Connect with us

News

‘Strong indications’ Putin decided to give separatists the missile that downed MH17 in 2014, say Dutch investigators | CNN

Published

on

‘Strong indications’ Putin decided to give separatists the missile that downed MH17 in 2014, say Dutch investigators | CNN



CNN
 — 

There are “robust indications” that Russian President Vladimir Putin personally authorised the choice to offer separatists in Ukraine with the missile that shot down the Malaysia Airways flight MH17 in 2014, Dutch investigators mentioned Wednesday.

Citing intercepted phone conversations by Russian authorities officers, the Public Prosecution Service’s Joint Investigation Workforce mentioned there have been “robust indications that in Russia, the president made the choice concerning the provision of the Buk-TELAR to separatists of the DPR,” or the self-declared Donetsk Folks’s Republic, in japanese Ukraine.

Investigators nonetheless mentioned that “the excessive bar of full and conclusive proof just isn’t met,” and that regardless, as a head of state, Putin has immunity from prosecution. The Joint Investigation Workforce mentioned that it had shared its findings with the households of the 298 victims.

Advertisement

CNN has reached out to the Kremlin for response. Moscow has repeatedly denied any accountability for the assault, and Russian officers and state media have put out a spread of typically contradictory explanations for the tragedy.

Flight MH17 was on its method from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur on July 17, 2014, when it was shot out of the sky over territory held by pro-Russian rebels in japanese Ukraine. All 298 individuals on board have been killed.

Dutch investigators had already concluded that the missile that downed MH17 was a Russian Buk rocket, fired from a launcher belonging to Russia’s 53rd anti-aircraft missile brigade. A Dutch court docket in November discovered two Russians and a separatist Ukrainian responsible of mass homicide for his or her involvement within the downing of MH17.

Of their latest discovering, investigators say that DPR leaders gave the impression to be in “shut contact” with Kremlin advisers and the Russian intelligence service.

“After the separatists ask for anti-aircraft weapons with larger vary, their request is within the second half of June 2014 mentioned on the Presidential administration in Moscow. That could be a state physique that helps the president. After this, the request for a heavier air protection system is offered to the minister of Protection and the president,” investigators instructed the Dutch court docket on Wednesday.

Advertisement

The investigators say that the separatists’ request was authorised.

“In recorded phone conversations, Russian authorities officers say that the choice about army help rests with the president,” the Joint Investigation Workforce mentioned. “The choice is even delayed every week ‘as a result of there is just one who comes to a decision […] the one that is at a summit in France.’ President Putin at the moment, on 5 and 6 June 2014, was on the D Day commemoration in France.

“There’s concrete info that the request from the separatists is offered to the president, and {that a} constructive determination is taken. It’s unknown whether or not the request explicitly mentions a Buk system. A short while later, heavy air-defense techniques have been delivered, together with the Buk that later shot down MH17.”

The investigators mentioned that there was not robust sufficient proof to start any new prosecutions.

“As a result of at this second it can’t be decided who the operators of the Buk-TELAR have been, and different concrete details about that is missing, it can’t be decided why they fired a Buk rocket at MH17, what their mission was, and what info that they had in the mean time of firing.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Apollo to finance UK Hinkley Point nuclear plant with £4.5bn loan

Published

on

Apollo to finance UK Hinkley Point nuclear plant with £4.5bn loan

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

US private equity giant Apollo will provide £4.5bn in debt financing to support the UK’s Hinkley Point nuclear project, in a deal that will help ease financial pressures on the flagship development.

The investment grade financing will be provided as unsecured debt at an interest rate just below 7 per cent, people familiar with the matter said.

The funding could be used for other UK projects by French state-owned electricity group EDF, but Hinkley Point is expected to be the primary target for the debt package.

Advertisement

The financing meets a key funding gap for the nuclear project, which has suffered from consistent cost overruns. It was expected to cost £18bn and to be completed in 2025 but the estimated cost has swelled to almost £46bn and its start date pushed back to 2029.

This is a developing story

Continue Reading

News

Trump Can Retain Control Of National Guard In LA, Appeals Court Rules

Published

on

Trump Can Retain Control Of National Guard In LA, Appeals Court Rules

Topline

A federal appeals court on Thursday night ruled that the California National Guard troops—deployed in Los Angeles last week amid protests against the federal government’s crackdown on immigrants—can remain under President Donald Trump’s control while the state’s legal challenge against the deployment moves forward.

Key Facts

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that on matters such as federalizing the California National Guard, any decision must be “highly deferential” towards the president, and the court concluded that “it is likely that the President lawfully exercised his statutory authority.”

Advertisement

However, the ruling disagreed with the White House’s primary argument that such a matter “is completely insulated from judicial review.”

The appellate court ruling blocks an already paused ruling issued by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer that ordered the president to “return control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California forthwith.”

The ruling only focused on the issue of presidential authority and did not address the claim made in Trump’s order that the protests amounted to a “form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.”

Advertisement

How Have California Officials Reacted To The Ruling?

California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a statement saying, “While it is disappointing that our temporary restraining order has been stayed pending the federal government’s appeal, this case is far from over…our state and local law enforcement officers responded effectively to isolated episodes of violence at otherwise peaceful protests and the President deliberately sought to create the very chaos and crises he claimed to be addressing.” Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote on X: “The court rightly rejected Trump’s claim that he can do whatever he wants with the National Guard and not have to explain himself to a court. The President is not a king and is not above the law. We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump’s authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against citizens.”

How Did Trump React To The Ruling?

In a post on his Truth Social platform, the president hailed the ruling as a “BIG WIN,” and attacked the California Governor, saying: “The Judges obviously realized that Gavin Newscum is incompetent and ill prepared.” Trump then signaled he could deploy forces to tackle protests in other states, saying: “this is much bigger than Gavin, because all over the United States, if our Cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should State and Local Police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done.”

Crucial Quote

The appeals court ruling noted that precedent from earlier rulings cited by the Trump administration, “does not compel us to accept the federal government’s position that the President could federalize the National Guard based on no evidence whatsoever, and that courts would be unable to review a decision that was obviously absurd or made in bad faith.”

Further Reading

Trump Keeps Control Of National Guard In Los Angeles After Appeals Court Pauses Ruling (Forbes)

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Video: How the L.A. Port got hit by Trump’s Tariffs

Published

on

Video: How the L.A. Port got hit by Trump’s Tariffs

New York Times reporter Ana Swanson reports from the Los Angeles Port, the largest port in the Western Hemisphere as well as the place that first saw the signs of Trump’s tariff war. The Port of Los Angeles is significant because of our trade relationship with China in particular, which is why The Trump administration’s 145% tariffs on the country resulted in lower volume at the port. Ana Swanson explains what the port illustrates about U.S. trade and how what’s felt at the Port of Los Angeles will soon be felt by U.S. consumers.

Continue Reading

Trending