• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Компании2020
      • Показать ещё
      Разное644
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы416
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации48
      • Показать ещё
      Люди162
      • Показать ещё
      Формат21
      Показатели80
      • Показать ещё
      Издания105
      • Показать ещё
      Сферы2
23 февраля, 04:58

As SEALs Fought For Their Lives, Trump's Account Sent And Deleted A TV Tweet

WASHINGTON ― As a team of elite U.S. commandos found themselves under unexpectedly heavy fire in a remote Yemeni village last month, eight time zones away, their commander in chief was not in the Situation Room. It’s unclear what he, personally, was doing. But his Twitter account was busy promoting an upcoming appearance on the Christian Broadcasting Network. “I will be interviewed by @TheBrodyFile on @CBNNews tonight at 11pm. Enjoy!” read a tweet from President Donald Trump’s personal account on Saturday, Jan. 28. Whether it was Trump himself or an aide who sent out that tweet at 5:50 p.m. ― about half an hour into a firefight that cost a Navy SEAL his life ― cannot be determined from the actual tweets, and the White House isn’t saying. Likewise, it’s not clear who deleted the tweet some 20 minutes later, or why the new president, just a week on the job, chose not to directly monitor the first high-risk military operation on his watch. The CBN interview did not actually air until the following night, Jan. 29, and Trump or an aide may have realized the error and deleted the tweet for that reason. Alternatively, Trump or an aide might have realized that the Yemen operation was going badly and deleted the tweet to avoid looking callous. The tweet appears to have been sent via an iPhone, not via Android. Tweets sent from an iPhone are generally from the president’s staff, often taking his dictation, while tweets sent by Android are usually composed by Trump himself. The White House did not respond to The Huffington Post’s queries on the issue. “He was obviously aware of the strike occurring,” White House press secretary Sean Spicer said the day after the raid. “He was kept in constant contact Saturday night of the status of the mission, both of the success that it had and the tragic loss of life that occurred to that member.” Spicer, though, has not specifically said what Trump was doing between 5:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. on Jan. 28, other than to say he was in the White House residence ― not in the Situation Room. That’s the hour ― 1:30 a.m. to 2:30 a.m. local time ― when the firefight in Yemen resulted in the deaths of some 30 people, according to news reports. U.S. forces had called in air strikes because of the ferocity of the resistance they encountered. At least 10 of those killed were women or children. The last event on the presidential schedule released to the media for that Saturday was a phone call with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull at 5 p.m. According to the White House pool reporter that day, Trump was on the phone with Turnbull at 5:11 p.m. when reporters were taken to witness the call through the Oval Office windows. “Obviously, if a raid is only 20 minutes in, you should wait to see how it turns out before tweeting,” said one former National Security Council participant under former President Barack Obama. The staffer added that while Obama did not monitor every operation from the Situation Room (as he did during the one that killed Osama bin Laden), it seemed odd that Trump did not monitor this operation. “It is your first one.” The timing of the CBN tweet and its deletion is the latest detail in the story of a military special operation that went not at all as planned. Chief Petty Officer William “Ryan” Owens was killed in the raid, and four U.S. service members were wounded. A $75 million Osprey aircraft was damaged and had to be destroyed to keep it from falling into enemy hands. Subsequent reports pointed out that Trump did not participate in a formal National Security Council review of the plan, but instead was briefed over a dinner meeting three nights before the raid. Spicer on Feb. 2 said that Defense Secretary James Mattis, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford, CIA director Mike Pompeo, then-national security adviser Mike Flynn, National Security Council chief of staff Keith Kellogg, White House chief of staff Reince Priebus and chief strategist Stephen Bannon took part in that dinner, as did Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner. “Doing it over dinner with Kushner and Bannon, without someone from the State Department present? I considered that a little odd,” said Luke Hartig, a former senior director for counterterrorism at the NSC under Obama. He added that more comprehensive planning might not have averted problems, but could have ensured that better contingency strategies were in place. In any event, Spicer on Feb. 2 essentially described the raid as something planned and approved under Obama (a characterization that Obama aides dispute). That places it about midway along the evolution of the White’s House description of the operation ― from immediately afterward, when Spicer declared the raid a complete success, to the following week, when he accused anyone who questioned that assessment of dishonoring the fallen serviceman. In the initial aftermath, Spicer said the raid had killed 14 fighters with the group al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Within a few days, as reports spread of civilian deaths which the Defense Department acknowledged, Spicer said the whole point of the mission was “intelligence gathering,” in the form of laptops and cellphones that were taken. By the following week, amid reports that Yemen had withdrawn permission for U.S. troops to conduct raids there and that the purported main target of the raid, AQAP leader Qassim al-Rimi, had escaped and was now taunting Trump, Spicer denounced criticism of the raid of any kind. “The life of Chief Ryan Owens was done in service to this country and we owe him and his family a great debt for the information that we received during that raid,” Spicer said on Feb. 8. “I think any suggestion otherwise is a disservice to his courageous life and the actions that he took, full stop.” -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

22 февраля, 12:00

Why #DeleteUber and Other Boycotts Matter

Even when a relatively small number of people participate

21 февраля, 19:26

For Trump, Generals Are Everywhere

Cross-posted with TomDispatch.com   If you’re going to surround yourself with generals in the Oval Office, as Donald Trump has done, that means one thing in these years: you’re going to appoint men whose careers were made (or unmade) by what was once known as the Global War on Terror.  They will be deeply associated with Washington’s 15 years of disastrous wars and conflicts in the Greater Middle East, which have left that region a set of failed or near-failed states and a hotbed of terror outfits, including various branches of al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.  Secretary of Defense James “Mad Dog” Mattis, for instance, led troops in the initial post-invasion period in Afghanistan in 2001; in the taking of the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, in 2003; in the fierce fighting for the city of Fallujah in 2004; and then, from 2010 to 2013, he was in charge of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), with responsibility for the Greater Middle East. In that post, he cooked up a scheme to take out either an Iranian oil refinery or power plant in the “dead of night,” an act of war meant to pay that country back for supplying mortars to Iraqi insurgents killing American troops. That plan, nixed by the Obama White House, seems to have played a role in his removal from the CENTCOM post five months early. General John Kelly, head of the Department of Homeland Security, also commanded troops and fought in Iraq.  (His son was killed in Afghanistan in 2010.)  Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn held key intelligence positions in both Afghanistan and Iraq, while his temporary replacement (and now National Security Council chief of staff), General Joseph “Keith” Kellogg, retired and working with private contractor Oracle at the time of the invasion of Iraq, was sent to Baghdad as chief operating officer of the Coalition Provisional Authority that the Bush administration set up to run its ill-fated occupation of that country.  He lasted only five months as that body began its “reconstruction” of Iraq, after disbanding Saddam’s army and so putting its officers and troops on the unemployment line, which meant at the disposal of the developing insurgency.  Army Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster, the new national security adviser, just tapped for the job by Trump, isn’t even retired and held command posts in both Iraq and Afghanistan. On the evidence of these last years, such experiences seem to have tied these men to the war against terror in a deep and visceral way, making any major reconsideration of what they had lived through inconceivable.  In the new Trump era, clues to this ongoing reality can already be found in two recent events: the first Trump-ordered action in the Greater Middle East, a thoroughly botched Special Operations raid in Yemen, which did not achieve its objective but got large numbers of civilians and one Navy SEAL killed and which, given the last 15 years of U.S. military action in the region, looked painfully familiar; and the request of the present U.S. Afghan commander, General John Nicholson Jr., for “several thousand” more American military advisers, one that it’s hard to imagine he would have made before the Senate Armed Services Committee without the agreement of Defense Secretary Mattis.  It’s also a request that was clearly meant as no more than an opening bid in a potentially far larger surge of American forces into Afghanistan.  (Where have you heard that before?) Under the circumstances, it’s good to know that, even if not at the highest ranks of the U.S. military, there are officers who have been able to take in what they experienced up close and personal in Iraq and Afghanistan and make some new ― not desperately old ― sense of it.  U.S. Army Major Danny Sjursen, a former history instructor at West Point and the author of Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge, who writes his inaugural TomDispatch post today (“How We Got Here”), is obviously one of them and I doubt he’s alone in the American armed forces after all these years. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

21 февраля, 16:26

How Do Google, Amazon, And Facebook Justify Advertising With Breitbart?

In the last month, leading technology companies have opposed President Trump’s ban on refugees and the citizens of seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States. Not only have numerous tech companies spoken out against Trump’s xenophobic and anti-Muslim rewriting of immigration policy, but Facebook, Google, and Amazon joined federal lawsuits challenging the restrictions. Yet despite opposing Trump’s Muslim ban, Facebook, Google, and Amazon continue to buy advertising from Breitbart, a sexist, racist, homophobic, and anti-Muslim website that enthusiastically promotes fake news and the white nationalist, so-called “alt right.” The far-right provocateur and pedophilia condoner Milo Yiannopoulos serves as a Senior Editor at Breitbart. And perhaps no other media outlet is more closely tied to the Trump administration than Breitbart. Last August, Trump tapped Breitbart editor and white nationalist Steven Bannon to become his campaign chief. Now Trump’s Chief Strategist, Bannon played a leading role in implementing the Muslim ban, according to officials at the Department of Homeland Security. In late January, Trump added two more Breitbart staffers to his administration. In addition to its own advertisements, Google places ads for more than a thousand companies on Breitbart through its AdSense service. This is in spite of the fact that AdSense’s policies prohibit ads from being “placed on pages that contain harassing or bullying content, or on content that incites hatred or promotes violence against individuals or groups.” Curious as to how Facebook, Google, and Amazon justify their continued collaboration with Breitbart, I reached out to each of the three companies for a statement. This is what I did (and didn’t) learn. To start, I asked Facebook’s press office for a comment on the company’s ads that have appeared alongside the following Breitbart headlines: 1) “Sorry Girls! But the Smartest People in The World Are All Men”; 2) “Milo: ‘Why Are We Surprised Muslims are Blowing Things Up? That’s What They Do”; and 3) “Bill Kristol: Republican Spoiler, Renegade Jew.” As Facebook’s representative Tom Channick explained, “We purchase ads through third party networks to reach as many people as possible. People visit different sites and we want to connect with all of them, independent of political affiliation or beliefs. We are not changing our advertising buys at this time.” In short, Facebook chose to hide behind political neutrality and ignore the misogynistic, anti-Muslim, and anti-Semitic message of the above ads. I also presented Google with screenshots of ads that AdSense placed next to the “Sorry Girls” and “Milo” headlines plus an additional misogynistic headline: “There’s No Hiring Bias Against Women in Tech, They Just Suck at Interviews.” I asked how Google could explain placing ads for itself and over a thousand other companies next to such headlines. Google’s response was even more evasive than Facebook’s statement. According to representative Suzanne Blackburn, although Google “review[s] sites on a regular basis for policy compliance...we are not going to comment on specific sites.” Blackburn mentioned that Google encourages “users to let us know when they come across ads or sites that they believe are in violation of our policies.” But Blackburn refused to acknowledge that Google’s ads appear alongside hate speech prohibited by its own policies. If Google would recognize this violation of its policies and stop collaborating with Breitbart, it could instantly eliminate the bulk of the site’s advertising revenue. Facebook and Google’s responses are objectionable on multiple levels. First, Google refuses to acknowledge its central role in placing ads for more than a thousand companies on Breitbart. Worse than that, both Google and Facebook seem to consider Breitbart’s hate speech like any other “political affiliation or beliefs” ― not unrepentant hate speech that degrades entire religions and genders. Both companies, in effect, are normalizing and condoning hate speech as acceptable political expression. At least Facebook and Google responded to my inquiries. Amazon simply refused to reply to my email to their press office. Amazon also failed to contact me after one of their managers promised a representative would follow up on a separate customer service complaint I made about the company’s ads on Breitbart. The online work of Sleeping Giants has convinced more than a thousand companies to reject Breitbart. What are these tech giants ― some of the richest companies in the United States ― so scared of? Is it the conservative backlash that Kellogg’s suffered for pulling its ads from Breitbart, or the xenophobic outrage Anheuser-Busch faced for daring to portray an immigrant positively in a Super Bowl advertisement? Is it the loss of a single advertising venue for Facebook and Amazon, or, in the case of Google, the loss of one website as an AdSense client? Regardless of their reasons, Facebook, Amazon, and Google are helping to fund Breitbart’s hate speech. Their support of Breitbart contradicts both their official policies and their opposition to Trump and Bannon’s Muslim ban. Citizens and customers who want these companies to stop dealing with Breitbart will have to embrace tactics voters are using to influence members of Congress. Tens of thousands of people working with the Twitter account Sleeping Giants have organized a sustained campaign to demand that corporations remove their advertising from Breitbart. Since November, over 1,100 companies―including major firms such as BMW, Chase, Kellogg’s, T-Mobile, and Visa―have chosen to pull their ads from Breitbart. After all, why would any company want their products or services associated with discriminatory hate speech? The online work of Sleeping Giants has convinced more than a thousand companies to reject Breitbart. But it’s clear that citizens will need to apply additional forms of direct pressure to persuade Breitbart’s more loyal advertisers to change course. Petitions are worthwhile, but Amazon is already ignoring the signatures of more than 500,000 people asking it to stop advertising with Breitbart. Call-in campaigns to these companies’ customer service lines could be effective, as could protests outside these companies’ offices. Even Amazon employees have started to demand that their employer cut ties with Breitbart. Hopefully employees at Google and Facebook will follow suit. An organized boycott of Amazon may eventually be necessary to get the online retailer to abandon Breitbart. Whatever the best strategy may be, citizens will have to continue putting direct pressure on tech companies to get them to honor their principles and policies and remove their ads from the hate website Breitbart. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

21 февраля, 01:18

Remarks by President Trump Announcing the Designation of Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster to National Security Advisor

Mar-a-Lago Club Palm Beach, Florida 2:52 P.M. EST THE PRESIDENT:  So I just wanted to announce -- we've been working all weekend very diligently, very hard -- that General H.R. McMaster will become the National Security Advisor.  He's a man of tremendous talent and tremendous experience.  I watched and read a lot over the last two days.  He is highly respected by everybody in the military.  And we're very honored to have him.  He also has also known for a long time General Keith Kellogg, who I also have gotten to know and he's a terrific man, and they're going to be working together.  And Keith is going to be Chief of Staff, and I think that combination is something very, very special. I met with many other people.  Tremendous respect for the people I met with.  I know John Bolton we're going to be asking to work with us in a somewhat different capacity.  John is a terrific guy.  We had some really good meetings with him.  He knows a lot.  He has a good number of ideas that I must tell you I agree very much with.  So we'll be talking to John Bolton in a different capacity.  And we’ll be talking to some of the other generals that I've met that I have really, really paid a lot of respect for. So I think with that, I'd like to ask H.R. to say a couple of words.  I'd like to ask Keith to say a couple of words.  And then I'll see you back in Washington.  We're leaving right now for Washington and the White House.   General. LT. GENERAL MCMASTER:  Mr. President, thank you very much.  I'd just like to say what a privilege it is to be able to continue serving our nation.  I'm grateful to you for that opportunity, and I look forward to joining the National Security team and doing everything I can to advance and protect the interests of the American people.  Thank you very much, sir. THE PRESIDENT:  You're going to do a great job. LT. GENERAL MCMASTER:  Thank you, sir. THE PRESIDENT:  General. LT. GENERAL KELLOGG:  Mr. President, thank you for the opportunity to serve.  I'm very honored by it and privileged by it.  And I'm very honored and privileged to serve alongside H.R. McMaster, who I've known for years as well.  He's a great statesman, he's a great soldier.  Thank you, sir. THE PRESIDENT:  And so are you.  Thank you very much.  What a privilege.  This is a great team.  We're very, very honored.  Our country is lucky to have two people like this.  And, frankly, after having met so many of the people in the military, we're lucky to have all of them.   So thank you all very much.  I'll see you back in Washington.  We're leaving now.  Thank you. Q    Did Vice President Pence play a role in helping you? THE PRESIDENT:  He did.  He did. END 2:55 P.M. EST

20 февраля, 23:45

Трамп назначил советником по национальной безопасности Герберта Макмастера

Президент США Дональд Трамп назначил своим советником по национальной безопасности генерал-лейтенанта Герберта Макмастера. Об этом сообщает пресс-секретарь Белого дома Шон Спайсер

20 февраля, 23:07

Donald Trump Names H.R. McMaster As National Security Adviser

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); President Donald Trump on Monday selected Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster to be his national security adviser. McMaster, an active service member, will replace retired Lt. Gen Michael Flynn. Flynn resigned last week after confirmation he’d spoken about U.S. sanctions against Russia with that country’s ambassador ahead of Trump’s inauguration. Trump announced McMaster’s selection at Mar-A-Lago, his Florida resort, with McMaster and Keith Kellogg, the National Security Council chief of staff. “He’s a man of tremendous talent and tremendous experience,” Trump said of McMaster. “I watched and read a lot over the last two days. He is highly respected by everybody in the military and we’re very honored to have him.” In brief remarks to reporters, McMaster thanked Trump for the opportunity, and said he “looks forward to joining the national security team and doing everything I can to advance and protect the interests of the American people.” Kellogg said he felt “very honored and privileged to serve along alongside H.R. McMaster. I’ve known him for years, and he’s a great statesman and a great soldier.” “This is a great team, and we are very, very honored, and our country is lucky to have two people like this,” Trump said of Kellogg and McMaster. “And frankly, after having met so many people in the military, we are lucky to have all of them.” As soon as they finished their remarks, Trump and the two men departed for Washington. The appointment of McMaster ends a weeklong search for Flynn’s replacement that was complicated by reports of power struggles and staffing problems within the president’s National Security Council. At least one candidate for the job, retired Vice Admiral Robert Harward, reportedly declined it in part because he was concerned he would not be given full control over staffing decisions. Trump’s chief of staff, Reince Priebus, made the Sunday talk show rounds stressing that any national security adviser would be given absolute control over staff. Initial reactions to Trump’s choice of McMaster were largely positive, with former administration officials and members of Congress praising his intellect and temperament. Democratic Rep. Steve Israel (N.Y.) called McMaster “brilliant.” I worked w/ Gen.McMaster on how we educate our troops. He's a brilliant,reasoned leader who understands both hard & soft power. Good pick!— (((Steve Israel))) (@RepSteveIsrael) February 20, 2017 Former Obama administration diplomat Jared Cohen was equally approving. HR McMaster as National Security Advisor is a fantastic appointment. He is a brilliant strategist and thinker.— Jared Cohen (@JaredCohen) February 20, 2017 Paige Lavender contributed reporting. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

20 февраля, 02:21

Press Gaggle by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders, 2/19/2017

Hilton-West Palm Beach West Palm Beach, Florida   4:23 P.M. EST MS. SANDERS:  Seems very formal here.  (Laughter.)  I'll keep it pretty short today.  I'm going to walk through a couple of things and then I'll take some questions. First of all, the President has had an extremely busy day today.  He has been in a number of meetings and quite a few calls, and also a lot of staff briefings and other meetings.  A couple big ones of note that you would probably find interesting:  He did several interviews and in-depth meetings that are still ongoing as of this afternoon, talking to different candidates for the National Security Advisor position.  Among those people, as of today, that he met with:  McMaster, Bolton, Caslen and Kellogg, and we may have some additional meetings and names tomorrow, and may also meet with a couple of those people again.  There's also an in-depth meeting on Obamacare.  Secretary Price, Mulvaney, Chief of Staff Priebus, Bannon, Seema Verma, and quite a few members of the domestic policy staff also were part of that meeting.  And they discussed Obamacare repeal-and-replace strategy, and that went on for several hours.  He was not there for the entirety of the meeting.   Q    Was everyone at Mar-a-Lago? MS. SANDERS:  Yes. Q    They all flew down? MS. SANDERS:  Yes.  Q    That was all in Mar-a-Lago? MS. SANDERS:  Yes.  I do believe that a couple of the people from that group also went over to the golf club, as well, for a brief period of time.  Q    You said he wasn’t there for the whole several hours? MS. SANDERS:  Correct. Q    But for part -- MS. SANDERS:  Correct.  And remember I'll get to the questions section here momentarily. He's had several foreign leader calls today, including with the President of Panama, where they talked about U.S. investment and private sector presence.  He also did a second foreign leader call with the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, where they talked about terrorism and other security challenges, including foreign fighters being the primary point of focus on those calls.  And we'll have more detailed readouts for both of those later this evening. I know there have been quite a few questions about his comments about Sweden last night.  I'll address that now as a group so we don’t have to have 75 emails to address it.  He was talking about rise in crime and recent incidents in general, not referring to a specific issue.       Q    I'm sorry, it's going too fast.  Can you just say that again? MS. SANDERS:  Sure.  He was talking about rise in crime and recent incidents in general, and not referring to a specific incident. As I said earlier, he's going to continue several meetings throughout the evening, including additional meetings with National Security Advisor candidates. And with that, I will take your questions. Q    On Sweden, where did he get the information about the rise in crime?  Was it from that Fox segment on Friday night? MS. SANDERS:  I believe he may have seen that, but I also know there have been a number of reports of rise in crime and specific incidents that have taken place over the last several weeks. Q    And also, why then did the President specifically say "last night"? MS. SANDERS:  I don’t think that was meant to be last night.  I think he was just referring to, again, in general.  I had a chance to get that clarified, and he wasn’t speaking about a specific incident the night before, but about rise in crime in general. Q    So he misspoke? MS. SANDERS:  Well, yeah -- I think he was referring to a report he had seen the previous night that spoke specifically to that topic. Q    Was that a report from Fox News? MS. SANDERS:  I don’t know. Q    Sarah, you said that there may be more interviews tomorrow.  Can you tell us who those names would be? MS. SANDERS:  Not at this time.  We don’t have any further details on those yet. Q    And do you have any updates on his timeline for making the decision? MS. SANDERS:  I know he hopes to make it soon.  I would think in the next few days. Q    Can you clarify whether Ray Odierno is one of the potential candidates? MS. SANDERS:  We don’t have any further names to release right now. Q    There's been some reporting about a memo signed by Kelly, draft memos on new guidelines for detaining and deporting immigrants.  Can you talk at all about those?  And is there anything particular in the documents that the White House is objecting to?   MS. SANDERS:  Right now those are nothing more than draft memos.  There are still a lot of conversations that are taking place.  The final documents haven’t been completed.  And we expect that to happen in the next couple of days, and we'll roll that out at that time. Q    That's on the immigration executive order? MS. SANDERS:  Yes. Q    Or is it on the --  MS. SANDERS:  Are you talking about the travel EOs? Q    No, I was talking specifically about the guidelines signed by Kelly about deporting illegal immigrants.   MS. SANDERS:  Those are also draft EOs, both sets.  I know there have been multiple versions floating around.   Q    These are the ones about hiring more enforcement agents.   MS. SANDERS:  None of those are final and have not been signed off by the White House. Q    But are they an accurate reflection of where the policy is headed when it rises to the level where the Secretary signs it? MS. SANDERS:  Some components are.  But again, those haven’t even made it to the White House.  And so for that to be a final version is just not accurate.   Q    And just to clarify again, that's about -- MS. SANDERS:  There's multiple sets of EOs.  None of them are final.  They are all in draft form. Q    And what EOs can we expect this week? MS. SANDERS:  I don’t have any specific announcements about it at this time, but I think you can expect the travel EO -- the revised travel immigration one to be in the next couple of days. Q    Can you say a little bit more about the Obamacare meeting -- like, who all was there; specifically how long they met; what exactly they were talking about, and if they were looping in members of Congress or it was just a White House-centric strategy? MS. SANDERS:  There weren’t members of Congress that were present today.  There were a handful of domestic policy advisors from the White House, Secretary Price, Mulvaney.  I know several members of senior staff, Chief of Staff Priebus, Steve Bannon, Jared Kushner were all present for that meeting. Q    Can you tell us more what it was? MS. SANDERS:  Again, it was primarily a strategy meeting about laying out the plan to repeal and replace Obamacare. Q    Any response regarding Senator McCain's comments this morning that he's very concerned about the membership of the National Security Council, specifically Steve Bannon? MS. SANDERS:  I'm not going to respond to Senator McCain's comments. Q    When the President is interviewing these candidates for National Security Advisor, how much of this is simply about him vetting the candidates himself, getting a sense of what they bring to the position, versus the candidates seeking assurances about the ability to set their own staff and other aspects of the job? MS. SANDERS:  I think we've made it pretty clear that whoever takes this position will have full authority on the staffing component.  I know Chief of Staff Priebus addressed that this morning on the Sunday shows.  And I don’t know if there's anything further in that realm that you want to look for, but in terms of staffing they'll have full authority to make those decisions. Q    And the President indicated to us yesterday that his timeline is in a matter of days.  Beyond the interviews that are happening this weekend, is there anything that could happen at the White House?  Or could an announcement come before he leaves here? MS. SANDERS:  Your speculation on that is probably as good as mine.  I think it could be probably anytime in the next couple of days. Q    Sarah, was the President golfing this morning?  And who was he golfing with? MS. SANDERS:  I know he played a couple of holes this morning, but I'm not going to disclose any of the others that were there. Q    And yesterday as well? MS. SANDERS:  I do believe he played a couple of holes yesterday. Q    A couple as in two, or -- MS. SANDERS:  I don’t think it was a full round, if that's what you're asking. Q    And on the four names you identified, you said some meetings have happened and some additional would be tonight?  Would those be repeat? MS. SANDERS:  Some are ongoing right now while we're here. Q    Repeat meetings? MS. SANDERS:  Not repeat meetings tonight, but they're ongoing as I'm standing here. Q    So this first round of four goes into this evening? MS. SANDERS:  Yes, correct.   Q    And just to clarify, they're all face-to-face? MS. SANDERS:  Yes. Q    So they're just here at Mar-a-Lago? MS. SANDERS:  Yes, correct. Q    Four finalists -- that's it? MS. SANDERS:  As of right now.  And I said -- remember -- there could be additional names and additional meetings as early as tomorrow. Q    There have been a couple of reports about administration staffers who have been fired or left their jobs after criticizing the President.  One was at HUD; I believe it was the chief of staff.  And there's another report today about an NSC aide, Craig Deare, who left his job after harsh criticism of Trump.  Is it fair to say that -- I mean, are government employees allowed to criticize the President? MS. SANDERS:  He was just sent back to his original position, so he wasn’t fired. Q    Who -- MS. SANDERS:  Craig Deare. Q    More broadly, do government employees need to be concerned that they are not allowed to criticize the President or they can lose their job? MS. SANDERS:  Well, I don’t think that any person that is there in order to carry out the President's agenda should be against the President's agenda.  It seems pretty silly that you would have somebody that's not supportive of what you're trying to accomplish there to carry out that very thing. Q    What about somebody who in the past was against the President's agenda? MS. SANDERS:  Again, I think if you don’t support the President's agenda, it would be very hard for you to take a position where your very job is to carry out and help him accomplish that agenda.  If they're not onboard with specific pieces of his agenda -- for instance, if you didn’t want to help create jobs in the way of cutting regulations, then it would be really silly for him to bring you in to be part of like an economic task force. Q    Sarah, is this test contributing to the administration's, so far, so few jobs -- so few Senate-confirmed jobs being nominated for, whether it be deputy secretaries from a number of Cabinet agencies, below dep-sec level? MS. SANDERS:  I think one of the biggest problems that we've had is the obstruction by Democrats.  It's really hard to put in the secondary staff when you don’t have the leader in that office.  If you can't confirm a Secretary, you can't really start filling out the second and third positions in a lot of those agencies, and if, by comparison to past administrations, there's not that big of a gap between what we have and what they have at this point in time. Q    But even in terms of -- not in terms of nominees for the secretaries who are confirmed, what's the timeline then? MS. SANDERS:  Well, and a lot of those have just been confirmed over the last week.  So, again, that's a moving process, and we're continuing to add and grow staff every day. Q    What was the job that Mr. Deare was sent back to? MS. SANDERS:  I'll have to double-check, but I have it, I just don’t want to tell you the wrong thing.  I don’t have it right in front of me. Q    Has the President followed Vice President Pence's trip overseas at all?  And what's his reaction to his sort of debut on the world stage? MS. SANDERS:  He has.  And they've spoken several times over the past several days.  I know that both the Vice President and the President have talked to each other, as well as their staffs have both talked back and forth, and very happy with how everything is going so far. Q    Can you tell us more about how you would disagree with the President if you're in a position?  You said that if a person doesn’t agree with his agenda, they shouldn’t have a job.  But some people I'm sure disagree with certain policies.  How does that work? MS. SANDERS:  I'm not going to get into the back-and-forth on the variation of disagreement that you might be able to have in order to have a job.  I think the broader point here is if you don’t support the President's agenda, you shouldn’t have a job in the White House. Q    I mean, administration-wide, though, we're talking about.  Are you extending that to various department agencies? MS. SANDERS:  I'm not extending like a blanket policy here.  I just am saying that if you do not support the agenda and you're not there to help carry it through, then you shouldn’t be part of the administration.  Q    The report that the immigrant draft EO that's been going around that shows the same seven countries, but exemptions for travelers who already have a visa, is that where that policy is at right now?  Is that an accurate reflection of where you guys are going? MS. SANDERS:  Again, that's not final.  There's still a lot of moving parts there.  And until it's final, I don’t want to get into the details.   Q    On the NSC, one of the reasons that we were told that Harward didn’t want to take the job was the fact that he couldn’t bring in all of his own team. MS. SANDERS:  That's inaccurate information. Q    In these interviews, are the candidates being told they can bring on their own team?  Or are the deputies who are currently there going to stay? MS. SANDERS:  I know it's been made clear that they can bring on their own team, and so that's inaccurate information that you have. Q    So the candidates.  And how involved is Pence in Trump's interviews and deciding who the NSC director will be? MS. SANDERS:  I don’t know his specific involvement, but I know that he and the President have spoken about it. Q    Leon Panetta today said that there has been no convening of the National Security Council in the Trump White House.  Is that accurate?  MS. SANDERS:  Not to my knowledge.  I don’t believe that's accurate.  But I'll double-check and verify that for you. Q    Let me ask you, on a slightly separate topic, we're just looking to confirm a trade story that was in the Wall Street Journal that says the administration is considering changes that would make the trade gap look larger than in past years, and that it would -- one idea would include excluding from the U.S. any exports -- any items imported to the country and then transferring them to another country, like Mexico or Canada.  Can you comment on the story? MS. SANDERS:  I saw your question on that, and I'm checking it and getting clarification.  I'll let you all know once we have it. Q    Can you tell us about last night when the President attended the cancer fundraiser at Mar-a-Lago?  We weren’t told about it.  Can you tell us a little bit about it? MS. SANDERS:  He did attend.  He and the First Lady were both present at the gala.  It's something they've gone to every year, I believe for the last 10 years.  They had dinner and then stopped by the event. Q    Who did he talk to and who did he sit with there?  Is it true he sat with Prime Minister Mulroney? MS. SANDERS:  I think he talked with quite a few people there.  I believe there were over 800 attendees, and so I think he talked to quite a few of them.  I don’t know all the names of each person. Q    Prime Minister Mulroney was at his table, is that right? MS. SANDERS:  I know that they did have an exchange.  I don’t know if they were actually seated together. Q    I know Reince confirmed this morning that the White House was aware of this request from the intelligence committee to preserve documents related to Russia.  Can you describe how those efforts are underway already?  Is the White House Counsel distributing information to make sure that staff are aware of this and doing their best to preserve the documents? MS. SANDERS:  I know that there have been instructions to preserve all documents.  But specific to that, I don’t have guidance, but I can see if we have something specific for that and let you know. One more question, anybody?  Last one.  All right, she got in first.  Last one. Q    There have been a lot of reports about the number of people who are coming down to Mar-a-Lago to meet with the President, talk with the President.  Do taxpayers pay for flying everyone down here, all the NSA candidates and the people he's meeting for for the Obamacare roundtables?  And any idea how many people that would be over the last couple of weekends? MS. SANDERS:  I don’t know the exact number of people that have been here, and I don’t have a comment on the specifics of each individual travel. Q    And along the lines of Mar-a-Lago, there's been concern that people who bought membership to the club, which is now $200,000 up front, are getting special access to the President and his staff that other people don’t get.  What's the administration's response to that? MS. SANDERS:  Look, I think this President is extremely accessible to most of America.  I think that's why he went out and did a rally last night, why he did a press conference earlier this week, why he comes back on the plane and talks to you guys.  I think this is the most accessible President that I've certainly ever seen, and I don’t think that that's an issue across the board.  I think he is in touch with regular Americans every single day, and, again, is very transparent and accessible across the board. Thanks, guys. Q    Do you have a week ahead, Sarah? MS. SANDERS:  Not yet, but I think we will later tonight. Q    And tomorrow, what time is he going back? MS. SANDERS:  I don’t know yet.  I think we're waiting to see some of the meetings that may take place tomorrow. Thanks, guys. END 4:50 P.M. EST 

19 февраля, 01:30

Trump to interview candidates for national security adviser Sunday

President Donald Trump is scheduled to speak with four candidates for national security adviser on Sunday.Army strategist Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, former United Nations ambassador John Bolton, acting national security adviser Keith Kellogg and West Point superintendent Lt. Col. Robert Caslen are all under consideration, press secretary Sean Spicer said, according to a pool report. It is unclear whether Trump will speak to the candidates in person or over the phone. There are also "potentially more" candidates, Spicer added. The president is spending the weekend at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida. Former CIA director David Petraeus, who Trump interviewed for secretary of state, is out of the running to fill the spot. Spicer did not have an update on whether former Army Chief of Staff and retired Gen. Ray Odierno was still under consideration.Trump's first pick for national security adviser Michael Flynn was ousted following revelations he lied to Vice President Mike Pence about the nature of conversations he held with the Russian ambassador. Trump's second pick, Retired Vice Admiral Robert Harward, turned down an offer from the president to serve as his adviser earlier this week.

Выбор редакции
18 февраля, 01:18

US food producers slip on blowback from merger talk

Kraft Heinz-Unilever tie-up seen as negative for Mondelez, Kellogg and Campbell Soup

18 февраля, 00:56

The Most Dangerous Job in Washington

Why nobody wants to be Donald Trump’s national security adviser.

18 февраля, 00:56

The Most Dangerous Job in Washington

Why nobody wants to be Donald Trump’s national security adviser.

17 февраля, 03:45

Harward turns down Trump's national security adviser offer

Retired Vice Admiral Robert Harward has turned down an offer from President Donald Trump to be national security adviser — saying he couldn't make the commitment necessary for the job — raising new questions whether a White House in turmoil can find a permanent replacement for Michael Flynn.Harward, a former deputy to Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, was seen by many as a steadying hand after Flynn's tumultuous tenure atop the National Security Council. Flynn was ousted after he failed to tell Vice President Mike Pence about his discussion of sanctions with the Russian ambassador before Trump took office. Flynn also set off a revolt among NSC staff over some of the changes he was implementing.In a statement reported by CNN on Thursday evening, after news broke that he was passing on the job, Harward said that "since retiring, I have the opportunity to address financial and family issues that would have been challenging in this position." "Like all service members understand, and live, this job requires 24 hours a day, 7 days a week focus and commitment to do it right," Harward's statement continued. "I currently could not make that commitment. My thoughts and prayers are with those that carry such heavy burdens and responsibility for taking care of our country's national security concerns. God bless this great country of ours." But according to an individual familiar with Harward's thinking, the former Navy SEAL who served on the National Security Council under President George W. Bush turned down the Trump offer because he did not receive sufficient assurances about staffing and autonomy. Specifically, the source said Harward wanted commitments that the National Security Council would be fully in charge of security matters, not Trump's political advisers. And he wanted to be able to select his own staff. Trump's decision last month to place his top strategist and former Breitbart CEO Steve Bannon on the National Security Council was roundly criticized as a departure from tradition, and previous administrations have tried to keep the NSC as divorced from politics as possible.The individual familiar with Harward's thinking, who asked that he not be identified, cited the "unwillingness of White House political team to be deferential to the White House national security team” and "unwillingness of [the] White House political team to be malleable” as driving factors in why Harward demurred. A Trump administration official said Harward's decision to decline the offer had more to do with family commitments and his obligations to his current employer, Lockheed Martin. "He came back today and said he could not overcome either," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Mary Beth Long, a former assistant secretary of defense in the Bush administration, was soliciting resumes from people willing to work on the NSC if he took the post, according to a former Bush administration official who was not authorized to speak publicly. The first source also said that the broader appearance of a White House struggling mightily to get organized factored heavily on Harward's thinking — what the source described as "lack of command and control," a "lack of discipline," and "an unwillingness of White House political team to be malleable.” POLITICO reported Wednesday that Trump offered Harward the job on Monday and he asked for time to mull it over. The news of Harward’s decision not to accept the job was first reported by the Financial Times.The White House has maintained that Trump has a roster of other potential candidates to fill the crucial post, which is responsible for a staff of hundreds that coordinate national security policymaking with the Pentagon, State Department, and other agencies and directly advise the president. The acting national security adviser is retired Army Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, who was serving as Flynn’s chief of staff and the NSC’s executive secretary. “The president is currently evaluating a group of very strong candidates that will be considered to fill the national security adviser position permanently and is confident in the ability of General Kellogg, a decorated and distinguished veteran of the United States Army, until that person is ultimately chosen,” White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters Tuesday. Harward was a deputy commander under then Gen. Mattis at U.S. Central Command, responsible for military operations in the Middle east. He previously served as the National Security Council’s director of strategy and defense before he was assigned to the National Counterterrorism Center in 2005.Inside the National Security Council, even senior aides said confusion reigned. "I don't know anything. Nobody knows anything. I don't know who knows anything," said a senior NSC aide who added that many colleagues are beginning to fear they will be dismissed by the incoming national security adviser, whoever that may be. Daniel Lippman, Eli Stokols, Tara Palmeri, Eliana Johnson and Michael Crowley contributed to this story.

14 февраля, 17:37

Donald Trump Says Michael Flynn's Scandal Is Less Important Than Who Leaked It

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); President Donald Trump responded Tuesday to the resignation of his embattled national security adviser by saying that “the real story” is who leaked information about him to the press.  The real story here is why are there so many illegal leaks coming out of Washington? Will these leaks be happening as I deal on N.Korea etc?— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 14, 2017 Michael Flynn, a retired general, stepped down on Monday over allegations that he spoke to the Russian ambassador last year about the possibility of easing sanctions that then-President Barack Obama had placed on Russia. The conversation would have taken place before Trump took office, and it’s illegal for private citizens to engage in diplomatic talks. Earlier on Monday, The Washington Post reported that the Department of Justice had previously warned the White House about Flynn’s relationship to Russia. Retired Lt. Gen. Joseph Keith Kellogg Jr. will serve as acting national security advisor until Trump appoints a replacement. Trump’s attitude toward Russia has also come under scrutiny, particularly in the wake of revelations that Russian President Vladimir Putin likely ordered his intelligence agencies to hack the U.S. presidential election. Trump has shied away from blaming Russia for hacking Democrats. The U.S. president also recently defended Putin over the alleged murders of his political opponents, saying, “we’ve got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country’s so innocent?” -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

14 февраля, 10:28

Why Donald Trump let Michael Flynn go

Inside Donald Trump's national security adviser's final days in the White House.

14 февраля, 10:12

Kellogg replaces Flynn as Trump seeks national security successor

Keith Kellogg will guide Trump through his first White House crisis, but Robert Harward could calm things down.

14 февраля, 08:55

How Sally Yates May Have Gotten The Ball Rolling On Michael Flynn's Resignation

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump’s embattled national security adviser, resigned late Monday after coming under fire for privately discussing U.S. sanctions against Russia before the presidential inauguration. The revelation, first reported by The Washington Post on Thursday, drew widespread criticism, but Flynn’s fall may have started with a separate casualty of the Trump administration: Sally Yates, the acting attorney general who was fired by the president last month. Near the end of her short tenure at the head of the Justice Department, Yates reportedly informed the White House that Flynn may have misled senior officials about his calls with the Russian ambassador, according to reports from The Post, which cited unnamed officials: The acting attorney general informed the Trump White House late last month that she believed Michael Flynn had misled senior administration officials about the nature of his communications with the Russian ambassador to the United States, and warned that the national security adviser was potentially vulnerable to Russian blackmail, current and former U.S. officials said. The message, delivered by Sally Q. Yates and a senior career national security official to the White House counsel, was prompted by concerns that Flynn, when asked about his calls and texts with the Russian diplomat, had told Vice ­President-elect Mike Pence and others that he had not discussed the Obama administration sanctions on Russia for its interference in the 2016 election, the officials said. It is unclear what the White House counsel, Donald McGahn, did with the information. Those concerns were later echoed by James Clapper, President Barack Obama’s former director of national intelligence, and John Brennan, the former director of the CIA. Yates made headlines at the end of January after announcing the Justice Department would refuse to defend Trump’s controversial executive order on immigration. She was fired within hours, and the White House released a strongly worded statement saying she had “betrayed” the administration. Yates was widely praised for her decision. Former U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said she “displayed the fierce intellect, unshakeable integrity, and deep commitment to the rule of law that have characterized her 27 years of distinguished service to the Department of Justice,” and former Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) tweeted, “Thank God there are people who will follow the Constitution.” Others called Yates a “profile in courage.” Retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg Jr. will serve as acting national security adviser until a full-time replacement is chosen. Four veteran strategists, including Kellogg, have already been suggested to fill the post. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

14 февраля, 07:31

The Resignation of Michael Flynn

President Trump’s national security adviser quit on Monday night after acknowledging he had misled Vice President Mike Pence about his conversations with the Russian ambassador.

14 февраля, 07:11

President Donald J. Trump Names Lt. General Joseph Keith Kellogg, Jr. as Acting National Security Advisor

President Donald J. Trump has named Lt. General Joseph Keith Kellogg, Jr. (Ret) as Acting National Security Advisor following the resignation of Lt. General Michael Flynn (Ret).  General Kellogg is a decorated veteran of the United States Army, having served from 1967 to 2003, including two tours during the Vietnam War, where he earned the Silver Star, the Bronze Star with “V” device, and the Air Medal with “V” device.  He served as the Commander of the 82nd Airborne Division from 1997 to 1998.  Prior to his retirement, General Kellogg was Director of the Command, Control, Communications, and Computers Directorate under the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The full text of General Flynn’s resignation letter is below: February 13, 2017 In the course of my duties as the incoming National Security Advisor, I held numerous phone calls with foreign counterparts, ministers, and ambassadors. These calls were to facilitate a smooth transition and begin to build the necessary relationships between the President, his advisors and foreign leaders. Such calls are standard practice in any transition of this magnitude. Unfortunately, because of the fast pace of events, I inadvertently briefed the Vice President Elect and others with incomplete information regarding my phone calls with the Russian Ambassador. I have sincerely apologized to the President and the Vice President, and they have accepted my apology. Throughout my over thirty three years of honorable military service, and my tenure as the National Security Advisor, I have always performed my duties with the utmost of integrity and honesty to those I have served, to include the President of the United States. I am tendering my resignation, honored to have served our nation and the American people in such a distinguished way. I am also extremely honored to have served President Trump, who in just three weeks, has reoriented American foreign policy in fundamental ways to restore America's leadership position in the world. As I step away once again from serving my nation in this current capacity, I wish to thank President Trump for his personal loyalty, the friendship of those who I worked with throughout the hard fought campaign, the challenging period of transition, and during the early days of his presidency. I know with the strong leadership of President Donald J. Trump and Vice President Mike Pence and the superb team they are assembling, this team will go down in history as one of the greatest presidencies in U.S. history, and I firmly believe the American people will be well served as they all work together to help Make America Great Again. Michael T. Flynn, LTG (Ret) Assistant to the President / National Security Advisor

14 февраля, 07:05

Donald Trump’s National Security Adviser Michael Flynn Resigns

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); WASHINGTON ― National security adviser Michael Flynn resigned late Monday, following revelations that he discussed U.S. sanctions against Russia with that country’s ambassador in the days surrounding their imposition ― and weeks prior to Donald Trump’s inauguration. Retired Lt. Gen. Joseph Keith Kellogg Jr. will serve as acting national security advisor until a full-time replacement is named, the White House announced. Kellogg, as well as Vice Adm. Robert Harward and retired Gen. David Petraeus are the three candidates in line to succeed Flynn, according to the administration. Flynn’s resignation came after a tumultuous few days of revelations about his ties to Russia and his role in attempting to ease sanctions that were put in place weeks before the Trump administration took office.  In late December, President Barack Obama announced the sanctions, which included the expulsion of 35 Russian intelligence operatives, in response to Russian interference in the November election designed to help Trump win. Flynn at first denied that he had discussed the sanctions when he spoke with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. He said the conversations concerned setting up a phone call between Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin and offering condolences after the murder of a Russian diplomat in Turkey. But following a Washington Post report ― based partially on transcripts of the conversations ― Flynn’s office revised his earlier statements, and said that he couldn’t recall whether the topic of sanctions had come up. On Monday night, the plot thickened, with The Washington Post reporting that top officials at the Department of Justice warned the Trump administration weeks ago that Flynn might have been compromised by Russian influences and The New York Times reporting that the Army had investigated whether Flynn received payments from the Russian government in 2015. As the revelations have piled up, the question has turned to why the Trump administration didn’t act sooner to sever ties. Trump has faced his own criticism for being too cozy to Russia. When Putin’s response to Obama’s sanctions was uncharacteristically subdued, for example, Trump praised the Russian leader for his savvy. (Putin did not respond by expelling suspected American intelligence agents as is normally done, and instead said he hoped relations would improve after Trump took office.) Trump also has been loathe to concede the Russian actors played a role in the 2016 elections, even though U.S. counterintelligence agencies concluded in October that Russia and WikiLeaks ― which many in the intelligence community believe is a mouthpiece for Russian spy agencies ― were trying to interfere. A follow-up report released Jan. 9 added that Russia had been actively trying to help Trump and hurt his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton. Flynn, like Trump, has advocated a closer relationship with Russia as an ally in the fight against Islamic terrorism. He appeared at an awards dinner honoring the Kremlin-sponsored RT network in 2015, at which he was seated beside Putin. A retired Army lieutenant general, Flynn was considered an accomplished intelligence field officer but was fired from his job running the Defense Intelligence Agency in the Obama administration in 2014. In 2015, he began supporting Trump’s primary campaign, and was a featured speaker at the Republican National Convention last summer, when he led the crowd in chants of “lock her up,” regarding Clinton. For this advocacy on the trail, Flynn enjoyed a tight relationship with Trump and got the plum foreign policy position in his administration when the election was over. Other Republican foreign policy operatives hesitated to work for him, making staffing inside the White House all the more difficult. But Trump remained committed, confounding others inside the administration who saw Flynn as toxic. As recently as a few hours before the resignation was announced, White House counsel Kellyanne Conway had said that Flynn enjoyed the “full confidence of the president.” That, clearly, turned out not to be true. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

02 сентября 2014, 04:21

10 компаний контролирующих мировую пищевую индустрию

  В сельском хозяйстве и пищевой промышленности занято более одного миллиарда человек в мире или треть всей рабочей силы. И хоть данный сектор играет ключевую роль в жизни человечества, как это ни парадоксально, его контролируют крайне небольшое число транснациональных компаний. Согласно докладу компании Oxfam International, 10 компаний, специализирующихся на производстве продуктов питания и напитков, могут формировать продуктовую корзину большей части населения планеты, влиять на их условия труда, а также окружающую среду.  Associated British Foods Выручка: $21,1 млрд Расходы на рекламу: неизвестно Прибыль: $837 млн Сотрудники: 112,6 тыс. Штаб-квартира: Лондон, Великобритания  Associated British Foods – это британская компания-производитель продуктов питания, которой удалось выстроить глобальную сеть с помощью приобретений. В результате постоянного прироста за счет покупки новых компаний, Associated British Foods производит практически все виды продовольствия, начиная от сахара, заканчивая кукурузным маслом и чаем. ABF один из основных поставщиков важных пищевых ингредиентов, в том числе эмульгаторов, ферментов и лактозы.   Coca-Cola Сo. Выручка: $46,9 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $3,0 млрд Прибыль: $8,6 млрд Сотрудники: 130,6 тыс. Штаб-квартира: тланта, Джорджия, США  Coca-Cola является одним из самых дорогих брендов в мире. Совокупный объем продаж в 2013 финансовом году в стоимостном выражении превысил отметку $47 млрд. Coca-Cola Сo. крупнейший мировой производитель и поставщик концентратов, сиропов и безалкогольных напитков. Крупнейшим акционером этой компании является фонд Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (8,61%), контролируемый легендарным инвестором Уорреном Баффетом.   Groupe Danone Выручка: $29,3 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $1,2 млрд Прибыль: $2,0 млрд Сотрудники: 104,6 тыс. Штаб-квартира: Париж, Франция  Французская компания Groupe Danone имеет обладает колоссальным присутствием в во всем мире. Его крупнейшим рынком, по объемам продаж, является Россия, далее следуют Франция, США, Китай и Индонезия. Компания является крупнейшим в мире продавцом свежих молочных продуктов, больше половины от всего объема продаж данной продукции в мире в 2013 году пришлось на Groupe Danone.   General Mills Выручка: $17,9 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $1,1 млрд Прибыль: $1,8 млрд Сотрудники: 43 тыс./LI] Штаб-квартира: Голден-Вэлли, Миннесота, США  Компания General Mills владеет рядом одних из наиболее известных американских брендов, таких как Pillsbury, Colombo Yogurt, Betty Crocker, «Зеленный великан». Производственные мощности компании размещены в 15 странах, однако, продукция реализуется более чем в 100. Полоска продукции компании невероятно широкая : хлопья для завтрака, йогурт, замороженное тесто, консервированные супы, пицца, мороженое, соевые продукты, овощи, мука и др.   Kellogg Выручка: $14,8 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $1,1 млрд Прибыль: $1,8 млрд Сотрудники: 30,2 тысячи Штаб-квартира: Батл-Крик, Мичиган, США  Американская компания Kellogg зарабатывает меньше всех среди пищевых гигантов, по итогам 2013 года объем выручки составил лишь $15 млрд. Kellogg является одним из крупнейших в мире хлебообработчиков и производителей печенья. Компания специализируется на производстве сухих завтраков и продуктов питания быстрого приготовления.   Mars Выручка: $33,0 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $2,2 млрд Прибыль: нет данных Сотрудники: 75 тыс. Штаб-квартира: Маклин, Виргиния, США  Из всех компаний, представленных в данном списке, Mars –единственная, которая находится в частной собственности. Mars владеет такими "шоколадными" брендами, как M&Ms, Milky Way, Snickers и Twix. Компания владеет продовольственными брендами, такими как Uncle Ben's, а также производителем жевательных резинок и конфет Wrigley.   Mondelez Выручка: $35,3 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $1,9 млрд Прибыль: $3,9 млрд Сотрудники: 107 тысяч Штаб-квартира: Дирфилд, Иллинойс, США  Компания Mondelez появилась в результате разделения пищевого гиганта Kraft Foods. Во время разделения мировые бренды (Oreo, TUC, Cadbury, Milka, Alpen Gold, Jacobs) достались Mondelez, вто время как американские - Kraft Foods Group. По итогам прошлого года, выручка компании составила $35 млрд выручки при капитализации более чем $72 млрд.   Nestle Выручка: $103,5 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $3,0 млрд Прибыль: $11,2 млрд Сотрудники: 333 тыс. Штаб-квартира: Веве, Швейцария  Nestle по всем показателям является крупнейшей пищевой компанией в мире. Выручка компании за прошлый год составила 92 млрд швейцарских франков. Компания производит растворимый кофе, минеральную воду, шоколад, мороженое, бульоны, молочные продукты, детское питание, корм для домашних животных, фармацевтическую продукцию и косметику. Более 2000 товарных знаков на 461 фабрике в 83 странах мира.   PepsiCo Выручка: $66,4 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $2,5 млрд Прибыль: $6,7 млрд Сотрудники: 274 тыс. Штаб-квартира: Пёрчейз, Нью-Йорк, США  Помимо известных "содовых" брендов, PepsiCo владеет рядом продуктовых торговых марок, таких как Tostitos, Doritos, Quaker. Более того, компания является крупнейшим рекламодателем в мире, расходы компании в этой области в 2012 году превысили $2,5 млрд.   История вопроса Выручка: $68,5 млрд Расходы на рекламу: $7,4 млрд Прибыль: $6,7 млрд Сотрудники: 174,3 тысячи Штаб-квартира: Лондон, Великобритания и Роттердам, Голландия  Unilever трудно назвать пищевой компанией, так как большую часть ее прдуктовой линейки представляют средства личной гигиены и бытовая химия. Однако, на еду и напитки проходится более трети выручки. По итогом прошлого года выручка компании составила 50 млрд евро. Компания владеет такими брендами, как Lipton, Brooke Bond, Calve, Rama, Creme Bonjour и другие.