OF THE
TIMES
Direct talks, if resumed, will break a six-year pause in negotiations between the Jewish state and the Palestinians over the territories, Jerusalem and an independent Palestinian state."No one has as much interest as the Palestinians in reaching a peace agreement and no one has as much to lose as the Palestinians in the absence of peace.
"If Israel declares the annexation of any part of the Palestinian territory, that will necessarily mean the annulation of all signed agreements."
One - he was not properly informed of what the government had even disclosed to his defense lawyers prior to the plea.Then Powell drops the bomb at the 5:50 mark where she discloses that Flynn was going to audit the Intel agencies because he knew about the billions former CIA Director John Brennan was running off the books. To hear Sidney Powell's interview on 1310 News Talk, go here.
Secondly, the government didn't disclose a fraction of what it should have disclosed (i.e. the whole case was made up).
And three, he was prosecuted and threatened with the prosecution of his son. That's how they coerced the guilty plea. It was just unconscionable conduct to threaten to indict him and his son the very next day and give them the Manafort treatment if he didn't enter his plea right then, and I'm convinced it's because they knew right then the press was going to explode with the Strzok-Page text messages and everything.
"U.S. and coalition force protection is a critical priority for both the president and the intelligence community. The selective leaking of any classified information disrupts the vital interagency work to collect, assess, and mitigate threats and places our forces at risk. it is also, simply put, a crime."
Unfortunately for AP, even the president's most ardent critics have declined to publicly corroborate their claim. John Bolton, who was serving as national security advisor at the time, declined to comment on whether he had briefed the president on the matter in March 2019. Undeterred, AP still reported that Bolton told colleagues that he had informed Trump about the bounties - citing unnamed sources.Yeesh. When even arch warmonger Bolton won't back the story, it should be clear it's pure fantasy.
The New York Times, referring to its own anonymous officials, claimed last week that Trump had known about the "bounties" for foreign troops since at least March of this year. The US president has denied that he was ever briefed on the matter accusing the "Fake News NYT" of peddling "another fabricated Russia Hoax."
White House spokeswoman Kayleigh McEnany said on Monday that there was "no consensus within the intelligence community" that the allegation had merit, and therefore the information was never brought to Trump's attention.
The Pentagon disclosed that it was "evaluating" the claims but so far has found "no corroborating evidence to validate" the sensational media reports. For its part, Russia has dismissed the unverified story as nonsense, pointing out that the allegation coincides with Trump's move to withdraw US forces from the 19-year occupation of Afghanistan.
Comment: Doom and gloom? Or an overblown reaction to anything Beijing? Something had to give.