[000:00:00;00] ah ah, breaking news on r t. i new york grand jury who reportedly votes to indict donald trump over a hush money allegedly pay to an adult film star. it's the 1st time in u. s. history. the former president would face the criminal also i had on the program, moscow, his love to dine washington's advice for all american citizens to leave russia. thing it just fear is more of it buys will get caught red handed after a wall street journal reporter was arrested on claims of involvement in espionage by the u. s. government ramping up the rhetoric just ahead of

a visit to china. the european commission president is beijing's desire for a multi quarter world, the cold shoulder level, so warning that completion. so the question agenda, if at once normal relations with europe, with wherever you're capturing the program from today, welcome to moscow on the global news roundup. on our t we begin with breaking news. donald trump has reportedly been indicted by a grand jury in new york. the case is focused on an alleged hush money payment to a porn star. during his 2016 election campaign, mr. trump would become the 1st former president to face criminal charges in the history of the united states will get the take on all of that from legal and media

analyst lionel. later in the program, russia is foreign ministry spokeswoman has slammed washington. the latest advice to all americans in russia to leave the country. maria is a horrible saves us. authorities are only telling citizens to go because they fear more journalists engaged in espionage will be caught. it comes after a reporter for the wall street journal was obtained by russian authorities amid spying claims. please heed. the u. s. government warning not to travel to russia. us citizens residing are traveling in russia, should depart right away. as the state department continues to advise. i think john can be forgot to add engaged in espionage before the word americans. it must have been said between the lines or moscow court on thursday rule to keep the wall street journal reported behind bars for the next 2 months, pending further investigation into the case ortiz,

marina costs river has been following developments. for us, there is a lot of thrust here at the moment, waiting to catch any glimpse all of the american journalists and any time the black car behind me makes any sort of noise like right now we believe that the american journalist is in that car right now the black car that is deporting this courtroom, he can see there we go. and we believe that even girl school, which is now leaving the moscow court. and as we can see, there's not only lots of press here but some heavy duty armed guards. and that's because earlier in the day this court received a bomb threat that had to be evacuated. this is shortly right before even getsco's actually made it here. but since then they checked everything. everything was okay . and the, the preceding returned back to normal. and we heard that the chief investigator asked for even girl courts to receive espionage charges. now once again,

this all comes after the f as be released, the statements where they said that they detains on the american journalists in the city of you got it in books while he was receiving secret information. now, 32 year old reporter, ah, he's been working for the moscow bureau of the wall street journal. previously he worked for the moscow times. i, he worked for agency france price. he was in accredited a journalist. he had an accreditation from russia's foreign ministry right now, they'll be looking into his activities here in russia were heard from ah, the crumb and spokesperson ms. scott earlier said that he was caught red handed, meaning that they have the evidence to charge him. i would assume so right now will be waiting to see what the outcome is after this hearing and will no doubt be given you more information as soon as we have it will. among the reaction we got to development set on the day was sir, from independent journalist,

mike jones and former us marine john, mark dilbren, let's listen to him. first is no secret, especially in this day and age that the american journalistic structure. all of them just about are working through the united states government. it really depends on what this individual was trying to get. but if you're trying to get military secrets related to like weapons, like how much they're producing or anything like this, that's very detrimental to russian security. and you know, they can't just let something like that go, unfortunately, trying to gather a secret information is not a normal thing that journalists do. i mean, they report on the ground in different countries. but you're, you're not really supposed to be going to weapons manufacturers and trying to obtain steep secrets. i would expect

a lot of spin on it and down playing his role and why he was there were speculating at the moment, but i wouldn't be surprised if it were to do with perhaps even the production of ammunition levels. because we know that the west is very concerned, you can't seem to ramp up their supplies and pops. he's trying to ascertain just how capable russian industry is. if indeed this is as it is, claim to be. again, it's another level of desperation. i feel of the u. s. in the collective west as they desperately try to scramble to gain some advantage in huge blunder and mistake that they've made and they're desperately trying to trying to back pedal well back to our top story. the reports that a grand jury in new york has voted to indict former president a donald trump on attempts that he had tried to by the silence of a porn star. mr. trump denies the allegations. well,

let's get the thoughts on all this and speak to legal and media analysts. line old good to see line. so donald trump would come the 1st former president, the face criminal charges in the entire history of the united states. your initial thoughts on developments. well, shocked at 1st, but let me make sure everybody understands what this is. an indictment merely means he was charged. an indictment is a formal document that is, that is delivered by a grand jury. and a grand jury need probable cause or reasonable cause to deliver this. the best definition i ever heard was, he probably did it. it's just the 1st step, alvin brag. who was the district attorney for new york? a state level court is going to have to prove this case. now it's not that donald trump allegedly putatively pe, either hush money to someone that he had

a dalliance with that is not against the law. nondisclosure agreements are, are done all the time. in fact, they are the, the bread and butter of hollywood. i mean, they're not, they're not at all risk. what they are alleging is as do some kind of, of machination that this team it, that was made to stormy. daniel's a former enter retainer that this somehow subverted campaign laws, and that there were falsified records that were provided. and it gets even more labyrinthine. and i am not going to bore you because you will fall asleep. but what i'm saying is it is one of the most convoluted and most complicated stretches for him to be brought to the, to the felony level. this is not the end of all of the charges. all of the

potential investigations that present in trump is facing. but what's interesting to know now is in what is considered either one of the most brilliant move on the present as bart or, or one of the most stupid. what he did was he had bound to the world president trump, that he was going to be arrested on tuesday. the district attorney said tuesday, what is he talking about? and they thought this was brilliant. he forced his hand. the last we heard was that the grand jury was taking a month off. everybody figured that's right to day minutes ago we find out he's indicted. so none of this makes sense. now, what's gonna happen is could the president face incarceration? let's assume that he is convicted. one could say no, because he would be a 1st time offender, provided this is a felony, provided he is found guilty of, of a charge that week think he's going to receive. but here is the,

it for the question. all president, former presidents have secret service protection for their entire life. how can you incarcerate somebody who's at sequence over to protect your? i'm jumping the gun. sure. will he have to show up in the finger printed? yes. will he be mung shadid s. will that picture become probably the most important mean to photo in the history of human kind? most probably it all embarrass but the but the thing in which is so interesting is that what will this do to him? politically, right. many people believe that this is going to elevate him, that this will ensure that he gets, it seemed powder intuitive, but that this will guarantee him that 2024 domination because people will think that he's been through too much. and that this is a which front, so that remains to be seen in that is the point, isn't it? because if we look at the timing of these charges,

it was before the 2016 election. the claims are focused on it's 2023. there is an election next year, which donald trump may well have been a front runner for the republican party. his supporters would said this is a which young, the timing of this is no coincidence. what would you say to those supporters? well, politically, any, if you can think it, it's most probably true if you think that wait a minute, this really poses a aisd situation is most probably true. but here is the thing which is interesting . and i am looking at this as a former prosecutor, as a lawyer. never, ever, ever think that a cases beyond a prosecutable or that a jury wouldn't to refer a return a verdict of guilty. imagine what that is going to be to see president trump. let me also say that in this particular jury pool, it would be the city of manhattan,

and one of the 5 boroughs of new york in new york, 80 percent last time i the voted for his opponent. so you're not going to get a group of people who by their very nature, tend to be in new york city pro trump, as we speak, people are jumping up and down because it's that, that, that blood that they wanted to has just now accusation, women finally a great juris one times that a good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich so i'll leave you with that. yeah, i know just the gotcha moment. i think some opponents would be, would be thinking, wouldn't they just that say as well, maybe to get your thoughts on that. the overall situation as regards his hopes for another term in the white house. does this, does this make it right now as it stands more or less likely? i'm not sure. which will i'm with you. i'm going to pretend that what i'm about

to say right now is a brilliant answer to your interesting question. it, it, it comes down to this and i find it interesting. under the laws of our country, you can be in prison and still run for president. it has nothing to do with it. that's number one. number 2, every rule. donald trump broke everything up till now. number 3, he has been involved in more litigation by virtue of his business by virtue of just being donald trump. so this is not something that he runs from. he all, he said the other day that he wanted to be a handcuffed publicly. so it remains to be seen as that's always the pat answer. but i will tell you this, this is not the only case. we have others, i don't want to bore you with it, but there's a maro lago case. there's a case involving his suppose id, possession of classified materials,

and whether there was a can commented obstruction of justice. that's a very serious charge that's pending. there are state attorney general's case is pending. there's the january 6 involvement that he may or may not have been a part of. there were civil cases involving a host of allegation. so what happens is, let's assume he, he is, it's this unscathed. he is acquitted. this is just round, one is going to also, as one warrior said it he, they've crossed the rubicon, the other prosecutors are going to want to come after him, even harder to pick up where they left off. so this is just round one, but i'm gonna tell you right now you, i am astonished. people have said without a, not even his mobiles armed political detractors at this case. thanks. it is ridiculous. it's a waste of time and then surprise, surprise, he's indicted. but as well as that, he's got a history of beating the elite doesn't a,

we only have to look at russia gate. you know, russia gate was, was, we talk about nothing else for a year or 2. and then it later, surprise, surprise, turned out to be false. he has every right to say, this is a similar case and he might use it. he's got the focus, the spotlight of america. the voters may be sitting on the fence listening now to what he has to say. rhonda sometimes is put to the background. he's not front and center. let me give you one little bit of information. this is the most interesting in the case that he is involved, and there's a fall in the michael cohen and michael cohen supposedly gave a $130000.00 to this adult entertainer. and this was somehow a way to get around and pain contributions and the light. michael cohen's ex lawyer is going to come forward and say he's a liar, he's already but on every feed and on fox news and every show you can imagine say

that his x client, some lawyer is is a, is, is a liar. then there's a document that he supposedly signed or authorized. that said, i did this money, i gave this money on my own. donald trump had nothing to do with it. now the 1st witness they're gonna call or cross examine is this individual. and they're going to ask mr. cohen, were you lying then? or are you lying? now? how do we know when you're telling the truth? this is going and then you're going to bring stormy daniels. this is her of professional name. you're going to bring her just think about this cavalcade of witnesses, and your 1st witness, the main witness for alvin brag. the district attorney here in new york is a convicted felon. but i mean, this is your, this is your, your lead off. going to be. it's gotta be incredibly, lionel we so appreciate coming in the program on giving us your view on all that. i'm sure we'll be speaking in the near future again on any,

on all developments line, all legal on media analyst on r t. thank you. thank you, sir. ah, the european union sage relations with china are dependent on the country stumps into ukrainian conflicts suggesting beijing should follow the western lead agenda. however, that does not fit with the principles of a multi polar world order that china is pushing for something that's concerning brussels. any piece plan which, what in effect, consolidate russian annexation is simply not a viable plan. we have to be frank on this point. oh, china continues to interact with proteins. war will be a determining factor for e. china relations. going follow it while lookout china, the unelected queen of europe. ursula vander line,

and the self appointed hall monitor for the global school yard is telling you that she and europe are going to be watching you while you hang out with russia, which it considers to be a bad influence on you. and just might decide to punish you if she doesn't like what she sees. and she's coming over to beijing next week with everyone's teachers, pet french president, emmanuel and michael. and what you going to do, he's going to go over there and weigh your finger in chinese president. she's in pings, face father mindset that china was becoming more repressive at home and more assertive abroad as she runs over to china, to assert herself on behalf of the e. u. in the wake of an entire winter during which she and european leaders are cracking down european shower time. no, that's not repressive at all. it's the kind of rhetoric that we've seen all over the mainstream western press talk about china preparing for war. even though it's the us that's been doing pretty much everything,

it actively can to gin up tensions between china and taiwan. particularity within the context of the conflict in ukraine, in which ukrainians are pretty much playing the role against russia on behalf of western interests. that tie, one would be playing for them against china in the event that a conflict ever went hot and popped off. and there's been no war since all of these kinds of headlines have started appearing back in 2020, at the very latest, but constant talking about war is and china and is just been ongoing in most telling of underlines said we're president. she's parting words to russian president vladimir putin on the steps outside the when, when he said right now there are changes the likes of which we haven't seen for a 100 years and we are the, was driving these changes together. chinese communist parties, clear goal, is

a systemic change of the international order with china at its center. we have seen it with china's positions in multi lateral bodies which show its determination to promote an alternative vision of the world order. and we have seen the show of friendship in moscow, which says a 1000 words about this new vision for an international order. okay, so she singled those words out. you have to wonder why she, so bothered by the prospect of multi polarity, which is essentially what the 2 men were talking about. perhaps because the risks losing its clothes in a multi polar world in which the u. s. doesn't run the show with europe riding shotgun, in which case you think wagner line would have eased up on the threats like the one she made to reassess the massive trade deal. the e. china comprehensive trade agreement on investment ratified in 2020. but when it

was then frozen in 2021 after brussels in beijing sanctioned each other's officials, still were talking about the use largest trading partner in a time when it's still paying a really high price. and of course, the citizens, especially from cutting itself off from its top provider of cheap energy, which would be russia. so wagner line also sound. and during this talk that to faced here, like someone who is invited over to a dinner party, but realized a few days before that it would be really awkward if she didn't at least try refraining things a bit. given that she had just spent the last few years, totally publicly badmouthing the host, our relationship with china is one of the most intricate and important anywhere in the world. and how we manage it will be a determining factor. i believe it is neither viable,

non your interest to decoupled from china or we relations. i'm not black or white and our response cannot be either and this is why we need to focus on de risk. not the couple. yeah, that sounds like an effort to not show up on the door of china with your foot shoved deep down your throat in your mouth. yeah, the relationship isn't black or white. all right? because europe has no clear and independent strategic vision unless ambiguity is suddenly a strategy towards your top trading partner. and it seems like it doesn't really have a clue where it's going either. it's trying to cater to washington's anti china interests, while at the same time wanting to preserve its own interests with china, brussels basically trying to drive down the highway while straddling to different lane switch. really, in any case doesn't seem like the smartest thing to do. well one

e country that often challenges the directives emerging from brussels is hungry. now, no, the deputy speaker of not nations parliament has said it's in the core interests of europe to achieve peace in ukraine as soon as possible because of the economic dumb it. initially, nato was created as an alliance, the purpose of which was to protect the member states from armed come, now nato is participating in the united states game using ukraine as a puppet. in reality, it is not in the interests of the european union to support the continuation of the ukrainian conflict. and the sanctions are, however, many you politicians want to escalate concerned about their economies with the energy crisis away, economies are suffering, we lose jobs, we have a high inflation. that is still propagating people directly. so this was the time that people say they don't want offense, they used to do getting us oil from all applies since the 1st of january. and this

was commencing, they said on the 1st of april and about 3 days. now that was talk that russia would consider that to stop that because they can because it was about pipeline network is by rushing state companies. they controlled company and they could of course say no. so i bagged the kremlin, actually in my position as an oppositional leader, i said, please let state oil from custody through your pipelines because our economy cannot have that. and i know that mr. charles is in that box because he said he would arrest mister food to me if you ever came to germany in order. you know, we have to put this rhetoric aside and find pragmatic solutions. and of course, the lift the sanctions because the only damaging us less russia lawmakers in the us are pressing the biden administration to investigate israel's

use of american weapons. as criticism grows over the scenes of violence involving palestinians on the actions of the new right wing is really government. we urge immediate action to prevent the further loss of israeli and palestinian lives. we call on your administration to ensure that all future foreign assistance to israel, including weapons and equipment, is not used in support of gross violations of human rights, including by strengthening and use monitoring and financial tracking. the letter signed by 10 democrats criticizes the israeli government, and several, a cabinet members, particularly the national security and finance ministers. the list of concerns include an escalation and violence, the killing of both palestinians on this release, westbank settlement expansion on using u. s. weapons in human rights violation for 2023, congress appropriated $3800000000.00 in aid to israel or defense. were this year got off to

a particularly deadly start with more than $85.00 palestinians killed since january, including 16 children. last year was the deadliest for those in the west bank since 2004 co director of the international action center. a think tank. sorry, flood leads, washington news exactly. how they weapons it sends to israel are being used. i know exactly what those weapons are doing. they're intended to kill palestinian people. it's not a surprise. it's not o g. we lost sight of a few guns a know the from the very beginning. that's what the weapons are intended to do. and that is very much what they achieve. so it's what the bombs are meant to do that bring down entire apartment complexes it's, it's what the weapons that kill children are meant to do whether on the west bank and gaza, or within the existing borders of israel. to day they're meant as repression

against the palestinian people. and they're also meant for war on the surrounding countries. as we see in syria to this day, where it says re all bombs. so they don't lose sight of these weapons. they know what they're doing and they're doing what they're intended to do. i want to share this with you as spokesman for the un secretary general appeared somewhat puzzled this week, but said whether the u. s. has a military presence in syria. the confusion came to light in an exchange with a reporter from the c g t in news that we're at this stage with what's the difference is related to it and syria is no attrition in syria and the situation you're crying. there's no us armed forces inside of syria. and so i'd, as i don't have a it's, it's not a of your parallel issue. and others note there's no u. s. u. s. military personnel, i believe is military activity. yeah, but a but a but in terms of ground presence in syria,

i'm not aware of that. okay. 5 us service members were injured in that attack. if there's no, there were no us soldier service members in syria. how could they got injured? but that's weird, right? should i ask you? well, it all comes after an american military base in syria was attacked earlier this month. the mascot sounds accused the us of stealing the country's oil under the galleys of a supposed anti terrorism operation. washington, which is believed to have had forces in syria for nearly a decade, has openly call for regime change in the country stevens. so we need a journalist in syria is of the view america has taken the u. n. hostage, american and parents in the inferior. yes, it is illegal in any country. if the governments of the country and the leader of the country asked for help from an from the states that cow syria did with iran,

syria, that was russia, that is legal appearance that is held from one prince to another friendly country. but the united states came in due to syria and occupied that he still here. yeah, we are all of the we will, the gas will, and the week of syria and are harvesting them and pumping the oil and gas, stealing them and giving the answer. and using that money to fund the kurdish militia separate this want to separate and get up into pieces. and that is why why? because they want to keep damascus week. does it give the student government and who's the president of dr. michelle? i thought they wanted. we, why do they want to 3? because he's, i'm sorry, the united states, and he doesn't go under the orders of the united states and the united states