An affordable price is probably the major benefit persuading people to buy drugs at www.americanbestpills.com. The cost of medications in Canadian drugstores is considerably lower than anywhere else simply because the medications here are oriented on international customers. In many cases, you will be able to cut your costs to a great extent and probably even save up a big fortune on your prescription drugs. What's more, pharmacies of Canada offer free-of-charge shipping, which is a convenient addition to all other benefits on offer. Cheap price is especially appealing to those users who are tight on a budget
Service Quality and Reputation
Although some believe that buying online is buying a pig in the poke, it is not. Canadian online pharmacies are excellent sources of information and are open for discussions. There one can read tons of users' feedback, where they share their experience of using a particular pharmacy, say what they like or do not like about the drugs and/or service. Reputable online pharmacy canadianrxon.com take this feedback into consideration and rely on it as a kind of expert advice, which helps them constantly improve they service and ensure that their clients buy safe and effective drugs. Last, but not least is their striving to attract professional doctors. As a result, users can directly contact a qualified doctor and ask whatever questions they have about a particular drug. Most likely, a doctor will ask several questions about the condition, for which the drug is going to be used. Based on this information, he or she will advise to use or not to use this medication.
The Russian delegation was sitting 3 chairs away from Ambassador Nikki Haley as she slammed Russia for their actions against Britain including the use of poison and the disdainful response by Putin towards Prime Minister Terresa May.
See the secret trial of the chemical weapon from Russia here.
As PM May expels almost 2 dozen Russian diplomats, actually they are spies, one wonders if Britain knew they were in country why they were not expelled previously. A theory has developed that Russian operatives applied the nerve agent, Novachok to the door handles of Skripal’s car. There was the case of the poison telephone:
Accounts of security deficiencies at weapons facilities indicate that, at least for a period in the 1990s, Moscow was not in firm control of its chemical weapons stockpiles or the people guarding them.
When Russian banking magnate Ivan Kivelidi and his secretary died in 1995 from organ failure after a military-grade poison was found on the telephone receiver of his Moscow office, an employee of a state chemical research institute confessed to having secretly supplied the toxin.
In a closed-door trial, Kivelidi’s business partner was convicted of poisoning Kivelidi over a dispute. At the trial, prosecutors said the business partner had obtained the poison, via several intermediaries, from Leonard Rink, an employee of a state chemical research institute known as GosNIIOKhT.
The same institute, according to Vil Mirzayanov, a Soviet chemical weapons scientist who later turned whistleblower, was part of the state chemical weapons programme and helped develop the “Novichok” family of nerve agents that Britain has said was responsible for poisoning Skripal. More here.
BRITAIN today ordered 23 Russian spooks to leave the country within a week in response to the spy poisoning scandal.
Theresa May told MPs that two dozen so-called diplomats who are in fact spies will be kicked out in a bid to stop Vladimir Putin meddling in Britain.
The PM said Russia had shown “contempt and defiance” in the aftermath of an attempt to kill ex-spy Sergei Skripal and warned that the poisoning represented “the unlawful use of force by Russia against the United Kingdom”.
She also confirmed that no ministers or members of the Royal Family will attend this summer’s World Cup in Russia – but stopped short of calling on the England team to pull out of the tournament.
Putin’s officials responded with fury, saying Britain’s tough response was “unacceptable, unjustified and shortsighted”.
But Jeremy Corbyn sparked anger when he suggested that Russia might NOT be behind the attack and compared the investigation to claims about Saddam Hussein’s WMDs.
Mrs May also announced this afternoon:
New laws to help Britain defend itself from all forms of hostile Russian activity
Flights and goods from Russia will face extra checks to stop ill-gotten gains entering the UK
All planned talks with Russian officials, including a visit from the foreign minister, are cancelled
Assets belonging to Putin’s government will be frozen to stop them being used for wrongdoing
Suspected spies could be detained at Britain’s borders like terrorists under new powers
The UK’s allies France, Germany and the US are in full support of her tough stance
The expulsion of 23 Russian spies is the toughest act of its kind for 30 years – and will almost certainly spark a tit-for-tat diplomatic war, with British diplomats likely to be kicked out of Moscow.
Mrs May told the House of Commons: “To those who seek to do us harm, our message is clear – you are not welcome here.”
Blasting Putin’s refusal to respond to her demand for an explanation, the PM said: “It was right to offer Russia the opportunity to provide an explanation.
“But their response has demonstrated complete disdain for the gravity of these events. They have provided no credible explanation that could suggest they lost control of their nerve agent.
“No explanation as to how this agent came to be used in the United Kingdom; no explanation as to why Russia has an undeclared chemical weapons programme in contravention of international law.
“Instead they have treated the use of a military grade nerve agent in Europe with sarcasm, contempt and defiance.
“There is no alternative conclusion other than that the Russian state was culpable for the attempted murder of Mr Skripal and his daughter – and for threatening the lives of other British citizens in Salisbury, including Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey.
“This represents an unlawful use of force by the Russian State against the United Kingdom.”
A police officer in a forensics suit as investigations continue into the poisoning
Any Russian spies who try to re-enter Britain will now be stopped at the border in the same way as terror suspects, the PM said.
She announced that sanctions on human rights violators will be stepped up, and vowed to freeze the assets of the Russian regime if they are being used to meddle in the UK.
Mrs May added: “We will continue to bring all the capabilities of UK law enforcement to bear against serious criminals and corrupt elites. There is no place for these people – or their money – in our country.”
Foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, who was due to visit Britain shortly, has had his invitation withdrawn, she announced.
The PM said: “I continue to believe it is not in our national interest to break off all dialogue between the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation.
“But in the aftermath of this appalling act against our country, this relationship cannot be the same.”
And she warned Putin that Britain will not stand alone, revealing that Donald Trump, Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel have promised to present a united front against Russian atrocities.
The Russian embassy in London responded to Mrs May’s statement with fury, saying: “We consider this hostile action as totally unacceptable, unjustified and shortsighted.
“All the responsibility for the deterioration of the Russia-UK relationship lies with the current political leadership of Britain.”
After today’s escalation of hostilities, Brits visiting Russia were warned they must avoid talking publically about politics in case they attract the regime’s attention.
The Foreign Office updated its travel advice for the country, telling tourists they could face “anti-British sentiment or harassment”.
Officials added: “You’re advised to remain vigilant, avoid any protests or demonstrations and avoid commenting publically on political developments.”
The Russian regime has refused to explain its role in the attempted hit – saying it will take at least ten days to respond to the PM’s ultimatum.
And ambassador Alexander Yakovenko went further today, saying: “Everything done today is absolutely unacceptable and we consider this a provocation.
“The UK should follow international law. They have to present the request to the organisation and we are happy to consider this within the ten days.
“We believe this is a very serious provocation and of course we are not ready to talk.”
Soldiers wearing protective clothing at an address in Gillingham
It has emerged that police are looking for a mysterious couple who may be witnesses to the attack on Mr Skripal and his daughter while the investigation has widened from Salisbury to Gillingham.
The PM set Russia a deadline of midnight last night to explain how nerve agent novichok came to be used in the brazen attack – but the regime responded by taunting Britain and boasting about its nuclear arsenal.
Mrs May held a meeting of the National Security Council this morning, before returning to the Commons to outline the next steps in the campaign to punish Russia for the assassination attempt.
Britain has also called for an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council in a bid to hold the regime to account, while the UK’s Nato allies pledged to stand firm alongside us.
This morning Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, made the bizarre claim that Russia hasn’t actually received a formal request for information from the UK.
He said Putin’s government would take ten days to respond once the official message is received.
Several sources familiar with McCabe’s move told NBC News that he made his decision to retire as a result of a meeting with Wray in which the inspector general’s investigation was discussed.
BI: Attorney General Jeff Sessions is reviewing a recommendation from the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility to fire former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe, The New York Times reported Wednesday.
Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe testifies before a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington Thomson Reuters
McCabe was forced out of the FBI earlier this year amid an internal investigation by the Office of Inspector General into his approval of unauthorized disclosures to the media in October 2016 about the bureau’s Hillary Clinton email investigation.
He’s scheduled to retire on Sunday, and a possible firing — which sources told The Times could could as soon as Friday — could endanger his pension benefits.
The Department of Justice’s inspector general Michael Horowitz reportedly concluded in a report that McCabe was not forthcoming during the OIG review. The FBI office subsequently recommended that Sessions fire McCabe, according to The Times.
The Wall Street Journal article at the center of the OIG’s inquiry was published on October 30, 2016, two days after then-FBI director James Comey announced in a letter to Congress that the bureau was reopening its investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server to conduct government business when she was secretary of state.
The article was a highly detailed account of internal strife within the top ranks of the DOJ about how to proceed after FBI agents investigating former New York congressman Anthony Weiner discovered 650,000 emails on his laptop that could have been sent to or from Clinton’s private email server. Many of the emails came from accounts belonging to Weiner’s wife, Huma Abedin, who was also Clinton’s longtime aide and a senior adviser to her campaign, The Journal reported.
At the same time, DOJ anticorruption prosecutors were at odds with FBI officials over whether to continue pursuing a separate investigation into the Clinton Foundation’s financial dealings.
While DOJ officials believed there wasn’t enough evidence to move forward with the probe and wouldn’t authorize further investigatory measures, FBI officials, including McCabe, believed they had the authority to continue the investigation using whatever leads they had already acquired, the report said.
Justice Department rules prevent investigators from taking significant actions that could be seen as trying to influence an election. And when a senior DOJ official called McCabe in August 2016 to express his disapproval with the FBI’s continued focus on the Clinton Foundation probe amid the heated election season, McCabe reportedly pushed back.
“Are you telling me that I need to shut down a validly predicated investigation?” McCabe said, according to The Journal.
The official replied, after a brief pause: “Of course not.”
The reporter who authored the Journal’s article, Devlin Barrett, was in touch with two top FBI officials on the phone two days before the story broke, according to text messages released in February. The officials were FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who often worked with McCabe, and then-FBI spokesman Michael Kortan.
While law-enforcement officials often speak to the press on background in order to provide more complete details about an ongoing story, they are prohibited from revealing information about ongoing investigations, like the Clinton emails and Clinton Foundation probes.
McCabe stepped down as deputy director in January after FBI director Christopher Wray briefed him about the impending OIG report about his conduct.
The deputy director’s ouster came following a string of public attacks President Donald Trump leveled against him, accusing him of putting his thumb on the scale in favor of Clinton.
Trump’s attacks were based on information contained in a separate Wall Street Journal article published one week before Barrett’s.
McCabe’s wife, Dr. Jill McCabe, mounted an unsuccessful run for a Virginia state Senate seat in 2015. The Journal reported on October 24, 2016 that her campaign received $675,000 in donations from the Virginia Democratic Party and from Common Good VA, the super PAC run by Democratic Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a longtime Clinton supporter. None of the donations came from Clinton or her family.
Trump latched onto the revelations, accusing McCabe of corruption and anti-Trump bias based on his wife’s political campaign.
McCabe wasn’t in charge of the Clinton investigation at the time, and didn’t take on an “oversight role” in the probe until February 2016, long after his wife lost her election bid.
and documents in January that confirmed McCabe was not warned against becoming involved in the Clinton investigation. But he recused himself anyway following The Journal’s report about his wife’s campaign.
Most notably, the upcoming OIG report detailed by The Times stands in contrast to Trump’s assertion, given its focus on McCabe’s authorization of disclosures that ultimately resulted in a negative story about Clinton.
