Democrats Sit On Their Hands Cartoons

Still Sitting and Still Crying.

The US attack on Syria is completely legal and utterly moral. Here’s what Trump’s critics need to know

Syria's President Bashar al-Assad is responsible for this.

Syria's President Bashar al-Assad is responsible for this.

President Trump’s calibrated and courageous decision to join France and Britain in striking chemical weapons targets in Syria before dawn Saturday drew support and opposition from members of Congress. Opponents have argued he should have sought congressional authorization for the military action in Syria. They are wrong.
President Trump’s action to attack Syria was exceptionally well-grounded legally. Self-evident moral authority supports using any reasonable means to protect innocents from the moral outrage of chemical weapons.
Ahead of the attack, Vice President Mike Pence personally notified House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis.; House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.; and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. He could not reach Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. He confirmed the limited nature, objectives and duration of the Syrian strike.
As Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and other U.S. officials made clear, America and our allies mounted a “one-off” attack to deter any future use of chemical weapons by Syria, a prerogative fully supported by international law.

President Trump’s thoughtful, well-planned, narrowly drawn and superbly executed strike on Syrian chemical weapons facilities wasted no time, ordnance or lives. Its purpose was clear, well-stated and well-served. It should be non-controversial. Still, he is attacked.

Neither President Trump nor anyone in his administration has suggested the onset of a long American military combat commitment in Syria.
But U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley reaffirmed America’s resolve to prevent any further use of chemical weapons. She said Saturday at the U.N.: “I spoke to the president this morning, and he said, ‘If the Syrian regime uses this poisonous gas again, the United States is locked and loaded.’”
Nevertheless, leading Democrats have been vocal in demanding congressional approval for any U.S. military involvement in Syria.
Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., the Democratic nominee for vice president in 2016, was quick to tweet: “Trump’s decision to launch airstrikes against Syria without Congress’ approval is illegal. We need to stop giving presidents a blank check to wage war. Today it’s Syria, but what’s going to stop him from bombing Iran or North Korea next?”
Kaine’s tweet is legally inept, and all but laughable, given that President Bill Clinton – husband of Kaine’s 2016 running mate, Hillary Clinton – undertook a long series of air strikes in Kosovo and elsewhere, without any congressional authorization or pretense to getting it.
Let’s cut to the nub: The 1973 War Powers Resolution was intended to dissuade presidents from long-duration combat engagements and insertion of large numbers of U.S. troops. The law grew out of a decade of U.S. combat in Vietnam. It presumes to require that presidents get congressional approval for military combat operations if they last more than 60 days.
Most legal scholars consider parts of the law unconstitutional. Presidents of both parties have generally demurred. No president has acceded to the law’s constitutionality.
That said, the interplay of executive and legislative branches on military matters – reflecting the constitutional balance between the Article II “commander-in-chief” powers and Congress’s Article I “declaration of war” powers – has always been respectful since Vietnam.
It was this time, also.
Yet some members of Congress still contend the War Powers Resolution has been triggered, or that President Trump must report to them before another strike.
This is nonsense. No president has been held to that standard, effectively transmuting the commander-in-chief’s authority to conduct limited duration, surgical strikes – consistent under international law and with allies – into a congressional prerogative.
Even the Authorization of Use of Military Force Act of 2001 – enacted after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks – is not relevant here. That law was intended to address, and thus authorized, counterterrorism operations on a major scale, within set limits.
The law, which has been roundly criticized in recent years, opened the door to attacks on state and non-state actors tied back to the Sept. 11 attacks – but without a time limit. Whatever one thinks of the law, our attack in Syria is not that kind of operation, nor is any such mass deployment in Syria under discussion.
Still, critics in Congress demand President Trump defend his Syria action and come to them for permission. They want, it seems, to further limit the president’s already limited ability to use the U.S. military to defend our nation, forcing him to get their authorization for what he did and any strikes that may lie ahead.
Frankly, this is unnecessary, wildly premature at best, and somewhat embarrassing.
Congressional Democrats seem unable to stop themselves. They must attack this president. It is now an article of faith with the party, even if not backed up by the Constitution.
President Trump’s thoughtful, well-planned, narrowly drawn and superbly executed strike on Syrian chemical weapons facilities wasted no time, ordnance or lives. Its purpose was clear, well-stated and well-served. It should be non-controversial. Still, he is attacked.
Famously, Sen. Arthur Vandenberg, R-Mich., said in 1947 that “we must stop partisan politics at the water’s edge,” explaining his support for Democratic President Harry Truman’s foreign policy.
Where has that traditional consensus gone? Democrats senselessly pile on, joined by a small band of anti-Trump Republicans. The specter of such internal division is odd. It must be to our allies.
Be sure of this: These frivolous claims of illegality are watched, maybe even fanned, by our worst adversaries. Anything that divides us helps them.
Some days, the head spins listening to official Washington go to war with itself. In this instance, leading Democratic critics of President Trump cannot just say “thank you and well done.”
They must, it seems, twist this legally justified, masterfully concluded operation – one that serves the best-long term interests of America and the world – into an act worthy of partisan resistance.
When will this stop? When will we think again, as Vandenberg did, about the importance of unity for national security, national security for preserving moral values, and both as a way for making the world a better, safer place? If not a consensus around this event, then when?
For his extraordinary, thoughtful and entirely legal strike on Syria’s chemical weapons infrastructure – establishing a new and higher level of credible deterrence to make the world a safer place – President Trump deserves our thanks, not our condemnation or attempts to limit his lawful authority as the commander-in-chief.  

Justice Dept. wants 'sanctuary' areas to prove they comply with laws

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan.  (Associated Press photos)

The U.S. Justice Department last week sent another round of letters to the so-called sanctuary cities of Seattle and Oakland, as well as the state of Vermont, demanding further proof that they are cooperating with federal immigration authorities.
The letters warn that the Justice Department could use subpoena power to force Seattle and Vermont to provide documents showing whether they are restricting information sharing between law enforcement agencies.
The department is further seeking a legal opinion on whether policies in Oakland's police manual violate the federal statute requiring information-sharing with federal immigration authorities.
"When cities and states enact policies that thwart the federal government's ability to enforce federal immigration law, they choose to place the protection of criminal aliens over the safety of their communities," Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement. "The Justice Department will not tolerate this intentional effort to undermine public safety and the rule of law, and I continue to remind all jurisdictions to reconsider policies that put their residents in harm's way."

"When cities and states enact policies that thwart the federal government's ability to enforce federal immigration law, they choose to place the protection of criminal aliens over the safety of their communities."

Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan denounced the department's subpoena threat.
"Our city complies with federal immigration law and asks that the Department of Justice and ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] do the same," Durkan said in a statement Friday. "The federal government does not get to run our cities or convert our local law enforcement officials into immigration cops. I implore this administration to focus on real public safety threats, like the opioid crisis, instead of unnecessarily threatening our residents and mayors across the country."

"The federal government does not get to run our cities or convert our local law enforcement officials into immigration cops."
- Jenny Durkan, mayor of Seattle

In February, Durkan issued a directive requiring that all requests for city information or access by immigration authorities be routed through her office, the Seattle Times reported.
She further weighed in on the new pressure from the DOJ over Seattle’s immigration policies, the Times report said.
“Unlike some in the Trump administration, Seattle respects the rule of law,” the mayor, a former U.S. attorney, said. “Our city is tasked with protecting public safety for all people who call Seattle home. We will also protect our residents from unjust law-enforcement actions.”
Thursday’s DOJ letter requesting documents gives the city a May 14 deadline, the Seattle Times reported.
Justin Berton, a spokesman for Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf, said the city attorney, Barbara J. Parker, is reviewing the letter.
Parker issued a statement saying “Oakland is proud to be a sanctuary city and is in compliance with federal immigration law, KRON 4 Bay Area reported. She said the city will respond to the letter “at the appropriate time.”

Libby Schaaf, mayor of Oakland, Calif.  (Law Breaker!)

“Our sanctuary city policy encourages the community to work with police and helps law enforcement to solve and prevent crimes in our city,” Parker said in the statement. “We will continue to focus our resources on fighting crime, rather than tearing apart Oakland families and making our city less safe.”
The Justice Department has threatened to deny grant money from communities that refuse to share such information.
However, a federal judge Wednesday sided with the city of Los Angeles and issued a nationwide injunction prohibiting the Justice Department from tying federal grants to local police departments’ cooperation with ICE, Axios reported.
The Justice Department also notified the District of Columbia and the Louisville-Jefferson County Metro Government in Kentucky that there is no evidence either jurisdiction is currently out of compliance with the federal statute.

Starbucks issues apology over arrest of two men

Article is about two big snowflakes crying and political correctness. 

Starbucks has issued an apology after a viral video showed two black men being arrested for refusing to leave when a store employee denied them access to the restroom.  (AP)

Starbucks has issued an apology after a viral video showed two black men being arrested for refusing to leave when a store employee denied them access to the restroom.
According to Philadelphia Police Commissioner Richard Ross, a Starbucks employee called 911 Thursday to report the two for "trespassing.” The employee told officers that the two men came in and asked to use the restroom but were not allowed to do so because they hadn’t purchased anything, which Ross said is company policy.
After police arrived, Ross said they asked the men to leave three times but they refused. They were arrested but ultimately released after the company decided not to pursue charges.
The video shows officers handcuffing the two while another man is overheard saying he was meeting the men, calling the arrest “ridiculous.”
Facing major backlash, Starbucks issued an apology on Twitter Saturday morning.
The incident prompted accusations of racism, but Ross quickly dismissed claims of wrongdoing by the officers.
"As an African-American male, I am very aware of implicit bias; we are committed to fair and unbiased policing," he said. But he added, "If a business calls and they say that 'someone is here that I no longer wish to be in my business,'" the officers have "a legal obligation to carry out their duties and they did just that."
He said the officers "did absolutely nothing wrong" and were professional in their conduct toward the individuals but "got the opposite back."
The mayor of Philadelphia, Jim Kenney, has since ordered the city’s Commission on Human Relations to review Starbucks’ policy.

Gun rights supporters hold rallies at state capitols across US

An estimated 160 pro-gun supporters participated in a gun-rights rally at the Atlanta statehouse on Saturday.  (Associated Press)

Gun rights advocates rallied at state capitols across the country on Saturday to make their voices heard amid recent efforts to impose stricter gun-control laws that they fear undermine their Second Amendment rights.
Peaceful protesters numbering in the hundreds gathered outside statehouses from Maine to Wyoming to hear speakers warn that any restrictions on gun ownership or use could eventually lead to bans for law-abiding gun owners.
“Gun owners have been portrayed in a negative way and it is our hope that this peaceable rally will show that we are safe, law-abiding individuals that happen to take our constitutional rights very seriously,” Dave Gulya, an organizer for the Maine event that attracted about 800 people, told the Bangor Daily News.
The National Constitutional Coalition of Patriotic Americans sponsored the 45 planned rallies across the U.S. in support of the right to bear arms, according to the paper.
"If you have a building and you take a brick out every so often, after a while you're not going to have a building," said Westley Williams, who joined about 100 people outside the state Supreme Court building in Cheyenne, Wyo.
An estimated 160 Second Amendment supporters rallied in Atlanta, with some carrying firearms, flags and signs saying “Don’t Tread on Me” as they listened to speakers talk about gun rights.

Gun rights activists with the National Constitutional Coalition of Patriotic Americans take part in a national rally aimed at pushing back against calls for stronger gun control measures outside the state Capitol Saturday in Albany, N.Y.  (Associated Press)

Protesters in Vermont took to the steps of the Statehouse in Montpelier, where days earlier they felt Gov. Phil Scott “betrayed” them when he signed three major gun control measures.
“Three days ago, on these steps, we were betrayed," Joe Nagle told the Burlington Free Press. "We were promised no new gun laws."
The paper reported that the National Rifle Association criticized Scott, a Republican, and called on gun owners to abandon the governor, who changed his stance in February after an alleged school shooting plot shook the state.

Mead Russell West posing with a copy of the U.S. Constitution at a gun rally Saturday in front of the Wyoming Supreme Court in Cheyenne, Wyo.  (Associated Press)

Saturday's protests came less than three weeks after hundreds of thousands marched in Washington, New York and elsewhere to demand tougher gun laws after the Feb. 14 school shooting in Parkland, Fla., that killed 17. Organizers of those protests demanded a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and called for universal background checks on potential gun owners.
Pro-gun protesters also showed up in Boston; Indianapolis; Albany, N.Y.; Austin, Texas; Des Moines, Iowa; and other cities.

A man holding a 3% flag as a group recited the pledge during a pro gun-rights rally at the state capitol in Austin, Texas.  (Associated Press)

"We've got to stop being quiet," Nagle told the Free Press.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad Cartoons

US warships, B-1 bombers strike against Assad after suspected chemical attack

The United States on Friday announced it approved precision military strikes on Syria after alleging that the Assad regime used chemical weapons in a recent attack in the country.
The size of the strike was twice the size of the U.S. assault last year. Fox News confirmed that warships and U.S. Air Force B-1 bombers were used in Friday's bombing campaign.
The B-1 bombers flew out of Qatar and have the ability to fire from 600 miles away. U.S. guided-missile destroyers can launch Tomahawk cruise missiles with a maximum range of  1,500 miles.
President Trump called the assault "a combined operation with the armed  forces of France and the United Kingdom." The U.S. said Russia was not notified about the strike.
Defense Secretary James Mattis said no follow-up attacks are planned.  He said the Pentagon was careful to ensure the safety of Russian troops and Syrian civilians in the area. There were three targets in the strikes as opposed to the single airbase in last year's assault.
"Clearly the Assad regime did not get the message last year," Mattis said. "This time our allies and we have struck harder."
Mattis said the U.S. intelligence has determined that the Syrian government used chlorine gas in last Saturday's poison attack.
Anatoly Antonov, Russia’s ambassador to the U.S., said a pre-designed scenario is being implemented.
“Again, we are being threatened," he said. "We warned that such actions will not be left without consequences. All responsibility for them rests with Washington, London and Paris."
Trump, in the meantime, touted the support of two major allies who also blame the chemical attacks on Assad.
French President Emmanuel Macron said the operation was targeting the "clandestine chemical arsenal."
British Prime Minister Theresa May said she "authorized British armed forces to conduct coordinated and targeted strikes to degrade the Syrian Regime’s chemical weapons capability and deter their use."
Trump's announcement immediately preceded reports of loud explosions lighting up the sky in Damascus, the Syrian capital.
Syrian TV reported that Syrian air defenses responded to the U.S.-British-French attack. There have been multiple strikes against at least two sites, Marine Corps Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said late Friday from the Pentagon.
"Important infrastructure was destroyed," Dunford said, noting that sites associated with the Syrian chemical weapons program were both "targeted and destroyed."
Trump said the U.S. is prepared to "sustain" pressure on Assad until he ends what the president called a criminal pattern of killing his own people with internationally banned chemical weapons.
At least 40 people died in the chemical attack in Douma last Saturday, about 10 miles east of Damascus, and over 500 people, mostly women and children, were injured and brought to medical centers.
The attack occurred amid a resumed offensive by Syrian government forces after the collapse of a truce. Syrian activists, rescuers and medics said families suffocated in their homes.
Assad's actions, Trump said, "are not the actions of a man," but "are the crimes of a monster instead."
A similar chemical attack in Khan Sheikhoun in April 2017 that killed nearly 100 people prompted the U.S. to launch dozens of cruise missiles at a Syrian airfield to dissuade Assad from using chemical weapons in the future, officials said. But during the weekend, images of dead and sick women and children again circulated following another alleged chemical attack.
Trump also hit Russia and Iran for their sustained support of the Assad regime.
"The nations of the world can be judged by the friends that they keep," he continued. "Russia must decide if it will continue down this dark path or continue with civilized nations."

Trump's Syria action sparks mixed reaction from lawmakers

Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle reacted Friday night after President Donald Trump announced that U.S. military strikes would be carried out in Syria against the regime of Bashar al-Assad.
The news came after a suspected chemical attack by pro-regime forces last weekend in the rebel-held town of Douma. At least 40 people died in the attack and more than 500 people, mostly women and children, were hospitalized.
On Friday, Trump said Assad’s actions were not those “of a man” but rather “the crimes of a monster instead.”
Immediately following Trump’s address to the nation, loud explosions and thick smoke were reported in Damascus.
Here's what members of Congress and other officials had to say about the announcement:
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said, “Tonight, the administration notified me of the president's decision to use military action to deter Bashar al-Assad and respond to the Syrian regime's use of chemical weapons against its own people. I support both the action and objective. 
"The planning for this robust operation by the United States and our allies was clearly well-considered," McConnell continued. "It is evident that the President was provided with a number of options, and that our forces executed a challenging mission."

"The planning for this robust operation by the United States and our allies was clearly well-considered. It is evident that the President was provided with a number of options, and that our forces executed a challenging mission."

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., released a statement saying, "Tonight, the United States has taken decisive action in coordination with our allies. We are united in our resolve that Assad's barbaric use of chemical weapons cannot go unanswered. His regime's unconscionable brutality against innocent civilians cannot be tolerated."
"There should be no doubt that Russia and Iran have blood on their hands, and their partnership with Assad reveals the true nature of their regimes," he continued. "The United States and our allies must continue to seek ways to hold Assad's enablers accountable. Let us all pay tribute to the men and women of our armed forces."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., stated, "A pinpointed, limited action to punish and hopefully deter Assad from doing this again is appropriate, but the administration has to be careful about not getting us into a greater and more involved war in Syria."
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., tweeted a statement and added that the president "must come to Congress to obtain a new AUMF [Authorization for Use of Military Force], present a clear set of objectives, & ultimately hold Putin accountable for the bloodshed he has enabled."
U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, tweeted a statement saying, "The President's decision to retaliate with air strikes as part of a broader military response reflect his seriousness in addressing the scale and depravity of Assad's actions."
U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., shared his support for the attack, saying "Assad musut be held accountable for the use of chemical weapons.
U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., called Trump's move to launch airstrikes without congressional approval "illegal."
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said, "It is Congress, not the president, which has the constitutional responsibility for making war. The international community must uphold the prohibition against the use of chemical weapons, but it is unclear how Trump's illegal and unauthorized strikes on Syria achieve that goal."
U.S. Sen. David Perdue, R-Ga., issued a statement saying, “Chemical attacks against innocent children and civilians are horrific and totally unacceptable. Assad must know his inhumane actions will not be tolerated. I’ve met some of the Syrian families who fled Assad’s terror and are living in a refugee camp at the Turkish border. For too long, the world has been asking: when will Assad stop? It is time for action. President Trump is engaged and led our allies in measured response to hold Assad accountable."
House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., tweeted his strong support of Trump's decision to ally with the U.K. and France in response "to the Syrian regime's criminal use of chemical weapons against innocent men, women and children."
He added that the president was "right to assert that the Assad regime's evil acts cannot go unanswered."
U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., tweeted, “I haven’t read France’s or Britain’s ‘Constitution,’ but I’ve read ours and no where in it is Presidential authority to strike Syria.”
U.S. Rep. Justin Amash, R-Mich., in a tweet called the strikes “unconstitutional, illegal, and reckless.”
U.S. Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, issued a statement, saying he supported "the President's decision to undertake this strike together with out allies."
"Assad's use of chemical weapons against innocent civilians is unacceptable," he said. "Equally concerning, the attack is part of a trend of Russian supported chemical weapons attacks across the world."
"Tough questions about the future of our policy in Syria remain, but those questions should not detract from the justness of tonight's actions," he continued.

Largest Syrian-American group hails Trump after military action

The nation's oldest and largest advocacy group for Syrian Americans said Friday that it applauded President Donald Trump’s decision to take military action in Syria and enforce international law prohibiting the use of chemical weapons.
“We send our sincere thanks to the administration for holding [Syrian leader Bashar] Assad accountable for Sunday’s chemical attack in Douma, and the crimes against humanity over the past seven years of the Syrian war,” the Washington-based Syrian American Council (SAC) said in a statement.
The SAC said it sees Trump's action as a “genuine opportunity” to end Syria's war, a conflict in which the Assad regime has employed chemical weapons, barrel bombs and cluster munitions used “to target and kill civilians.”
“We urge President Trump and the coalition to sustain the strikes and to ground Assad’s air force, creating a No-Fly Zone and thereby disabling the Assad regime’s ability to commit further war crimes and mass atrocities,” the council said.

“We urge President Trump and the coalition to sustain the strikes and to ground Assad’s air force, creating a No-Fly Zone and thereby disabling the Assad regime’s ability to commit further war crimes and mass atrocities.”

The council said it remains “optimistic” that the Trump administration will work with the Syrian people to “remove Assad, put an end to the slaughter, and bring about peace, freedom, and democracy in Syria.”
The SAC’s mission is to empower the Syrian-American community to organize and advocate for a “free, democratic, secular and pluralistic Syria through American support,” according to its website.
The organization said that all means to politically and peacefully implement United Nations solutions have been tried to no avail, adding that Syria's allies in Russia and Iran continue to destroy de-escalation zones.
According to a fact sheet on SAC’s website, around 40 percent of Syria’s pre-war population of 22 million people are refugees, which equates to almost 10 million people.
The SAC also urged providing assistance to opposition forces to “empower them to collaborate with the United States and other international governments to fight terrorism and terrorist factions in Syria.”
But Syrian-Americans are not unanimous in support of Trump's Friday action. A separate group called the Syrian American Forum (SAF) says it opposes the U.S.-led intervention.
Ghias Moussa, head of the group's New York and New Jersey chapters, told USA Today that the Trump administration should not push for regime change in Syria.
“We don’t think that killing more innocent people in Syria by bombing them will rectify what has happened, whether it was done by the Assad regime or not,” Moussa told the newspaper.
“Americans should not change regimes around the world to get somebody we like and fight people we don’t like.”
Meanwhile, U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres released a statement Friday commenting on the reports of air strikes in Syria by the U.S. France, and Britain.
“Any use of chemical weapons is abhorrent,” Guterres said. “I have repeatedly expressed my deep disappointment that the Security Council failed to agree on a dedicated mechanism for effective accountability for the use of chemical weapons in Syria. I urge the Security Council to assume its responsibilities and fill this gap.”
He also urged U.N. member states "to show restraint in these dangerous circumstances and to avoid any acts that could escalate the situation and worsen the suffering of the Syrian people.”

Putin declares US-led Syria strike an 'act of aggression'

Russian officials warned of “consequences” after President Donald Trump announced his approval of U.S.-led military strikes in Syria against the Russian-backed regime of Bashar al-Assad.
Early Saturday, Russian President Vladimir Putin issued a statement saying the Western coalition’s “act of aggression” would only exacerbate the humanitarian catastrophe in Syria.
Putin called the strike a "destructive influence on the entire system of international relations" and said Moscow would call for an emergency of the U.N. Security Council.
Immediately following Trump’s televised address Friday night, announcing the U.S.-led strikes, loud explosions and thick smoke were reported in the Syrian capital city, Damascus.
Syrian air defense units shot down 71 out of 103 cruise missiles launched by the U.S., Britain and France, the Russian military claimed Saturday.
Russia’s Defense Ministry had earlier asserted that none of the missiles launched by the U.S. and its allies entered areas protected by Russia’s missile defense.
Prior to Putin's statement, other Russian officials issued grim reactions to the Western military effort.
“The worst apprehensions have come true,” Anatoly Antonov, Russia’s ambassador to the U.S., tweeted Friday. “Our warnings have been left unheard.

Anatoly Antonov, Russia's ambassador to the U.S.  (Reuters)

“A pre-designed scenario is being implemented,” Antonov said. “Again, we are being threatened. We warned that such actions will not be left without consequences. All responsibility for them rests with Washington, London and Paris.

“Insulting the President of Russia is unacceptable and inadmissible. The U.S. — the possessor of the biggest arsenal of chemical weapons — has no moral right to blame other countries.”

“Insulting the President of Russia is unacceptable and inadmissible,” he said. “The U.S.—the possessor of the biggest arsenal of chemical weapons—has no moral right to blame other countries.”

Maria Zakharov, spokeswoman for Russia's Foreign Ministry.  (Reuters)

Maria Zakharova, spokeswoman for Russia's Foreign Ministry, denounced the U.S. in a Facebook post Friday for the strikes on Syria -- a country that, she wrote, “for many years has been trying to survive terrorist aggression."
"The White House stated that its assuredness of the chemical attack from Damascus was based on 'mass media, reports of symptoms, video, photos as well as credible information,'” she wrote. “After this statement the American and other Western mass media should understand their responsibility in what is happening."
Russia and the U.S. had disagreed over a proper response in Syria after a suspected chemical attack by the regime last weekend in rebel-held Douma, a town about 10 miles east of Damascus, killed at least 40 people and injured more than 500, mostly women and children. The attack occurred amid a resumed offensive by Syrian government forces after the collapse of a truce.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov  (Associated Press)

Earlier Friday, Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, told reporters in Moscow that the claims of the suspected gas attack were a fabrication.
"Intelligence agencies of a state that is now striving to spearhead a Russo-phobic campaign were involved in that fabrication," Lavrov said, without elaborating or naming the state.
A Russian lawmaker claimed the strikes were aimed at disrupting the work of international investigators looking into whether Syria used chemical weapons in the town of Douma.
"The airstrikes were carried out by the U.S.-led coalition consciously to spoil the investigation," Russian parliament member Dmitry Sablin was quoted by the Interfax news agency as saying.
Alexander Sherin, deputy head of the State Duma's defense committee, likened Trump to Adolf Hitler, and considered the strikes to be a move against Russia.
Trump "can be called Adolf Hitler No. 2 of our time — because, you see, he even chose the time that Hitler attacked the Soviet Union," state news agency RIA-Novosti quoted Sherin as saying.
The strike came hours after Trump’s U.N. ambassador, Nikki Haley, told an emergency meeting of the Security Council that "the United States estimates that Assad has used chemical weapons in the Syrian war at least 50 times."
“Did a chemical weapons attack happen? Yes,” Haley told reporters before the meeting. “The U.S. has analyzed, yes, it has happened. The U.K. has analyzed, yes, it has happened. France analyzed, yes, it has happened. Three separate analysis all coming back with same thing. There is proof that this happened.”
Haley said during the meeting that should the U.S. and its allies decide to act in Syria, it would in the defense of "a bedrock international norm that benefits all nations" from the use of chemical weapons.

Smoke rising after Syrian government airstrikes hit in the town of Douma, in eastern Ghouta region east of Damascus, Syria, on Saturday, April 7, 2018.  (Associated Press)

Russia’s military on Friday again refuted the claim that chemical weapons had been used in Douma, citing a lack of evidence.
"According to the results of a survey of witnesses, studying samples and investigating locations undertaken by Russian specialists and medical personnel in the city of Douma, where chemical weapons purportedly were used, the use of poisonous substances was not shown,” said Maj. Gen. Yuri Yevtushenko, head of the Russian center for reconciliation of the warring parties in Syria.
Yevtushenko also said the Russian military would supply security for investigators from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons as they worked to determine whether chemical weapons had been used.
Russia's Defense Ministry said earlier Thursday that Douma was under the control of Syrian forces and that some 1,500 fighters of the Army of Islam group had left the city.
Yevtushenko said that the action was to "prevent provocations, guarantee security, for the support of law and order and organize aid for the local population."