WASHINGTON—Ahead of St. Patrick's Day, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) hosted President Trump and the Taoiseach of Ireland, Leo Varadkar, for the annual Friends of Ireland Luncheon, a tradition that dates back to 1983. Following are Speaker Ryan's remarks, as prepared for delivery: I want to begin by welcoming the Taoiseach. Leo, this is one of our most precious traditions. We come together to honor those known for the gifts of blarney and tall tales…which, in this town, means everybody. As with most things Irish, this all began with a good scrap. Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill were fierce political opponents. But their heritage was their bond. When it came to Ireland, the only thing they’d argue about was who was more Irish. Reagan was so committed to winning he would say he was old enough to have actually met Saint Patrick. With a name like Ryan, it is a personal privilege to carry on this tradition. Our family traces its roots back to County Kilkenny, to the town of Graiguenamanagh. My wife and I took our kids over there just a few years back. The whole town came out. It was grand. Well, my cousin William O’Shea drove there, and he couldn’t find a parking spot. Finally, he got so frustrated that he prayed, ‘Lord, if you open a space up for me, I swear I’ll give up drinking whiskey, and I promise to go to church every Sunday.’ Suddenly, the clouds parted, and the sun shone on an empty space. Without hesitation, he said, ‘Never mind Lord, I found one.’ Leo, for you, this is actually ‘welcome back’ to the Capitol. You were an intern here not too many years ago, and now you are the guest of honor. That is just incredible. I, too, started as an intern here. Though this is not all that different from being an intern, right? Politicians go on and on, and you hope to get a free meal out of it. The good news is, we have Guinness. Now, the Guinness does taste better in Ireland. But I realize this probably isn’t the right year to bring up trade issues… America’s Irish ties really are as strong as ever. The Speaker is Irish. The Senate Majority Leader is Scots-Irish. And a Kennedy may run for president. So many members of the president’s administration are Irish too. Think about it: Pence, Kelly, Mulvaney… O’Mnuchin……FitzMattis… All this really means is that our meetings start twice as late…last twice as long…and only half the decisions get made. But on a serious note… Before Notre Dame was known as the ‘Fighting Irish,’ that name belonged to the U.S. Army’s 69th Infantry Regiment. They say Lincoln was so moved by the bravery of this brigade, that on a visit to the battlefield, he picked up a corner of the Irish flag, kissed it, and said, “God bless the Irish flag.” God bless the Irish people, too. The Irish people, in the spirit of the great St. Patrick, have always turned the darkness into light, and hardship into hope. They were our friends when we were friendless, defenders of our union when we were divided. The Irish came here in search of a better life, and made this a better country. With their faith and their passion. A people of gentle hearts, and strong roots. In these times, as we strive to secure peace and opportunity, the friendship of the Irish remains our anchor in the choppiest waters. And so I would like to offer a toast: May the winds of fortune sail you, May you sail the gentlest sea. May it always be the other guy or gal Who says, ‘This drink is on me.’ Sláinte.
Forgive us if you've heard this one before. For at least the third time in the past month, a respected national media organization has published a story claiming that President Trump's legal team is leaning toward advising their client to sit for an interview - albeit with certain restrictions - with Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Today's report, published by Politico, bore certain similarities to a story published by the Wall Street Journal last week. Last month, the New York Times reported that Trump's lawyers were pushing Mueller to accept written answers - a solution reminiscent of Ronald Reagan's handling of the Iran-Contra scandal. One of Politico's sources said the negotiations were "moving fast", and that an interview could be arranged soon. Of course, we've heard that one before. "I don’t think it’s months and months out. I don’t think it’s in a week," said the person familiar with the negotiations. "But I think it’s moving toward closure." Given Trump's litigious reputation, one might expect the president to be comfortable during interviews and depositions of this nature. However, his legal team is worried that what Politico characterizes as the president's "improvisational nature" could lead to Trump accidentally uttering a falsehood, potentially drawing a perjury charge from Mueller. Trump is hardly a stranger to legal proceedings: In one 2012 deposition, according to the Atlantic, Trump said he had participated in more than 100 depositions. But that doesn’t mean Trump is always well-prepared to field complex legal questions under oath. During a 2016 deposition tied to his lawsuit against a chef who backed out of a deal to open a restaurant at Trump’s Washington D.C. hotel, Trump was asked what he did to prepare for the hearing. "I would say virtually nothing," he replied. "I spoke with my counsel for a short period of time. I just arrived here, and we proceeded to the deposition." Trump added that he didn’t study any documents beforehand. Before any interview, Trump and his lawyers must complete their sensitive negotiations with Mueller over its terms. Among other things, Trump’s lawyers have argued that the burden is on Mueller to show his investigation can’t be completed without an interview with the president. They have also studied the feasibility of answering questions in writing, as President Ronald Reagan did during the Iran-Contra scandal. And they have made clear their resistance to Mueller questioning Trump more than once. To mitigate these risks, Trump's lawyers are seeking clear boundaries for the topics discussed, and the NYT has even reported that Trump's lawyers were seeking assurances that, should Trump agree to a sit-down, Mueller would see to it that the probe concludes before a given date. Trump's legal team should already have a clear picture of what Mueller intends to ask: Thanks to his documents requests, Mueller is interested in a broad range of topics from Trump’s firing of FBI director James Comey to how he responded to the theft and leaks of Democratic emails during the 2016 presidential campaign. "It’s a tug of war both internally and probably with Mueller," said a senior Republican who recently met with the president. "The end goal for the White House is to get as narrow a discussion as can be possibly negotiated including maybe just answering written questions like Reagan." Then again, we've also heard reports to the contrary: The NYT's Maggie Haberman published a report earlier this month about Trump's growing frustration with his legal team - drawing a tweeted rebuke from the president. Some legal experts objected to the idea that Mueller might agree to a predetermined end-date for the probe. Solomon Wisenberg, a former deputy on Kenneth Starr's independent counsel investigation into President Bill Clinton, said that idea would be a non-starter for Mueller. "That’s bullshit," he said. "You accommodate the president but you don’t change the rules for him in a substantive way." Notably, one anonymous Trump associate who spoke with Politico confirmed an idea that we first highlighted following the initial reports about the behind-the-scenes bargaining: That is, the notion that Trump's legal team is using these media reports as a ploy to convince Trump that they at least tried to strike a deal with Mueller. As one strategist points out, Trump's legal team has crafted a "win-win" scenario for itself. "It's a strategy by the lawyers," the defense attorney said. "Either Mueller will agree to the terms in some fashion, and at least they get something out of it, or he won't and then they can convince the president not to sit for the interview." ...Sounds like a pretty good deal to us. The House Intelligence Committee announced last week that it would be ending its collusion probe - to the horror of the committee's Democrats, who have pledged to issue a dissenting report.
Ларри Кадлоу заменит Гэри Кона, который подал в отставку после возникновения разногласий с президентом США из-за высоких пошлин на сталь и алюминий.
But it's not clear how much an improvisational president can be scripted before a possible meeting with special counsel Robert Mueller.
Paul Manafort, the former Trump campaign chairman, has added another former federal prosecutor and tax fraud expert to his legal defense team, while his onetime deputy Rick Gates was rebuffed on Wednesday in a request for extra freedoms after pleading guilty and cooperating with special counsel Robert Mueller.Manafort, who is facing the prospect of fighting Mueller’s prosecutors in two separate trials, has hired Richard Westling, according to a document filed on Wednesday in a U.S. District Court.Westling’s online biography at the law firm Epstein Becker Green emphasizes his experience in health care compliance issues but also notes that he has nearly 30 years dealing with a range of white-collar defense issues. He worked for more than eight years at the Justice Department, including as an assistant U.S. attorney in New Orleans and as a trial attorney in the tax division’s criminal section.Manafort is scheduled to go to trial — on charges of money laundering and failing to register as a foreign agent — on Sept. 17 in Washington. But it’s also possible a Manafort trial in Alexandria, Virginia, involving bank and tax fraud charges could be set sooner because the court is known for its “rocket docket.”The judge in the Virginia case, T.S. Ellis III, said in an order made public on Tuesday that Manafort must remain on a “24-hour-a-day lockdown” at his Alexandria condo, except for medical appointments or emergencies, court appearances and meeting with his defense attorneys.“The defendant is a person of great wealth who has the financial means and international connections to flee and remain at large, as well as every incentive to do so,” wrote Ellis, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, adding that “given the nature of the charges against the defendant and the apparent weight of the evidence against him, defendant faces the very real possibility of spending the rest of his life in prison.”Manafort’s legal team already includes two attorneys with tax expertise: former federal prosecutors Kevin Downing and Thomas Zehnle. In a separate ruling on Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson rejected Gates’ request to remove the electronic GPS monitoring device that he’s been forced to wear since October after his indictment alongside Manafort.Gates pleaded guilty in February to Mueller’s charges and agreed to cooperate with the Russia investigation. Because of that cooperation, Mueller’s attorneys had consented to Gates’ request to lose the GPS device.But Jackson wasn’t convinced, noting in her three-page ruling that Gates’ “change of heart is quite recent” and that he’s also pleaded guilty to lying to Mueller during a special “Queen for a Day” interview in which defendants are typically allowed to speak freely without facing more criminal charges.Jackson did accept Gates’ request to end court-imposed restrictions on his travel from his home in Richmond, Virginia, for meetings with Mueller or the FBI in Washington.
U.S. television commentator and conservative economic analyst Larry Kudlow will replace Gary Cohn as President Donald Trump's top economic adviser, the White House and Kudlow said on Wednesday, adding another loyalist to Trump's inner circle. Kudlow, a Republican who served as an economic adviser to former President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s and also worked on Wall Street, is an ardent advocate of "supply side" economic policies that focus on cutting taxes and reducing regulations.
**Should-Read**: **Dani Rodrik**: [Trump’s Trade Gimmickry](https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/trump-tariffs-trade-gimmickry-by-dani-rodrik-2018-03): "The imbalances and inequities generated by the global economy cannot be tackled by protecting a few politically well-connected industries, using manifestly ridiculous national security considerations as an excuse... >...Trump’s trade measures to date amount to small potatoes. In particular, they pale in comparison to the scale and scope of the protectionist policies of President Ronald Reagan’s administration in the 1980s. Reagan raised tariffs and tightened restrictions on a wide range of industries, including textiles, automobiles, motorcycles, steel, lumber, sugar, and electronics. He famously pressured Japan to accept “voluntary” restraints on car exports. He imposed 100% tariffs on selected Japanese electronics products when Japan allegedly failed to keep exported microchip prices high.... >Trump’s protectionism may well have very different consequences; history need not repeat itself. For one thing, even though their overall impact remains limited, Trump’s trade restrictions have more of a unilateral, in-your-face quality.... The voluntary export restraints (VERs) of the 1980s in autos and steel, for example, were administered by the exporting countries. This allowed Japanese and European companies to collude in raising their export prices for the US market.... Another contrast with the Reagan-era measures is that we are living in a...
**Should-Read**: **Bill McBride**: [Larry Kudlow is usually wrong...](http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2018/03/larry-kudlow-is-usually-wrong.html) "...and frequently absurd, as an example, in June 2005 Kudlow wrote... >..."The Housing Bears are Wrong Again" (link has been replaced) and called me (or people like me) "bubbleheads": >>Homebuilders led the stock parade this week with a fantastic 11 percent gain. This is a group that hedge funds and bubbleheads love to hate. All the bond bears have been dead wrong in predicting sky-high mortgage rates. So have all the bubbleheads who expect housing-price crashes in Las Vegas or Naples, Florida, to bring down the consumer, the rest of the economy, and the entire stock market. >I guess I was one of those "bubbleheads"! In December 2007, he wrote: Bush Boom Continues: >>There’s no recession coming. The pessimistas were wrong. It’s not going to happen. At a bare minimum, we are looking at Goldilocks 2.0. (And that’s a minimum). Goldilocks is alive and well. The Bush boom is alive and well. It’s finishing up its sixth consecutive year with more to come. Yes, it’s still the greatest story never told.... >In 2014, Kudlow claimed: "I've always believed the 1990s were Ronald Reagan's third term." In that piece, Kudlow was rewriting his...
The president tapped the CNBC contributor to be his top economic adviser Tuesday night, a week after Gary Cohn announced his resignation.
30 лет назад, 8 декабря 1987 года в Вашингтоне руководители СССР Михаил Горбачев и США Рональд Рейган подписали бессрочный «Договор между Союзом Советских Социалистических Республик и Соединенными Штатами Америки о ликвидации их ракет средней дальности и меньшей дальности» В вашем браузере не установлен плагин для просмотра PDF-файлов, но вы можете скачать этот файл и просмотреть на своем ПК 14.03.2018 Tweet март 2018
‘The way it was described to me is she approached the whole thing like it was ‘The Apprentice,’ Kay Coles James said.
A federal appeals court on Tuesday formally overturned nearly all of an injunction that a U.S. District Court judge issued last year against a Texas immigration law aimed at blocking local governments in the state from adopting so-called sanctuary policies.The ruling from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was not a surprise, because that court issued a stay last September allowing the bulk of the Texas law, known as Senate Bill 4, to take effect. However, the decisions came from two separate three-judge panels of the appeals court.The new decision largely tracked with the earlier stay, finding legally problematic only one part of the Texas law that prohibited local officials from taking any steps to “endorse” a sanctuary policy.Lawyers for the state proposed a narrow reading of that provision, but the appeals court rejected that reading and held that portion of the law likely unconstitutional.“As written, SB4 proscribes core political speech when such ‘endorsement’ is uttered by elected officials,” Judge Edith Jones wrote. “The state cannot regulate the substance of elected officials’ speech under the First Amendment without passing the strict scrutiny test.”Even in that regard, however, the 5th Circuit narrowed the impact of the injunction, barring the state only from enforcing the law against elected officials. The appeals judges suggested the provision might be constitutional as applied to subordinate employees.Some language in the 5th Circuit opinion could also influence an ongoing debate about immigration detainers and local officials’ authority to comply with such requests to hold foreigners so they can be turned over to immigration officers.Some courts have suggested that local police officers or sheriffs who hold on to individuals in order to comply with detainers may be violating the Constitution because those detainers are not based on a probable-cause determination by a judge.But the conservative 5th Circuit panel said the District Court judge handling the case “erred” when he said local officers needed to have probable cause to believe a person subject to a detainer had committed a criminal offense.“Courts have upheld many statutes that allow seizures absent probable cause that a crime has been committed,” wrote Jones, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan. “The District Court’s contention is also patently at odds with immigration law and procedure; civil removal proceedings necessarily contemplate detention absent proof of criminality.”The appeals court’s language could help the Trump administration undercut sanctuary laws and ordinances by bolstering legal arguments that immigration detainers are a valid basis for local officials to detain foreigners at federal request.However, one immigration law expert said the impact of the 5th Circuit ruling on the acceptance of detainers will be limited because the ruling doesn't foreclose the possibility that some detainers could be an inadequate legal basis to hold someone."Even if following detainers are not unconstitutional in all circumstances, they can be in some," University of Buffalo law professor Rick Su said. "The federal government is now asserting that their detainers are supported by administrative warrants certifying probable cause of removability, but there is no guarantee that they will abide by this limitation in all circumstances and forever, or that they will be certifying correctly on sufficient evidence."The Trump administration backed the validity of the Texas law in the lawsuits, which were brought by local officials and governments.Attorney General Jeff Sessions hailed the appeals court ruling Tuesday."Today's decision is an important step in restoring legality to our immigration system, which is what President Trump wants, what the American people deserve, and what the laws passed by Congress are intended to achieve," Sessions said in a statement. "It is a judicial victory that will better enable federal, state, and local law enforcement to protect all Americans from criminal aliens who have harmed countless innocent Americans and should be removed from our country.”Jones’ opinion was joined by Judges Jerry Smith and Edward Prado. Smith is a Reagan appointee. Prado was appointed by President George W. Bush.
With all the discussion that Larry Kudlow might be named the new director of the White House's National Economic Council, I've been asked to repost a post I wrote in 2016 "Larry Kudlow is usually wrong". On Kudlow, see from Bloomberg: Trump Says Kudlow Has ‘Very Good Chance’ at Taking Cohn’s Job and CNN Trump tells people he is selecting Larry Kudlow to replace Gary CohnMost of the following is a repeat of the 2016 post ...Larry Kudlow is usually wrong and frequently absurd, as an example, in June 2005 Kudlow wrote "The Housing Bears are Wrong Again" (link has been replaced) and called me (or people like me) "bubbleheads".Homebuilders led the stock parade this week with a fantastic 11 percent gain. This is a group that hedge funds and bubbleheads love to hate. All the bond bears have been dead wrong in predicting sky-high mortgage rates. So have all the bubbleheads who expect housing-price crashes in Las Vegas or Naples, Florida, to bring down the consumer, the rest of the economy, and the entire stock market.I guess I was one of those "bubbleheads"!In December 2007, he wrote: Bush Boom ContinuesThere’s no recession coming. The pessimistas were wrong. It’s not going to happen. At a bare minimum, we are looking at Goldilocks 2.0. (And that’s a minimum). Goldilocks is alive and well. The Bush boom is alive and well. It’s finishing up its sixth consecutive year with more to come. Yes, it’s still the greatest story never told.Note the date of the article. The recession started in December 2007! Note: At the beginning of 2007 I predicted a recession would start that year - made it by one month. It seems I'm always on the opposite side from Kudlow of each forecast - and one of us has been consistently wrong.In 2014, Kudlow claimed: "I've always believed the 1990s were Ronald Reagan's third term."In that piece, Kudlow was rewriting his own history. Near the beginning of Clinton's first term, Kudlow was arguing Clinton's policies would take the economy into a deep recession or even depression. Kudlow was wrong then (I remember because I was on the other side of that debate), so he can't claim he "always believed" now. Nonsense.Also in 2007, right before the crash during President George W. Bush's 2nd term, Kudlow wrote: A Stock Market Vote of Confidence for Bush:"I have long believed that stock markets are the best barometer of the health, wealth and security of a nation. And today's stock market message is an unmistakable vote of confidence for the president."Well, maybe Kudlow had a point ... about President Obama!Now Larry Kudlow might be the new director of the White House's National Economic Council. Oh my.
Paul Manafort, the former Trump campaign chairman, runs a significant risk of spending the rest of his life in prison and the evidence against him by special counsel Robert Mueller’s office seems strong, a federal judge declared in an order made public on Tuesday.U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III, who is based in Alexandria, Virginia, and is assigned to a newly filed indictment against Manafort dealing with bank fraud and tax evasion, said the veteran lobbyist and political consultant posed “a substantial risk of flight” because of his assets and the gravity of his legal predicament.“The defendant is a person of great wealth who has the financial means and international connections to flee and remain at large, as well as every incentive to do so,” Ellis wrote in an order setting the terms of what the judge called “home incarceration” for Manafort, 68, who lives in Alexandria but also has homes in Florida and on Long Island.“Given the nature of the charges against the defendant and the apparent weight of the evidence against him, defendant faces the very real possibility of spending the rest of his life in prison,” wrote Ellis, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan.The order, dated Friday, puts Manafort in a “24-hour-a-day lockdown” at his Alexandria condo, except for medical appointments or emergencies, court appearances and meeting with his defense attorneys. Ellis did not require Manafort to post any assets, but did order that he pay $10 million if he fails to appear in court.Manafort’s conditions of release are now subject to approval by two judges, with the result that the once high-flying international consultant is now wearing two bracelets to allow his movements to be tracked by GPS.Last October, a grand jury in Washington, acting at the request of Mueller’s team, returned an indictment charging Manafort with money laundering and failing to register as a foreign agent in connection with his work for Ukraine. Last month, in Alexandria, Mueller’s team obtained a second indictment of Manafort on 18 tax, bank fraud and bank fraud conspiracy charges.Mueller’s office said that it gave Manafort the option of facing a consolidated case in Washington but that he declined, insisting on his right to be charged with the new counts in the district where they were committed.Under federal sentencing guidelines, Manafort faces up to nearly 20 years in prison in the Washington case and up to about 10 years solely on the tax charges in the Virginia case if convicted, prosecutors said in a court filing last month.Each of the nine bank fraud or bank fraud conspiracy charges he faces in the Alexandria court carries a maximum sentence of up to 30 years in prison, although judges generally follow the guidelines, which typically call for sentences well below the maximum.During a hearing on Thursday, Ellis suggested that he was willing to loosen the limits on Manafort’s freedom if he pledged property sufficient to assure his appearance in court.Manafort made just such an effort again in the Washington court on Monday, filing a sealed motion listing a series of properties he will put up to try to get released from home confinement. U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, has rejected prior offers from Manafort, saying that it was not clear that the available value in the properties after any mortgages amounted to the $10 million figure she is seeking.
These popular celebrities dared to show off some skin, despite being older than 40 years old.
Michael Auslin Security, Asia Trump’s bold gamble is as much a diplomatic breakthrough as it is strategically risky. The White House is warning against inflated expectations over the proposed summit between President Donald Trump and North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un. The surprise announcement that Trump had accepted the invitation from Pyongyang to hold the first-ever summit between the leaders of the United States and North Korea stunned everyone from war hawks to peace advocates. Trump’s bold gamble, however, is as much a diplomatic breakthrough as it is strategically risky. Above all, the administration must guard against the summit turning into a Korean Reykjavik, where Trump finds irresistible a dramatic grand bargain to solve the North Korean crisis. Such a move could wind up harming U.S. interests more than continued stalemate. On the face of it, of course, the North Korean offer seems a victory for Trump’s hard line. Some may even claim that it vindicates his widely derided “mad man” theory of diplomacy. To be sure, the administration’s successful implementation of harsh sanctions appears to have changed the North’s calculus, and reports that it is running low on foreign reserves suggests why Kim may have made his invitation. Yet anyone who has watched the sad history of U.S. interaction with North Korea knows that Pyongyang always plays a multi-layer game while Washington focuses narrowly on one goal. Pyongyang’s newest gambit may just as easily be a prelude to a further surprise: the unveiling of a tempting grand solution to the Korean peninsula crisis, possibly dropped into the middle of the talks between the two leaders. It might be hard for Trump to resist such an offer. When Ronald Reagan met Mikhail Gorbachev at Reykjavik, Iceland, in October 1986, their talks quickly ballooned into a truly historic proposal for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons. The fact that an agreement faltered on the rocks of Reagan’s cherished Strategic Defense Initiative does not minimize just how close the two sides came to committing themselves to a plan neither had fully thought out. Read full article
President Donald Trump said Tuesday he is looking "very strongly" at financial analyst Larry Kudlow to replace Gary Cohn as his top economic adviser, citing Kudlow's support for utilizing trade tariffs as a negotiating tactic with other countries as an appealing factor in the decision. "I'm looking at Larry Kudlow very strongly. I've known him a long time," Trump told reporters outside the White House. Kudlow if chosen would replace Cohn, the former National Economic Council director who resigned last Tuesday amid a battle with other administration officials over Trump's plan to impose steel and aluminum tariffs on other countries. The president indicated Tuesday that Kudlow was in favor of his strategy to use the duties to leverage more favorable deals for the U.S. "We don't agree on everything but in this case I think it's good. I want a divergent opinion," the president said. "He now has come around to believing in tariffs as also a negotiating point."Kudlow has been widely-seen as a leading candidate for the role, despite his criticism of Trump's decision to impose the 10-percent tariff on aluminum and 25-percent tariff on steel imports. One senior administration official told POLITICO Monday that the selection could be formalized within 24 hours, but that the decision had not yet been finalized. The announcement came shortly after Trump announced on Twitter that CIA Director Mike Pompeo would replace Rex Tillerson as secretary of state, the latest in a series of prominent staffing changes for the Trump administration.Trump said Tuesday he is "also speaking to many others" in selecting who will become the administration's top economic adviser, but added that "Larry has a very good chance."Kudlow, a CNBC contributor and on-air personality, previously served in the Ronald Reagan administration as an associate director of economics and planning for the Office of Management and Budget.
Проведённая Владимиром Путиным видеодемонстрация новых грозных российских стратегических вооружений, занявшая почти половину недавнего послания российского президента высшему законодательному органу о положении в стране, предоставила военным аналитикам немало пищи для размышлений. Презентация, которую Путин, вероятно, предназначал как для своей внутренней аудитории, так и для международной, оставила открытыми вопросы, например о том, насколько близки к развёртыванию вооружения, которые были описаны в форме анимации, такие как крылатые ракеты с ядерным двигателем и уничтожающие порты ядерные торпеды, разработанные с целью обходить средства обороны США. Но также важен более широкий международный политический процесс, в котором эта демонстрация — только одно из проявлений. Этот процесс затрагивает не только Россию, но и другие державы и то, как они реагируют на политику США.
At SXSW, the former California governor lets loose on climate change, Donald Trump and gives his first in-depth remarks on #MeToo.
Самая таинственная и труднодоступная заброшка находится на Чукотке - ядерная военная часть Анадырь-1 или, как называют её местные, Гудым. Появилась она в начале 60-х годов для размещения ядерных ракет поближе к возможному противнику, то есть США. База была супер-секретной, местные знали только что поблизости какая-то воинская часть.Сердце Гудыма - огромная бетонная "нора" со складами для хранения и обслуживания ядерных ракет. Как и каким образом её "грызли" в вечной мерзлоте для меня загадка. Кроме военного объекта, был ещё городок, где проживали служащие и их семьи.Впрочем, в традиционной попытке всех "жестко переиграть", мы переиграли, главным образом, самих себя. 8 декабря 1987 года в Вашингтоне состоялась советско-американская встреча на высшем уровне, в ходе которой Горбачёв и Рейган подписали бессрочный "Договор о ликвидации ракет средней и малой дальности", после чего с базы вывезли всё вооружение. Некоторое время подземные помещения использовать как базу хранения Анадырского военного гарнизона, но в 2002 году Гудым полностью забросили.Сегодня это город-призрак. Что было более-менее ценное разворовали. Тем не менее, несмотря на прогнившие станы домов и облупленную краску подземных тоннелей, можно увидеть грандиозные масштабы Гудыма...Склады по пути к базе. Кругом валяются крылатые ракеты. Судя по всему учебные. На панораме они слева у синей бочки:3. Их тут очень много. Не считал, но навскидку штук 20:4. 5. Закрылки на ракете:6. Внутри какие-то шары:7. 8. Итак, Гудым. Через 3 дня после меня в Анадырь приезжал Шойгу и должен был посещать эту заброшенную базу. Сейчас этот объект никем не охраняется и никому не нужен, но может скоро сюда повесят замок и тогда я стану последним блогером, кто побывал внутри:9. На подъезде к нему незаметный ДОТ:10. Крупнее:11. Вход в главный военный объект, где хранились ракеты:12. Туда прямо на машине заехали. Внутри длинный коридор с ответвлениями. В ответвления не совались, а по туннелю проехали:13. Тоннель закрывается массивной бронированной дверью, весом в 40 тонн (вес среднего танка). Время закрытия примерно 2 минуты:14. Пульт рядом с дверью:15. Объект имеет полную противоатомную защиту, рассчитан на бомбежки с воздуха:16. Интересно, конечно, куда ведут эти ответвления, но изучать не решились:17. Второй выход:18. Признаки бывшей охраны военного объекта:19. Но сейчас Гудым охраняют только евражки:20. 21. Зловещие инсталляции оставлены, по видимому, редкими путешественниками. Местным до этого точно нет дела, они выпиливают последние двери:22. Военный городок сейчас полностью разрушен и разворован. Не представляет интереса в качестве "заброшки", так как тут ничего не осталось:23. Местные приезжают сюда как на склад стройматериалов и тащат всё, что не приколочено. Я видел 3 машины с бригадами, которые отдирали доски и бревна от домов и грузили на прицепы:24. Какой-то интерес может вызвать бывший торговый центр:25. Для военного городка на крайнем севере он немаленький:26. Здания:27. 28. 29. Бывший штаб:30. Внутри полная разруха:31. 32. Надпись: "В карауле, как на войне - будь бдительным вдвойне". Это карцер:33. Помещение охранников:34. 35. Комната отдыха:36. Вход в тюрьму:37. Камеры:38. Мягко скажем, небольшие:39. Напоследок, короткая экспозиция неизвестного военного автора:40. В следующем посте я покажу более оптимистичное место - Анадырский поселок Угольные Копи. Stay Tuned!Подписаться на обновленияЯ в других социальных сетях:
К празднованию нашего 30-летнего юбилея редактор TNI Джейкоб Хеилбранн садится за один стол с бывшим госсекретарем. Джейкоб Хеилбранн (Jacob Heilbrunn) Редактор The National Interest Джейкоб Хеилбранн (Jacob Heilbrunn) побеседовал с Генри Киссинджером в начале июля в Нью-Йорке.