coie lawyer representing both the campaign and the D.N.C., Marc Elias, pushed back earlier this year when asked whether his firm was the client for the dossier, whether he possessed it before the election and whether he was involved in efforts to encourage media outlets to write about its contents.

In October, the veteran Democratic consultant Anita Dunn, who is working with Perkins Coie, explained Mr. Elias’s earlier response. “Obviously, he was not at liberty to confirm Perkins Coie as the client at that point, and should perhaps have ‘no commented’ more artfully,” Ms. Dunn wrote in an email.

Is this sort of research common or legal?

Campaigns and party committees frequently pay companies to assemble what’s known in politics as opposition research — essentially damaging information about their opponents — and nothing is illegal about the practice.

However, Republicans and campaign watchdogs have accused the Clinton campaign and the D.N.C. of violating campaign finance laws by disguising the payments to Fusion GPS on mandatory disclosures to the Federal Election Commission. Their disclosure reports do not list any payments from the Clinton campaign or the D.N.C. to Fusion GPS. They do list a total of $12.4 million in
payments to Perkins Coie, but that’s almost entirely for legal consulting, with only one payment — of $66,500 — for “research consulting” from the D.N.C.
In a complaint filed with the election commission in October, the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit group that urges stricter enforcement of election laws, alleged that “at least some of those payments were earmarked for Fusion GPS, with the purpose of conducting opposition research on Donald Trump.” The complaint asserts that the failure to list the ultimate purpose of that money “undermined the vital public information role that reporting is intended to serve.”

Graham M. Wilson, a partner at Perkins Coie, called the complaint “patently baseless,” in part because, he said, the research was done “to support the provision of legal services, and payments made by vendors to sub-vendors are not required to be disclosed in circumstances like this.”

Who else knew about the Fusion GPS research during the campaign?

Officials from the Clinton campaign and the D.N.C. have said they were unaware that Perkins Coie facilitated the research on their behalf, even though the law firm was using their money to pay for it. Even Mrs. Clinton found about Mr. Steele’s research only after BuzzFeed published the dossier, according to two associates who discussed the matter with her. They said that she was disappointed that the research — as well as the fact that the F.B.I. was looking into connections between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia — was not made public before Election Day.

But word of the memos and their contents had circulated in Washington political and media circles before the election. In British court filings, Mr. Steele’s lawyers said that he and Fusion GPS briefed journalists from a range of media outlets, including The New York Times, on his research starting in September 2016.

Yet the research and even the existence of the dossier were not reported by the media, with the exception of mom Jones magazine, which published a story in the days before the election that described the dossier, its origin and significance, while omitting the salacious claims.

How much of the dossier has been substantiated?
There has been no public corroboration of the salacious allegations against Mr. Trump, nor of the specific claims about coordination between his associates and the Russians. In fact, some of those claims have been challenged with supporting evidence. For instance, Mr. Trump’s longtime personal lawyer, Michael D. Cohen, produced his passport to rebut the dossier’s claim that he had secret meetings in Prague with a Russian official last year.

Where does the dossier fit in with the government’s Russia investigations?
James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director whose firing by Mr. Trump prompted the appointment of a special counsel to oversee the Justice Department’s Russia investigation, received a copy of the memos after Election Day from Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona.
Mr. McCain had dispatched David J. Kramer, a former top State Department official, to obtain the dossier
directly from Mr. Steele. And before Election Day, the F.B.I. reached an agreement to pay Mr. Steele to continue his research, though that plan was scrapped after the dossier was published. During the presidential transition, senior American intelligence officials briefed Mr. Trump and President Barack Obama on the dossier.

Investigators from the House and Senate intelligence committees and Mr. Mueller’s team have been exploring claims made in the dossier. Mr. Mueller’s team reportedly interviewed Mr. Steele over the summer.

Mr. Simpson has provided at least 20 hours of testimony to three different congressional committees investigating the possible Russia ties. The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, has described Mr. Simpson as “uncooperative.”

The Trump Dossier: What We Know and Who Paid for It - The ...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/25/us/politics/...
Oct 25, 2017 · WASHINGTON — This article was updated on Dec. 21 with more details about Fusion GPS, the company that compiled the dossier, and who paid for it. The dossier of research into President Trump’s...
 
Last edited:
Hey....good news....the steele dossier is coming out with a book....I know...most will wait for the movie....but just a few tidbits for those of you dying to know the facts...….oh wait....that leaves the trumptards out!

The Trump Dossier: What We Know and Who Paid for It

WASHINGTON — This article was updated on Dec. 21 with more details about Fusion GPS, the company that compiled the dossier, and who paid for it.

The dossier of research into President Trump’s connections to Russia is the product of a research firm founded by a former journalist, Glenn R. Simpson.

What is the dossier?
It is a 35-page collection of research memos written by Christopher Steele, a respected former British intelligence agent, primarily during the 2016 presidential campaign. The memos, compiled by a research firm called Fusion GPS, allege a multifaceted conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russian government to help Mr. Trump defeat Mrs. Clinton. The memos also detail unsubstantiated accounts of encounters between Mr. Trump and Russian prostitutes, and real estate deals that were intended as bribes, among other claims about Mr. Trump’s businesses.

Mr. Simpson founded Fusion GPS in 2010. The firm is paid to do research by a variety of clients, including political donors, corporations, hedge funds and law firms. During election years, the firm is mostly focused on political opposition research — digging up dirt on a client’s opponent. The firm’s website lists very few details — there is a two-paragraph description of what the firm does and a single email address.

Who paid for it?

During the Republican primaries, a research firm called Fusion GPS was hired by The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website, to unearth potentially damaging information about Mr. Trump. The Free Beacon — which was funded by a major donor supporting Mr. Trump’s rival for the party’s nomination, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida — told Fusion GPS to stop doing research on Mr. Trump in May 2016, as Mr. Trump was clinching the Republican nomination.

After Mr. Trump secured the nomination, Fusion GPS was hired on behalf of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and the D.N.C. by their law firm, Perkins Coie, to compile research about Mr. Trump, his businesses and associates — including possible connections with Russia. It was at that point that Fusion GPS hired Mr. Steele, who has deep sourcing in Russia, to gather information.

In October, Mr. Trump said in a Twitter post that his party was outraged at Mrs. Clinton’s involvement. But nothing of the original sponsor.


Does it matter who paid for it?
That depends on your politics.

Republicans have criticized the dossier since it was first publicly disseminated when BuzzFeed published it in January. Mr. Trump has blasted it as “fake news” and “phony stuff,” and alleged that it is part of a broader witch hunt intended to cast doubt on his victory. His allies now contend that the allegations in the dossier are discredited by the fact that it was funded at least partially by the Clinton campaign and the D.N.C. Mr. Trump asserted in October in an interview with Fox Business Network’s “Lou Dobbs Tonight” that the Democrats’ payments for the research were “the real collusion.”

Democrats argue that who paid for the research is irrelevant to the veracity of its claims, which they say should be thoroughly investigated. Yet some of the Democrats who funded the dossier have been wary of being associated with it. The lead Perkins Coie lawyer representing both the campaign and the D.N.C., Marc Elias, pushed back earlier this year when asked whether his firm was the client for the dossier, whether he possessed it before the election and whether he was involved in efforts to encourage media outlets to write about its contents.

In October, the veteran Democratic consultant Anita Dunn, who is working with Perkins Coie, explained Mr. Elias’s earlier response. “Obviously, he was not at liberty to confirm Perkins Coie as the client at that point, and should perhaps have ‘no commented’ more artfully,” Ms. Dunn wrote in an email.

Is this sort of research common or legal?

Campaigns and party committees frequently pay companies to assemble what’s known in politics as opposition research — essentially damaging information about their opponents — and nothing is illegal about the practice.

However, Republicans and campaign watchdogs have accused the Clinton campaign and the D.N.C. of violating campaign finance laws by disguising the payments to Fusion GPS on mandatory disclosures to the Federal Election Commission. Their disclosure reports do not list any payments from the Clinton campaign or the D.N.C. to Fusion GPS. They do list a total of $12.4 million in
payments to Perkins Coie, but that’s almost entirely for legal consulting, with only one payment — of $66,500 — for “research consulting” from the D.N.C.
In a complaint filed with the election commission in October, the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit group that urges stricter enforcement of election laws, alleged that “at least some of those payments were earmarked for Fusion GPS, with the purpose of conducting opposition research on Donald Trump.” The complaint asserts that the failure to list the ultimate purpose of that money “undermined the vital public information role that reporting is intended to serve.”

Graham M. Wilson, a partner at Perkins Coie, called the complaint “patently baseless,” in part because, he said, the research was done “to support the provision of legal services, and payments made by vendors to sub-vendors are not required to be disclosed in circumstances like this.”

Who else knew about the Fusion GPS research during the campaign?

Officials from the Clinton campaign and the D.N.C. have said they were unaware that Perkins Coie facilitated the research on their behalf, even though the law firm was using their money to pay for it. Even Mrs. Clinton found about Mr. Steele’s research only after BuzzFeed published the dossier, according to two associates who discussed the matter with her. They said that she was disappointed that the research — as well as the fact that the F.B.I. was looking into connections between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia — was not made public before Election Day.

But word of the memos and their contents had circulated in Washington political and media circles before the election. In British court filings, Mr. Steele’s lawyers said that he and Fusion GPS briefed journalists from a range of media outlets, including The New York Times, on his research starting in September 2016.

Yet the research and even the existence of the dossier were not reported by the media, with the exception of mom Jones magazine, which published a story in the days before the election that described the dossier, its origin and significance, while omitting the salacious claims.

How much of the dossier has been substantiated?
There has been no public corroboration of the salacious allegations against Mr. Trump, nor of the specific claims about coordination between his associates and the Russians. In fact, some of those claims have been challenged with supporting evidence. For instance, Mr. Trump’s longtime personal lawyer, Michael D. Cohen, produced his passport to rebut the dossier’s claim that he had secret meetings in Prague with a Russian official last year.

Where does the dossier fit in with the government’s Russia investigations?
James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director whose firing by Mr. Trump prompted the appointment of a special counsel to oversee the Justice Department’s Russia investigation, received a copy of the memos after Election Day from Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona.
Mr. McCain had dispatched David J. Kramer, a former top State Department official, to obtain the dossier
directly from Mr. Steele. And before Election Day, the F.B.I. reached an agreement to pay Mr. Steele to continue his research, though that plan was scrapped after the dossier was published. During the presidential transition, senior American intelligence officials briefed Mr. Trump and President Barack Obama on the dossier.

Investigators from the House and Senate intelligence committees and Mr. Mueller’s team have been exploring claims made in the dossier. Mr. Mueller’s team reportedly interviewed Mr. Steele over the summer.

Mr. Simpson has provided at least 20 hours of testimony to three different congressional committees investigating the possible Russia ties. The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, has described Mr. Simpson as “uncooperative.”

The Trump Dossier: What We Know and Who Paid for It - The ...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/25/us/politics/...
Oct 25, 2017 · WASHINGTON — This article was updated on Dec. 21 with more details about Fusion GPS, the company that compiled the dossier, and who paid for it. The dossier of research into President Trump’s...
Stormy Daniels, to Comey, to Mueller, to Pelosi's impeachment challenge, to this? I guess it will never end until 2025 until Trump's successor is sworn in? :unsure:
 
Mueller Reminds the Nation That Trump Betrayed the USA
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/05/robert-mueller-donald-trump-usa/ · May 31, 2019

Trump's behavior is treasonous -- wringing our hands about legal definitions misses the point After months of reporting showing the many, many ties between the Russians and President Trump’s associates, the social and political norms that once governed the boundaries of public discourse have corroded or entirely disappeared.


Trump’s behavior is treasonous — wringing our hands about ...
www.rawstory.com/2017/08/trumps-behavior-is-treasonous-wringing-our-hands-about-legal-defi

Mueller Reminds the Nation That Trump Betrayed the USA ...
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/05/robert-mueller-donald-trump-usa/ · May 31, 2019

Mueller Warns of Russian Sabotage and Rejects Trump’s ...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/24/us/politics/trump-mueller-testimony.html

Jul 24, 2019 · Robert S. Mueller III laid out damning insights about President Trump, calling his responses to investigators untruthful and acknowledging that he could later be charged with a crime.


Mueller report: collusion findings are devastating for ...
https://www.vox.com/2019/4/18/18484965/mueller-report-trump-no-collusion · Jul 17, 2019


Mueller reported


Much of the immediate commentary following special counsel Robert Mueller’s surprise press conference on Wednesday focused on his damning statements about President Donald Trump’s actions that potentially could be charged as obstruction of justice—if Justice Department policy did not prohibit the indictment of a sitting president. But Mueller’s remarks were also a reminder of the core elements of the Trump-Russia scandal: Moscow attacked the 2016 election to help Trump, and Trump assisted Vladimir Putin’s assault by claiming at the time (and afterward) that it wasn’t real.


That is, whether or not Trump had criminally colluded with Russian operatives, he did side with a foreign adversary that attacked American democracy—and that’s treachery.


Mueller began his statement by reiterating what has already been stated by the US intelligence community, Democratic and Republican members of Congress, and his own report: Putin “launched a concerted attack on our political system.” He noted the Russians “used sophisticated cyber techniques to hack into computers and networks used by the Clinton campaign. They stole private information and then released that information through fake online identities and through the organization WikiLeaks. The releases were designed and timed to interfere with our election and to damage a presidential candidate.”

The Kremlin’s goal was to impede Hillary Clinton and, consequently, boost Trump. And, Mueller added, “a private Russian entity engaged in a social media operation where Russian citizens posed as Americans in order to influence an election.”

In other words, there is no Russian hoax. This is no Deep State concoction cooked up to subvert Trump’s campaign or his presidency. The attack was real. It was significant. And there was a compelling need to investigate it and any contacts between Trump associates and Russians.

Yet during the campaign, Trump and his lieutenants repeatedly denied the Russian attack was under way. As soon as the Democratic National Committee publicly announced its servers had been penetrated by Russian hackers, the Trump campaign claimed this was a “hoax” devised by the DNC itself. After Democratic emails swiped by the Russians were dumped by WikiLeaks right before the Democratic convention in July 2016, Donald Trump Jr. and Paul Manfort, then the campaign chairman, went on news shows and denied this had anything to do with the Russians. (Only a month earlier, they and Jared Kushner had attended a meeting with a Russian emissary whom they were told was bringing them dirt on Clinton as part of a secret Kremlin scheme to help the Trump campaign.)

Even after the intelligence community briefed Trump in mid-August of that year and informed him that Moscow indeed was behind the hack-and-dump operation, he continued to say in public that there was no reason to blame the Russians for this intervention. At the first presidential debate, Trump huffed, “I don’t think anybody knows it was Russia that broke into the DNC…It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, OK? You don’t know who broke into DNC.” He kept this up after the Obama administration a few weeks later officially declared Russia was culpable.

Comments like these must have signaled to Russia—a foreign adversary trying to subvert an American election—that the Trump campaign was just fine with its underhanded efforts.


(After the DNC emails were posted around convention time, Trump publicly called on Russians to hack Clinton: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.” And, according to Mueller’s report, hours later, Russian hackers targeted Clinton’s servers.)

Also in the summer of 2016, George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, was trying to set up a back-channel with Putin’s office.

This means that while Putin was waging information warfare on the United States, one of the campaigns was reaching out and saying,
Hey, we want to play ball with you. No doubt, that was another sign of encouragement for Moscow. (And don’t forget that from October 2015 until June 2016, Trump was secretly negotiating to develop a tower project in Moscow that could reap him hundreds of millions of dollars—talks that included communicating with the office of Putin’s top aide. At the same time, Trump was telling American voters he had nothing to do with Russia.)

Trump put his own interests ahead of the security of the nation. And by insisting there was no Russian attack, he helped Putin pull off this caper and made it more difficult for President Barack Obama to enlist Republicans in a united front against Moscow’s attack. With Russia falsely claiming it had nothing to do with the hacks and dumps, Trump and his team were repeating and amplifying Putin’s disinformation. They were aiding and abetting the Kremlin. And after Trump won the election, he continued this pattern, failing to acknowledge the Russian attack and notoriously saying he accepted Putin’s denials. (One result of this was that Trump
has done nothing to prioritize actions to prevent future attacks on US elections.)

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/05/robert-mueller-donald-trump-usa/
 
Donald Trump Just Betrayed America’s Intelligence Community
https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trump-just...
May 16, 2017 · Donald Trump Just Betrayed America’s Intelligence Community We don’t know—yet—why Trump feels the need to cower before Russia. We do know that he’s sold out our allies to benefit an …

Donald Trump's Syria Retreat Will Mostly Benefit Russia ...
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-syria-retreat-benefit-russia-iran-cia-deputy...
Donald Trump's Syria Retreat Will Mostly Benefit Russia and Iran, Former CIA Deputy Director Warns ... John McLaughlin condemned Trump for abandoning America's Kurdish allies ... Donald Trump's …


Trump pulls United States out of military treaty that ...
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/trump-pulls-united-states-out-of-military-treaty-that...
Oct 07, 2019 · One of the key benefits to the treaty is that it allows the United States and its allies […] Trump pulls United States out of military treaty that allows surveillance of Russia: report – Raw Story

Allies React With Alarm to Trump Pull-out Tweet, Kurds ...
https://www.voanews.com/middle-east/allies-react-alarm-trump-pull-out-tweet-kurds-fear...
Dec 19, 2018 · Allies React With Alarm to Trump Pull-out Tweet, Kurds Fear Turkish Attack ... lawmakers by surprise and angered some of President Donald Trump's top allies on Capitol Hill. ... stand to benefit ...
 
Back
Top