US President Donald Trump has denied that there are any tapes of his conversations with sacked FBI director James Comey just days after suggesting the possibility of such tapes existing.

In a tweet, Trump said, &quot;With all of the recently reported electronic surveillance, intercepts, unmasking and illegal leaking of information, I have no idea whether there are &#39;tapes&#39; or recordings of my conversations with James Comey, but I did not make, and do not have, any such recordings.&quot;

In an earlier Twitter post just after he sacked Comey from the position of FBI director on May 9, Trump had said: &quot;James Comey better hope that there are no &#39;tapes&#39; of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!&quot;

US lawmakers who are investigating Russia&#39;s role in the 2016 Presidential elections had asked the White House to provide recordings of conversations between Comey and Trump.

Comey had appeared before a Senate hearing testifying that Trump had asked him to drop a probe against former Nationsla Security Adviser Michael Flynn for his alleged links to the Russian ambassador.

Trump and his administration is under fire for the alleged meddling by Russians in the 2016 US Presidential elections.&nbsp;

Kremlin has denied the US intelligence agencies&#39; probe that Russia tried to influence the elections in Trump&#39;s favour by hacking into Demoratic Party&#39;s emails.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

Trump had earlier posted on Twitter that there could be a possibility of recordings of conversations between Comey and him

US President Donald Trump has denied that there are any tapes of his conversations with sacked FBI director James Comey just days after suggesting the possibility of such tapes existing. In a tweet, Trump said, "With all of the recently reported electronic surveillance, intercepts, unmasking and illegal leaking of information, I have no idea whether there are 'tapes' or recordings of my conversations with James Comey, but I did not make, and do not have, any such recordings." In an earlier Twitter post just after he sacked Comey from the position of FBI director on May 9, Trump had said: "James Comey better hope that there are no 'tapes' of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!" US lawmakers who are investigating Russia's role in the 2016 Presidential elections had asked the White House to provide recordings of conversations between Comey and Trump. Comey had appeared before a Senate hearing testifying that Trump had asked him to drop a probe against former Nationsla Security Adviser Michael Flynn for his alleged links to the Russian ambassador. Trump and his administration is under fire for the alleged meddling by Russians in the 2016 US Presidential elections. Kremlin has denied the US intelligence agencies' probe that Russia tried to influence the elections in Trump's favour by hacking into Demoratic Party's emails.

Trump says no recordings of conversations between him and former FBI director Comey

Russian hackers targeted 21 US states&#39; election systems in last year&#39;s presidential race, a Department of Homeland Security official told Congress on Wednesday.

Jeanette Manfra, the department&#39;s acting deputy undersecretary of cyber security, would not identify which states had been targeted, citing confidentiality agreements. She reiterated that there was no evidence that any actual votes were manipulated.

&quot;As of right now, we have evidence that election-related systems in 21 states were targeted,&quot; Manfra told the Senate Intelligence Committee, which investigating Russia&#39;s meddling in the 2016 presidential election. Systems were breached in a smaller number of states, she said, but did not give a specific figure.

Department officials had said about 20 states had been probed by hackers working on behalf of the Russian government, but recent news media reports had suggested the number could have been far higher.

Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate panel, expressed frustration at Manfra&#39;s refusal to identify which states had been targeted.

&quot;I just fundamentally disagree,&quot; he said.

Warner on Tuesday sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly asking the agency to disclose more information about hacking attempts on state and local election systems.

Arizona and Illinois last year confirmed that hackers had targeted their voter registration systems.

US&nbsp;intelligence agencies concluded that the Kremlin orchestrated a wide-ranging influence operation that included email hacking and online propaganda in order to discredit Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump, a Republican, win the White House.

Manfra and other officials testifying on Wednesday reiterated that US&nbsp;elections are resilient to hacking in part because they are decentralized and largely operated on the state and local level. 
Senator Angus King, an independent from Maine who caucuses with the Democrats, expressed skepticism at that assertion, saying only a small amount of votes in key battleground states would need to be altered to tip the scales of an election.

&quot;A sophisticated actor could hack an election simply by focusing on certain counties,&quot; King said. &quot;I don&#39;t think it works just to say it&rsquo;s a big system and diversity will protect us.&quot;

Russia has repeatedly denied responsibility for any cyber attacks during the US presidential election. Trump has inconsistently said Russia may or may not have been responsible for the hacking but has dismissed allegations that his associates colluded with Moscow as &quot;fake news.&quot; 
&nbsp;

The official did not identify the states but said there was no evidence that any actual votes were manipulated

Russian hackers targeted 21 US states' election systems in last year's presidential race, a Department of Homeland Security official told Congress on Wednesday. Jeanette Manfra, the department's acting deputy undersecretary of cyber security, would not identify which states had been targeted, citing confidentiality agreements. She reiterated that there was no evidence that any actual votes were manipulated. "As of right now, we have evidence that election-related systems in 21 states were targeted," Manfra told the Senate Intelligence Committee, which investigating Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election. Systems were breached in a smaller number of states, she said, but did not give a specific figure. Department officials had said about 20 states had been probed by hackers working on behalf of the Russian government, but recent news media reports had suggested the number could have been far higher. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate panel, expressed frustration at Manfra's refusal to identify which states had been targeted. "I just fundamentally disagree," he said. Warner on Tuesday sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly asking the agency to disclose more information about hacking attempts on state and local election systems. Arizona and Illinois last year confirmed that hackers had targeted their voter registration systems. US intelligence agencies concluded that the Kremlin orchestrated a wide-ranging influence operation that included email hacking and online propaganda in order to discredit Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump, a Republican, win the White House. Manfra and other officials testifying on Wednesday reiterated that US elections are resilient to hacking in part because they are decentralized and largely operated on the state and local level. Senator Angus King, an independent from Maine who caucuses with the Democrats, expressed skepticism at that assertion, saying only a small amount of votes in key battleground states would need to be altered to tip the scales of an election. "A sophisticated actor could hack an election simply by focusing on certain counties," King said. "I don't think it works just to say it’s a big system and diversity will protect us." Russia has repeatedly denied responsibility for any cyber attacks during the US presidential election. Trump has inconsistently said Russia may or may not have been responsible for the hacking but has dismissed allegations that his associates colluded with Moscow as "fake news."

Russian hackers targeted 21 US states during election: US official

In a move to improve the government&#39;s computing system, President Donald Trump met with the heads of 18 US technology companies including Apple, Amazon.com&nbsp;and Microsoft on Monday.&nbsp;

Others who attended the meeting included Alphabet executive chairman Eric Schmidt, venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins chairman John Doerr and the CEOs of Microsoft International Business Machines, Intel,&nbsp;Qualcomm, Oracle and Adobe Systems. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was invited, but he could not attend because of a conflict, the company said.&nbsp;

The White House wants to update government information technology systems, cut costs, eliminate waste and improve service. Trump on Monday cited estimates that the government could save up to $1 trillion over 10 years through such measures.&nbsp;

&quot;Our goal is to lead a sweeping transformation of the federal government&rsquo;s technology that will deliver dramatically better services for citizens,&quot; Trump said. &quot;Government needs to catch up with the technology revolution.&quot;

The executives are part of the so-called American Technology Council that Trump formed in May to support efforts to modernize the US government.

&ldquo;The US&nbsp;should have the most modern government in the world. Today it doesn&rsquo;t,&rdquo; Apple Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook said. Amazon Chief Executive Officer Jeff Bezos said he wanted the Trump administration to make use of commercially available technologies, worker retraining, machine learning and artificial intelligence. 
 
Before meeting with Trump, the CEOs met in 10 small group sessions with Vice President Mike Pence, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, along with the presidents of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Ohio State University.

Jared Kushner, Trump&#39;s son-in-law and adviser, said the administration wanted to &quot;unleash the creativity of the private sector to provide citizen services in a way that has never happened before.&quot;

He said the administration was scrapping unneeded regulations for government computing systems, such as a rule on preventing Y2K issues. Most of the government&#39;s 6,100 data centers can be consolidated and moved to a cloud-based storage system.

The White House is seeking to shrink government, reduce the federal workforce and eliminate regulations. Trump in March signed an order to overhaul the federal government and tapped Kushner to lead a White House Office of American Innovation to leverage business ideas and potentially privatise some government functions. Many of the tech executives are eager to get White House help in dealing with regulatory and other policy issues such as visas for highly skilled workers.

A 2016 US&nbsp;Government Accountability Office report estimated that the U.S. government spent more than $80 billion on IT annually, excluding classified operations. In 2015, the US&nbsp;government made at least 7,000 separate IT investments and some agencies were using systems that had components at least 50 years old. &quot;This structure is unsustainable,&quot; Kushner said.

Visa programme

The CEOs and White House also planned to discuss Trump&#39;s review announced in April of the US&nbsp;visa program for bringing high-skilled foreign workers into the country.&nbsp; 
 
The council also seeks to boost the security of US&nbsp;government IT systems and wants to learn from private-sector practices. In 2015, hackers exposed the personal information of 22 million people from US&nbsp;government databases. 
 
The White House thinks it can learn from credit card companies about significantly reducing fraud. A 2016 government audit found that in Medicaid alone there was $29 billion in fraud in a single year.

Following Trump&#39;s June 1 decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accords, Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Walt Disney&nbsp;CEO Robert Iger stepped down from White House advisory panels. White House officials said the dispute had little impact and that they had to turn away tech leaders from Monday&#39;s event because of lack of space.

President Donald Trump met with the heads of 18 US technology companies

In a move to improve the government's computing system, President Donald Trump met with the heads of 18 US technology companies including Apple, Amazon.com and Microsoft on Monday. Others who attended the meeting included Alphabet executive chairman Eric Schmidt, venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins chairman John Doerr and the CEOs of Microsoft International Business Machines, Intel, Qualcomm, Oracle and Adobe Systems. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was invited, but he could not attend because of a conflict, the company said. The White House wants to update government information technology systems, cut costs, eliminate waste and improve service. Trump on Monday cited estimates that the government could save up to $1 trillion over 10 years through such measures. "Our goal is to lead a sweeping transformation of the federal government’s technology that will deliver dramatically better services for citizens," Trump said. "Government needs to catch up with the technology revolution." The executives are part of the so-called American Technology Council that Trump formed in May to support efforts to modernize the US government. “The US should have the most modern government in the world. Today it doesn’t,” Apple Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook said. Amazon Chief Executive Officer Jeff Bezos said he wanted the Trump administration to make use of commercially available technologies, worker retraining, machine learning and artificial intelligence. Before meeting with Trump, the CEOs met in 10 small group sessions with Vice President Mike Pence, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, along with the presidents of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Ohio State University. Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and adviser, said the administration wanted to "unleash the creativity of the private sector to provide citizen services in a way that has never happened before." He said the administration was scrapping unneeded regulations for government computing systems, such as a rule on preventing Y2K issues. Most of the government's 6,100 data centers can be consolidated and moved to a cloud-based storage system. The White House is seeking to shrink government, reduce the federal workforce and eliminate regulations. Trump in March signed an order to overhaul the federal government and tapped Kushner to lead a White House Office of American Innovation to leverage business ideas and potentially privatise some government functions. Many of the tech executives are eager to get White House help in dealing with regulatory and other policy issues such as visas for highly skilled workers. A 2016 US Government Accountability Office report estimated that the U.S. government spent more than $80 billion on IT annually, excluding classified operations. In 2015, the US government made at least 7,000 separate IT investments and some agencies were using systems that had components at least 50 years old. "This structure is unsustainable," Kushner said. Visa programme The CEOs and White House also planned to discuss Trump's review announced in April of the US visa program for bringing high-skilled foreign workers into the country. The council also seeks to boost the security of US government IT systems and wants to learn from private-sector practices. In 2015, hackers exposed the personal information of 22 million people from US government databases. The White House thinks it can learn from credit card companies about significantly reducing fraud. A 2016 government audit found that in Medicaid alone there was $29 billion in fraud in a single year. Following Trump's June 1 decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accords, Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Walt Disney CEO Robert Iger stepped down from White House advisory panels. White House officials said the dispute had little impact and that they had to turn away tech leaders from Monday's event because of lack of space.

Trump seeks help from tech CEOs to improve government's IT services

President Donald Trump&#39;s administration appears ready to harden its approach toward Pakistan to crack down on Pakistan-based militants launching attacks in neighbouring Afghanistan, U.S. officials tell Reuters.

Potential Trump administration responses being discussed include expanding U.S. drone strikes, redirecting or withholding some aid to Pakistan and perhaps eventually downgrading Pakistan&#39;s status as a major non-NATO ally, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Some U.S. officials, however, are skeptical of the prospects for success, arguing that years of previous U.S. efforts to curb Pakistan&#39;s support for militant groups have failed, and that already strengthening U.S. ties to India, Pakistan&#39;s arch-enemy, undermine chances of a breakthrough with Islamabad.

U.S. officials say they seek greater cooperation with Pakistan, not a rupture in ties, once the administration finishes a regional review of the strategy guiding the 16-year-old war in Afghanistan.

Precise actions have yet to be decided.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Pakistan fiercely denies allowing any militants safe haven on its territory</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Pakistan fiercely denies allowing any militants safe haven on its territory" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

The White House and Pentagon declined to comment on the review before its completion. Pakistan&#39;s embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

&quot;The United States and Pakistan continue to partner on a range of national security issues,&quot; Pentagon spokesman Adam Stump said.

But the discussions alone suggest a shift toward a more assertive approach to address safe havens in Pakistan that have been blamed for in part helping turn Afghanistan&#39;s war into an intractable conflict.

Experts on America&#39;s longest war argue that militant safe havens in Pakistan have allowed Taliban-linked insurgents a place to plot deadly strikes in Afghanistan and regroup after ground offensives.

Although long mindful of Pakistan, the Trump administration in recent weeks has put more emphasis on the relationship with Islamabad in discussions as it hammers out a the regional strategy to be presented to Trump by mid-July, nearly six months after he took office, one official said.

&quot;We&#39;ve never really fully articulated what our strategy towards Pakistan is. The strategy will more clearly say what we want from Pakistan specifically,&quot; the U.S. official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Other U.S. officials warn of divisions within the government about the right approach and question whether any mix of carrots and sticks can get Islamabad to change its behavior. At the end of the day, Washington needs a partner, even if an imperfect one, in nuclear-armed Pakistan, they say.

The United States is again poised to deploy thousands more troops in Afghanistan, an acknowledgment that U.S.-backed forces are not winning and Taliban militants are resurgent.

Without more pressure on militants within Pakistan who target Afghanistan, experts say additional U.S. troop deployments will fail to meet their ultimate objective: to pressure the Taliban to eventually negotiate peace.

&quot;I believe there will be a much harder U.S. line on Pakistan going forward than there has been in the past,&quot; Hamdullah Mohib, the Afghan ambassador to the United States, told Reuters, without citing specific measures under review.

Kabul has long been critical of Pakistan&#39;s role in Afghanistan.

Pakistan fiercely denies allowing any militants safe haven on its territory. It bristles at U.S. claims that Pakistan&#39;s spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate, has ties to Haqqani network militants blamed for some of the deadliest attacks in Afghanistan.

&quot;What Pakistan says is that we are already doing a lot and that our plate is already full,&quot; a senior Pakistani government source told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The source doubted the Trump administration would press too hard, saying: &quot;They don&rsquo;t want to push Pakistan to abandon their war against terrorism.&quot;

Pakistani officials point towards the toll militancy has taken on the country. Since 2003, almost 22,000 civilians and nearly 7,000 Pakistani security forces have been killed as a result of militancy, according to the South Asia Terrorism Portal, which tracks violence.

Experts say Pakistan&#39;s policy towards Afghanistan is also driven in part by fears that India will gain influence in Afghanistan.

IS PAKISTAN AN ALLY?

Nuclear-armed Pakistan won the status as a major non-NATO ally in 2004 from the George Bush administration, in what was at the time seen in part as recognition of its importance in the U.S. battle against al Qaeda and Taliban insurgents.

The status is mainly symbolic, allowing limited benefits such as giving Pakistan faster access to surplus U.S. military hardware.

Some U.S. officials and experts on the region scoff at the title.

&quot;Pakistan is not an ally. It&rsquo;s not North Korea or Iran. But it&rsquo;s not an ally,&quot; said Bruce Riedel, a Pakistan expert at the Brookings Institution.

But yanking the title would be seen by Pakistan as a major blow.

&quot;The Pakistanis would take that very seriously because it would be a slap at their honor,&quot; said a former U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Lisa Curtis, senior director for South and Central Asia at the National Security Council, co-authored a report with Husain Haqqani, Pakistan&#39;s former ambassador to Washington, in which they recommended the Trump administration warn Pakistan the status could be revoked in six months.

&quot;Thinking of Pakistan as an ally will continue to create problems for the next administration as it did for the last one,&quot; said the February report.

It was unclear how seriously the Trump administration was considering the proposal.

The growing danger to Afghanistan from suspected Pakistan-based militants was underscored by a devastating May 31 truck bomb that killed more than 80 people and wounded 460 in Afghanistan&#39;s capital, Kabul.

Afghanistan&#39;s main intelligence agency said the attack - one of the deadliest in memory in Kabul - had been carried out by the Haqqani network with assistance from Pakistan, a charge Islamabad denies.

Washington believes the strikes appeared to be the work of the Haqqani network, U.S. officials told Reuters.

U.S. frustration over the Haqqani&#39;s presence in Pakistan has been building for years. The United States designated the Haqqani network as a terrorist organization in 2012. U.S. Navy Admiral Mike Mullen, then the top U.S. military officer, told Congress in 2011 that the Haqqani network was a &quot;veritable arm&quot; of the ISI.

The potential U.S. pivot to a more assertive approach would be sharply different than the approach taken at the start of the Obama administration, when U.S. officials sought to court Pakistani leaders, including Army chief General Ashfaq Kayani.

David Sedney, who served as Obama&#39;s deputy assistant secretary of defense for Afghanistan, Pakistan and Central Asia from 2009 to 2013, said the attempt to turn Islamabad into a strategic partner was a &quot;disaster.&quot;

&quot;It didn&#39;t affect Pakistan&#39;s behavior one bit. In fact, I would argue it made Pakistan&#39;s behavior worse,&quot; Sedney said.

MORE DRONES, CASH CUT-OFF

Pakistan has received more than $33 billion in U.S. assistance since 2002, including more than $14 billion in so-called Coalition Support Funds (CSF), a U.S. Defense Department program to reimburse allies that have incurred costs in supporting counter-insurgency operations.

It is an important form of foreign currency for the nuclear-armed country and one that is getting particularly close scrutiny during the Trump administration review.

Last year, the Pentagon decided not to pay Pakistan $300 million in CSF funding after then-U.S. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter declined to sign authorization that Pakistan was taking adequate action against the Haqqani network.

U.S. officials said the Trump administration was discussing withholding at least some assistance to Pakistan.

Curtis&#39; report also singled out the aid as a target.

But U.S. aid cuts could cede even more influence to China, which already has committed nearly $60 billion in investments in Pakistan.

Another option under review is broadening a drone campaign to penetrate deeper into Pakistan to target Haqqani fighters and other militants blamed for attacks in Afghanistan, U.S. officials and a Pakistan expert said.

&quot;Now the Americans (will be) saying, you aren&#39;t taking out our enemies, so therefore we are taking them out ourselves,&quot; the Pakistan expert, who declined to be identified, said.

Pakistan&#39;s army chief of staff last week criticized &quot;unilateral actions&quot; such as drone strikes as &quot;counterproductive and against (the) spirit of ongoing cooperation and intelligence sharing being diligently undertaken by Pakistan&quot;.

The Trump administration is also mulling the redirecting or withholding of some aid to Pakistan

President Donald Trump's administration appears ready to harden its approach toward Pakistan to crack down on Pakistan-based militants launching attacks in neighbouring Afghanistan, U.S. officials tell Reuters. Potential Trump administration responses being discussed include expanding U.S. drone strikes, redirecting or withholding some aid to Pakistan and perhaps eventually downgrading Pakistan's status as a major non-NATO ally, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Some U.S. officials, however, are skeptical of the prospects for success, arguing that years of previous U.S. efforts to curb Pakistan's support for militant groups have failed, and that already strengthening U.S. ties to India, Pakistan's arch-enemy, undermine chances of a breakthrough with Islamabad. U.S. officials say they seek greater cooperation with Pakistan, not a rupture in ties, once the administration finishes a regional review of the strategy guiding the 16-year-old war in Afghanistan. Precise actions have yet to be decided. Pakistan fiercely denies allowing any militants safe haven on its territory × The White House and Pentagon declined to comment on the review before its completion. Pakistan's embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment. "The United States and Pakistan continue to partner on a range of national security issues," Pentagon spokesman Adam Stump said. But the discussions alone suggest a shift toward a more assertive approach to address safe havens in Pakistan that have been blamed for in part helping turn Afghanistan's war into an intractable conflict. Experts on America's longest war argue that militant safe havens in Pakistan have allowed Taliban-linked insurgents a place to plot deadly strikes in Afghanistan and regroup after ground offensives. Although long mindful of Pakistan, the Trump administration in recent weeks has put more emphasis on the relationship with Islamabad in discussions as it hammers out a the regional strategy to be presented to Trump by mid-July, nearly six months after he took office, one official said. "We've never really fully articulated what our strategy towards Pakistan is. The strategy will more clearly say what we want from Pakistan specifically," the U.S. official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Other U.S. officials warn of divisions within the government about the right approach and question whether any mix of carrots and sticks can get Islamabad to change its behavior. At the end of the day, Washington needs a partner, even if an imperfect one, in nuclear-armed Pakistan, they say. The United States is again poised to deploy thousands more troops in Afghanistan, an acknowledgment that U.S.-backed forces are not winning and Taliban militants are resurgent. Without more pressure on militants within Pakistan who target Afghanistan, experts say additional U.S. troop deployments will fail to meet their ultimate objective: to pressure the Taliban to eventually negotiate peace. "I believe there will be a much harder U.S. line on Pakistan going forward than there has been in the past," Hamdullah Mohib, the Afghan ambassador to the United States, told Reuters, without citing specific measures under review. Kabul has long been critical of Pakistan's role in Afghanistan. Pakistan fiercely denies allowing any militants safe haven on its territory. It bristles at U.S. claims that Pakistan's spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate, has ties to Haqqani network militants blamed for some of the deadliest attacks in Afghanistan. "What Pakistan says is that we are already doing a lot and that our plate is already full," a senior Pakistani government source told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity. The source doubted the Trump administration would press too hard, saying: "They don’t want to push Pakistan to abandon their war against terrorism." Pakistani officials point towards the toll militancy has taken on the country. Since 2003, almost 22,000 civilians and nearly 7,000 Pakistani security forces have been killed as a result of militancy, according to the South Asia Terrorism Portal, which tracks violence. Experts say Pakistan's policy towards Afghanistan is also driven in part by fears that India will gain influence in Afghanistan. IS PAKISTAN AN ALLY? Nuclear-armed Pakistan won the status as a major non-NATO ally in 2004 from the George Bush administration, in what was at the time seen in part as recognition of its importance in the U.S. battle against al Qaeda and Taliban insurgents. The status is mainly symbolic, allowing limited benefits such as giving Pakistan faster access to surplus U.S. military hardware. Some U.S. officials and experts on the region scoff at the title. "Pakistan is not an ally. It’s not North Korea or Iran. But it’s not an ally," said Bruce Riedel, a Pakistan expert at the Brookings Institution. But yanking the title would be seen by Pakistan as a major blow. "The Pakistanis would take that very seriously because it would be a slap at their honor," said a former U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity. Lisa Curtis, senior director for South and Central Asia at the National Security Council, co-authored a report with Husain Haqqani, Pakistan's former ambassador to Washington, in which they recommended the Trump administration warn Pakistan the status could be revoked in six months. "Thinking of Pakistan as an ally will continue to create problems for the next administration as it did for the last one," said the February report. It was unclear how seriously the Trump administration was considering the proposal. The growing danger to Afghanistan from suspected Pakistan-based militants was underscored by a devastating May 31 truck bomb that killed more than 80 people and wounded 460 in Afghanistan's capital, Kabul. Afghanistan's main intelligence agency said the attack - one of the deadliest in memory in Kabul - had been carried out by the Haqqani network with assistance from Pakistan, a charge Islamabad denies. Washington believes the strikes appeared to be the work of the Haqqani network, U.S. officials told Reuters. U.S. frustration over the Haqqani's presence in Pakistan has been building for years. The United States designated the Haqqani network as a terrorist organization in 2012. U.S. Navy Admiral Mike Mullen, then the top U.S. military officer, told Congress in 2011 that the Haqqani network was a "veritable arm" of the ISI. The potential U.S. pivot to a more assertive approach would be sharply different than the approach taken at the start of the Obama administration, when U.S. officials sought to court Pakistani leaders, including Army chief General Ashfaq Kayani. David Sedney, who served as Obama's deputy assistant secretary of defense for Afghanistan, Pakistan and Central Asia from 2009 to 2013, said the attempt to turn Islamabad into a strategic partner was a "disaster." "It didn't affect Pakistan's behavior one bit. In fact, I would argue it made Pakistan's behavior worse," Sedney said. MORE DRONES, CASH CUT-OFF Pakistan has received more than $33 billion in U.S. assistance since 2002, including more than $14 billion in so-called Coalition Support Funds (CSF), a U.S. Defense Department program to reimburse allies that have incurred costs in supporting counter-insurgency operations. It is an important form of foreign currency for the nuclear-armed country and one that is getting particularly close scrutiny during the Trump administration review. Last year, the Pentagon decided not to pay Pakistan $300 million in CSF funding after then-U.S. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter declined to sign authorization that Pakistan was taking adequate action against the Haqqani network. U.S. officials said the Trump administration was discussing withholding at least some assistance to Pakistan. Curtis' report also singled out the aid as a target. But U.S. aid cuts could cede even more influence to China, which already has committed nearly $60 billion in investments in Pakistan. Another option under review is broadening a drone campaign to penetrate deeper into Pakistan to target Haqqani fighters and other militants blamed for attacks in Afghanistan, U.S. officials and a Pakistan expert said. "Now the Americans (will be) saying, you aren't taking out our enemies, so therefore we are taking them out ourselves," the Pakistan expert, who declined to be identified, said. Pakistan's army chief of staff last week criticized "unilateral actions" such as drone strikes as "counterproductive and against (the) spirit of ongoing cooperation and intelligence sharing being diligently undertaken by Pakistan".

Trump may expand drone strikes in Pakistan, to contain militants attacking Afghanistan

One of President Donald Trump&#39;s personal lawyers said in television interviews on Sunday that the president was not under investigation for obstruction of justice, but when pressed on the assertion, said he was not certain.

&quot;The fact of the matter is the president has not been and is not under investigation,&quot; Jay Sekulow, a new member of Trump&#39;s legal team, said on CBS&#39; &quot;Face the Nation&quot; in one of four interviews he gave on Sunday.

There have been multiple news reports and a tweet from Trump himself on Friday that began with: &quot;I am being investigated.&quot;

Challenged on &quot;Fox News Sunday&quot; about the issue, Sekulow said he could not be certain Trump was not under investigation but that no one had notified the legal team if that was the case. It is common for subjects of federal investigations not to know they are under scrutiny, especially in the initial phases.

A source familiar with the Mueller probe said on Thursday that investigators would have to gather a large amount of evidence before an interview with the president would be warranted.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Holy crap. This exchange between Chris Wallace and Trump&#39;s lawyer is absolutely incredible. <a href="https://t.co/Wem33Lc1VK">pic.twitter.com/Wem33Lc1VK</a>
&mdash; David Mack (@davidmackau) <a href="https://twitter.com/davidmackau/status/876513747598270464">June 18, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Trump, who has denied any collusion between his campaign and Russia, has frequently lashed out about the allegations, which have overshadowed his administration&#39;s efforts to overhaul the healthcare system, cut taxes and boost jobs.

Mueller, the special counsel named by the Justice Department to probe the Russia matter, is investigating whether anyone associated with Trump or his campaign had any illegal dealings with Russian officials or others with ties to the Kremlin. Russian officials have denied meddling in the US&nbsp;election.

The source familiar with the Mueller probe told Reuters that Mueller was also examining whether Trump or others tried to interfere with the investigation.

&nbsp;

&#39;CANNOT READ MIND&#39; OF SPECIAL PROSECUTOR

Sekulow said that Trump, in his tweet, was reacting to a story in the Washington Post, which was the first to report Mueller was examining whether Trump had tried to obstruct the probe by firing FBI Director James Comey in May.

Sekulow acknowledged that he could not be certain that the report was false. &quot;I cannot read the mind of the special prosecutor,&quot; he said. Peter Carr, a spokesman for the Mueller team, declined to comment.

Sekulow, a conservative activist and radio talk-show host, earlier this month joined Trump&#39;s legal team, which is led by Marc Kasowitz. Sekulow has publicly criticised Comey, whom Trump fired.

In addition to being the author of several books such as &quot;Undemocratic: How unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats are stealing your liberty and freedom,&quot; Sekulow is the chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, a politically conservative Christian organisation.

Barak Cohen, a former Justice Department lawyer and now a defense attorney specialising in white-collar crime and investigations, said there was no requirement that the special counsel notify Trump he was under investigation, so the lack of such notice meant nothing.

He said, however, that Sekulow&rsquo;s comments could mean the White House was taking the position that no investigation exists until Mueller&rsquo;s team officially confirms it, disregarding media reports based on anonymous sourcing.

Cohen said the first official communication that a target is under investigation typically comes when prosecutors begin requesting documents and other evidence. At that time, defense lawyers often will ask about their clients&rsquo; status.

Prosecutors will often answer then to avoid misleading the target. They may not answer if they are trying to build a case and develop further evidence.

&quot;No answer is probably the most troubling answer in criminal defense,&rdquo; Cohen said.

(Reuters)

In a weird exchange Jay Sekulow denied that the president was under investigation, even though Trump himself has admitted it

One of President Donald Trump's personal lawyers said in television interviews on Sunday that the president was not under investigation for obstruction of justice, but when pressed on the assertion, said he was not certain. "The fact of the matter is the president has not been and is not under investigation," Jay Sekulow, a new member of Trump's legal team, said on CBS' "Face the Nation" in one of four interviews he gave on Sunday. There have been multiple news reports and a tweet from Trump himself on Friday that began with: "I am being investigated." Challenged on "Fox News Sunday" about the issue, Sekulow said he could not be certain Trump was not under investigation but that no one had notified the legal team if that was the case. It is common for subjects of federal investigations not to know they are under scrutiny, especially in the initial phases. A source familiar with the Mueller probe said on Thursday that investigators would have to gather a large amount of evidence before an interview with the president would be warranted. Holy crap. This exchange between Chris Wallace and Trump's lawyer is absolutely incredible. pic.twitter.com/Wem33Lc1VK — David Mack (@davidmackau) June 18, 2017 × Trump, who has denied any collusion between his campaign and Russia, has frequently lashed out about the allegations, which have overshadowed his administration's efforts to overhaul the healthcare system, cut taxes and boost jobs. Mueller, the special counsel named by the Justice Department to probe the Russia matter, is investigating whether anyone associated with Trump or his campaign had any illegal dealings with Russian officials or others with ties to the Kremlin. Russian officials have denied meddling in the US election. The source familiar with the Mueller probe told Reuters that Mueller was also examining whether Trump or others tried to interfere with the investigation. 'CANNOT READ MIND' OF SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Sekulow said that Trump, in his tweet, was reacting to a story in the Washington Post, which was the first to report Mueller was examining whether Trump had tried to obstruct the probe by firing FBI Director James Comey in May. Sekulow acknowledged that he could not be certain that the report was false. "I cannot read the mind of the special prosecutor," he said. Peter Carr, a spokesman for the Mueller team, declined to comment. Sekulow, a conservative activist and radio talk-show host, earlier this month joined Trump's legal team, which is led by Marc Kasowitz. Sekulow has publicly criticised Comey, whom Trump fired. In addition to being the author of several books such as "Undemocratic: How unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats are stealing your liberty and freedom," Sekulow is the chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, a politically conservative Christian organisation. Barak Cohen, a former Justice Department lawyer and now a defense attorney specialising in white-collar crime and investigations, said there was no requirement that the special counsel notify Trump he was under investigation, so the lack of such notice meant nothing. He said, however, that Sekulow’s comments could mean the White House was taking the position that no investigation exists until Mueller’s team officially confirms it, disregarding media reports based on anonymous sourcing. Cohen said the first official communication that a target is under investigation typically comes when prosecutors begin requesting documents and other evidence. At that time, defense lawyers often will ask about their clients’ status. Prosecutors will often answer then to avoid misleading the target. They may not answer if they are trying to build a case and develop further evidence. "No answer is probably the most troubling answer in criminal defense,” Cohen said. (Reuters)

Trump lawyer says president not informed he is under investigation

Flamboyant former NBA star Dennis Rodman landed in Beijing Saturday after a visit to North Korea, describing the escapade as a &quot;real good trip&quot;.&nbsp;

Sporting a baseball cap, sunglasses, green nail polish and a black t-shirt emblazoned with the logo of sponsor PotCoin -- a cryptocurrency for the legal cannabis industry -- Rodman declined to comment further as he was swarmed at the Beijing airport by journalists.&nbsp;

He had arrived in North Korea on Tuesday, saying that he wanted to &quot;open the door&quot; to the regime and claiming that US President Donald Trump would be pleased with his mission.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>While in North Korea, Rodman was shown in video and photos presenting the isolated country&#39;s sports minister Kim Il Guk with off-the-wall gifts that included a copy of Trump&#39;s book &#39;The Art of the Deal&#39;, soap, two autographed jerseys and a copy of &#39;Where&#39;s Waldo? The Totally Essential Travel Collection&#39;</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=While in North Korea, Rodman was shown in video and photos presenting the isolated country's sports minister Kim Il Guk with off-the-wall gifts that included a copy of Trump's book 'The Art of the Deal', soap, two autographed jerseys and a copy of 'Where's Waldo? The Totally Essential Travel Collection'" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

&quot;Dennis is working hard for both countries, trying to, you know, mend the tension as much as possible,&quot; his assistant, who accompanied him and asked to be called &quot;Vo,&quot; told reporters.&nbsp;

&quot;With sports that&#39;s what happens, right? Sports unite, sports and music unite,&quot; he added.&nbsp;

While in North Korea, Rodman was shown in video and photos presenting the isolated country&#39;s sports minister Kim Il Guk with off-the-wall gifts that included a copy of Trump&#39;s book &quot;The Art of the Deal&quot;, soap, two autographed jerseys and a copy of &quot;Where&#39;s Waldo? The Totally Essential Travel Collection.&quot;&nbsp;

Trump was Rodman&#39;s boss when he appeared on the &quot;Celebrity Apprentice&quot; reality TV show.

This is at least the fifth trip to North Korea for the heavily pierced and tattooed former basketball star.

In 2014 he attracted a deluge of criticism after being filmed in the country singing happy birthday to his &quot;friend for life&quot;, leader Kim Jong-Un.

Rodman has met Kim on some but not all of his previous trips, and it remains unclear if he met with the leader this time.&nbsp;

This latest visit comes amid high tensions between Washington and Pyongyang following a series of missile tests by the North, which have triggered tightened UN sanctions.

Rodman has previously described his visits, including one in 2013 with the Harlem Globetrotters, as &quot;basketball diplomacy&quot; but has been roundly criticised for failing to raise human rights issues.

His trip this time coincided with North Korea&#39;s release of a comatose US student, 22-year-old Otto Warmbier of Cincinnati, who was incarcerated in March 2016 for stealing a political poster from a hotel.

US officials repeatedly said Rodman was travelling to North Korea as a private citizen, despite speculation he was working as an unofficial emissary for Trump.

In the US, Fred Warmbier echoed Washington&#39;s denials that Rodman&#39;s visit to Pyongyang had anything to do with the sudden release of his sick son.

American doctors treating the University of Virginia student have cast doubt on North Korean claims that the young man contracted botulism during his detention, saying Warmbier is unresponsive and has experienced extensive tissue loss in all regions of his brain.

The North is currently holding three other US citizens.&nbsp;

'Dennis is working hard for both countries, trying to, you know, mend the tension as much as possible,' his assistant said

Flamboyant former NBA star Dennis Rodman landed in Beijing Saturday after a visit to North Korea, describing the escapade as a "real good trip". Sporting a baseball cap, sunglasses, green nail polish and a black t-shirt emblazoned with the logo of sponsor PotCoin -- a cryptocurrency for the legal cannabis industry -- Rodman declined to comment further as he was swarmed at the Beijing airport by journalists. He had arrived in North Korea on Tuesday, saying that he wanted to "open the door" to the regime and claiming that US President Donald Trump would be pleased with his mission. While in North Korea, Rodman was shown in video and photos presenting the isolated country's sports minister Kim Il Guk with off-the-wall gifts that included a copy of Trump's book 'The Art of the Deal', soap, two autographed jerseys and a copy of 'Where's Waldo? The Totally Essential Travel Collection' × "Dennis is working hard for both countries, trying to, you know, mend the tension as much as possible," his assistant, who accompanied him and asked to be called "Vo," told reporters. "With sports that's what happens, right? Sports unite, sports and music unite," he added. While in North Korea, Rodman was shown in video and photos presenting the isolated country's sports minister Kim Il Guk with off-the-wall gifts that included a copy of Trump's book "The Art of the Deal", soap, two autographed jerseys and a copy of "Where's Waldo? The Totally Essential Travel Collection." Trump was Rodman's boss when he appeared on the "Celebrity Apprentice" reality TV show. This is at least the fifth trip to North Korea for the heavily pierced and tattooed former basketball star. In 2014 he attracted a deluge of criticism after being filmed in the country singing happy birthday to his "friend for life", leader Kim Jong-Un. Rodman has met Kim on some but not all of his previous trips, and it remains unclear if he met with the leader this time. This latest visit comes amid high tensions between Washington and Pyongyang following a series of missile tests by the North, which have triggered tightened UN sanctions. Rodman has previously described his visits, including one in 2013 with the Harlem Globetrotters, as "basketball diplomacy" but has been roundly criticised for failing to raise human rights issues. His trip this time coincided with North Korea's release of a comatose US student, 22-year-old Otto Warmbier of Cincinnati, who was incarcerated in March 2016 for stealing a political poster from a hotel. US officials repeatedly said Rodman was travelling to North Korea as a private citizen, despite speculation he was working as an unofficial emissary for Trump. In the US, Fred Warmbier echoed Washington's denials that Rodman's visit to Pyongyang had anything to do with the sudden release of his sick son. American doctors treating the University of Virginia student have cast doubt on North Korean claims that the young man contracted botulism during his detention, saying Warmbier is unresponsive and has experienced extensive tissue loss in all regions of his brain. The North is currently holding three other US citizens.

Rodman returns from 'real good trip' to North Korea

Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has made fun of US&nbsp;President Donald Trump and alluded to his ties with Russia, according to a leaked tape of an off-the-record media event. Reuters reports that PM Turnbull, who had a frosty first telephone call with the US&nbsp;president early this year, was recorded mimicking Trump at a media ball at Parliament House in Canberra late on Wednesday, which was strictly off the record.

&quot;The Donald and I...we are winning in the polls. We are! Not the fake polls. We are winning in the real polls. You know, the online polls. They are so easy to win,&quot; Turnbull said in the leaked recording, adding: &quot;I have this Russian guy...&quot;

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TxSHqkFBYWM" width="560"></iframe>

Back tracking

An Australian journalist later broadcast the recording saying because he had not been at the event, he was not bound by the confidentiality rule.

Turnbull later told the 3AW radio station he was disappointed by the leak, which he said was a breach of protocol.

He said his &quot;affectionately light-hearted&quot; speech was a &quot;good humoured roast&quot; in which he was the butt of his own jokes.

The US&nbsp;embassy in Canberra said it understood that the Mid-Winter Ball was the equivalent of the White House Correspondents&#39; Dinner, an annual Washington event at which the media and president traditionally rib each other. &quot;We take this with the good humour that was intended,&quot; the embassy said.

&nbsp;

Trump and Turnbull

Turnbull was one of the first foreign leaders Trump spoke to after he took office on January&nbsp;20. During their telephone call, the president became irritated about an agreement made by his Democratic predecessor, Barack Obama, to accept as many as 1,250 refugees held in Australian processing centres on remote Pacific islands.

In return, Australia would resettle refugees from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. Trump broke off what was supposed to be an hour-long call after 25 minutes and later tweeted that the refugee agreement was &quot;dumb&quot;.

Vice President Mike Pence visited Australia in April and made clear that while Trump was not happy about the refugee agreement, the United States would honour it.

The two leaders were all smiles during their first face to face meeting in New York last month, when they declared that they &quot;get along great&quot;.

&nbsp;

Trump does not enjoy being laughed at

People who crave to be seen as the most powerful cannot tolerate being the butt of a joke. They can withstand criticism, but not laughter.

Trump&#39;s lack of&nbsp;humour&nbsp;concerning himself was on display in&nbsp;one well-known example, the 2011 Correspondent&#39;s dinner. Referenced above, it&#39;s&nbsp;a tradition in America&nbsp;where for one night media, politicians and other hobnobbers get together and mock each other lightheartedly.&nbsp;

In 2011, President Obama and the evening&#39;s host Seth Myers made jokes about Trump that some people today consider a turning point for Trump. Perhaps Trump decided to run for president as revenge on this room of people laughing at him, or perhaps the effect of being mocked by his nemesis Obama is overstated.&nbsp;

Time will tell how Trump reacts to being mocked by a Prime Minister&nbsp;about Russia, a topic which&nbsp;for some reason,&nbsp;he is particularly sensitive about.

Trump may be newly sensitive because he<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-president-donald-trump-under-investigation-for-obstruction-of-justice-washington-post-16848" target="_blank"> himself is under&nbsp;investigation</a> for obstruction of justice and also financial crimes in relation to Russia.

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ya1Mi9yIJbY" width="560"></iframe>

(With inputs from Reuters)

&nbsp;

Donald does not enjoy being laughed at. Not about his popularity, and definitely not about anything Russia related

Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has made fun of US President Donald Trump and alluded to his ties with Russia, according to a leaked tape of an off-the-record media event. Reuters reports that PM Turnbull, who had a frosty first telephone call with the US president early this year, was recorded mimicking Trump at a media ball at Parliament House in Canberra late on Wednesday, which was strictly off the record. "The Donald and I...we are winning in the polls. We are! Not the fake polls. We are winning in the real polls. You know, the online polls. They are so easy to win," Turnbull said in the leaked recording, adding: "I have this Russian guy..." Back tracking An Australian journalist later broadcast the recording saying because he had not been at the event, he was not bound by the confidentiality rule. Turnbull later told the 3AW radio station he was disappointed by the leak, which he said was a breach of protocol. He said his "affectionately light-hearted" speech was a "good humoured roast" in which he was the butt of his own jokes. The US embassy in Canberra said it understood that the Mid-Winter Ball was the equivalent of the White House Correspondents' Dinner, an annual Washington event at which the media and president traditionally rib each other. "We take this with the good humour that was intended," the embassy said. Trump and Turnbull Turnbull was one of the first foreign leaders Trump spoke to after he took office on January 20. During their telephone call, the president became irritated about an agreement made by his Democratic predecessor, Barack Obama, to accept as many as 1,250 refugees held in Australian processing centres on remote Pacific islands. In return, Australia would resettle refugees from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. Trump broke off what was supposed to be an hour-long call after 25 minutes and later tweeted that the refugee agreement was "dumb". Vice President Mike Pence visited Australia in April and made clear that while Trump was not happy about the refugee agreement, the United States would honour it. The two leaders were all smiles during their first face to face meeting in New York last month, when they declared that they "get along great". Trump does not enjoy being laughed at People who crave to be seen as the most powerful cannot tolerate being the butt of a joke. They can withstand criticism, but not laughter. Trump's lack of humour concerning himself was on display in one well-known example, the 2011 Correspondent's dinner. Referenced above, it's a tradition in America where for one night media, politicians and other hobnobbers get together and mock each other lightheartedly. In 2011, President Obama and the evening's host Seth Myers made jokes about Trump that some people today consider a turning point for Trump. Perhaps Trump decided to run for president as revenge on this room of people laughing at him, or perhaps the effect of being mocked by his nemesis Obama is overstated. Time will tell how Trump reacts to being mocked by a Prime Minister about Russia, a topic which for some reason, he is particularly sensitive about. Trump may be newly sensitive because he himself is under investigation for obstruction of justice and also financial crimes in relation to Russia. (With inputs from Reuters)

Australian PM mocks Trump over 'Russian guy' at off-the-record media party

The US Senate voted nearly unanimously on Thursday for legislation to impose new sanctions on Russia, and to force President Donald Trump to get Congress&#39; approval before easing any existing sanctions on Russia.

In a move that could complicate US President Donald Trump&#39;s desire for warmer relations with Moscow, the Senate backed the measure by 98-2. Republican Senator Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats, were the only two &quot;no&quot; votes.

The measure is intended to punish Russia for meddling in the 2016 US election, annexation of Ukraine&#39;s Crimea region and support for Syria&#39;s government in the six-year-long civil war.

If passed, it would put into law sanctions previously established via former President Barack Obama&#39;s executive orders, including some on Russian energy projects. It allows new sanctions on Russian mining, metals, shipping and railways and targets Russians guilty of conducting cyber attacks or supplying weapons to Syria&#39;s government.

&quot;The legislation sends a very, very strong signal to Russia, the nefarious activities they&#39;ve been involved in,&quot; Senator Bob Corker, the Republican chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said as lawmakers debated the measure.

If the measure became law, it could complicate relations with some countries in Europe. Germany and Austria said the new punitive measures could expose European companies involved in projects in Russia to fines.

The legislation sets up a review process that would require Trump to get Congress&#39; approval before taking any action to ease, suspend or lift any sanctions on Russia.

Trump was especially effusive about Russian president Vladimir Putin during the 2016 US&nbsp;election campaign, though his openness to closer ties to Moscow has tempered somewhat, with his administration on the defensive over investigations into alleged Russian meddling in the election.

Putin dismissed the proposed sanctions, saying they reflected an internal political struggle in the United States, and that Washington&#39;s policy of imposing sanctions on Moscow had always been to try to contain Russia.

The bill also includes new sanctions on Iran over its ballistic missile programme and other activities not related to the international nuclear agreement reached with the United States and other world powers.

To become law, the legislation must pass the House of Representatives and be signed by Trump. House aides said they expected the chamber would begin to debate the measure in coming weeks. They could not predict when it might face a final vote.

Secretary of state Rex Tillerson had questioned the legislation on Wednesday, urging Congress to ensure that any legislation &quot;allows the president to have the flexibility to adjust sanctions to meet the needs of what is always an evolving diplomatic situation&quot;.

However, aides in both chambers said they expected support for the bill would be strong enough to override a Trump veto if necessary.

Previously, US&nbsp;energy sanctions had only targeted Russia&#39;s future high-tech energy projects, such as drilling for oil in the Arctic, fracking and offshore drilling. They blocked US&nbsp;companies such as Exxon Mobil, where Tillerson was chairman, from investing in such projects.

The new bill would slap sanctions on companies in other countries looking to invest in those projects in the absence of US&nbsp;companies, a practice known as backfilling.

Also included for the first time are discretionary measures the Trump administration could impose on investments by companies in Western countries on Russia energy export pipelines to Europe.

Lawmakers also voted overwhelmingly on Thursday to add provisions to the bill allowing the US&nbsp;space agency NASA to continue using Russian-made rocket engines and reaffirming the US&nbsp;commitment to the NATO alliance.

The measure is intended to punish Russia for meddling in the 2016 US election, annexation of Ukraine's Crimea region and support for Syria's government in the six-year-long civil war

The US Senate voted nearly unanimously on Thursday for legislation to impose new sanctions on Russia, and to force President Donald Trump to get Congress' approval before easing any existing sanctions on Russia. In a move that could complicate US President Donald Trump's desire for warmer relations with Moscow, the Senate backed the measure by 98-2. Republican Senator Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats, were the only two "no" votes. The measure is intended to punish Russia for meddling in the 2016 US election, annexation of Ukraine's Crimea region and support for Syria's government in the six-year-long civil war. If passed, it would put into law sanctions previously established via former President Barack Obama's executive orders, including some on Russian energy projects. It allows new sanctions on Russian mining, metals, shipping and railways and targets Russians guilty of conducting cyber attacks or supplying weapons to Syria's government. "The legislation sends a very, very strong signal to Russia, the nefarious activities they've been involved in," Senator Bob Corker, the Republican chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said as lawmakers debated the measure. If the measure became law, it could complicate relations with some countries in Europe. Germany and Austria said the new punitive measures could expose European companies involved in projects in Russia to fines. The legislation sets up a review process that would require Trump to get Congress' approval before taking any action to ease, suspend or lift any sanctions on Russia. Trump was especially effusive about Russian president Vladimir Putin during the 2016 US election campaign, though his openness to closer ties to Moscow has tempered somewhat, with his administration on the defensive over investigations into alleged Russian meddling in the election. Putin dismissed the proposed sanctions, saying they reflected an internal political struggle in the United States, and that Washington's policy of imposing sanctions on Moscow had always been to try to contain Russia. The bill also includes new sanctions on Iran over its ballistic missile programme and other activities not related to the international nuclear agreement reached with the United States and other world powers. To become law, the legislation must pass the House of Representatives and be signed by Trump. House aides said they expected the chamber would begin to debate the measure in coming weeks. They could not predict when it might face a final vote. Secretary of state Rex Tillerson had questioned the legislation on Wednesday, urging Congress to ensure that any legislation "allows the president to have the flexibility to adjust sanctions to meet the needs of what is always an evolving diplomatic situation". However, aides in both chambers said they expected support for the bill would be strong enough to override a Trump veto if necessary. Previously, US energy sanctions had only targeted Russia's future high-tech energy projects, such as drilling for oil in the Arctic, fracking and offshore drilling. They blocked US companies such as Exxon Mobil, where Tillerson was chairman, from investing in such projects. The new bill would slap sanctions on companies in other countries looking to invest in those projects in the absence of US companies, a practice known as backfilling. Also included for the first time are discretionary measures the Trump administration could impose on investments by companies in Western countries on Russia energy export pipelines to Europe. Lawmakers also voted overwhelmingly on Thursday to add provisions to the bill allowing the US space agency NASA to continue using Russian-made rocket engines and reaffirming the US commitment to the NATO alliance.

US Senate votes near unanimously for Russia, Iran sanctions

The founder of Sulabh International, Bindeshwar&nbsp;Pathak, has announced that an open defecation-free village in Mewat in Haryana will be named after US President Donald Trump.

Pathak, who made his announcement in the US, said the move would help build good relations with the&nbsp;United States, ANI reported.

Pathak added that the move would draw the attention of the world towards India &#39;s cleanliness campaign &#39;Swacch Bharat Abhiyan&#39;.

One of Sulabh&#39;s -- which is a not-for-profit -- aims is to provide people with toilets.

Sulabh, ANI reported, is currently working in some villages of Mewat to make them open defecation-free.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

The move is aimed at helping build good relations with the United States

The founder of Sulabh International, Bindeshwar Pathak, has announced that an open defecation-free village in Mewat in Haryana will be named after US President Donald Trump. Pathak, who made his announcement in the US, said the move would help build good relations with the United States, ANI reported. Pathak added that the move would draw the attention of the world towards India 's cleanliness campaign 'Swacch Bharat Abhiyan'. One of Sulabh's -- which is a not-for-profit -- aims is to provide people with toilets. Sulabh, ANI reported, is currently working in some villages of Mewat to make them open defecation-free.

Cleaning India? Sulabh names Haryana village after Trump

US Attorney General&nbsp;Jeff&nbsp;Sessions on Tuesday denounced as &quot;an appalling and detestable lie&quot; the idea he colluded with Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign but refused to answer a series of questions during a high-stakes Senate hearing.

Sessions, a senior member of Republican President Donald Trump&#39;s Cabinet and an adviser to his presidential campaign, faced criticism from Democratic senators for declining to answer their questions relating to conversations he had with Trump.

Democratic Senator Martin Heinrich accused Sessions of violating his vow to tell the full truth. He told Sessions: &ldquo;You&rsquo;re impeding this investigation.&rdquo;&nbsp;

Sessions dodged questions about were whether he had discussed FBI director James Comey&#39;s handling of the FBI&#39;s Russia probe with Trump before the president fired Comey on May 9. Similarly, he did not answer whether Trump had expressed concern to Sessions about the attorney general&#39;s March decision to recuse himself from the Russia investigation.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
I questioned Attorney General Jeff Sessions. The American people don&rsquo;t deserve evasion - we deserve the truth. <a href="https://t.co/rIcE6ATDcl">pic.twitter.com/rIcE6ATDcl</a>
&mdash; Kamala Harris (@SenKamalaHarris) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenKamalaHarris/status/874778688906174465">June 14, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Democratic Senator Ron Wyden told Sessions, &quot;I believe the American people have had it with stonewalling. Americans don&#39;t want to hear that answers to relevant questions are privileged.&quot;

&quot;I am not stonewalling,&quot; Sessions replied. &quot;I am following the historic policies of the Department of Justice.&quot; Sessions said he would not discuss confidential communications with the president.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Before Sen Harris was rudely interrupted, she absolutely crushed <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/JeffSessions?src=hash">#JeffSessions</a>&ndash;&ndash;who was not prepared to answer the majority of questions. <a href="https://t.co/0ZM0KucWFr">pic.twitter.com/0ZM0KucWFr</a>
&mdash; Jezebel (@Jezebel) <a href="https://twitter.com/Jezebel/status/874734053152493568">June 13, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Senator Angus King, an independent, questioned Sessions&#39; legal basis for refusing to answer. Sessions said Trump had not invoked executive privilege regarding the conversations.&nbsp;

Executive privilege is a power that can be claimed by a president or senior executive branch officials to withhold information from Congress or the courts to protect the executive branch decision-making process.

US&nbsp;intelligence agencies concluded in a report released in January that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an effort to interfere in the election to help Trump in part by hacking and releasing damaging emails about Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton.

The testimony by Sessions marked the latest chapter in a saga that has dogged the Republican Trump&#39;s first five months as president and distracted from his domestic policy agenda including major healthcare and tax cut initiatives.

&quot;I have never met with or had any conversation with any Russians or any foreign officials concerning any type of interference with any campaign or election in the United States. Further, I have no knowledge of any such conversations by anyone connected with the Trump campaign,&quot; Sessions said.

&quot;The suggestion that I participated in any collusion or that I was aware of any collusion with the Russian government to hurt this country, which I have served with honour for over 35 years, or to undermine the integrity of our democratic process, is an appalling and detestable lie,&quot; he said.

Sessions is the most senior member of Trump&#39;s administration caught up in the controversy over whether associates of the president colluded with Russia to help Trump win the election.

Special Counsel

Even before Sessions testified, attention in Washington swivelled to whether Trump might seek to fire Robert Mueller, named last month by the Justice Department to head a federal probe into the Russia issue.

Sessions told the senators that he has confidence in Mueller but said he had &quot;no idea&quot; if Trump did because he had not spoken to the president about the matter. Asked whether he would ever take any action to remove Mueller, Sessions said, &quot;I would not think that would be appropriate for me to do.&quot;

Such a move would be complicated and potentially politically explosive. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, the person who would be responsible for carrying out any such dismissal, told a different congressional panel on Tuesday he would not fire Mueller without good cause and he had seen no such cause.

Sessions, a former Republican US&nbsp;senator and an early supporter of Trump&#39;s presidential campaign, appeared before the committee just five days after Comey told the panel Trump ousted him to undermine the agency&#39;s investigation of the Russia matter. Sessions had written a letter to Trump recommending Comey&#39;s firing.

In March he acknowledged he met twice last year with Russia&#39;s ambassador to Washington, Sergei Kislyak. Sessions said he did not mislead Congress because the encounters were part of his job as a US&nbsp;senator, not as a Trump campaign representative. But Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation in March after the revelations of the two Kislyak meetings.

The abrupt dismissal of Comey prompted Trump&#39;s critics to charge that the president was trying to interfere with a criminal investigation.

Asked about media reports that he had met with Kislyak on a third occasion at a Washington hotel last year, Sessions testified that did not remember meeting or having a conversation with the ambassador at the event. Sessions said he &quot;racked my brain&quot; and had no meeting with any Russian in his capacity as a Trump campaign adviser.

Sessions said he did not recuse himself because he felt he was a subject of the investigation himself but rather because he felt he was required to by Justice Department rules.

US Attorney General Sessions is the most senior member of Trump's administration caught up in the Trump-Russia probes

US Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Tuesday denounced as "an appalling and detestable lie" the idea he colluded with Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign but refused to answer a series of questions during a high-stakes Senate hearing. Sessions, a senior member of Republican President Donald Trump's Cabinet and an adviser to his presidential campaign, faced criticism from Democratic senators for declining to answer their questions relating to conversations he had with Trump. Democratic Senator Martin Heinrich accused Sessions of violating his vow to tell the full truth. He told Sessions: “You’re impeding this investigation.” Sessions dodged questions about were whether he had discussed FBI director James Comey's handling of the FBI's Russia probe with Trump before the president fired Comey on May 9. Similarly, he did not answer whether Trump had expressed concern to Sessions about the attorney general's March decision to recuse himself from the Russia investigation. I questioned Attorney General Jeff Sessions. The American people don’t deserve evasion - we deserve the truth. pic.twitter.com/rIcE6ATDcl — Kamala Harris (@SenKamalaHarris) June 14, 2017 × Democratic Senator Ron Wyden told Sessions, "I believe the American people have had it with stonewalling. Americans don't want to hear that answers to relevant questions are privileged." "I am not stonewalling," Sessions replied. "I am following the historic policies of the Department of Justice." Sessions said he would not discuss confidential communications with the president. Before Sen Harris was rudely interrupted, she absolutely crushed #JeffSessions––who was not prepared to answer the majority of questions. pic.twitter.com/0ZM0KucWFr — Jezebel (@Jezebel) June 13, 2017 × Senator Angus King, an independent, questioned Sessions' legal basis for refusing to answer. Sessions said Trump had not invoked executive privilege regarding the conversations. Executive privilege is a power that can be claimed by a president or senior executive branch officials to withhold information from Congress or the courts to protect the executive branch decision-making process. US intelligence agencies concluded in a report released in January that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an effort to interfere in the election to help Trump in part by hacking and releasing damaging emails about Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. The testimony by Sessions marked the latest chapter in a saga that has dogged the Republican Trump's first five months as president and distracted from his domestic policy agenda including major healthcare and tax cut initiatives. "I have never met with or had any conversation with any Russians or any foreign officials concerning any type of interference with any campaign or election in the United States. Further, I have no knowledge of any such conversations by anyone connected with the Trump campaign," Sessions said. "The suggestion that I participated in any collusion or that I was aware of any collusion with the Russian government to hurt this country, which I have served with honour for over 35 years, or to undermine the integrity of our democratic process, is an appalling and detestable lie," he said. Sessions is the most senior member of Trump's administration caught up in the controversy over whether associates of the president colluded with Russia to help Trump win the election. Special Counsel Even before Sessions testified, attention in Washington swivelled to whether Trump might seek to fire Robert Mueller, named last month by the Justice Department to head a federal probe into the Russia issue. Sessions told the senators that he has confidence in Mueller but said he had "no idea" if Trump did because he had not spoken to the president about the matter. Asked whether he would ever take any action to remove Mueller, Sessions said, "I would not think that would be appropriate for me to do." Such a move would be complicated and potentially politically explosive. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, the person who would be responsible for carrying out any such dismissal, told a different congressional panel on Tuesday he would not fire Mueller without good cause and he had seen no such cause. Sessions, a former Republican US senator and an early supporter of Trump's presidential campaign, appeared before the committee just five days after Comey told the panel Trump ousted him to undermine the agency's investigation of the Russia matter. Sessions had written a letter to Trump recommending Comey's firing. In March he acknowledged he met twice last year with Russia's ambassador to Washington, Sergei Kislyak. Sessions said he did not mislead Congress because the encounters were part of his job as a US senator, not as a Trump campaign representative. But Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation in March after the revelations of the two Kislyak meetings. The abrupt dismissal of Comey prompted Trump's critics to charge that the president was trying to interfere with a criminal investigation. Asked about media reports that he had met with Kislyak on a third occasion at a Washington hotel last year, Sessions testified that did not remember meeting or having a conversation with the ambassador at the event. Sessions said he "racked my brain" and had no meeting with any Russian in his capacity as a Trump campaign adviser. Sessions said he did not recuse himself because he felt he was a subject of the investigation himself but rather because he felt he was required to by Justice Department rules.

Jeff Sessions denies secret meetings with Russia, calls it 'detestable lie'

The US Defence Secretary Jim &quot;Mad Dog&quot;&nbsp;Mattis&nbsp;told the American Congress&nbsp;that the country is not winning in Afghanistan. This, in common words, means they are losing. Finally, someone acknowledged it.&nbsp;

A few months back, during a hearing in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee, General Nicholson, commander of the US forces in Afghanistan,&nbsp;had been more optimistic,&nbsp;defining the situation as a &quot;stalemate&quot;.&nbsp;&nbsp;

According to the US military, the Afghan government can claim to control 60 per cent of the country&rsquo;s districts, 11 per cent less than the previous year. &nbsp;&quot;We recognise the need for urgency,&quot; Mattis said.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Trump vs Obama

US President Donald Trump decided to leave it to the Pentagon to decide how many troops are needed on the ground. This decision gives more power to the military, a change&nbsp;from the previous administration which&nbsp;carefully supervised&nbsp;all military deployments.&nbsp;

It has now become clear that Trump&rsquo;s foreign policy, at least when it comes to war-torn areas, is more troops, more bombs, more fighting. Coalition forces have increased the frequency&nbsp;of airstrikes in both Syria and Iraq. It has been recently documented that they have been using white phosphorous over Mosul, where many civilians still live.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Afghanistan&#39;s battered forces

Sixteen years and more than 2,300 military victims after the US invasion, Afghan Taliban are once again on the offensive, the Islamic State established a presence and cities are more prone to suicide attacks. The Afghan National Army (ANA) is tired, suffering and in a few cases vulnerable to Taliban infiltration. In 2016 alone they lost 6,000 soldiers.&nbsp;

The ANA faces shortages of up-to-standard equipment and, even worse, they lack ammunitions. Several military outposts are completely at the mercy of Taliban ambushes and do not even have enough bullets to try to hold their position. The most recent of such episodes happened in&nbsp;late May, when Taliban attacked a military outpost in Kandahar, killing 15 soldiers. A week earlier the same fate hit another outpost and ten Afghan soldiers lost their lives.&nbsp;

Afghans have a fighting spirit and the country&rsquo;s history proves it. They defeated every army who tried to conquer their land, but there is a limit to the sacrifice a nation can ask&nbsp;its soldiers. During a conflict dedication is important, but not enough.&nbsp;

The rampant corruption within the army ranks is also a major problem. At the end of March, Afghan defence officials communicated that more than a thousand military personnel, including generals and officers, had been fired on charges of corruption.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

History on their side?

The US military and the coalition forces have not been able to secure a lasting stability in Afghanistan, and a few thousand soldiers will not save&nbsp;the country. This is being presented as&nbsp;sending&nbsp;in reinforcements to win the war, when really&nbsp;they&nbsp;may be&nbsp;needed to prevent losing it.

Afghan history shows pretty blatantly that the solution does not lie in further military actions, but in a difficult and painful dialogue between the belligerents. National reconciliation, an honest judiciary system, people&rsquo;s empowerment and economic development are the foundation&nbsp;on which Afghanistan can&nbsp;build peace. Time has proved how bombs are not effective.&nbsp;&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Rumours&nbsp;

In early May, media reported&nbsp;diplomatic rumours in Washington suggesting a possible deployment of 15,000 Indian soldiers in Afghanistan under the banner of the United Nations. This is just a very weak rumour, its origins are so unclear that it can hardly be taken into account. The Indian ambassador in Kabul, Mr. Manpreet Vohra, has denied any official communication on the matter between the two governments. &ldquo;There is no such proposal from the United Nations to the best of my knowledge,&rdquo; Mr. Vohra told WION.&nbsp;&nbsp;

&nbsp;

India in Afghanistan

If these media reports are to be believed, the move could result in a further destabilisation of Afghanistan. Many Taliban leaders and fighters are based out of Pakistan and are supported by the country&rsquo;s deep state. It is very likely that the reaction to a possible Indian deployment would be to increase the number of attacks, both against soldiers and civilians living in the country. This, for India, could also mean to &quot;bring the war home&quot;, increasing the risk of attacks within the country. Many people on the streets of Kabul are also fed up with war:&nbsp;They had enough foreign troops on their soil in the last decades, and nothing has changed.&nbsp;

India has been a precious ally to Afghanistan, and is putting a lot of effort in the reconstruction process. The Salma Dam is perhaps one of the largest infrastructure that India completed in the country, and it is directly benefitting the local population. Since 2001 India invested $2 billion in Afghanistan and in late 2016 it pledged another billion on top of that.

Afghanistan will benefit of the services provided by the&nbsp;satellite India recently launched and defined as&nbsp;&quot;a gift to South Asia&quot;. Indian doctors travel regularly to Afghanistan, and many Afghans are allowed to travel to India for medical purposes. All these investments are not made only out of generosity, there is a clear element of soft power. This is the way Delhi&nbsp;aims to&nbsp;solidify&nbsp;their position as major influencer of the South Asian region, and to isolate Islamabad as much as possible.&nbsp;&nbsp;

One can doubt the sincerity of their motivation.

Whatever&nbsp;the purity of their&nbsp;motivation,&nbsp;as far as long-term stability goes&nbsp;India&#39;s increased&nbsp;civilian investment, rather than America increasing&nbsp;military deployment, is what will improve Afghanistan.

(WION)

Trump pledged to let the Pentagon set troop levels in Afghanistan. Long-term this won't stabilise things, even if the Taliban is strong

The US Defence Secretary Jim "Mad Dog" Mattis told the American Congress that the country is not winning in Afghanistan. This, in common words, means they are losing. Finally, someone acknowledged it. A few months back, during a hearing in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee, General Nicholson, commander of the US forces in Afghanistan, had been more optimistic, defining the situation as a "stalemate". According to the US military, the Afghan government can claim to control 60 per cent of the country’s districts, 11 per cent less than the previous year. "We recognise the need for urgency," Mattis said. Trump vs Obama US President Donald Trump decided to leave it to the Pentagon to decide how many troops are needed on the ground. This decision gives more power to the military, a change from the previous administration which carefully supervised all military deployments. It has now become clear that Trump’s foreign policy, at least when it comes to war-torn areas, is more troops, more bombs, more fighting. Coalition forces have increased the frequency of airstrikes in both Syria and Iraq. It has been recently documented that they have been using white phosphorous over Mosul, where many civilians still live. Afghanistan's battered forces Sixteen years and more than 2,300 military victims after the US invasion, Afghan Taliban are once again on the offensive, the Islamic State established a presence and cities are more prone to suicide attacks. The Afghan National Army (ANA) is tired, suffering and in a few cases vulnerable to Taliban infiltration. In 2016 alone they lost 6,000 soldiers. The ANA faces shortages of up-to-standard equipment and, even worse, they lack ammunitions. Several military outposts are completely at the mercy of Taliban ambushes and do not even have enough bullets to try to hold their position. The most recent of such episodes happened in late May, when Taliban attacked a military outpost in Kandahar, killing 15 soldiers. A week earlier the same fate hit another outpost and ten Afghan soldiers lost their lives. Afghans have a fighting spirit and the country’s history proves it. They defeated every army who tried to conquer their land, but there is a limit to the sacrifice a nation can ask its soldiers. During a conflict dedication is important, but not enough. The rampant corruption within the army ranks is also a major problem. At the end of March, Afghan defence officials communicated that more than a thousand military personnel, including generals and officers, had been fired on charges of corruption. History on their side? The US military and the coalition forces have not been able to secure a lasting stability in Afghanistan, and a few thousand soldiers will not save the country. This is being presented as sending in reinforcements to win the war, when really they may be needed to prevent losing it. Afghan history shows pretty blatantly that the solution does not lie in further military actions, but in a difficult and painful dialogue between the belligerents. National reconciliation, an honest judiciary system, people’s empowerment and economic development are the foundation on which Afghanistan can build peace. Time has proved how bombs are not effective. Rumours In early May, media reported diplomatic rumours in Washington suggesting a possible deployment of 15,000 Indian soldiers in Afghanistan under the banner of the United Nations. This is just a very weak rumour, its origins are so unclear that it can hardly be taken into account. The Indian ambassador in Kabul, Mr. Manpreet Vohra, has denied any official communication on the matter between the two governments. “There is no such proposal from the United Nations to the best of my knowledge,” Mr. Vohra told WION. India in Afghanistan If these media reports are to be believed, the move could result in a further destabilisation of Afghanistan. Many Taliban leaders and fighters are based out of Pakistan and are supported by the country’s deep state. It is very likely that the reaction to a possible Indian deployment would be to increase the number of attacks, both against soldiers and civilians living in the country. This, for India, could also mean to "bring the war home", increasing the risk of attacks within the country. Many people on the streets of Kabul are also fed up with war: They had enough foreign troops on their soil in the last decades, and nothing has changed. India has been a precious ally to Afghanistan, and is putting a lot of effort in the reconstruction process. The Salma Dam is perhaps one of the largest infrastructure that India completed in the country, and it is directly benefitting the local population. Since 2001 India invested $2 billion in Afghanistan and in late 2016 it pledged another billion on top of that. Afghanistan will benefit of the services provided by the satellite India recently launched and defined as "a gift to South Asia". Indian doctors travel regularly to Afghanistan, and many Afghans are allowed to travel to India for medical purposes. All these investments are not made only out of generosity, there is a clear element of soft power. This is the way Delhi aims to solidify their position as major influencer of the South Asian region, and to isolate Islamabad as much as possible. One can doubt the sincerity of their motivation. Whatever the purity of their motivation, as far as long-term stability goes India's increased civilian investment, rather than America increasing military deployment, is what will improve Afghanistan. (WION)

Analysis from Kabul: Afghanistan needs civilian investment, not bombs

Donald Trump is considering firing former FBI chief Robert Mueller, the special counsel investigating if Russia colluded in last year&#39;s bitter election campaign, a friend of the US president said Monday.

Newsmax Media CEO Christopher Ruddy made the comments on the eve of testimony at the Senate Intelligence Committee by US Attorney General Jeff Sessions over the Trump-Russia probe.

His comments came just days after explosive comments by ousted FBI director James Comey to the same committee, suggesting that Trump sought to interfere with the investigation.

&quot;I think he&#39;s considering perhaps terminating the special counsel. I think he&#39;s weighing that option,&quot; Ruddy told PBS &quot;NewsHour&quot; when asked if Trump would let Mueller continue in his role in the Russia probe. &quot;I personally think it would be a very significant mistake,&quot; Ruddy added.

A White House official stressed that Ruddy &quot;speaks for himself,&quot; not the Trump administration.

CNN cited a source close to Trump as saying the president was &quot;being advised by many people&quot; to not fire Mueller, who led the FBI between 2001 and 2013.

The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, warned on Twitter that &quot;If President fired Bob Mueller, Congress would immediately re-establish independent counsel and appoint Bob Mueller. Don&#39;t waste our time.&quot;

The president sacked Comey in early May. Given that as FBI director Comey was overseeing the probe into Russia, and its possible collusion with the Trump team, the firing has led to questions about potential obstruction of justice.&nbsp;

Sessions, who recommended in a signed memo that Comey be fired, may end up claiming executive privilege as a means of limiting the scope of his testimony.&nbsp;

Trump has expressed frustrations with Sessions, one of the president&#39;s earliest high-profile backers.

(AFP)

Just days ago, the fired FBI director James Comey suggested that Trump sought to interfere with the Russia investigation

Donald Trump is considering firing former FBI chief Robert Mueller, the special counsel investigating if Russia colluded in last year's bitter election campaign, a friend of the US president said Monday. Newsmax Media CEO Christopher Ruddy made the comments on the eve of testimony at the Senate Intelligence Committee by US Attorney General Jeff Sessions over the Trump-Russia probe. His comments came just days after explosive comments by ousted FBI director James Comey to the same committee, suggesting that Trump sought to interfere with the investigation. "I think he's considering perhaps terminating the special counsel. I think he's weighing that option," Ruddy told PBS "NewsHour" when asked if Trump would let Mueller continue in his role in the Russia probe. "I personally think it would be a very significant mistake," Ruddy added. A White House official stressed that Ruddy "speaks for himself," not the Trump administration. CNN cited a source close to Trump as saying the president was "being advised by many people" to not fire Mueller, who led the FBI between 2001 and 2013. The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, warned on Twitter that "If President fired Bob Mueller, Congress would immediately re-establish independent counsel and appoint Bob Mueller. Don't waste our time." The president sacked Comey in early May. Given that as FBI director Comey was overseeing the probe into Russia, and its possible collusion with the Trump team, the firing has led to questions about potential obstruction of justice. Sessions, who recommended in a signed memo that Comey be fired, may end up claiming executive privilege as a means of limiting the scope of his testimony. Trump has expressed frustrations with Sessions, one of the president's earliest high-profile backers. (AFP)

Trump considering 'terminating' Russia probe leader

US President Donald Trump on Sunday intensified his effort to discredit ousted FBI director James Comey, accusing him of cowardice in leaking an eye-popping account of their private meetings.

In an angry early-morning tweet from his New Jersey golf club, the embattled president questioned Comey&#39;s character and whether he had broken the law in revealing their conversations.

Comey had been leading an FBI investigation into several Trump aides and their contacts with the Russian government -- which US intelligence agencies say tried to tilt the 2016 election in Trump&#39;s favor -- before being fired.&nbsp;

After his dismissal, Comey leaked shocking details of a series of meetings with Trump, in which the president allegedly asked for Comey&#39;s &quot;loyalty&quot; and suggested that he shelve an FBI investigation into Trump&#39;s national security adviser.

Trump critics said that was evidence that the president may have obstructed justice, possible grounds for impeachment.

The president has suggested several times, but not confirmed, that tapes of his private talks with Comey exist -- a prospect the ex-FBI chief has emphatically welcomed.

A member of Trump&#39;s legal team, Jay Sekulow, told ABC on Sunday that Trump would &quot;address the issue of the tapes, whether the tapes exist or not, next week.&quot;

The White House has repeatedly tried to shift the focus away from the content of Comey&#39;s allegations and onto the manner of their release.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
I believe the James Comey leaks will be far more prevalent than anyone ever thought possible. Totally illegal? Very &#39;cowardly!&#39;
&mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/873879934040780801">June 11, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

It was not clear exactly what Trump meant by &quot;prevalent&quot; -- a point made in a flurry of Twitter postings by critics of the president. And legal experts have questioned whether Comey&#39;s leak broke any law.

Trump under oath?

Trump&#39;s lawyer Marc Kasowitz has indicated he will file a complaint about Comey to the Justice Department, which oversees the FBI.

In sworn testimony to the Senate on Thursday, Comey painted Trump as untrustworthy and admitted he asked a &quot;friend,&quot; identified as a Columbia University law professor, to release a memo of his conversations with the president to the press.

Comey said he had hoped releasing the information via the media would prompt the appointment of a special counsel to handle the Russia probe, a ploy that ultimately proved successful.

He also branded the president a liar and said Trump urged him to abandon the investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

On Friday, Trump&#39;s former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski criticized Comey as not &quot;man enough&quot; for having leaked the memo via his friend rather than doing it himself.

&quot;He gave his notes to a Columbia law professor because he wasn&#39;t man enough to give the notes directly to the media,&quot; Lewandowski told NBC&#39;s morning show &quot;Today.&quot;

Though Trump has lambasted Comey as a &quot;leaker,&quot; he also claimed &quot;total and complete vindication&quot; following the ex-FBI chief&#39;s testimony, focusing on Comey&#39;s confirmation that Trump was not personally being probed.

Comey &quot;leaking his own memos to manipulate the system is exactly why people dislike the swamp,&quot; said Trump ally Newt Gingrich. During his campaign, Trump often said it was time to &quot;drain the swamp&quot; in Washington of corrupt and self-dealing insiders.

But Trump&#39;s denunciations of Comey have only fueled demands that the president -- who has denied asking for loyalty or urging that the investigation be shelved -- give his account under oath.

On Friday, Trump indicated that he was willing to do that, a highly unusual step for a sitting president and one fraught with legal hazard.&nbsp;

&#39;A giant perjury trap&#39;

Leaders of the House Intelligence Committee, which is also investigating suspected Russian election meddling, have written White House counsel Don McGahn asking whether tapes exist and, if so, that they be produced to the committee by June 23.

Republican Senator Susan Collins called on Sunday for Trump to &quot;voluntarily turn them over&quot; to the Senate Intelligence Committee and to the special counsel, Robert Mueller, investigating possible collusion between Trump aides and Russia.

&quot;I would be fine with issuing a subpoena, but that most likely would come from the special counsel&#39;s office,&quot; Collins told CNN.

Another Republican senator, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, told CBS he thought it would be &quot;inappropriate for the president to testify publicly.&quot; &nbsp;

He said he tended to believe Trump&#39;s denial of having done &quot;anything wrong with the Russians,&quot; wryly adding: &quot;He can&#39;t collude with his own government. Why do you think he&#39;s colluding with the Russians?&quot;

More seriously, former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer voiced the growing concern among Trump allies that the president is digging himself into a legal hole, offering this advice to the president:&nbsp;

&quot;You have not been vindicated. U won&#39;t be unless Bob Mueller says so. Stop talking. You&#39;re heading into a giant perjury trap.&quot;

In a tweet, Trump questioned Comey's character and whether he had broken the law in revealing their conversations

US President Donald Trump on Sunday intensified his effort to discredit ousted FBI director James Comey, accusing him of cowardice in leaking an eye-popping account of their private meetings. In an angry early-morning tweet from his New Jersey golf club, the embattled president questioned Comey's character and whether he had broken the law in revealing their conversations. Comey had been leading an FBI investigation into several Trump aides and their contacts with the Russian government -- which US intelligence agencies say tried to tilt the 2016 election in Trump's favor -- before being fired. After his dismissal, Comey leaked shocking details of a series of meetings with Trump, in which the president allegedly asked for Comey's "loyalty" and suggested that he shelve an FBI investigation into Trump's national security adviser. Trump critics said that was evidence that the president may have obstructed justice, possible grounds for impeachment. The president has suggested several times, but not confirmed, that tapes of his private talks with Comey exist -- a prospect the ex-FBI chief has emphatically welcomed. A member of Trump's legal team, Jay Sekulow, told ABC on Sunday that Trump would "address the issue of the tapes, whether the tapes exist or not, next week." The White House has repeatedly tried to shift the focus away from the content of Comey's allegations and onto the manner of their release. I believe the James Comey leaks will be far more prevalent than anyone ever thought possible. Totally illegal? Very 'cowardly!' — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 11, 2017 × It was not clear exactly what Trump meant by "prevalent" -- a point made in a flurry of Twitter postings by critics of the president. And legal experts have questioned whether Comey's leak broke any law. Trump under oath? Trump's lawyer Marc Kasowitz has indicated he will file a complaint about Comey to the Justice Department, which oversees the FBI. In sworn testimony to the Senate on Thursday, Comey painted Trump as untrustworthy and admitted he asked a "friend," identified as a Columbia University law professor, to release a memo of his conversations with the president to the press. Comey said he had hoped releasing the information via the media would prompt the appointment of a special counsel to handle the Russia probe, a ploy that ultimately proved successful. He also branded the president a liar and said Trump urged him to abandon the investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn. On Friday, Trump's former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski criticized Comey as not "man enough" for having leaked the memo via his friend rather than doing it himself. "He gave his notes to a Columbia law professor because he wasn't man enough to give the notes directly to the media," Lewandowski told NBC's morning show "Today." Though Trump has lambasted Comey as a "leaker," he also claimed "total and complete vindication" following the ex-FBI chief's testimony, focusing on Comey's confirmation that Trump was not personally being probed. Comey "leaking his own memos to manipulate the system is exactly why people dislike the swamp," said Trump ally Newt Gingrich. During his campaign, Trump often said it was time to "drain the swamp" in Washington of corrupt and self-dealing insiders. But Trump's denunciations of Comey have only fueled demands that the president -- who has denied asking for loyalty or urging that the investigation be shelved -- give his account under oath. On Friday, Trump indicated that he was willing to do that, a highly unusual step for a sitting president and one fraught with legal hazard. 'A giant perjury trap' Leaders of the House Intelligence Committee, which is also investigating suspected Russian election meddling, have written White House counsel Don McGahn asking whether tapes exist and, if so, that they be produced to the committee by June 23. Republican Senator Susan Collins called on Sunday for Trump to "voluntarily turn them over" to the Senate Intelligence Committee and to the special counsel, Robert Mueller, investigating possible collusion between Trump aides and Russia. "I would be fine with issuing a subpoena, but that most likely would come from the special counsel's office," Collins told CNN. Another Republican senator, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, told CBS he thought it would be "inappropriate for the president to testify publicly." He said he tended to believe Trump's denial of having done "anything wrong with the Russians," wryly adding: "He can't collude with his own government. Why do you think he's colluding with the Russians?" More seriously, former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer voiced the growing concern among Trump allies that the president is digging himself into a legal hole, offering this advice to the president: "You have not been vindicated. U won't be unless Bob Mueller says so. Stop talking. You're heading into a giant perjury trap."

Trump blasts Comey on Twitter, accuses him of cowardice over 'leaks'

Maryland and the US capital sued President Donald Trump Monday, saying he is breaking laws by raking in money from foreign governments and businesses at his luxury hotels and office towers.

The lawsuit said heavy spending by foreign diplomats and embassies at the Trump International Hotel just a few blocks from the White House, payments by foreign entities at his Trump Tower and Trump International Tower in New York, and other business operations effectively violate the US Constitution&#39;s ban on presidents enriching themselves while in office.

&quot;The suit alleges that president Trump is flagrantly violating the constitution, which explicitly bars presidents from receiving gifts or inducements from foreign or domestic government entities,&quot; said Washington Attorney General Karl Racine.

&quot;Never in the history of this country have we had a president with these kinds of extensive business entanglements. Or a president who refused to adequately distance themselves from their holdings,&quot; Racine said.

The suit says that despite billionaire Trump having placed his extensive business holdings in a trust after he was elected president, he still owns the properties and is well-aware of the money they are earning him.

&quot;Although he formed a trust to hold his business assets, he may obtain distributions from his trust at any time,&quot; it said.

Corruption &#39;firewall&#39;

The suit detailed the popularity&nbsp;of the opulent Trump International Hotel with foreign officials since his January 20 inauguration, alleging that the hotel &quot;has specifically marketed itself to the diplomatic community.&quot;

It pointed to news reports of Asian and Middle Eastern diplomats saying they will go there to impress the president. Kuwait held its national day celebration at the hotel, and Saudi Arabia has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars there, the suit claims.

In New York, Trump Tower leases space to the Chinese government-controlled bank ICBC and Trump World Tower and other properties also focus on foreign clients, including Russians, it said.

The suit also alleged that Trump benefits from foreign distribution payments for his &quot;The Apprentice&quot; reality TV show and generally from the international real estate projects of the Trump Organisation.

Those benefits violate the US Constitution&#39;s &quot;emoluments clauses&quot;, which ban US officials from taking gifts or other benefits from foreign governments, the suit argues.

&quot;The emolument clauses are a firewall against presidential corruption,&quot; said Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh.

&quot;He&#39;s going to have to answer in court.&quot;

The focus on Trump International Hotel stems in part from businesses in Washington and Maryland, some partly owned by the local governments,&nbsp;complaining that its link to the president effectively gives it an unfair competitive advantage.

The lawsuit followed an earlier similar complaint by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, filed on January 23 in New York federal district court.

On Friday the Justice Department asked the court to drop that complaint, saying Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington had no grounds to sue because it had not experienced any loss in relation to Trump.

It also argued that the emoluments clause was never intended to target a president&#39;s private businesses, unconnected with his official office or actions.

&quot;Were plaintiffs&#39; interpretation correct, presidents from the very beginning of the republic, including George Washington, would have received prohibited &#39;emoluments,&#39;&quot; the department said.

Asked Mnday about the lawsuits, White House spokesman Sean Spicer branded them political.

&quot;It&#39;s not hard to conclude that partisan politics may be one of the motivations,&quot; he said.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

The suit says that despite billionaire Trump having placed his extensive business holdings in a trust after he was elected president, he still owns the properties and is well-aware of the money they are earning him

Maryland and the US capital sued President Donald Trump Monday, saying he is breaking laws by raking in money from foreign governments and businesses at his luxury hotels and office towers. The lawsuit said heavy spending by foreign diplomats and embassies at the Trump International Hotel just a few blocks from the White House, payments by foreign entities at his Trump Tower and Trump International Tower in New York, and other business operations effectively violate the US Constitution's ban on presidents enriching themselves while in office. "The suit alleges that president Trump is flagrantly violating the constitution, which explicitly bars presidents from receiving gifts or inducements from foreign or domestic government entities," said Washington Attorney General Karl Racine. "Never in the history of this country have we had a president with these kinds of extensive business entanglements. Or a president who refused to adequately distance themselves from their holdings," Racine said. The suit says that despite billionaire Trump having placed his extensive business holdings in a trust after he was elected president, he still owns the properties and is well-aware of the money they are earning him. "Although he formed a trust to hold his business assets, he may obtain distributions from his trust at any time," it said. Corruption 'firewall' The suit detailed the popularity of the opulent Trump International Hotel with foreign officials since his January 20 inauguration, alleging that the hotel "has specifically marketed itself to the diplomatic community." It pointed to news reports of Asian and Middle Eastern diplomats saying they will go there to impress the president. Kuwait held its national day celebration at the hotel, and Saudi Arabia has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars there, the suit claims. In New York, Trump Tower leases space to the Chinese government-controlled bank ICBC and Trump World Tower and other properties also focus on foreign clients, including Russians, it said. The suit also alleged that Trump benefits from foreign distribution payments for his "The Apprentice" reality TV show and generally from the international real estate projects of the Trump Organisation. Those benefits violate the US Constitution's "emoluments clauses", which ban US officials from taking gifts or other benefits from foreign governments, the suit argues. "The emolument clauses are a firewall against presidential corruption," said Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh. "He's going to have to answer in court." The focus on Trump International Hotel stems in part from businesses in Washington and Maryland, some partly owned by the local governments, complaining that its link to the president effectively gives it an unfair competitive advantage. The lawsuit followed an earlier similar complaint by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, filed on January 23 in New York federal district court. On Friday the Justice Department asked the court to drop that complaint, saying Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington had no grounds to sue because it had not experienced any loss in relation to Trump. It also argued that the emoluments clause was never intended to target a president's private businesses, unconnected with his official office or actions. "Were plaintiffs' interpretation correct, presidents from the very beginning of the republic, including George Washington, would have received prohibited 'emoluments,'" the department said. Asked Mnday about the lawsuits, White House spokesman Sean Spicer branded them political. "It's not hard to conclude that partisan politics may be one of the motivations," he said.

Maryland and DC sue Trump over business benefits of his office

Ex-prosecutor Preet Bharara told ABC news that he was fired after refusing to pick up Donald Trump&#39;s&nbsp;phone calls.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Former US Attorney <a href="https://twitter.com/PreetBharara">@PreetBharara</a> recounts &quot;very unusual&quot; calls with Trump: &quot;There has to be some kind of arms-length relationship.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/eviG27YT53">pic.twitter.com/eviG27YT53</a>
&mdash; ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) <a href="https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/status/873893311353823232">June 11, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Bharara watched the Comey testimony and said&nbsp;he feels &quot;there is absolutely&nbsp;evidence to begin a case&quot; of&nbsp;obstruction of justice against&nbsp;the US president.

&quot;I think it&#39;s very important for all sorts of armchair speculators in the law to be clear that no one knows right now whether there is a&nbsp;provable&nbsp;case for obstruction. It&#39;s also true, I think, from based on what I see as a third party and out of government that there&#39;s no basis to say there&#39;s&nbsp;no&nbsp;obstruction.&quot;

Why Bharara says he&nbsp;was fired

Bharara&nbsp;says that President Trump&nbsp;tried to &quot;cultivate a relationship&quot; with him.&nbsp;Trump had asked him to stay on as&nbsp;the chief federal law enforcement officer, where Bharara&nbsp;had&nbsp;jurisdiction to investigate business interests in New York. Trump&#39;s business empire is based in New York.&nbsp;

Trump made&nbsp;two phone calls to Bharara while president-elect, &quot;sensibly, just to shoot the breeze&quot;, Bharara says,&nbsp;then a final call after he became president. Bharara says he didn&#39;t return this call, then he was fired.&nbsp;

Watch the above clip and watch Bharara&nbsp;describe how he thought the president&#39;s conduct was inappropriate.

Bharara&#39;s statement comes days after ex-FBI Director James Comey testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee, where he told lawmakers that he believed Trump was trying to pressure him to drop the investigation into the former head of national security Michael&nbsp;Flynn, which was a part of&nbsp;the probe into Russia&#39;s efforts to interfere in the 2016 US election.

Comey says Trump asked for &quot;loyalty&quot;, and instead Comey said he would give the president&nbsp;&quot;honest loyalty&quot;. Trump later fired Comey.

&nbsp;

Preet Bharara wouldn't take the president's phone call, trying to keep an 'arms-length' relationship, then Trump fired him

Ex-prosecutor Preet Bharara told ABC news that he was fired after refusing to pick up Donald Trump's phone calls. Former US Attorney @PreetBharara recounts "very unusual" calls with Trump: "There has to be some kind of arms-length relationship." pic.twitter.com/eviG27YT53 — ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) June 11, 2017 × Bharara watched the Comey testimony and said he feels "there is absolutely evidence to begin a case" of obstruction of justice against the US president. "I think it's very important for all sorts of armchair speculators in the law to be clear that no one knows right now whether there is a provable case for obstruction. It's also true, I think, from based on what I see as a third party and out of government that there's no basis to say there's no obstruction." Why Bharara says he was fired Bharara says that President Trump tried to "cultivate a relationship" with him. Trump had asked him to stay on as the chief federal law enforcement officer, where Bharara had jurisdiction to investigate business interests in New York. Trump's business empire is based in New York. Trump made two phone calls to Bharara while president-elect, "sensibly, just to shoot the breeze", Bharara says, then a final call after he became president. Bharara says he didn't return this call, then he was fired. Watch the above clip and watch Bharara describe how he thought the president's conduct was inappropriate. Bharara's statement comes days after ex-FBI Director James Comey testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee, where he told lawmakers that he believed Trump was trying to pressure him to drop the investigation into the former head of national security Michael Flynn, which was a part of the probe into Russia's efforts to interfere in the 2016 US election. Comey says Trump asked for "loyalty", and instead Comey said he would give the president "honest loyalty". Trump later fired Comey.

'Absolute evidence' to start obstruction of justice case against Trump: Ex-prosecutor Preet Bharara

&nbsp;US appeals court on Monday left in place a block on President Donald Trump&#39;s travel ban targeting citizens from six Muslim majority nations -- the latest in a string of judicial blows for the controversial measure.

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in its ruling largely upheld an injunction on the ban issued by a lower court, but said the government was within its right to review the vetting process for people entering the country.

&quot;Immigration, even for the president, is not a one-person show,&quot; the three justices said in their unanimous ruling. &quot;The president, in issuing the executive order, exceeded the scope of the authority delegated to him by Congress.&quot;

The decision came just ahead of a deadline for states challenging the ban to submit briefings before the US Supreme Court in response to the Trump administration&#39;s request that the nine justices hear the case.

The US Justice Department filed an emergency application to the Supreme Court on June 1, urging it to undo two lower court rulings blocking Trump&#39;s decision to prevent entry to travelers from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days.

Trump&#39;s executive order also temporarily puts a halt to America&#39;s refugee program and reduces the number of refugees to be admitted this year to 50,000, instead of the 110,000 planned by the Obama administration.

The Trump administration argues the measures are needed to ward off terrorist attacks in the country while the government reviews its vetting process.

Critics say the ban is discriminatory and violates the US constitution by specifically targeting Muslim-majority countries.

The Justice Department declined to comment on the latest ruling.

Powers not &#39;unlimited&#39;

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals appeared to reject much of the administration&#39;s arguments for reinstating the travel ban, notably relying on government reports to support its decision.

Its ruling said that a report from the Department of Homeland Security issued just after Trump&#39;s first executive order in March concluded that citizenship of any given country &quot;is unlikely to be a reliable indicator of potential terrorist activity.&quot;

Quoting the report, it added that citizens from the countries targeted by Trump&#39;s ban are &quot;rarely implicated in US-based terrorism.&quot;

It also rejected the government&#39;s assertion that Trump&#39;s executive order -- which was revised after the initial one was struck down by the courts -- was not subject to judicial review.

&quot;Although the executive order has broad discretion over the admission and exclusion of aliens, that discretion is not boundless,&quot; the court said.

&quot;Whatever deference we accord the president&#39;s immigration and national security policy judgments does not preclude us from reviewing the policy at all,&quot; it added.

It said while the president has broad powers to suspend the entry of aliens, that authority is not &quot;unlimited.&quot;

The state of Hawaii, one of the jurisdictions challenging the ban, said in court papers filed Monday before the Supreme Court that Trump&#39;s order had had &quot;staggering&quot; consequences. It said reinstating it would plunge &quot;the country back into the chaos and confusion that resulted when the first (executive order) was announced.&quot;

&nbsp;

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals appeared to reject much of the administration's arguments for reinstating the travel ban, notably relying on government reports to support its decision

US appeals court on Monday left in place a block on President Donald Trump's travel ban targeting citizens from six Muslim majority nations -- the latest in a string of judicial blows for the controversial measure. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in its ruling largely upheld an injunction on the ban issued by a lower court, but said the government was within its right to review the vetting process for people entering the country. "Immigration, even for the president, is not a one-person show," the three justices said in their unanimous ruling. "The president, in issuing the executive order, exceeded the scope of the authority delegated to him by Congress." The decision came just ahead of a deadline for states challenging the ban to submit briefings before the US Supreme Court in response to the Trump administration's request that the nine justices hear the case. The US Justice Department filed an emergency application to the Supreme Court on June 1, urging it to undo two lower court rulings blocking Trump's decision to prevent entry to travelers from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days. Trump's executive order also temporarily puts a halt to America's refugee program and reduces the number of refugees to be admitted this year to 50,000, instead of the 110,000 planned by the Obama administration. The Trump administration argues the measures are needed to ward off terrorist attacks in the country while the government reviews its vetting process. Critics say the ban is discriminatory and violates the US constitution by specifically targeting Muslim-majority countries. The Justice Department declined to comment on the latest ruling. Powers not 'unlimited' The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals appeared to reject much of the administration's arguments for reinstating the travel ban, notably relying on government reports to support its decision. Its ruling said that a report from the Department of Homeland Security issued just after Trump's first executive order in March concluded that citizenship of any given country "is unlikely to be a reliable indicator of potential terrorist activity." Quoting the report, it added that citizens from the countries targeted by Trump's ban are "rarely implicated in US-based terrorism." It also rejected the government's assertion that Trump's executive order -- which was revised after the initial one was struck down by the courts -- was not subject to judicial review. "Although the executive order has broad discretion over the admission and exclusion of aliens, that discretion is not boundless," the court said. "Whatever deference we accord the president's immigration and national security policy judgments does not preclude us from reviewing the policy at all," it added. It said while the president has broad powers to suspend the entry of aliens, that authority is not "unlimited." The state of Hawaii, one of the jurisdictions challenging the ban, said in court papers filed Monday before the Supreme Court that Trump's order had had "staggering" consequences. It said reinstating it would plunge "the country back into the chaos and confusion that resulted when the first (executive order) was announced."

US appeals court upholds block on Trump travel ban

Ex-prosecutor Preet Bharara told ABC News today that he was fired after refusing to pick up Donald Trump&#39;s&nbsp;phone calls.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Former US Attorney <a href="https://twitter.com/PreetBharara">@PreetBharara</a> recounts &quot;very unusual&quot; calls with Trump: &quot;There has to be some kind of arms-length relationship.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/eviG27YT53">pic.twitter.com/eviG27YT53</a>
&mdash; ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) <a href="https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/status/873893311353823232">June 11, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Bharara&nbsp;says that President Trump&nbsp;tried to &quot;cultivate a relationship&quot; with him.&nbsp;Trump had asked him to stay on as&nbsp;the chief federal law enforcement officer, where Bharara&nbsp;had&nbsp;jurisdiction to investigate business interests in New York. Trump&#39;s business empire is based in New York.&nbsp;

Trump made&nbsp;two phone calls to Bharara while president-elect, &quot;sensibly, just to shoot the breeze&quot;, Bharara says,&nbsp;then a final call after he became president. Bharara says he didn&#39;t return this call, then he was fired.&nbsp;

Watch the above clip and watch Bharara&nbsp;describe how he thought the president&#39;s conduct was inappropriate.

Bharara&#39;s statement comes days after ex-FBI Director James Comey testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee, where he told lawmakers that he believed Trump was trying to pressure him to drop the investigation into the former head of national security Michael&nbsp;Flynn, which was a part of&nbsp;the probe into Russia&#39;s efforts to interfere in the 2016 US election.

Comey says Trump asked for &quot;loyalty&quot;, and instead Comey said he would give the president&nbsp;&quot;honest loyalty&quot;.&nbsp;

Trump fired Comey.

Preet Bharara wanted to keep an 'arms-length relationship' with the President. Then, apparently for this, he got sacked

Ex-prosecutor Preet Bharara told ABC News today that he was fired after refusing to pick up Donald Trump's phone calls. Former US Attorney @PreetBharara recounts "very unusual" calls with Trump: "There has to be some kind of arms-length relationship." pic.twitter.com/eviG27YT53 — ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) June 11, 2017 × Bharara says that President Trump tried to "cultivate a relationship" with him. Trump had asked him to stay on as the chief federal law enforcement officer, where Bharara had jurisdiction to investigate business interests in New York. Trump's business empire is based in New York. Trump made two phone calls to Bharara while president-elect, "sensibly, just to shoot the breeze", Bharara says, then a final call after he became president. Bharara says he didn't return this call, then he was fired. Watch the above clip and watch Bharara describe how he thought the president's conduct was inappropriate. Bharara's statement comes days after ex-FBI Director James Comey testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee, where he told lawmakers that he believed Trump was trying to pressure him to drop the investigation into the former head of national security Michael Flynn, which was a part of the probe into Russia's efforts to interfere in the 2016 US election. Comey says Trump asked for "loyalty", and instead Comey said he would give the president "honest loyalty". Trump fired Comey.

Ex-prosecutor wouldn't take Trump's phone call, fired next day

The White House has two new occupants: US First Lady Melania Trump and her 11-year-old son Barron have finally moved in to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Six months after President Donald Trump arrived, the Slovenia-born former model and the couple&#39;s 11-year-old son joined him last night, an aide to the First Lady told AFP.

The pair had previously stayed in New York so that Barron could complete the school year. <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/326356-petition-calls-for-melania-trump-to-move-to-white-house-or-pay" target="_blank">Reports </a>peg the taxpayer&nbsp;cost of their secret service protection at&nbsp;$127,000 a day.&nbsp;

After arriving at the White House Melania tweeted a picture from a window looking on to the South Lawn and the Washington Monument.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Looking forward to the memories we&#39;ll make in our new home! <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Movingday?src=hash">#Movingday</a> <a href="https://t.co/R5DtdV1Hnv">pic.twitter.com/R5DtdV1Hnv</a>
&mdash; Melania Trump (@FLOTUS) <a href="https://twitter.com/FLOTUS/status/874061401995608065">June 12, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Melania is the first First Lady in modern history to delay her arrival in Washington after an election win.

A number of cool public displays between the President Trump and his wife have fuelled public speculation about their closeness.

Melania appeared to swat away an outreached presidential hand as the couple walked along a red carpet upon arriving in Israel last month.

<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="giphy-embed" frameborder="0" height="247" src="https://giphy.com/embed/3o7btUQsATH7RakJvG" width="480"></iframe>

<a href="https://giphy.com/gifs/donald-trump-melania-hand-swat-3o7btUQsATH7RakJvG">via GIPHY</a>

Here is the First Lady and President Trump during his presidential inauguration.

<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="giphy-embed" frameborder="0" height="352" src="https://giphy.com/embed/se9DzCuIcELYY" width="480"></iframe>

<a href="https://giphy.com/gifs/trump-melania-se9DzCuIcELYY">via GIPHY</a>

There have been more&nbsp;awkward moments between Melania Trump and her family.

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/U2RnHf_gFCE" width="560"></iframe>

During the week at least, President Trump had been living alone in the vast, private quarters of the White House as he fends off the flood of reporting over Russia having allegedly meddled in the 2016 US election with the aim of helping him defeat Hillary Clinton.

The first lady has mostly kept a low profile since her real estate mogul husband became president.

(With inputs from AFP)

Melania is the first First Lady in modern history to delay her arrival in Washington after an election win

The White House has two new occupants: US First Lady Melania Trump and her 11-year-old son Barron have finally moved in to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Six months after President Donald Trump arrived, the Slovenia-born former model and the couple's 11-year-old son joined him last night, an aide to the First Lady told AFP. The pair had previously stayed in New York so that Barron could complete the school year. Reports peg the taxpayer cost of their secret service protection at $127,000 a day. After arriving at the White House Melania tweeted a picture from a window looking on to the South Lawn and the Washington Monument. Looking forward to the memories we'll make in our new home! #Movingday pic.twitter.com/R5DtdV1Hnv — Melania Trump (@FLOTUS) June 12, 2017 × Melania is the first First Lady in modern history to delay her arrival in Washington after an election win. A number of cool public displays between the President Trump and his wife have fuelled public speculation about their closeness. Melania appeared to swat away an outreached presidential hand as the couple walked along a red carpet upon arriving in Israel last month. via GIPHY Here is the First Lady and President Trump during his presidential inauguration. via GIPHY There have been more awkward moments between Melania Trump and her family. During the week at least, President Trump had been living alone in the vast, private quarters of the White House as he fends off the flood of reporting over Russia having allegedly meddled in the 2016 US election with the aim of helping him defeat Hillary Clinton. The first lady has mostly kept a low profile since her real estate mogul husband became president. (With inputs from AFP)

Melania, Barron finally move into White House

Prime Minister Theresa May&#39;s office said on Sunday there had been no change to plans for US&nbsp;President Donald Trump&#39;s to come to Britain on a state visit, after the Guardian newspaper <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/fearing-public-protests-trump-puts-uk-visit-on-hold-16700" target="_blank">reported </a>the trip had been postponed.

The paper, citing an unidentified adviser at May&#39;s Downing Street office who was in the room at the time, reported Trump had told May by telephone in recent weeks that he did not want to come if there were likely to be large-scale protests.

&quot;We aren&rsquo;t going to comment on speculation about the contents of private phone conversations,&quot; a spokeswoman for May&#39;s office said. &quot;The queen extended an invitation to President Trump to visit the UK and there is no change to those plans.&quot;

&nbsp;

Meanwhile, the White House also denied the Guardian report,&nbsp;with an administration official telling Reuters, &quot;The subject never came up on the call.&quot;

No date has been set for the visit, which was agreed during May&#39;s visit to Washington in January, but British media had reported it was planned for October.

May&#39;s hold on power has been significantly weakened since the results of a snap election last week cost her Conservative Party a parliamentary majority. In a bid to save her position, May has been trying to form a government with Northern Ireland&#39;s Democratic Unionist Party, or DUP,&nbsp;a small faction of social conservatives.

She needs eight seats to form a majority, and the DUP hold ten. British politics is going through an upheaval just a week before talks begin on Britain&#39;s exit from the European Union, set for 2019.

Trump&#39;s public criticism this month of London Mayor Sadiq Khan&#39;s response to an attack by Islamist militants in London was condemned in Britain. May found herself forced to defend Khan, who is from the opposition Labour party.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Pathetic excuse by London Mayor Sadiq Khan who had to think fast on his &quot;no reason to be alarmed&quot; statement. MSM is working hard to sell it!
&mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/871725780535062528">June 5, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

At that time, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said there was no reason to cancel the visit, while White House spokesman Sean Spicer said that Trump intended to go and that &quot;he appreciates Her Majesty&#39;s gracious invitation&quot;.

Trump said he was unwilling&nbsp;to explicitly endorse a candidate in the UK election, but he had&nbsp;<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/27/theresa-may-meets-donald-trump-white-house-live/" target="_blank">appeared</a> with pro-Brexit Theresa May, holding hands in late January. After the election, where May lost her majority but retained power in the UK, Trump called to offer his &quot;warm support&quot;.

Bernie Sanders called to congratulate the Labour Party&#39;s Jeremy Corbyn, May&#39;s opponent, who while not coming into power gained important seats and achieved a large and surprising success.

(With inputs from Reuters)

The White House denied a report saying Trump told May on the phone that he wouldn't visit the UK, fearing large-scale protests

Prime Minister Theresa May's office said on Sunday there had been no change to plans for US President Donald Trump's to come to Britain on a state visit, after the Guardian newspaper reported the trip had been postponed. The paper, citing an unidentified adviser at May's Downing Street office who was in the room at the time, reported Trump had told May by telephone in recent weeks that he did not want to come if there were likely to be large-scale protests. "We aren’t going to comment on speculation about the contents of private phone conversations," a spokeswoman for May's office said. "The queen extended an invitation to President Trump to visit the UK and there is no change to those plans." Meanwhile, the White House also denied the Guardian report, with an administration official telling Reuters, "The subject never came up on the call." No date has been set for the visit, which was agreed during May's visit to Washington in January, but British media had reported it was planned for October. May's hold on power has been significantly weakened since the results of a snap election last week cost her Conservative Party a parliamentary majority. In a bid to save her position, May has been trying to form a government with Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party, or DUP, a small faction of social conservatives. She needs eight seats to form a majority, and the DUP hold ten. British politics is going through an upheaval just a week before talks begin on Britain's exit from the European Union, set for 2019. Trump's public criticism this month of London Mayor Sadiq Khan's response to an attack by Islamist militants in London was condemned in Britain. May found herself forced to defend Khan, who is from the opposition Labour party. Pathetic excuse by London Mayor Sadiq Khan who had to think fast on his "no reason to be alarmed" statement. MSM is working hard to sell it! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 5, 2017 × At that time, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said there was no reason to cancel the visit, while White House spokesman Sean Spicer said that Trump intended to go and that "he appreciates Her Majesty's gracious invitation". Trump said he was unwilling to explicitly endorse a candidate in the UK election, but he had appeared with pro-Brexit Theresa May, holding hands in late January. After the election, where May lost her majority but retained power in the UK, Trump called to offer his "warm support". Bernie Sanders called to congratulate the Labour Party's Jeremy Corbyn, May's opponent, who while not coming into power gained important seats and achieved a large and surprising success. (With inputs from Reuters)

Will Trump visit UK? May, White House deny Guardian report, say trip still on

Jeff Sessions, a longtime senator until President Donald Trump picked him as US attorney general, heads to Congress this coming week when he will face a grilling about his Russian interactions.

Sessions, among the earliest high-profile backers of Trump&#39;s election campaign, appears before his former colleagues Tuesday, days after explosive testimony by ousted FBI director James Comey, whose removal he recommended.

Concerns have been raised about whether Sessions helped otherwise subvert the ongoing Russia-related investigations.

&quot;This is going to prompt a lot of questions for him,&quot; the panel&#39;s top Democrat, Senator Patrick Leahy, told AFP of an appearance in which lawmakers will be eager to learn what role Sessions played in Comey&#39;s firing last month.

The Senate Appropriations Committee had called in the attorney general to testify about budget issues. But on Saturday, after senators made clear they would zero in on Sessions&#39;s connections to Russia, Sessions shifted his plan, opting to address the Senate Intelligence Committee.

&quot;In light of reports regarding Mr Comey&#39;s recent testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, it is important that I have an opportunity to address these matters,&quot; Sessions said in a letter announcing the change.

The intelligence panel &quot;is the most appropriate forum for such matters, as it has been conducting an investigation and has access to relevant, classified information,&quot; he added.

With reports circulating that Trump had been clashing with his attorney general, and that Sessions had offered to resign, the White House on Tuesday declined to say whether the president maintained confidence in Sessions.

And in a stunning moment of inside-the-Beltway intrigue, Comey dropped a bombshell about why he and other top FBI officials concluded that the attorney general was going to recuse himself from the probe.

&quot;We also were aware of facts that I can&#39;t discuss in an open setting that would make his continued engagement in a Russia-related investigation problematic,&quot; Comey said.

&nbsp;

&#39;Something big&#39;

Although Sessions, a&nbsp;70-year-old from the southern state of Alabama who served 20 years in the Senate, backed Trump&#39;s campaign, he was also one of the first administration officials to fly into turbulence. During his January confirmation hearing he failed to disclose meetings he held with Russian officials.

On March 1, The Washington Post reported that he met twice with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, during the campaign.

The following day, Sessions recused himself from the Russia probe, and several top Democrats, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, demanded he resign. Sessions refused.

He may also be under a cloud of suspicion after Comey, in his devastating testimony, suggested the attorney general may have failed to take appropriate steps to protect the FBI chief.

At the conclusion of a February 14 meeting in the White House, Comey testified, Trump urged everyone else but Comey to leave the Oval Office, including Sessions.

&quot;My impression was, something big is about to happen,&quot; Comey said, as he recalled the encounter. &quot;My sense was the attorney general knew he shouldn&#39;t be leaving,&quot; Comey added.&nbsp;

When the two men were alone, the ex-FBI director said, Trump urged Comey to stop the investigation into fired national security advisor Michael Flynn.

In written testimony Comey said he told Sessions it was &quot;inappropriate&quot; for him to leave the FBI director alone with the president, and that Sessions &quot;did not reply&quot;.

With Sessions already under fire for failing to disclose the two meetings with Russians, CNN reported last week that investigators were looking into a possible third Sessions meeting with Kislyak, on the sidelines of an April 27, 2016 campaign event in Washington.

Despite his recusal, Sessions in May signed a letter to Trump recommending he remove Comey, the man overseeing the investigation into Russian election meddling and the possible Russia-Trump nexus.

Lawmakers and critics have expressed concern about any possible role by Sessions in either sacking Comey, or in subverting the ongoing investigation by the FBI.

&quot;There remain a number of questions about his own interactions with the Russians,&quot; Republican Senator Susan Collins told CNN Friday.

&quot;We on the Intelligence Committee want to know the answers to those questions, and we have begun to request information from the attorney general to allow us to get to the bottom of that.&quot;

With the Russia story spreading, the Justice Department in May appointed former FBI director Robert Mueller, widely respected within both parties, as a special counsel to head a separate Russia probe.

(AFP)

Concerns have been raised about whether Sessions helped otherwise subvert the ongoing Russia-related investigations

Jeff Sessions, a longtime senator until President Donald Trump picked him as US attorney general, heads to Congress this coming week when he will face a grilling about his Russian interactions. Sessions, among the earliest high-profile backers of Trump's election campaign, appears before his former colleagues Tuesday, days after explosive testimony by ousted FBI director James Comey, whose removal he recommended. Concerns have been raised about whether Sessions helped otherwise subvert the ongoing Russia-related investigations. "This is going to prompt a lot of questions for him," the panel's top Democrat, Senator Patrick Leahy, told AFP of an appearance in which lawmakers will be eager to learn what role Sessions played in Comey's firing last month. The Senate Appropriations Committee had called in the attorney general to testify about budget issues. But on Saturday, after senators made clear they would zero in on Sessions's connections to Russia, Sessions shifted his plan, opting to address the Senate Intelligence Committee. "In light of reports regarding Mr Comey's recent testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, it is important that I have an opportunity to address these matters," Sessions said in a letter announcing the change. The intelligence panel "is the most appropriate forum for such matters, as it has been conducting an investigation and has access to relevant, classified information," he added. With reports circulating that Trump had been clashing with his attorney general, and that Sessions had offered to resign, the White House on Tuesday declined to say whether the president maintained confidence in Sessions. And in a stunning moment of inside-the-Beltway intrigue, Comey dropped a bombshell about why he and other top FBI officials concluded that the attorney general was going to recuse himself from the probe. "We also were aware of facts that I can't discuss in an open setting that would make his continued engagement in a Russia-related investigation problematic," Comey said. 'Something big' Although Sessions, a 70-year-old from the southern state of Alabama who served 20 years in the Senate, backed Trump's campaign, he was also one of the first administration officials to fly into turbulence. During his January confirmation hearing he failed to disclose meetings he held with Russian officials. On March 1, The Washington Post reported that he met twice with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, during the campaign. The following day, Sessions recused himself from the Russia probe, and several top Democrats, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, demanded he resign. Sessions refused. He may also be under a cloud of suspicion after Comey, in his devastating testimony, suggested the attorney general may have failed to take appropriate steps to protect the FBI chief. At the conclusion of a February 14 meeting in the White House, Comey testified, Trump urged everyone else but Comey to leave the Oval Office, including Sessions. "My impression was, something big is about to happen," Comey said, as he recalled the encounter. "My sense was the attorney general knew he shouldn't be leaving," Comey added. When the two men were alone, the ex-FBI director said, Trump urged Comey to stop the investigation into fired national security advisor Michael Flynn. In written testimony Comey said he told Sessions it was "inappropriate" for him to leave the FBI director alone with the president, and that Sessions "did not reply". With Sessions already under fire for failing to disclose the two meetings with Russians, CNN reported last week that investigators were looking into a possible third Sessions meeting with Kislyak, on the sidelines of an April 27, 2016 campaign event in Washington. Despite his recusal, Sessions in May signed a letter to Trump recommending he remove Comey, the man overseeing the investigation into Russian election meddling and the possible Russia-Trump nexus. Lawmakers and critics have expressed concern about any possible role by Sessions in either sacking Comey, or in subverting the ongoing investigation by the FBI. "There remain a number of questions about his own interactions with the Russians," Republican Senator Susan Collins told CNN Friday. "We on the Intelligence Committee want to know the answers to those questions, and we have begun to request information from the attorney general to allow us to get to the bottom of that." With the Russia story spreading, the Justice Department in May appointed former FBI director Robert Mueller, widely respected within both parties, as a special counsel to head a separate Russia probe. (AFP)

US attorney general next in scandal's spotlight

The government of Qatar has hired John Ashcroft, the US&nbsp;attorney general during the September&nbsp;11 attacks, as it seeks to rebut accusations from US&nbsp;President Donald Trump and its Arab neighbors that it supports terrorism.

Qatar will pay the Ashcroft Law Firm $2.5 million for a 90-day period as the country seeks to confirm its efforts to fight global terrorism and comply with financial regulations including US&nbsp;Treasury rules, according to a Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, filing on Friday with the Justice Department.

&quot;The firm&#39;s work will include crisis response and management, program and system analysis, media outreach, education and advocacy regarding the client&#39;s historical, current and future efforts to combat global terror and its compliance goals and accomplishments,&quot; according to a letter by Ashcroft firm partner Michael Sullivan included in the filing.

Qatar faces isolation by fellow Arab countries after Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Egypt severed ties with Doha on Monday, accusing it of supporting Islamist militants and their adversary Iran. Qatar denies the allegations.

The crisis is a major diplomatic test for the United States, which is a close ally of countries on both sides but has given mixed signals on whether to isolate Qatar or bring it into talks with other Gulf countries.

Trump on Friday accused Qatar of being a &quot;high level&quot; sponsor of terrorism in remarks made shortly after his secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, pushed Qatar&#39;s Arab neighbors to &quot;immediately take steps to de-escalate the situation.&quot;

The Ashcroft firm was hired to do a compliance and regulatory view of Qatar&#39;s anti-money laundering and counterterrorist financing framework, Sullivan said in an email.

&quot;Qatar is confident that the review and analysis will confirm that Qatar has significant measures in place to prevent and detect efforts to launder funds and/or to use its financial systems to finance terrorist organizations,&quot; he said.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Ashcroft was US&nbsp;attorney general under President George W. Bush from February 2001 to February 2005, turbulent years in which US&nbsp;policies and laws were reshaped by the so-called war on terrorism that followed the 2001 al Qaeda attacks.

Ashcroft&#39;s firm includes an array of former senior government officials including Sullivan, a former US&nbsp;attorney in Massachusetts appointed by Bush to lead the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).

&nbsp;

Qatar will pay the Ashcroft Law Firm $2.5 million for a 90-day period

The government of Qatar has hired John Ashcroft, the US attorney general during the September 11 attacks, as it seeks to rebut accusations from US President Donald Trump and its Arab neighbors that it supports terrorism. Qatar will pay the Ashcroft Law Firm $2.5 million for a 90-day period as the country seeks to confirm its efforts to fight global terrorism and comply with financial regulations including US Treasury rules, according to a Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, filing on Friday with the Justice Department. "The firm's work will include crisis response and management, program and system analysis, media outreach, education and advocacy regarding the client's historical, current and future efforts to combat global terror and its compliance goals and accomplishments," according to a letter by Ashcroft firm partner Michael Sullivan included in the filing. Qatar faces isolation by fellow Arab countries after Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Egypt severed ties with Doha on Monday, accusing it of supporting Islamist militants and their adversary Iran. Qatar denies the allegations. The crisis is a major diplomatic test for the United States, which is a close ally of countries on both sides but has given mixed signals on whether to isolate Qatar or bring it into talks with other Gulf countries. Trump on Friday accused Qatar of being a "high level" sponsor of terrorism in remarks made shortly after his secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, pushed Qatar's Arab neighbors to "immediately take steps to de-escalate the situation." The Ashcroft firm was hired to do a compliance and regulatory view of Qatar's anti-money laundering and counterterrorist financing framework, Sullivan said in an email. "Qatar is confident that the review and analysis will confirm that Qatar has significant measures in place to prevent and detect efforts to launder funds and/or to use its financial systems to finance terrorist organizations," he said. Ashcroft was US attorney general under President George W. Bush from February 2001 to February 2005, turbulent years in which US policies and laws were reshaped by the so-called war on terrorism that followed the 2001 al Qaeda attacks. Ashcroft's firm includes an array of former senior government officials including Sullivan, a former US attorney in Massachusetts appointed by Bush to lead the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).

Qatar hires ex-US attorney general John Ashcroft to rebut accusations of sponsoring terror

Masked gunmen attacked a group of Coptic Christians in southern Egypt on Friday, killing 26 people and wounding 26 others as they were driving to a monastery, medical sources and eyewitnesses said.

The group was travelling in two buses and a small truck in Minya province, which is home to a sizeable Christian minority, the sources said.

Provincial governor Essam al-Bedaiwy said earlier that 23 peoople had been killed and 25 wounded.

Eyewitnesses said the Copts were attacked as they were going to pray at the monastery of Saint Samuel the Confessor in the western part of the province.

They said masked men stopped the vehicles on a road leading to the monastery and opened fire.

Coptic Christians, who make up about 10 per cent of Egypt&#39;s population of 92 million, have been the subject of a series of deadly attacks in recent months.

About 70 have been killed in bomb attacks on churches in the cities of Cairo, Alexandria and Tanta since December.

Those attacks were claimed by Islamic State. There was no immediate claim of responsibility for Friday&#39;s attack. 
 
(Reuters)

President Trump can't feel 'vindicated' after Comey's testimony all but accused him of obstruction of justice. Why put out that message then?

Masked gunmen attacked a group of Coptic Christians in southern Egypt on Friday, killing 26 people and wounding 26 others as they were driving to a monastery, medical sources and eyewitnesses said. The group was travelling in two buses and a small truck in Minya province, which is home to a sizeable Christian minority, the sources said. Provincial governor Essam al-Bedaiwy said earlier that 23 peoople had been killed and 25 wounded. Eyewitnesses said the Copts were attacked as they were going to pray at the monastery of Saint Samuel the Confessor in the western part of the province. They said masked men stopped the vehicles on a road leading to the monastery and opened fire. Coptic Christians, who make up about 10 per cent of Egypt's population of 92 million, have been the subject of a series of deadly attacks in recent months. About 70 have been killed in bomb attacks on churches in the cities of Cairo, Alexandria and Tanta since December. Those attacks were claimed by Islamic State. There was no immediate claim of responsibility for Friday's attack. (Reuters)

Comey hearing: Whenever reality makes Trump look guilty, the president changes reality

Iran said Thursday that five of its nationals who killed 17 people in twin attacks in Tehran were Islamic State members who had been to the group&#39;s strongholds in Iraq and Syria. Wednesday&#39;s <a href="http://Iran twin attacks: 13 killed, Iran Guards claim US, Saudi 'involved'">attacks on Tehran&#39;s parliament complex and the shrine of revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini</a>, which also wounded more than 50 people, were the first claimed by IS in Iran.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/attackers-raid-iran-parliament-twelve-killed-3635">Also see:&nbsp;Attackers raid Iran parliament, twelve killed</a>

&quot;The five known terrorists... after joining the Daesh (IS) terrorist group, left the country and participated in crimes carried out by this terrorist group in Mosul and Raqa,&quot; the intelligence ministry said in a statement. It suggested there were only five attackers rather than the six originally reported.

An official said previously that those who attacked the parliament complex had been dressed as women. The ministry released their photographs and first names.

It said they were part of a network that entered Iran in July-August 2016 under the leadership of &quot;high-ranking Daesh commander&quot; Abu Aisha intending to carry out &quot;terrorist operations in religious cities&quot;.

Abu Aisha was killed and the network forced to flee the country, the statement said. It was unclear when the five men returned to Iran ahead of Wednesday&#39;s attacks. IS on Thursday released a video of the five attackers before the assault, via its Amaq propaganda agency.&nbsp;

&quot;Allah permitting, this is the first brigade that was established (in Iran) but it will not be the last,&quot; one said in the video message, as the group sat masked in a circle with their weapons. The jihadist group had earlier released footage of the attackers from inside the building, also via Amaq -- a rare claim of responsibility while an assault was still going on.

&nbsp;

The evil they promote

Following the attacks, US President Donald Trump said the United States would &quot;grieve and pray&quot; for the victims, but added: &quot;We underscore that states that sponsor terrorism risk falling victim to the evil they promote.&quot;

The statement was condemned by foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who tweeted: &quot;Repugnant WH (White House) statement... as Iranians counter terror backed by US clients.&quot;

Trump was also criticised on social media by Iranians, who recalled their government&#39;s offers of support and the candlelight vigils held in Iran after the attacks of September 11, 2001 in the United States.

&quot;Iranians lit candles for you on 9/11. You kick them while they&#39;re down. Classy,&quot; tweeted Ali Ghezelbash, an Iranian business analyst.

The US president has long accused Iran of backing terrorism and has threatened to tear up a 2015 nuclear deal between Tehran and major powers.&nbsp;

Even as Washington expressed its condolences on Wednesday, the US Senate advanced legislation to impose new sanctions on Iran, partly for what the bill described as the regime&#39;s &#39;support for acts of international terrorism&#39;. Iran&#39;s elite Revolutionary Guards have pointed the finger at regional rival Saudi Arabia -- a close US ally -- which Tehran accuses of funding extremism and groups including IS.

IS has threatened to step up recruitment within Iran, releasing its first Persian-language video in March in which it threatened to &quot;conquer Iran and restore it to the Sunni Muslim nation as it was before.&quot; The Sunni jihadists of IS consider Shiite Iranians to be apostates, and Tehran is deeply involved in fighting the group in both Syria and Iraq.

&nbsp;

Khomeini shrugs off attacks&nbsp;

The attackers were armed with rifles and pistols and at least two blew themselves up with suicide vests, Iranian media reported. Police said a further five people were arrested around Khomeini&#39;s shrine on suspicion of involvement.

In the midst of the unfolding attacks, the intelligence ministry said a third team had been stopped before the attacks started, but no further details have since been given. Sunni Gulf Arab states are in the midst of a major diplomatic crisis after Saudi Arabia and its allies cut ties with Qatar on Monday over claims it supports extremism and has fewer tensions with Iran.

Iranian leaders sought to play down the attacks, with supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei saying: &quot;These firecrackers that happened today will not have the slightest effect on the will of the people.&quot;

(AFP)

Iran said the five nationals involved in the twin attacks in Tehran were Islamic State members who had been to the group's strongholds in Iraq and Syria

Iran said Thursday that five of its nationals who killed 17 people in twin attacks in Tehran were Islamic State members who had been to the group's strongholds in Iraq and Syria. Wednesday's attacks on Tehran's parliament complex and the shrine of revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, which also wounded more than 50 people, were the first claimed by IS in Iran. Also see: Attackers raid Iran parliament, twelve killed "The five known terrorists... after joining the Daesh (IS) terrorist group, left the country and participated in crimes carried out by this terrorist group in Mosul and Raqa," the intelligence ministry said in a statement. It suggested there were only five attackers rather than the six originally reported. An official said previously that those who attacked the parliament complex had been dressed as women. The ministry released their photographs and first names. It said they were part of a network that entered Iran in July-August 2016 under the leadership of "high-ranking Daesh commander" Abu Aisha intending to carry out "terrorist operations in religious cities". Abu Aisha was killed and the network forced to flee the country, the statement said. It was unclear when the five men returned to Iran ahead of Wednesday's attacks. IS on Thursday released a video of the five attackers before the assault, via its Amaq propaganda agency. "Allah permitting, this is the first brigade that was established (in Iran) but it will not be the last," one said in the video message, as the group sat masked in a circle with their weapons. The jihadist group had earlier released footage of the attackers from inside the building, also via Amaq -- a rare claim of responsibility while an assault was still going on. The evil they promote Following the attacks, US President Donald Trump said the United States would "grieve and pray" for the victims, but added: "We underscore that states that sponsor terrorism risk falling victim to the evil they promote." The statement was condemned by foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who tweeted: "Repugnant WH (White House) statement... as Iranians counter terror backed by US clients." Trump was also criticised on social media by Iranians, who recalled their government's offers of support and the candlelight vigils held in Iran after the attacks of September 11, 2001 in the United States. "Iranians lit candles for you on 9/11. You kick them while they're down. Classy," tweeted Ali Ghezelbash, an Iranian business analyst. The US president has long accused Iran of backing terrorism and has threatened to tear up a 2015 nuclear deal between Tehran and major powers. Even as Washington expressed its condolences on Wednesday, the US Senate advanced legislation to impose new sanctions on Iran, partly for what the bill described as the regime's 'support for acts of international terrorism'. Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards have pointed the finger at regional rival Saudi Arabia -- a close US ally -- which Tehran accuses of funding extremism and groups including IS. IS has threatened to step up recruitment within Iran, releasing its first Persian-language video in March in which it threatened to "conquer Iran and restore it to the Sunni Muslim nation as it was before." The Sunni jihadists of IS consider Shiite Iranians to be apostates, and Tehran is deeply involved in fighting the group in both Syria and Iraq. Khomeini shrugs off attacks The attackers were armed with rifles and pistols and at least two blew themselves up with suicide vests, Iranian media reported. Police said a further five people were arrested around Khomeini's shrine on suspicion of involvement. In the midst of the unfolding attacks, the intelligence ministry said a third team had been stopped before the attacks started, but no further details have since been given. Sunni Gulf Arab states are in the midst of a major diplomatic crisis after Saudi Arabia and its allies cut ties with Qatar on Monday over claims it supports extremism and has fewer tensions with Iran. Iranian leaders sought to play down the attacks, with supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei saying: "These firecrackers that happened today will not have the slightest effect on the will of the people." (AFP)

Iran says Teheran attackers had been in Iraq, Syria for IS

Iran said on Thursday that five of its nationals who were killed in twin attacks in Tehran were Islamic State members who had been to the group&#39;s strongholds in Iraq and Syria.

Wednesday&#39;s attacks on Tehran&#39;s parliament complex and the shrine of revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, which also wounded more than 50 people, were the first claimed by IS in Iran.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/iran-twin-attacks-13-killed-iran-guards-claim-us-saudi-involved-16527">Also Read:&nbsp;Iran twin attacks: 13 killed, Iran Guards claim US, Saudi &#39;involved&#39;</a>

&quot;The five known terrorists... after joining the Daesh (IS) terrorist group, left the country and participated in crimes carried out by this terrorist group in Mosul and Raqa,&quot; the intelligence ministry said in a statement. It suggested there were only five attackers rather than the six originally reported.

An official said previously that those who attacked the parliament complex had been dressed as women. The ministry released their photographs and first names.

It said they were part of a network that entered Iran in July-August 2016 under the leadership of &quot;high-ranking Daesh commander&quot; Abu Aisha intending to carry out &quot;terrorist operations in religious cities&quot;.

Abu Aisha was killed and the network forced to flee the country, the statement said. It was unclear when the five men returned to Iran ahead of Wednesday&#39;s attacks. IS on Thursday released a video of the five attackers before the assault, via its Amaq propaganda agency.&nbsp;

&quot;Allah permitting, this is the first brigade that was established (in Iran) but it will not be the last,&quot; one said in the video message, as the group sat masked in a circle with their weapons. The jihadist group had earlier released footage of the attackers from inside the building, also via Amaq -- a rare claim of responsibility while an assault was still going on.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/attackers-raid-iran-parliament-twelve-killed-3635">See also: Attackers raid Iran parliament, twelve killed</a>

Following the attacks, US President Donald Trump had said the United States would &quot;grieve and pray&quot; for the victims, but added: &quot;We underscore that states that sponsor terrorism risk falling victim to the evil they promote.&quot;

The statement was condemned by foreign&nbsp;minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who tweeted: &quot;Repugnant WH (White House) statement... as Iranians counter-terror backed by US clients.&quot;

Trump was also criticised on social media by Iranians, who recalled their government&#39;s offers of support and the candlelight vigils held in Iran after the attacks of September 11, 2001 in the United States.

&quot;Iranians lit candles for you on 9/11. You kick them while they&#39;re down. Classy,&quot; tweeted Ali Ghezelbash, an Iranian business analyst.

The US president has long accused Iran of backing terrorism and has threatened to tear up a 2015 nuclear deal between Tehran and major powers.&nbsp;

Even as Washington expressed its condolences on Wednesday, the US Senate advanced legislation to impose new sanctions on Iran, partly for what the bill described as the regime&#39;s &#39;support for acts of international terrorism&#39;. Iran&#39;s elite Revolutionary Guards have pointed the finger at regional rival Saudi Arabia -- a close US ally -- which Tehran accuses of funding extremism and groups including IS.

IS has threatened to step up recruitment within Iran, releasing its first Persian-language video in March in which it threatened to &quot;conquer Iran and restore it to the Sunni Muslim nation as it was before.&quot; The Sunni jihadists of IS consider Shiite Iranians to be apostates, and Tehran is deeply involved in fighting the group in both Syria and Iraq.

(AFP)

Iran said the that five nationals involved in the twin attacks in Tehran were Islamic State members who had been to the group's strongholds in Iraq and Syria

Iran said on Thursday that five of its nationals who were killed in twin attacks in Tehran were Islamic State members who had been to the group's strongholds in Iraq and Syria. Wednesday's attacks on Tehran's parliament complex and the shrine of revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, which also wounded more than 50 people, were the first claimed by IS in Iran. Also Read: Iran twin attacks: 13 killed, Iran Guards claim US, Saudi 'involved' "The five known terrorists... after joining the Daesh (IS) terrorist group, left the country and participated in crimes carried out by this terrorist group in Mosul and Raqa," the intelligence ministry said in a statement. It suggested there were only five attackers rather than the six originally reported. An official said previously that those who attacked the parliament complex had been dressed as women. The ministry released their photographs and first names. It said they were part of a network that entered Iran in July-August 2016 under the leadership of "high-ranking Daesh commander" Abu Aisha intending to carry out "terrorist operations in religious cities". Abu Aisha was killed and the network forced to flee the country, the statement said. It was unclear when the five men returned to Iran ahead of Wednesday's attacks. IS on Thursday released a video of the five attackers before the assault, via its Amaq propaganda agency. "Allah permitting, this is the first brigade that was established (in Iran) but it will not be the last," one said in the video message, as the group sat masked in a circle with their weapons. The jihadist group had earlier released footage of the attackers from inside the building, also via Amaq -- a rare claim of responsibility while an assault was still going on. See also: Attackers raid Iran parliament, twelve killed Following the attacks, US President Donald Trump had said the United States would "grieve and pray" for the victims, but added: "We underscore that states that sponsor terrorism risk falling victim to the evil they promote." The statement was condemned by foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who tweeted: "Repugnant WH (White House) statement... as Iranians counter-terror backed by US clients." Trump was also criticised on social media by Iranians, who recalled their government's offers of support and the candlelight vigils held in Iran after the attacks of September 11, 2001 in the United States. "Iranians lit candles for you on 9/11. You kick them while they're down. Classy," tweeted Ali Ghezelbash, an Iranian business analyst. The US president has long accused Iran of backing terrorism and has threatened to tear up a 2015 nuclear deal between Tehran and major powers. Even as Washington expressed its condolences on Wednesday, the US Senate advanced legislation to impose new sanctions on Iran, partly for what the bill described as the regime's 'support for acts of international terrorism'. Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards have pointed the finger at regional rival Saudi Arabia -- a close US ally -- which Tehran accuses of funding extremism and groups including IS. IS has threatened to step up recruitment within Iran, releasing its first Persian-language video in March in which it threatened to "conquer Iran and restore it to the Sunni Muslim nation as it was before." The Sunni jihadists of IS consider Shiite Iranians to be apostates, and Tehran is deeply involved in fighting the group in both Syria and Iraq. (AFP)

Parliament, shrine attacks: Iran confirms own citizens linked to IS

Here is the fired FBI Director's own words on the private meetings that took place between he and Donald Trump

The following is the full, unedited transcript of former FBI director James B Comey to the Senate Intelligence Committee about his private contact with Donald Trump: Statement for the Record Senate Select Committee on Intelligence James B Comey June 8, 2017 Chairman Burr, Ranking Member Warner, Members of the Committee. Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today. I was asked to testify today to describe for you my interactions with President-Elect and President Trump on subjects that I understand are of interest to you. I have not included every detail from my conversations with the President, but, to the best of my recollection, I have tried to include information that may be relevant to the Committee. January 6 Briefing I first met then-President-Elect Trump on Friday, January 6 in a conference room at Trump Tower in New York. I was there with other Intelligence Community (IC) leaders to brief him and his new national security team on the findings of an IC assessment concerning Russian efforts to interfere in the election. At the conclusion of that briefing, I remained alone with the President-Elect to brief him on some personally sensitive aspects of the information assembled during the assessment. The IC leadership thought it important, for a variety of reasons, to alert the incoming President to the existence of this material, even though it was salacious and unverified. Among those reasons were: (1) we knew the media was about to publicly report the material and we believed the IC should not keep knowledge of the material and its imminent release from the President-Elect; and (2) to the extent there was some effort to compromise an incoming President, we could blunt any such effort with a defensive briefing. The Director of National Intelligence asked that I personally do this portion of the briefing because I was staying in my position and because the material implicated the FBI’s counter-intelligence responsibilities. We also agreed I would do it alone to minimize potential embarrassment to the President-Elect. Although we agreed it made sense for me to do the briefing, the FBI’s leadership and I were concerned that the briefing might create a situation where a new President came into office uncertain about whether the FBI was conducting a counter-intelligence investigation of his personal conduct. It is important to understand that FBI counter-intelligence investigations are different than the more-commonly known criminal investigative work. The Bureau’s goal in a counter-intelligence investigation is to understand the technical and human methods that hostile foreign powers are using to influence the United States or to steal our secrets. The FBI uses that understanding to disrupt those efforts. Sometimes disruption takes the form of alerting a person who is targeted for recruitment or influence by the foreign power. Sometimes it involves hardening a computer system that is being attacked. Sometimes it involves “turning” the recruited person into a double-agent, or publicly calling out the behavior with sanctions or expulsions of embassy-based intelligence officers. On occasion, criminal prosecution is used to disrupt intelligence activities. Because the nature of the hostile foreign nation is well known, counterintelligence investigations tend to be centered on individuals the FBI suspects to be witting or unwitting agents of that foreign power. When the FBI develops reason to believe an American has been targeted for recruitment by a foreign power or is covertly acting as an agent of the foreign power, the FBI will “open an investigation” on that American and use legal authorities to try to learn more about the nature of any relationship with the foreign power so it can be disrupted. In that context, prior to the January 6 meeting, I discussed with the FBI’s leadership team whether I should be prepared to assure President-Elect Trump that we were not investigating him personally. That was true; we did not have an open counter-intelligence case on him. We agreed I should do so if circumstances warranted. During our one-on-one meeting at Trump Tower, based on President-Elect Trump’s reaction to the briefing and without him directly asking the question, I offered that assurance. I felt compelled to document my first conversation with the President-Elect in a memo. To ensure accuracy, I began to type it on a laptop in an FBI vehicle outside Trump Tower the moment I walked out of the meeting. Creating written records immediately after one-on-one conversations with Mr. Trump was my practice from that point forward. This had not been my practice in the past. I spoke alone with President Obama twice in person (and never on the phone) – once in 2015 to discuss law enforcement policy issues and a second time, briefly, for him to say goodbye in late 2016. In neither of those circumstances did I memorialize the discussions. I can recall nine one-on-one conversations with President Trump in four months – three in person and six on the phone. Also read: Ex-FBI chief Comey tells US senators Trump pressured him on Russia probe January 27 Dinner The President and I had dinner on Friday, January 27 at 6:30 pm in the Green Room at the White House. He had called me at lunchtime that day and invited me to dinner that night, saying he was going to invite my whole family, but decided to have just me this time, with the whole family coming the next time. It was unclear from the conversation who else would be at the dinner, although I assumed there would be others. It turned out to be just the two of us, seated at a small oval table in the center of the Green Room. Two Navy stewards waited on us, only entering the room to serve food and drinks. The President began by asking me whether I wanted to stay on as FBI Director, which I found strange because he had already told me twice in earlier conversations that he hoped I would stay, and I had assured him that I intended to. He said that lots of people wanted my job and, given the abuse I had taken during the previous year, he would understand if I wanted to walk away. My instincts told me that the one-on-one setting, and the pretense that this was our first discussion about my position, meant the dinner was, at least in part, an effort to have me ask for my job and create some sort of patronage relationship. That concerned me greatly, given the FBI’s traditionally independent status in the executive branch. I replied that I loved my work and intended to stay and serve out my ten-year term as Director. And then, because the set-up made me uneasy, I added that I was not “reliable” in the way politicians use that word, but he could always count on me to tell him the truth. I added that I was not on anybody’s side politically and could not be counted on in the traditional political sense, a stance I said was in his best interest as the President. A few moments later, the President said, “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.” I didn’t move, speak, or change my facial expression in any way during the awkward silence that followed. We simply looked at each other in silence. The conversation then moved on, but he returned to the subject near the end of our dinner. At one point, I explained why it was so important that the FBI and the Department of Justice be independent of the White House. I said it was a paradox: Throughout history, some Presidents have decided that because “problems” come from Justice, they should try to hold the Department close. But blurring those boundaries ultimately makes the problems worse by undermining public trust in the institutions and their work. Near the end of our dinner, the President returned to the subject of my job, saying he was very glad I wanted to stay, adding that he had heard great things about me from Jim Mattis, Jeff Sessions, and many others. He then said, “I need loyalty.” I replied, “You will always get honesty from me.” He paused and then said, “That’s what I want, honest loyalty.” I paused, and then said, “You will get that from me.” As I wrote in the memo I created immediately after the dinner, it is possible we understood the phrase “honest loyalty” differently, but I decided it wouldn’t be productive to push it further. The term – honest loyalty – had helped end a very awkward conversation and my explanations had made clear what he should expect. He then said, “I need loyalty.” I replied, “You will always get honesty from me.” He paused and then said, “That’s what I want, honest loyalty.” I paused, and then said, “You will get that from me.” × During the dinner, the President returned to the salacious material I had briefed him about on January 6, and, as he had done previously, expressed his disgust for the allegations and strongly denied them. He said he was considering ordering me to investigate the alleged incident to prove it didn’t happen. I replied that he should give that careful thought because it might create a narrative that we were investigating him personally, which we weren’t, and because it was very difficult to prove a negative. He said he would think about it and asked me to think about it. As was my practice for conversations with President Trump, I wrote a detailed memo about the dinner immediately afterwards and shared it with the senior leadership team of the FBI. February 14 Oval Office Meeting On February 14, I went to the Oval Office for a scheduled counterterrorism briefing of the President. He sat behind the desk and a group of us sat in a semi-circle of about six chairs facing him on the other side of the desk. The Vice President, Deputy Director of the CIA, Director of the National Counter-Terrorism Center, Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and I were in the semi-circle of chairs. I was directly facing the President, sitting between the Deputy CIA Director and the Director of NCTC. There were quite a few others in the room, sitting behind us on couches and chairs. The President signaled the end of the briefing by thanking the group and telling them all that he wanted to speak to me alone. I stayed in my chair. As the participants started to leave the Oval Office, the Attorney General lingered by my chair, but the President thanked him and said he wanted to speak only with me. The last person to leave was Jared Kushner, who also stood by my chair and exchanged pleasantries with me. The President then excused him, saying he wanted to speak with me. When the door by the grandfather clock closed, and we were alone, the President began by saying, “I want to talk about Mike Flynn.” Flynn had resigned the previous day. The President began by saying Flynn hadn’t done anything wrong in speaking with the Russians, but he had to let him go because he had misled the Vice President. He added that he had other concerns about Flynn, which he did not then specify. The President then made a long series of comments about the problem with leaks of classified information – a concern I shared and still share. After he had spoken for a few minutes about leaks, Reince Priebus leaned in through the door by the grandfather clock and I could see a group of people waiting behind him. The President waved at him to close the door, saying he would be done shortly. The door closed. The President then returned to the topic of Mike Flynn, saying, “He is a good guy and has been through a lot.” He repeated that Flynn hadn’t done anything wrong on his calls with the Russians, but had misled the Vice President. He then said, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” I replied only that “he is a good guy.” (In fact, I had a positive experience dealing with Mike Flynn when he was a colleague as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency at the beginning of my term at FBI.) I did not say I would “let this go”. The President then returned to the topic of Mike Flynn, saying, “He is a good guy and has been through a lot.” He repeated that Flynn hadn’t done anything wrong on his calls with the Russians, but had misled the Vice President. He then said, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go." × The President returned briefly to the problem of leaks. I then got up and left out the door by the grandfather clock, making my way through the large group of people waiting there, including Mr. Priebus and the Vice President. I immediately prepared an unclassified memo of the conversation about Flynn and discussed the matter with FBI senior leadership. I had understood the President to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December. I did not understand the President to be talking about the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign. I could be wrong, but I took him to be focusing on what had just happened with Flynn’s departure and the controversy around his account of his phone calls. Regardless, it was very concerning, given the FBI’s role as an independent investigative agency. The FBI leadership team agreed with me that it was important not to infect the investigative team with the President’s request, which we did not intend to abide. We also concluded that, given that it was a one-on-one conversation, there was nothing available to corroborate my account. We concluded it made little sense to report it to Attorney General Sessions, who we expected would likely recuse himself from involvement in Russia-related investigations. (He did so two weeks later.) The Deputy Attorney General’s role was then filled in an acting capacity by a United States Attorney, who would also not be long in the role. After discussing the matter, we decided to keep it very closely held, resolving to figure out what to do with it down the road as our investigation progressed. The investigation moved ahead at full speed, with none of the investigative team members – or the Department of Justice lawyers supporting them – aware of the President’s request. Shortly afterwards, I spoke with Attorney General Sessions in person to pass along the President’s concerns about leaks. I took the opportunity to implore the Attorney General to prevent any future direct communication between the President and me. I told the AG that what had just happened – him being asked to leave while the FBI Director, who reports to the AG, remained behind – was inappropriate and should never happen. He did not reply. For the reasons discussed above, I did not mention that the President broached the FBI’s potential investigation of General Flynn. March 30 Phone Call On the morning of March 30, the President called me at the FBI. He described the Russia investigation as “a cloud” that was impairing his ability to act on behalf of the country. He said he had nothing to do with Russia, had not been involved with hookers in Russia, and had always assumed he was being recorded when in Russia. He asked what we could do to “lift the cloud.” I responded that we were investigating the matter as quickly as we could, and that there would be great benefit, if we didn’t find anything, to our having done the work well. He agreed, but then re-emphasized the problems this was causing him. Then the President asked why there had been a congressional hearing about Russia the previous week – at which I had, as the Department of Justice directed, confirmed the investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign. I explained the demands from the leadership of both parties in Congress for more information, and that Senator Grassley had even held up the confirmation of the Deputy Attorney General until we briefed him in detail on the investigation. I explained that we had briefed the leadership of Congress on exactly which individuals we were investigating and that we had told those Congressional leaders that we were not personally investigating President Trump. I reminded him I had previously told him that. He repeatedly told me, “We need to get that fact out.” (I did not tell the President that the FBI and the Department of Justice had been reluctant to make public statements that we did not have an open case on President Trump for a number of reasons, most importantly because it would create a duty to correct, should that change.) The President went on to say that if there were some “satellite” associates of his who did something wrong, it would be good to find that out, but that he hadn’t done anything wrong and hoped I would find a way to get it out that we weren’t investigating him. In an abrupt shift, he turned the conversation to FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, saying he hadn’t brought up “the McCabe thing” because I had said McCabe was honorable, although McAuliffe was close to the Clintons and had given him (I think he meant Deputy Director McCabe’s wife) campaign money. Although I didn’t understand why the President was bringing this up, I repeated that Mr. McCabe was an honorable person. He finished by stressing “the cloud” that was interfering with his ability to make deals for the country and said he hoped I could find a way to get out that he wasn’t being investigated. I told him I would see what we could do, and that we would do our investigative work well and as quickly as we could. Immediately after that conversation, I called Acting Deputy Attorney General Dana Boente (AG Sessions had by then recused himself on all Russia-related matters), to report the substance of the call from the President, and said I would await his guidance. I did not hear back from him before the President called me again two weeks later. April 11 Phone Call On the morning of April 11, the President called me and asked what I had done about his request that I “get out” that he is not personally under investigation. I replied that I had passed his request to the Acting Deputy Attorney General, but I had not heard back. He replied that “the cloud” was getting in the way of his ability to do his job. He said that perhaps he would have his people reach out to the Acting Deputy Attorney General. I said that was the way his request should be handled. I said the White House Counsel should contact the leadership of DOJ to make the request, which was the traditional channel. He said he would do that and added, “Because I have been very loyal to you, very loyal; we had that thing you know.” I did not reply or ask him what he meant by “that thing.” I said only that the way to handle it was to have the White House Counsel call the Acting Deputy Attorney General. He said that was what he would do and the call ended. That was the last time I spoke with President Trump. (WION)

READ: Full statement from James Comey to Senate intelligence committee on Trump contact

Former FBI Director James Comey said on Wednesday that US&nbsp;President Donald Trump asked him to drop an investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn as part of a probe into Russia&#39;s alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

In written testimony released the day before he appears before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Comey said Trump told him at a meeting in the White House in February: &quot;I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go.&quot;

The testimony puts more pressure on Trump, a Republican, whose presidency has been overshadowed by allegations that Moscow helped him win last year&#39;s election.

Some legal experts said Comey&rsquo;s testimony could strengthen any impeachment case built on obstruction of justice, but US&nbsp;markets shrugged off the news from the testimony for lack of any major disclosures.

To build a criminal obstruction of justice case, federal law requires prosecutors to show that a person acted with &quot;corrupt&quot; intent. It does not matter whether the person succeeds in impeding an investigation.

While a sitting president is very unlikely to face criminal prosecution, obstruction of justice could form the basis for impeachment.

Comey said he had told Trump on three occasions he was not being investigated, confirming an earlier account from the president.

Trump, who spent part of Wednesday in Ohio talking about the need to fix the nation&#39;s crumbling infrastructure, ignored reporters&rsquo; shouted questions about Comey. On returning to the Oval Office, Trump went into a meeting with top advisers, including chief of staff Reince Priebus.

Later, his outside counsel released a statement saying Trump felt &quot;completely and totally vindicated&quot; by Comey&#39;s account.

&quot;The president is pleased that Mr. Comey has finally publicly confirmed his private reports that the president was not under investigation in any Russian probe,&quot; Marc Kasowitz, Trump&#39;s attorney, said in a statement.

&nbsp;

&#39;AWKWARD SILENCE&#39;

Several congressional committees, as well as the FBI and a special counsel, are investigating whether Russia tried to tilt last November&#39;s election in Trump&#39;s favour, using means such as hacking into the emails of senior Democrats. Trump and the Kremlin have separately denied any collusion.

Trump abruptly fired Comey, who was leading the Federal Bureau of Investigation&#39;s probe, on May 9.

Comey painted a vivid picture for senators of awkward encounters with Trump in seven pages of testimony.

Comey described a private dinner in the Green Room of the White House on Jan. 26, where Trump asked him whether he wanted to stay on as FBI director, telling him: &quot;I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.&quot;

&quot;I didn&rsquo;t move, speak, or change my facial expression in any way during the awkward silence that followed. We simply looked at each other in silence,&quot; Comey said in his testimony, explaining he became concerned that Trump was trying to create &quot;some sort of patronage relationship&quot;.

On February&nbsp;14, after an Oval Office briefing on counterterrorism, Trump asked Comey to stay behind, dismissing Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his son-in-law Jared Kushner, who lingered, and waving off Priebus, who peeked through the door.

&quot;When the door by the grandfather clock closed, and we were alone, the president began by saying, &#39;I want to talk about Mike Flynn,&#39;&quot; Comey said in his testimony.

Trump had fired Flynn the previous day in a controversy over contacts between the retired general and the Russian ambassador to the United States. The FBI has been investigating Flynn as it looks into allegations of links between Russia and the Trump campaign.

Comey quoted Trump as telling him: &quot;I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.&quot;

On March 30, Trump phoned Comey and asked what &quot;we could do to lift the cloud&quot; of the FBI&#39;s Russia investigation.

&quot;He said he had nothing to do with Russia, had not been involved with hookers in Russia, and had always assumed he was being recorded when in Russia,&quot; said Comey, who had briefed Trump on &quot;salacious material&quot; that had arisen in a counter-intelligence investigation.

Michael Cohen, a lawyer for Trump, said in a statement that the uncorroborated dossier of compromising material that Russian operatives allegedly collected on Trump has been &quot;debunked&quot;.

&quot;Comey&rsquo;s statement released today needs to be carefully scrutinised as his testimony claims the president was concerned about the dossier,&quot; said Cohen.

Cohen, along with Flynn, has been subpoenaed by the House Intelligence Committee, which is also conducting a Russia probe.

&nbsp;

LEGAL FALLOUT?

Some legal experts said Comey&rsquo;s written statement could be used to show that Trump engaged in obstruction of justice.

&ldquo;It shows the president was doing everything he could to shut down the Flynn investigation,&rdquo; said Andrew Wright, a professor of criminal law at Savannah Law School.

Bruce Green, a professor of law at Fordham University School of Law, said it would be difficult, however, to show that Trump intended to obstruct justice. Trump could say he was merely vouching for Flynn&#39;s character and voicing concerns about how the probe was interfering with his ability to function effectively as president, Green said.

Democrats jumped on the testimony, expressing concern that Trump had inappropriately meddled with the probe.

&quot;It&#39;s certainly very possible that this is evidence, in combination with other actions by the president, that could amount to obstruction. It&#39;s certainly an effort to interfere in the investigation,&quot; the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Adam Schiff, told CNN.

Republican House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan, asked about Trump&#39;s request for loyalty from Comey, said it was &quot;very, very critical&quot; that FBI directors remain &quot;independent&quot;.

But Republican Senator Richard Burr, who heads the Senate intelligence panel, said he did not take issue with Trump&#39;s request.

&quot;I don&#39;t think it&#39;s wrong to ask for loyalty from anybody in an administration,&quot; Burr said.

(Reuters)

While a sitting president is very unlikely to face criminal prosecution, obstruction of justice could form the basis for impeachment

Former FBI Director James Comey said on Wednesday that US President Donald Trump asked him to drop an investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn as part of a probe into Russia's alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential election. In written testimony released the day before he appears before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Comey said Trump told him at a meeting in the White House in February: "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go." The testimony puts more pressure on Trump, a Republican, whose presidency has been overshadowed by allegations that Moscow helped him win last year's election. Some legal experts said Comey’s testimony could strengthen any impeachment case built on obstruction of justice, but US markets shrugged off the news from the testimony for lack of any major disclosures. To build a criminal obstruction of justice case, federal law requires prosecutors to show that a person acted with "corrupt" intent. It does not matter whether the person succeeds in impeding an investigation. While a sitting president is very unlikely to face criminal prosecution, obstruction of justice could form the basis for impeachment. Comey said he had told Trump on three occasions he was not being investigated, confirming an earlier account from the president. Trump, who spent part of Wednesday in Ohio talking about the need to fix the nation's crumbling infrastructure, ignored reporters’ shouted questions about Comey. On returning to the Oval Office, Trump went into a meeting with top advisers, including chief of staff Reince Priebus. Later, his outside counsel released a statement saying Trump felt "completely and totally vindicated" by Comey's account. "The president is pleased that Mr. Comey has finally publicly confirmed his private reports that the president was not under investigation in any Russian probe," Marc Kasowitz, Trump's attorney, said in a statement. 'AWKWARD SILENCE' Several congressional committees, as well as the FBI and a special counsel, are investigating whether Russia tried to tilt last November's election in Trump's favour, using means such as hacking into the emails of senior Democrats. Trump and the Kremlin have separately denied any collusion. Trump abruptly fired Comey, who was leading the Federal Bureau of Investigation's probe, on May 9. Comey painted a vivid picture for senators of awkward encounters with Trump in seven pages of testimony. Comey described a private dinner in the Green Room of the White House on Jan. 26, where Trump asked him whether he wanted to stay on as FBI director, telling him: "I need loyalty, I expect loyalty." "I didn’t move, speak, or change my facial expression in any way during the awkward silence that followed. We simply looked at each other in silence," Comey said in his testimony, explaining he became concerned that Trump was trying to create "some sort of patronage relationship". On February 14, after an Oval Office briefing on counterterrorism, Trump asked Comey to stay behind, dismissing Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his son-in-law Jared Kushner, who lingered, and waving off Priebus, who peeked through the door. "When the door by the grandfather clock closed, and we were alone, the president began by saying, 'I want to talk about Mike Flynn,'" Comey said in his testimony. Trump had fired Flynn the previous day in a controversy over contacts between the retired general and the Russian ambassador to the United States. The FBI has been investigating Flynn as it looks into allegations of links between Russia and the Trump campaign. Comey quoted Trump as telling him: "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go." On March 30, Trump phoned Comey and asked what "we could do to lift the cloud" of the FBI's Russia investigation. "He said he had nothing to do with Russia, had not been involved with hookers in Russia, and had always assumed he was being recorded when in Russia," said Comey, who had briefed Trump on "salacious material" that had arisen in a counter-intelligence investigation. Michael Cohen, a lawyer for Trump, said in a statement that the uncorroborated dossier of compromising material that Russian operatives allegedly collected on Trump has been "debunked". "Comey’s statement released today needs to be carefully scrutinised as his testimony claims the president was concerned about the dossier," said Cohen. Cohen, along with Flynn, has been subpoenaed by the House Intelligence Committee, which is also conducting a Russia probe. LEGAL FALLOUT? Some legal experts said Comey’s written statement could be used to show that Trump engaged in obstruction of justice. “It shows the president was doing everything he could to shut down the Flynn investigation,” said Andrew Wright, a professor of criminal law at Savannah Law School. Bruce Green, a professor of law at Fordham University School of Law, said it would be difficult, however, to show that Trump intended to obstruct justice. Trump could say he was merely vouching for Flynn's character and voicing concerns about how the probe was interfering with his ability to function effectively as president, Green said. Democrats jumped on the testimony, expressing concern that Trump had inappropriately meddled with the probe. "It's certainly very possible that this is evidence, in combination with other actions by the president, that could amount to obstruction. It's certainly an effort to interfere in the investigation," the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Adam Schiff, told CNN. Republican House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan, asked about Trump's request for loyalty from Comey, said it was "very, very critical" that FBI directors remain "independent". But Republican Senator Richard Burr, who heads the Senate intelligence panel, said he did not take issue with Trump's request. "I don't think it's wrong to ask for loyalty from anybody in an administration," Burr said. (Reuters)

Ex-FBI chief Comey tells US senators Trump pressured him on Russia probe

James Comey said on Thursday he was disturbed by President Donald Trump&#39;s bid to get him to drop a probe into the former national security advisor, but the former FBI director would not say whether he thought the president sought to obstruct justice.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="videos-block">
<div class="embed-responsive embed-responsive-16by9"><iframe class="embed-responsive-item" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wtLtg2VIeAM"></iframe></div>
</div>

<div class="media-description">
Former FBI Director James Comey faces US Senate Panel (WION)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Comey told US&nbsp;lawmakers in one of the most widely anticipated US&nbsp;congressional hearing in years that the Trump administration had told lies and defamed him and the FBI when the president fired him on May 9.

In written testimony released on Wednesday, Comey said Trump had asked him in February to drop an FBI investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn as part of the probe into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 US&nbsp;presidential election.

&quot;I don&#39;t think it&#39;s for me to say whether the conversation I had with the president was an effort to obstruct. I took it as a very disturbing thing, very concerning,&quot; Comey told lawmakers.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Comey says Trump asked him for loyalty, which he took to mean Trump wanted something in exchange for staying in job<a href="https://t.co/wTqYk0mA2P">pic.twitter.com/wTqYk0mA2P</a>
&mdash; MissAnthrope (@LyssAnthrope) <a href="https://twitter.com/LyssAnthrope/status/872832606588596226">June 8, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

The hearing could have significant repercussions for Trump&#39;s presidency as special counsel Robert Mueller and several congressional committees investigate alleged Russian efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and whether Trump&#39;s campaign colluded with this.

Russia has denied such interference and the White House has denied any collusion.

Trump triggered a political firestorm when he dismissed Comey.

The former FBI head said Trump&#39;s administration had defamed him in comments made after his firing.

&quot;Although the law required no reason at all to fire the FBI director, the administration then chose to defame me and more importantly the FBI by saying that the organisation was in disarray, that the workforce had lost confidence in its leader,&quot; Comey said.

&quot;Those were lies, plain and simple,&quot; he said.

The Russia issue has dogged Trump&#39;s first months in office, with critics saying that any efforts by him to hinder the FBI probe could amount to obstruction of justice.

Some legal experts said Comey&#39;s testimony could strengthen any impeachment case in Congress to remove Trump from office built on an allegation of obstruction of justice.

Comey testified that he kept notes after meeting with Trump because &quot;I was honestly concerned that he might lie about the nature of our meeting, and so I thought it really important to document.&quot;

The White House has given shifting explanations on why Trump fired Comey. Trump has called Comey a &quot;showboat&quot; and a &quot;grandstander&quot; and said he was thinking of &quot;this Russia thing&quot; in dismissing him.

(Reuters)

The Russia issue has dogged Trump's first months, with critics saying that efforts by him to hinder the FBI probe could amount to obstruction of justice

James Comey said on Thursday he was disturbed by President Donald Trump's bid to get him to drop a probe into the former national security advisor, but the former FBI director would not say whether he thought the president sought to obstruct justice. Former FBI Director James Comey faces US Senate Panel (WION) × Comey told US lawmakers in one of the most widely anticipated US congressional hearing in years that the Trump administration had told lies and defamed him and the FBI when the president fired him on May 9. In written testimony released on Wednesday, Comey said Trump had asked him in February to drop an FBI investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn as part of the probe into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 US presidential election. "I don't think it's for me to say whether the conversation I had with the president was an effort to obstruct. I took it as a very disturbing thing, very concerning," Comey told lawmakers. Comey says Trump asked him for loyalty, which he took to mean Trump wanted something in exchange for staying in jobpic.twitter.com/wTqYk0mA2P — MissAnthrope (@LyssAnthrope) June 8, 2017 × The hearing could have significant repercussions for Trump's presidency as special counsel Robert Mueller and several congressional committees investigate alleged Russian efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and whether Trump's campaign colluded with this. Russia has denied such interference and the White House has denied any collusion. Trump triggered a political firestorm when he dismissed Comey. The former FBI head said Trump's administration had defamed him in comments made after his firing. "Although the law required no reason at all to fire the FBI director, the administration then chose to defame me and more importantly the FBI by saying that the organisation was in disarray, that the workforce had lost confidence in its leader," Comey said. "Those were lies, plain and simple," he said. The Russia issue has dogged Trump's first months in office, with critics saying that any efforts by him to hinder the FBI probe could amount to obstruction of justice. Some legal experts said Comey's testimony could strengthen any impeachment case in Congress to remove Trump from office built on an allegation of obstruction of justice. Comey testified that he kept notes after meeting with Trump because "I was honestly concerned that he might lie about the nature of our meeting, and so I thought it really important to document." The White House has given shifting explanations on why Trump fired Comey. Trump has called Comey a "showboat" and a "grandstander" and said he was thinking of "this Russia thing" in dismissing him. (Reuters)

FBI ex-head Comey accuses Trump administration of defaming him, telling 'lies'

The Watergate scandal pales in comparison to events in Washington surrounding US&nbsp;President Donald Trump and alleged links between his campaign and Russia, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said on Wednesday.

Clapper questioned Trump&#39;s continued pro-Russian stance, saying his sharing of intelligence with Russia &quot;reflect either ignorance or disrespect, and either is very problematic&quot;.

&quot;I think if you compare the two that Watergate pales, really, in my view, compared to what we&#39;re confronting now,&quot; Clapper told reporters in Canberra, Australia&#39;s capital.

The break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate Hotel in Washington in 1972, and subsequent cover-up, brought down former Republican US&nbsp;President Richard Nixon in 1974.

Clapper&rsquo;s appearance in Canberra comes before highly anticipated testimony by sacked FBI director James Comey before the Senate intelligence committee on Thursday.

The committee is examining whether Trump&rsquo;s campaign colluded with Russian officials to interfere in the US&nbsp;presidential election.

Trump in May removed Comey as director of FBI, despite a US&nbsp;Justice Department probe into contacts between presidential aides and Russia, raising the spectre of political interference in the investigation.

Trump has called the probe a &quot;witch hunt&quot; and said there was no collusion between his campaign and Russia.

Clapper said it was &quot;inexplicable&quot; that Trump continued his pro-Russia stance despite evidence Moscow sought to interfere in the 2016 US&nbsp;presidential election.

&quot;His subsequent actions, sharing sensitive intelligence with the Russians and compromising its source, reflect either ignorance or disrespect and either is very problematic,&quot; said Clapper.

Trump disclosed highly classified information about a planned Islamic State operation to Russia&#39;s foreign minister in an Oval Office meeting in May, two US&nbsp;officials have said.

(Reuters)

'I think if you compare the two that Watergate pales, really, in my view, compared to what we're confronting now'

The Watergate scandal pales in comparison to events in Washington surrounding US President Donald Trump and alleged links between his campaign and Russia, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said on Wednesday. Clapper questioned Trump's continued pro-Russian stance, saying his sharing of intelligence with Russia "reflect either ignorance or disrespect, and either is very problematic". "I think if you compare the two that Watergate pales, really, in my view, compared to what we're confronting now," Clapper told reporters in Canberra, Australia's capital. The break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate Hotel in Washington in 1972, and subsequent cover-up, brought down former Republican US President Richard Nixon in 1974. Clapper’s appearance in Canberra comes before highly anticipated testimony by sacked FBI director James Comey before the Senate intelligence committee on Thursday. The committee is examining whether Trump’s campaign colluded with Russian officials to interfere in the US presidential election. Trump in May removed Comey as director of FBI, despite a US Justice Department probe into contacts between presidential aides and Russia, raising the spectre of political interference in the investigation. Trump has called the probe a "witch hunt" and said there was no collusion between his campaign and Russia. Clapper said it was "inexplicable" that Trump continued his pro-Russia stance despite evidence Moscow sought to interfere in the 2016 US presidential election. "His subsequent actions, sharing sensitive intelligence with the Russians and compromising its source, reflect either ignorance or disrespect and either is very problematic," said Clapper. Trump disclosed highly classified information about a planned Islamic State operation to Russia's foreign minister in an Oval Office meeting in May, two US officials have said. (Reuters)

Watergate 'pales' compared with Trump-Russia: Former US intelligence head

A US&nbsp;intelligence contractor has been charged with leaking to a news organization classified National Security Agency material about Russian interference in the 2016 American presidential election, the Justice Department and officials said.

The Justice Department on Monday charged Reality Leigh Winner, 25, with removing classified material from a government facility in Georgia. It said she was arrested on Saturday.

It was one of the first concrete efforts by the administration of President Donald Trump to crack down on leaks to the media.

The charges were announced less than an hour after The Intercept published a top-secret document from the NSA that described Russian efforts to launch cyber attacks on at least one US&nbsp;voting software supplier and send &quot;spear-phishing&quot; emails, or targeted emails, that try to trick a recipient into clicking on a malicious link to steal data, to more than 100 local election officials days before the November&nbsp;8 US&nbsp;election.

While the charges do not name the publication, a US&nbsp;official with knowledge of the case said Winner was charged with leaking the NSA report to The Intercept. A second official confirmed The Intercept document was authentic and did not dispute that the charges were directly tied to it.

The Justice Department declined to comment on the case beyond its filing. The Federal Bureau of Investigation did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Winner&#39;s mother also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Intercept report carried details it said supported the conclusion of US&nbsp;intelligence agencies that Russian intelligence services were seeking to infiltrate state voter registration systems as part of a broader effort to interfere in the election, discredit Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and help the Republican Trump win the election.

The new material does not suggest that actual votes were manipulated.

The Intercept co-founding editor Glenn Greenwald did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

While partially redacted, the NSA document is marked to show it would be up for declassification on May 5, 2042. The indictment against Winner alleges she &quot;printed and improperly removed&quot; classified intelligence reporting that was dated &quot;on or about May 5, 2017.&quot;

Classified documents are typically due to be declassified after 25 years under an executive order signed under former President Bill Clinton.

The NSA opened a facility in Augusta in 2012 at Fort Gordon, a US&nbsp;Army outpost.

The FBI and several congressional committees are investigating how Russia interfered in the election and whether associates of President Donald Trump may have colluded with Russian intelligence operatives during the campaign.

Trump has dismissed the allegations as &quot;fake news&quot; and sought to focus attention on leaks of information to the media.

Winner graduated from basic military training at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio in 2011. Investigators determined she was one of only six individuals to print the document in question and that she had exchanged emails with the news outlet, according to the criminal complaint.

The complaint said that on Saturday, Winner told an FBI agent she had intentionally printed classified intelligence and mailed it to a news organization while knowing &quot;the contents of the reporting could be used to the injury of the United States and to the advantage of a foreign nation.&quot;

US&nbsp;intelligence agencies including the NSA and Central Intelligence Agency have fallen victim to several thefts of classified material in recent years, often at the hands of a federal contractor. Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden in 2013 disclosed secret documents to journalists, including Greenwald, that revealed broad US&nbsp;surveillance programs.

(Reuters)

Winner, 25, leaked a top-secret NSA document describing Russian efforts to launch cyber attacks on at least 1 US?voting software supplier

A US intelligence contractor has been charged with leaking to a news organization classified National Security Agency material about Russian interference in the 2016 American presidential election, the Justice Department and officials said. The Justice Department on Monday charged Reality Leigh Winner, 25, with removing classified material from a government facility in Georgia. It said she was arrested on Saturday. It was one of the first concrete efforts by the administration of President Donald Trump to crack down on leaks to the media. The charges were announced less than an hour after The Intercept published a top-secret document from the NSA that described Russian efforts to launch cyber attacks on at least one US voting software supplier and send "spear-phishing" emails, or targeted emails, that try to trick a recipient into clicking on a malicious link to steal data, to more than 100 local election officials days before the November 8 US election. While the charges do not name the publication, a US official with knowledge of the case said Winner was charged with leaking the NSA report to The Intercept. A second official confirmed The Intercept document was authentic and did not dispute that the charges were directly tied to it. The Justice Department declined to comment on the case beyond its filing. The Federal Bureau of Investigation did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Winner's mother also did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Intercept report carried details it said supported the conclusion of US intelligence agencies that Russian intelligence services were seeking to infiltrate state voter registration systems as part of a broader effort to interfere in the election, discredit Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and help the Republican Trump win the election. The new material does not suggest that actual votes were manipulated. The Intercept co-founding editor Glenn Greenwald did not immediately respond to a request for comment. While partially redacted, the NSA document is marked to show it would be up for declassification on May 5, 2042. The indictment against Winner alleges she "printed and improperly removed" classified intelligence reporting that was dated "on or about May 5, 2017." Classified documents are typically due to be declassified after 25 years under an executive order signed under former President Bill Clinton. The NSA opened a facility in Augusta in 2012 at Fort Gordon, a US Army outpost. The FBI and several congressional committees are investigating how Russia interfered in the election and whether associates of President Donald Trump may have colluded with Russian intelligence operatives during the campaign. Trump has dismissed the allegations as "fake news" and sought to focus attention on leaks of information to the media. Winner graduated from basic military training at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio in 2011. Investigators determined she was one of only six individuals to print the document in question and that she had exchanged emails with the news outlet, according to the criminal complaint. The complaint said that on Saturday, Winner told an FBI agent she had intentionally printed classified intelligence and mailed it to a news organization while knowing "the contents of the reporting could be used to the injury of the United States and to the advantage of a foreign nation." US intelligence agencies including the NSA and Central Intelligence Agency have fallen victim to several thefts of classified material in recent years, often at the hands of a federal contractor. Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden in 2013 disclosed secret documents to journalists, including Greenwald, that revealed broad US surveillance programs. (Reuters)

Trump-Russia: US intelligence contractor charged with leaks

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump &quot;believes the climate is changing,&quot; US&nbsp;Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said on Saturday after Trump&#39;s decision to take the United States out of the Paris climate accord sparked dismay across the world.

&quot;President Trump believes the climate is changing and he believes pollutants are part of the equation,&quot; Haley said during an excerpt of a CNN interview released on Saturday. The interview will be broadcast on CNN&#39;s &quot;State of the Union&quot; on Sunday.

Trump &quot;knows that it&#39;s changing and that the US&nbsp;has to be responsible for it and that&#39;s what we&#39;re going to do,&quot; Haley said.

On Thursday, Trump announced the United States would withdraw from the Paris climate change pact, tapping into his &quot;America First&quot; campaign theme. He said participating in the pact would undermine the US&nbsp;economy, wipe out jobs, weaken national sovereignty and put his country at a permanent disadvantage.

&quot;Just because the US&nbsp;got out of a club doesn&#39;t mean we aren&#39;t going to care about the environment,&quot; Haley said.

Later on Saturday, Vice President Mike Pence said that remaining in the accord would have proved costly to US economic growth and to the working-class Americans at the core of Trump&#39;s political base.

&quot;By withdrawing from the Paris climate accord, President Donald Trump chose to put the forgotten men and women of America first. And he always will,&quot; Pence told a political rally in Iowa.

On Friday, nobody at the White House was able to say whether Trump believed in climate change. In recent years, he has expressed scepticism about whether climate change is real, sometimes calling it a hoax. But since becoming president, he has not offered an opinion.

The decision to take the United States out of the pact prompted a negative reaction around the world, and world leaders redoubled their commitment to an accord agreed to by every country on the planet save Nicaragua and Syria.

China and Europe on Friday pledged to unite to save what German Chancellor Angela Merkel called &quot;our Mother Earth,&quot; standing firmly against Trump&#39;s decision.

The vast majority of scientists believe global warming is mainly the result of human activities, including power generation, transportation, agriculture and industry.

A small group of sceptics, some of them in the White House, believe the Paris Pact threatened business.

(Reuters)

Trump 'knows that it's changing and that the US has to be responsible for it and that's what we're going to do,' Haley said

US President Donald Trump "believes the climate is changing," US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said on Saturday after Trump's decision to take the United States out of the Paris climate accord sparked dismay across the world. "President Trump believes the climate is changing and he believes pollutants are part of the equation," Haley said during an excerpt of a CNN interview released on Saturday. The interview will be broadcast on CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday. Trump "knows that it's changing and that the US has to be responsible for it and that's what we're going to do," Haley said. On Thursday, Trump announced the United States would withdraw from the Paris climate change pact, tapping into his "America First" campaign theme. He said participating in the pact would undermine the US economy, wipe out jobs, weaken national sovereignty and put his country at a permanent disadvantage. "Just because the US got out of a club doesn't mean we aren't going to care about the environment," Haley said. Later on Saturday, Vice President Mike Pence said that remaining in the accord would have proved costly to US economic growth and to the working-class Americans at the core of Trump's political base. "By withdrawing from the Paris climate accord, President Donald Trump chose to put the forgotten men and women of America first. And he always will," Pence told a political rally in Iowa. On Friday, nobody at the White House was able to say whether Trump believed in climate change. In recent years, he has expressed scepticism about whether climate change is real, sometimes calling it a hoax. But since becoming president, he has not offered an opinion. The decision to take the United States out of the pact prompted a negative reaction around the world, and world leaders redoubled their commitment to an accord agreed to by every country on the planet save Nicaragua and Syria. China and Europe on Friday pledged to unite to save what German Chancellor Angela Merkel called "our Mother Earth," standing firmly against Trump's decision. The vast majority of scientists believe global warming is mainly the result of human activities, including power generation, transportation, agriculture and industry. A small group of sceptics, some of them in the White House, believe the Paris Pact threatened business. (Reuters)

Trump 'believes the climate is changing', says UN ambassador Nikki Haley

&nbsp;France and India will seek to show a united front to tackle climate change when their leaders meet on Saturday with President Emmanuel Macron likely to underline his country&#39;s stability in talks with Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Modi&#39;s arrival in Paris comes after US&nbsp;President Donald Trump announced his decision to withdraw from the 2015 Paris climate agreement and at a time when uncertainty in the European Union prevails following Britain&#39;s decision to leave the 28-nation bloc.

&quot;Climate will obviously be one of the first topics discussed. It&#39;s a personal commitment from Modi so it&#39;s crucial that this engagement is reiterated in the current context,&quot; said a senior French diplomat.

Modi, whose country is the world&#39;s third-biggest emissions generator, said in Russia on Friday that he would continue to back the deal. Macron&#39;s call on Thursday for the accord&#39;s remaining 194 countries to fill the void left by the US&nbsp;may see the two sides push for greater cooperation.

&quot;Trump&#39;s decision is very bad news, but we have to move on with world&#39;s key actors, starting with India,&quot; said the diplomat. &quot;We need to show that we are stable, not unpredictable and have convictions that we aren&#39;t afraid to stick to.&quot;

Prior to the visit Modi had already hailed Macron&#39;s victory over the far-right as an opportunity to reinforce ties between the two countries almost 20 years after agreeing in 1998 a strategic partnership.

&quot;Within a lot of uncertainty and instability where we don&#39;t know in which direction the world&#39;s great powers are going, it&#39;s important to show that the relationship between France and India is stable,&quot; said the diplomat.

Ties between the two countries have grown in recent years most notably in the defence sector with New Delhi ordering 36 French-made Rafale fighter jets to modernise its ageing warplane fleet.

The two are also in talks over nuclear power and renewable energy deals, although the Paris visit is not aimed at sealing contracts.

France&#39;s foreign ministry says more than 1,000 French firms operate in India in sectors ranging from defence to new technologies employing some 300,000 people.

&quot;The Indians had a vision of Europe over the last couple of years that was a bit cataclysmic partly because of the crises we went through, Brexit and the far-right wave.

&quot;Brexit especially traumatized them and there was a real worry that Europe would explode so Macron&#39;s victory has provided a boost,&quot; the diplomat said.

(Reuters)

&nbsp;

Indian PM Modi's ?Paris visit ?comes after Trump pulled out?of the 2015 Paris climate agreement

France and India will seek to show a united front to tackle climate change when their leaders meet on Saturday with President Emmanuel Macron likely to underline his country's stability in talks with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Modi's arrival in Paris comes after US President Donald Trump announced his decision to withdraw from the 2015 Paris climate agreement and at a time when uncertainty in the European Union prevails following Britain's decision to leave the 28-nation bloc. "Climate will obviously be one of the first topics discussed. It's a personal commitment from Modi so it's crucial that this engagement is reiterated in the current context," said a senior French diplomat. Modi, whose country is the world's third-biggest emissions generator, said in Russia on Friday that he would continue to back the deal. Macron's call on Thursday for the accord's remaining 194 countries to fill the void left by the US may see the two sides push for greater cooperation. "Trump's decision is very bad news, but we have to move on with world's key actors, starting with India," said the diplomat. "We need to show that we are stable, not unpredictable and have convictions that we aren't afraid to stick to." Prior to the visit Modi had already hailed Macron's victory over the far-right as an opportunity to reinforce ties between the two countries almost 20 years after agreeing in 1998 a strategic partnership. "Within a lot of uncertainty and instability where we don't know in which direction the world's great powers are going, it's important to show that the relationship between France and India is stable," said the diplomat. Ties between the two countries have grown in recent years most notably in the defence sector with New Delhi ordering 36 French-made Rafale fighter jets to modernise its ageing warplane fleet. The two are also in talks over nuclear power and renewable energy deals, although the Paris visit is not aimed at sealing contracts. France's foreign ministry says more than 1,000 French firms operate in India in sectors ranging from defence to new technologies employing some 300,000 people. "The Indians had a vision of Europe over the last couple of years that was a bit cataclysmic partly because of the crises we went through, Brexit and the far-right wave. "Brexit especially traumatized them and there was a real worry that Europe would explode so Macron's victory has provided a boost," the diplomat said. (Reuters)

France to push stability in India talks amid Trump climate turmoil

donald-trump

Donald Trump, News on Donald Trump, stories on Donald Trump, articles on Donald Trump, Donald Trump stories at Wion, Donald Trump news, Donald Trump latest news

donald trump