Eng 728x90

Ludy Ongkeko

Ludy Ongkeko

Ludy Ongkeko (2)

‘Russian leaks’ still pervading despite White House assertions

Very recent media reports concerning Russia and members of President Trump's team are being described as: "The slow drip, drip of Russia stories."
Trump's chief of staff, Reince Priebus, announced how upset he is at the mention of the stories that have not been terminated at all.
Preibus, in his role, has been described as having contacted the deputy director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).The focus of the Preibus' FBI contact as announced: "to request the agency dispute on news stories that the Trump campaign had contact with Russian officials."
Such a communication by Preibus was categorized as highly unusual by the White House press coverage based on what ought to be aired through the news media, both print and broadcast.
Strong voices from the media: The Preibus action is called meddling.
"The meddling puts the president's chief of staff in the middle of an ongoing investigation that involves his boss.
"FBI Director James Comey refused Priebus' request owing to alleged contacts between Trump's campaign and Russia are still under review."
Trump's quest for the presidency during his candidacy was rife with his personal comments: Washington's government institutions were "rigged" against him.
The then presidential candidate laudedC omey's 'public intervention in the election when the FBI director informed Congress he was"reopening" the investigation into the much- publicized Clinton e-mails as she likewise sought the presidency.
It was widely publicized that Comey stated how he did not find anything new and quickly closed the subject. The Comey report did not fall on deaf ears and was used as a weapon against the Democratic presidential candidate by the Trump backers.
Trump proceeded to attack the intelligence community -- it was termed a continuation of a lengthy "spat" with American officials tasked with ferreting out truths critical to national security.
Therefore, how would some members of theAmerican populace translate the Priebus' move? Isn't it clear even to non-partisans that the Priebus' request directed to the aforesaid intelligence agency could vastly weakenTrump's position?
TheTrump reaction was (as always) via 'Tweet' in regard to the response of Comey directed to the Priebus' request. Trump was described as having blasted the FBI and NSA on Twitter; central to that tweet surfaced: that the FBI is totally unable to stop the national security leakers.
After all the caustic exchange of opinions that has taken place, which originally came from Trump's main surrogate, Comey's having turned down the Priebus request is deemed justifiable by those who have been keeping a close watch on the intelligence panorama.
Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign manager whose very recent re-appearance on the political scene, is the latest report on alleged Russian ties.
Reportedly, texts were sent to the cell phone of Manafort's daughter relating to the involvement of Manafort himself: that he had close financial ties with the former president of Ukraine,a Russia ally.
Similarly, what was bruited around re Manafort's ties, was how he helped set up a meeting between DonaldTrump and an associate of the Ukrainian president in 2012, on Trump's alleged relations with Russia.
Trump, in the meantime, delivered a keynote address to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). He railed about his ongoing war with journalists. He made emphatic his views on news reports as “fake,” calling unnamed sources as the “real enemy of the people.”
But the media coverage did bring out the mood at the CPAC convention.
Some in attendance at the same CPAC event were described as waving small Russian flags with the word "Trump" on them as he started his speech.
How else could some observers at the very same audience react to whatever knowledge has been aired without hesitation, in regard to how Trump has conducted himself amid so-called "Russian backing?"


The cost of protecting the Trump family

"It’s not easy or cheap," as per estimates gathered by The Washington Post

Early reports from the nation's capital paper have stated that President Trump and his family would supersede what it cost to protect former President Barack Obama and his family by 'hundreds of millions of dollars.'
According to Judicial Watch, a well-known conservative group that kept track of Obama's travel expenses, an estimate of $97 million was spent during the former president's eight years in office.
The period under report has set forth an example of just four weeks into the 45th president's term.

Enumerated below are but a few examples thus far:
· 3 trips to Mar-a-Lago in Florida since the Trump inauguration, may have cost about $10 million, based on a government report from October that provided an analysis of the White House travel which includes expenses on the cost of US Coast Guard patrol boats on the shoreline.

· Palm Beach County officials announced how they will request reimbursement of tens of thousands of dollars per day from the White House, for their deputies who provided “security and logistical support around the city.”

· Police officials have provided estimates on what it would cost New York $500,000 a day or $183 million a year, to guard Trump Tower, where First Lady Melania Trump and the ten-year old Barron Trump live.

· Secret Service and embassy employees paid some $100,000 in hotel room bills during a trip to Uruguay by a Trump son, Eric. Reportedly, he went to that South American city where he
promoted a "Trump-branded building."

· Should the Pentagon successfully secure rental space in Trump Tower -- "needed" when the president returns to New York -- it would cost $1.5 million per month, per information received from the building's website according to news reports.

Subscribe to this RSS feed

Sign up to keep in touch!

Be the first to hear about special offers and exclusive deals from TechNews and our partners.

Check out our Privacy Policy & Terms of use
You can unsubscribe from email list at any time