Withheld from Congress: US Intelligence Community’s IG Report on Whistle-blower’s Complaint

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
Rep. Andy Biggs introduces motion to censure Schiff for parody transcript | Fox News



"Savages" has been trending on Twitter after President Trump called 6 members of the House of Representatives that on Saturday morning. Lumping AOC+3 with the two heads of House committees leading the impeachment hearings perpetuates the narrative that it’s the far left that’s behind The Troubles for Mr Trump.

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump

Can you imagine if these Do Nothing Democrat Savages, people like Nadler, Schiff, AOC Plus 3, and many more, had a Republican Party who would have done to Obama what the Do Nothings are doing to me. Oh well, maybe next time!

5:16 AM - 28 Sep 2019

Perchance Mr Trump is mighty sore Mr Obama got the Nobel Prize and he has gotten an Impeachment Inquiry?

 

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
Former acting and deputy director of the CIA Michael Morell on the Trump-Ukraine whistleblower complaint |CBSN Red&Blue

The 4 concerns of the whistle-blower:

1. The phone call – “allegation of the whistle-blower is 100% right because we now have the summary of the phone conversation”
2. The cover-up of the phone call
3. The follow up – the action of policy officials
4. Background: what happened prior to all of this – the cancelling of assistance to the Ukraine government



The Republican spin for brainwashing the Trump base who are on the fence thinking about jumping off:

_Whistle-blower’s complaint looks like something a law professor would write so, truly, is there even a whistle-blower?
_If Pelosi truly wanted Trump removed, then why did Congress go on recess?
_No High Crimes & Misdemeanors
_Quid Pro Quo Joe

....but they're not talking about why Moscow Mitch is doing some of the things he's doing.

Here's House Minority Whip Steve Scalise:




Cuomo debunks comparison between Biden's and Trump's actions in Ukraine | CNN:




 
Last edited:

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
With reference to that Jimmy Dore Show episode that's the so-called full story of Trump-Biden-Ukraine....

Jimmy Dore: “…and of course, just like with Russiagate, the Democrats are finding a bullshit issue to distract everybody from this stuff they should be screaming about but they’re not screaming about the stuff they are supposed to be screaming about or opposing Trump on this stuff they’re supposed to be opposing him on. Why? Because they agree with him. What? Like how about his policy on blah blah … and the fact that it involves actual corruption from Joe Biden and his family also means that half the country is not going to go along with this impeachment. In fact, we already know it’s not going to go anywhere in the Senate so this is just another political stunt because the Democrats don’t have a policy position to offer to counter Donald Trump….”

Aaron "I totally agree" Maté: “It is so symbolic that this is the issue that leads them to finally coalesce around impeachment because it shows that you can do anything, you can cause, as you say Jimmy, genocide in Yemen, but you cannot go after another member of the establishment. And so the Democrats and the Democratic partisans who identify with them in the media, this now is the impeachment worthy scandal, not committing mass murder in Yemen, not pulling out of the Iran deal, the Paris according, not locking up kids in cages and subjecting immigrants to even more cruelty then they already were under Obama. No, you cannot go after Joe Biden and this is what we are going to get you back for.”
Truly, is this all Dore and Maté can see? The mind boggles.

Aaron Maté is the same chap who mocked Andy McCabe's Go-Fund-Me contributors over Twitter when Fox News contributors spread the 'news' that the authorities were about to indict McCabe, btw.
 

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
When it Ukraines it Pours, with Jimmy Kimmel:

 

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
Regarding the Greece-registered but Ukraine-based Burisma, The Hill reported in April that Yuri Lutsenko, the current Ukrainian prosecutor general, had told its columnist that while investigating Burisma he’d found information of interest about Joe Biden’s intervention in the case. The following month, Lutsenko clarified with Bloomberg News (reported May 16th) that there was no evidence of wrongdoing by Joe or Hunter Biden.
The first thing to note is that the current Prosecutor General of Ukraine is not Yuriy Lutsenko. My bad. He was succeeded in office by Rusian Riaboshapka on August 29th of this year, according to Wiki. Corroboration comes from a September NBC news exclusive with Lutsenko, which mentions that he was PG until last month. There are news reports out there that still identify Lutsenko as the current PG.



The second thing, the whistle-blower mentions Lutsenko in a multipage letter-cum-statement dated August 12th 2019, which was sent to the chairs of the intel committees. So, at this time Lutsenko was still PG.

The letter-cum-statement is marked “Unclassified". A paragraph in it reads: “To the best of my knowledge the entirety of this statement is unclassified when separated from the classified enclosure. (Etc., etc.)”

Section IV of this unclassified document titled Circumstances leading up to the 25 July Presidential phone call refers to the series of articles that appeared in online publication The Hill beginning late March 2019 in which “several Ukrainian officials – most notably, Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko – made a series of allegations against other Ukrainian officials and current and former US officials. Mr Lutsenko and his colleagues allege, inter alia: … that former Vice President Biden had pressured former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in 2016 to fire then Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin in order to quash a purported criminal probe into Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company on whose board the former Vice President’s son Hunter Biden sat.
“In several public comments, Mr Lutsenko also stated that he wished to communicate directly with Attorney General Barr on these matters.”


The full unclassified document may be read here: https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20190812_-_whistleblower_complaint_unclass.pdf

Section I deals with The 25 July Presidential phone call involving President Trump and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Excerpts:

“…after an initial exchange of pleasantries, the President used the remainder of the call to advance his personal interests. Namely, he sought to pressure the Ukrainian leader to take actions to help the President’s 2020 reelection bid. According to the White House officials who had direct knowledge of the call, the President pressured Mr Zelenskyy to, inter alia:
· initiate or continue an investigation into the activities of former Vice President Joseph Biden, and his son Hunter Biden;
· assist in purportedly uncovering that allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 US Presidential election originated in the Ukraine, with a specific request that the Ukrainian leader locate and turn over servers used by the DNC and examined by the US cyber-security firm Crowdstrike, which initially reported that Russian hackers had penetrated the DNC’s network in 2016; and
· meet or speak with two people the President named explicitly as his personal envoys on these matters, Mr Guiliani and Attorney-General Barr, to whom the President referred multiple times in tandem.

….


“The White House officials who told me this information were deeply disturbed by what had transpired in the phone call. They told me that there was already a “discussion ongoing” with White House lawyers about how to treat the call because of the likelihood, in the officials’ retelling, that they had witnessed the President abuse his office for personal gain.”

ETA:
James Risen: I Wrote About the Bidens and Ukraine in 2015. The Right-Wing Media Twisted My Reporting | Democracy NOW!


 
Last edited:

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
Jake Tapper fact-checks Rep. Jim Jordan (ranking member of the House Oversight Committee) on Ukraine scandal | CNN

 

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
...and more Republican senators will cross party lines in their thinking.
ETA: Given the cracks already in the Senate dam (as seen in Jeff Flake's remarks), I won’t be surprised if the dam visibly breaks in the Senate soon, say within the next couple of weeks.


Jeff Flake: 'At least 35' GOP senators would vote to remove Trump if vote was private


Reporting by Savannah Behrmann |USA Today | Sept 27th

WASHINGTON — Former Republican Senator Jeff Flake said that he thinks at least 35 Republican senators would vote for President Donald Trump to be removed from office if they could vote in private.

Speaking at the 2019 Texas Tribune Festival Thursday, Flake was responding to comments made by Republican political consultant Mike Murphy on MSNBC who said that if there was a secret vote, at least 30 GOP Senators would back impeachment.

“That's not true. There would be at least 35," Flake said.

Once an officeholder has been impeached, the proceedings shift to the Senate, which holds a trial and decides whether to convict the accused and remove him or her from office.

Calls for an official impeachment inquiry came to fruition Tuesday by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over the president's efforts to get Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter.

During an interview with NPR, the Arizona Republican elaborated on his comments, continuing that “anybody who has sat through two years, as I have, of Republican luncheons realizes that there's not a lot of love for the president. There's a lot of fear of what it means to go against the president, but most Republican senators would not like to be dealing with this for another year or another five years.”

A two-thirds majority, or 67 senators, is needed to convict and remove the accused from office. Republicans currently hold the majority. For the President to be removed from office by the Senate with impeachment, at least 20 Republicans would need to join the Democrats and independents.

Flake was one of the President’s most visible GOP critics in the Senate and announced he wouldn’t be seeking re-election in 2017, citing nastiness of Trump-era politics.

“That was a pretty damning transcript,” Flake said of the summary of the July 25th phone call between Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky released Wednesday. “That was not anything you want your president to be doing. I think we need to wait for the investigation to conclude and wait for likely testimony from the whistleblower him or herself before drawing conclusions. But it seems the House is already moving ahead.”

He stated that he was glad "to see the (House) Intel Committee have the hearing yesterday," elaborating that he doesn't want to see impeachment in such a divided country, and that he'd rather see the President defeated the "old fashioned way at the ballot box."

Flake reinforced Trump's power of the Senate GOP, stating that "this is the president's party without a doubt. And to win a Republican primary in just about every state, you've got to be with the president. And there's a lot of fear that if you aren't, you'll get primaried.”

Flake also said that he has "not ruled out" voting for a Democrat over Trump, hoping that the "Democrats nominate somebody who has a broad appeal."

Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...-gop-senators-would-impeach-trump/3792866002/
 
Last edited:

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
Jimmy Dore: ... In fact, we already know it’s not going to go anywhere in the Senate so this is just another political stunt ...
Below, an extract from the USA Today report @ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ld-white-house-release-transcript/3806507002/

After Pelosi announced the impeachment inquiry, McConnell criticized the "impeachment parade" and a Democratic "obsession with relitigating 2016."

The impeachment developments also brought up speculation that McConnell would refuse to hold a Senate trial if Trump were impeached by the House.

However, that prompted NPR's Tom Dreisbach to remind other media outlets and observers that McConnell told NPR months ago the Senate would hold a trial.

[My note: Dreisbach’s tweet on this includes an embedded audio of McConnell telling the NPR in March 2019 “definitively and on the record that if the House impeached, the Senate *would* hold a trial”. https://twitter.com/TomDreisbach/st...ld-white-house-release-transcript/3806507002/ As rules stand, the Senate must hold a trial if the House impeaches. The trial will be presided over by the Supreme Court, which the Republicans have stacked, but some folk have faith the Chief Justice will be mindful of his legacy and not do anything to skew the trial.]
 

Frank Underwood

Telly Talk Star
Messages
2,644
Reaction score
557
Medals
3
Member Since
June 2001
Perchance Mr Trump is mighty sore Mr Obama got the Nobel Prize and he has gotten an Impeachment Inquiry?
Which is a disgrace considering Obama was just as big of a war monger as any Republican.

With reference to that Jimmy Dore Show episode that's the so-called full story of Trump-Biden-Ukraine....

Jimmy Dore: “…and of course, just like with Russiagate, the Democrats are finding a bullshit issue to distract everybody from this stuff they should be screaming about but they’re not screaming about the stuff they are supposed to be screaming about or opposing Trump on this stuff they’re supposed to be opposing him on. Why? Because they agree with him. What? Like how about his policy on blah blah … and the fact that it involves actual corruption from Joe Biden and his family also means that half the country is not going to go along with this impeachment. In fact, we already know it’s not going to go anywhere in the Senate so this is just another political stunt because the Democrats don’t have a policy position to offer to counter Donald Trump….”

Aaron "I totally agree" Maté: “It is so symbolic that this is the issue that leads them to finally coalesce around impeachment because it shows that you can do anything, you can cause, as you say Jimmy, genocide in Yemen, but you cannot go after another member of the establishment. And so the Democrats and the Democratic partisans who identify with them in the media, this now is the impeachment worthy scandal, not committing mass murder in Yemen, not pulling out of the Iran deal, the Paris according, not locking up kids in cages and subjecting immigrants to even more cruelty then they already were under Obama. No, you cannot go after Joe Biden and this is what we are going to get you back for.”
Truly, is this all Dore and Maté can see? The mind boggles.
The mind boggles if you support the establishment and the deep state. IMO, Dore and Maté are 100% spot on. The video also showed Nancy Pelosi saying Dems wouldn't impeach Bush for war crimes when he was president. Nobody tried to impeach Trump over violating the emoluments clause, violating the First Amendment with his Muslim ban, illegally bombing Yemen and Syria, separating families at the border and locking kids in cages, creating conditions that could potentially lead to a nuclear war, or plunging the climate into further disarray. They didn't even try to impeach Trump over obstruction of justice claims. Both times impeachment has been on the table, it's been because Trump was accused of asking a foreign government for dirt on an opponent. Russiagate didn't work out, but the incident with Ukraine finally gave them the ammunition they needed. And all because Trump crossed the establishment.

So yes, Dore and Maté are absolutely right. The Democrats don't care if you're a murderous pig using the presidency to enrich yourself. They don't care if you recklessly pull out of nuclear deals or climate accords. They don't care if you lock kids in cages or illegally ban Muslims from entering the country. Sure, many of them will claim to be against those things, but somehow the Democratic leadership will say impeachment is off the table. But the minute they can prove you asked a foreign government to investigate a Democrat, they'll open an impeachment inquiry so fast it will make your head spin. I'm not even saying that what Trump did isn't illegal, but it show's how the establishment's only concern is protecting its own. It's also hypocritical when you consider that the Democrats also turned to Russian and Ukraine sources for dirt on Trump. But we're supposed to pretend that never happened, just like we're supposed to pretend that the 2016 primaries weren't rigged against Bernie Sanders. Democrats support Republican atrocities while engaging in corrupt behavior of their own.

Aaron Maté is the same chap who mocked Andy McCabe's Go-Fund-Me contributors over Twitter when Fox News contributors spread the 'news' that the authorities were about to indict McCabe, btw.
Good for Maté. Paying the legal bills of an accused liar and wealthy former member of the corrupt FBI is ridiculous.
 
Last edited:

Frank Underwood

Telly Talk Star
Messages
2,644
Reaction score
557
Medals
3
Member Since
June 2001
These once-secret memos cast doubt on Joe Biden's Ukraine story

Former Vice President Joe Biden, now a 2020 Democratic presidential contender, has locked into a specific story about the controversy in Ukraine.

He insists that, in spring 2016, he strong-armed Ukraine to fire its chief prosecutor solely because Biden believed that official was corrupt and inept, not because the Ukrainian was investigating a natural gas company, Burisma Holdings, that hired Biden's son, Hunter, into a lucrative job.

There’s just one problem.

Hundreds of pages of never-released memos and documents — many from inside the American team helping Burisma to stave off its legal troubles — conflict with Biden’s narrative.

And they raise the troubling prospect that U.S. officials may have painted a false picture in Ukraine that helped ease Burisma’s legal troubles and stop prosecutors’ plans to interview Hunter Biden during the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

For instance, Burisma’s American legal representatives met with Ukrainian officials just days after Biden forced the firing of the country’s chief prosecutor and offered “an apology for dissemination of false information by U.S. representatives and public figures” about the Ukrainian prosecutors, according to the Ukrainian government’s official memo of the meeting. The effort to secure that meeting began the same day the prosecutor's firing was announced.

In addition, Burisma’s American team offered to introduce Ukrainian prosecutors to Obama administration officials to make amends, according to that memo and the American legal team’s internal emails.

The memos raise troubling questions:

1.) If the Ukraine prosecutor’s firing involved only his alleged corruption and ineptitude, why did Burisma's American legal team refer to those allegations as “false information?"

2.) If the firing had nothing to do with the Burisma case, as Biden has adamantly claimed, why would Burisma’s American lawyers contact the replacement prosecutor within hours of the termination and urgently seek a meeting in Ukraine to discuss the case?

Ukrainian prosecutors say they have tried to get this information to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) since the summer of 2018, fearing it might be evidence of possible violations of U.S. ethics laws. First, they hired a former federal prosecutor to bring the information to the U.S. attorney in New York, who, they say, showed no interest. Then, the Ukrainians reached out to President Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani.

Ukraine’s new president, Volodymyr Zelensky, told Trump in July that he plans to launch his own wide-ranging investigation into what happened with the Bidens and Burisma.

“I’m knowledgeable about the situation,” Zelensky told Trump, asking the American president to forward any evidence he might know about. "The issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue of making sure to restore the honesty so we will take care of that and will work on the investigation of the case.”

Biden has faced scrutiny since December 2015, when the New York Times published a story noting that Burisma hired Hunter Biden just weeks after the vice president was asked by President Obama to oversee U.S.-Ukraine relations. That story also alerted Biden’s office that Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin had an active investigation of Burisma and its founder.

Documents I obtained this year detail an effort to change the narrative after the Times story about Hunter Biden, with the help of the Obama State Department.

Hunter Biden’s American business partner in Burisma, Devon Archer, texted a colleague two days after the Times story about a strategy to counter the “new wave of scrutiny” and stated that he and Hunter Biden had just met at the State Department. The text suggested there was about to be a new “USAID project the embassy is announcing with us” and that it was “perfect for us to move forward now with momentum.”

I have sued the State Department for any records related to that meeting. The reason is simple: There is both a public interest and an ethics question to knowing if Hunter Biden and his team sought State’s assistance while his father was vice president.

The controversy ignited anew earlier this year when I disclosed that Joe Biden admitted during a 2018 videotaped speech that, as vice president in March 2016, he threatened to cancel $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, to pressure Ukraine’s then-President Petro Poroshenko to fire Shokin.

At the time, Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma. Shokin told me he was making plans to question Hunter Biden about $3 million in fees that Biden and his partner, Archer, collected from Burisma through their American firm. Documents seized by the FBI in an unrelated case confirm the payments, which in many months totaled more than $166,000.

Some media outlets have reported that, at the time Joe Biden forced the firing in March 2016, there were no open investigations. Those reports are wrong. A British-based investigation of Burisma's owner was closed down in early 2015 on a technicality when a deadline for documents was not met. But the Ukraine Prosecutor General's office still had two open inquiries in March 2016, according to the official case file provided me. One of those cases involved taxes; the other, allegations of corruption. Burisma announced the cases against it were not closed and settled until January 2017.

After I first reported it in a column, the New York Times and ABC News published similar stories confirming my reporting.

Joe Biden has since responded that he forced Shokin’s firing over concerns about corruption and ineptitude, which he claims were widely shared by Western allies, and that it had nothing to do with the Burisma investigation.

Some of the new documents I obtained call that claim into question.

In a newly sworn affidavit prepared for a European court, Shokin testified that when he was fired in March 2016, he was told the reason was that Biden was unhappy about the Burisma investigation. “The truth is that I was forced out because I was leading a wide-ranging corruption probe into Burisma Holdings, a natural gas firm active in Ukraine and Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, was a member of the Board of Directors,” Shokin testified.

“On several occasions President Poroshenko asked me to have a look at the case against Burisma and consider the possibility of winding down the investigative actions in respect of this company but I refused to close this investigation,” Shokin added.

Shokin certainly would have reason to hold a grudge over his firing. But his account is supported by documents from Burisma’s legal team in America, which appeared to be moving into Ukraine with intensity as Biden’s effort to fire Shokin picked up steam.

Burisma’s own accounting records show that it paid tens of thousands of dollars while Hunter Biden served on the board of an American lobbying and public relations firm, Blue Star Strategies, run by Sally Painter and Karen Tramontano, who both served in President Bill Clinton’s administration.

Just days before Biden forced Shokin’s firing, Painter met with the No. 2 official at the Ukrainian embassy in Washington and asked to meet officials in Kiev around the same time that Joe Biden visited there. Ukrainian embassy employee Oksana Shulyar emailed Painter afterward: “With regards to the meetings in Kiev, I suggest that you wait until the next week when there is an expected vote of the government’s reshuffle.”

Ukraine’s Washington embassy confirmed the conversations between Shulyar and Painter but said the reference to a shakeup in Ukrainian government was not specifically referring to Shokin’s firing or anything to do with Burisma.

Painter then asked one of the Ukraine embassy’s workers to open the door for meetings with Ukraine’s prosecutors about the Burisma investigation, the memos show. Eventually, Blue Star would pay that Ukrainian official money for his help with the prosecutor's office.

At the time, Blue Star worked in concert with an American criminal defense lawyer, John Buretta, who was hired by Burisma to help address the case in Ukraine. The case was settled in January 2017 for a few million dollars in fines for alleged tax issues.

Buretta, Painter, Tramontano, Hunter Biden and Joe Biden’s campaign have not responded to numerous calls and emails seeking comment.

On March 29, 2016, the day Shokin’s firing was announced, Buretta asked to speak with Yuriy Sevruk, the prosecutor named to temporarily replace Shokin, but was turned down, the memos show.

Blue Star, using the Ukrainian embassy worker it had hired, eventually scored a meeting with Sevruk on April 6, 2016, a week after Shokin’s firing. Buretta, Tramontano and Painter attended that meeting in Kiev, according to Blue Star’s memos.

Sevruk memorialized the meeting in a government memo that the general prosecutor’s office provided to me, stating that the three Americans offered an apology for the “false” narrative that had been provided by U.S. officials about Shokin being corrupt and inept.

“They realized that the information disseminated in the U.S. was incorrect and that they would facilitate my visit to the U.S. for the purpose of delivering the true information to the State Department management,” the memo stated.

The memo also quoted the Americans as saying they knew Shokin pursued an aggressive corruption investigation against Burisma’s owner, only to be thwarted by British allies: “These individuals noted that they had been aware that the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine had implemented all required steps for prosecution … and that he was released by the British court due to the underperformance of the British law enforcement agencies.”

The memo provides a vastly different portrayal of Shokin than Biden's. And its contents are partially backed by subsequent emails from Blue Star and Buretta that confirm the offer to bring Ukrainian authorities to meet the Obama administration in Washington.

For instance, Tramontano wrote the Ukrainian prosecution team on April 16, 2016, saying U.S. Justice Department officials, including top international prosecutor Bruce Swartz, might be willing to meet. “The reforms are not known to the US Justice Department and it would be useful for the Prosecutor General to meet officials in the US and share this information directly,” she wrote.

Buretta sent a similar email to the Ukrainians, writing that “I think you would find it productive to meet with DOJ officials in Washington” and providing contact information for Swartz. “I would be happy to help,” added Buretta, a former senior DOJ official.

Burisma, Buretta and Blue Star continued throughout 2016 to try to resolve the open issues in Ukraine, and memos recount various contacts with the State Department and the U.S. embassy in Kiev seeking help in getting the Burisma case resolved.

Just days before Trump took office, Burisma announced it had resolved all of its legal issues. And Buretta gave an interview in Ukraine about how he helped navigate the issues.

Today, two questions remain.

One is whether it was ethically improper or even illegal for Biden to intervene to fire the prosecutor handling Burisma’s case, given his son’s interests. That is one that requires more investigation and the expertise of lawyers.

The second is whether Biden has given the American people an honest accounting of what happened. The new documents I obtained raise serious doubts about his story’s credibility. And that’s an issue that needs to be resolved by voters.

Source: https://thehill.com/opinion/campaig...-memos-cast-doubt-on-joe-bidens-ukraine-story
 

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
Both times impeachment has been on the table, it's been because Trump was accused of asking a foreign government for dirt on an opponent. Russiagate didn't work out, but the incident with Ukraine finally gave them the ammunition they needed. And all because Trump crossed the establishment.
Rubbish.
 

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
IMO, Dore and Maté are 100% spot on
Then Dore and Maté have a definition of "corruption" and "corrupt" that's not in any English-language dictionary that I know of. What Dore did was call issues of ethical concern corruption, though he offered no proof of corruption. Maté did not point that out to him, and said he agreed with Dore. Some prize-winning journalist he.
 
Last edited:

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
They don't care if you lock kids in cages or illegally ban Muslims from entering the country. Sure, many of them will claim to be against those things, but somehow the Democratic leadership will say impeachment is off the table.
Are you aware of when impeachment is applicable? Please enlighten us when you are.
 

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
Paying the legal bills of an accused liar and wealthy former member of the corrupt FBI is ridiculous.
The only folk who call Andy McCabe a liar are folk who think like yourself. Even the DoJ's IG's Office did not call him a liar. That is not what they accused him of, and even what they accused him of they have not proven. Maté chose to mock folk over how they spent their own money. Why was there even a need to do that?
 
Last edited:

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
Some of the President’s Men in the Trump Shadow Government….

First, the man in charge. Rudy Giuliani told CNN that he had text messages that indicated that the State department was encouraging his work in Ukraine.

Then he told George Stephanopoulos:

"I wouldn't cooperate with Adam Schiff": Giuliani | ABC News


Upshot: Mr Giuliani was subpoenaed on Monday. He’s been asked to preserve and produce documents relating to his dealings with Ukraine dating backing to January 2017. The subpoena lists some two dozen items including documents, conversations with associates, work done by Mr Giuliani with Ukrainian entities, and details of phone calls between Trump and Ukrainian officials and other US Cabinet agencies.

The subpoena also seeks documents and depositions from Ukrainian and Russian associates of Mr Giuliani – the Soviet-born Ukrainian emigres Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman who are biz partners living in South Florida; and Russian Semyon Kislin, a commodities trader in New York. "According to FBI and Interpol reports, Kislin … was using his company to launder money from Russia to the U.S.," Newsweek reported, quoting investigative reporter Olga Lautman. https://www.newsweek.com/giuliani-mysterious-ties-russia-former-soviet-union-decades-1215349

The documents are due to the House Democrats by Oct 15th.

Earlier, on Friday, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was subpoenaed:

State Department issues subpoena to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo


Since then, the Wall Street Journal has reported Mr Pompeo had sat in on the telephone conversation between Prezs Zelensky and Trump. The WH had not previously disclosed this.

Also, you might recall the FBI learnt from its investigation into the Trump 2016 election campaign that George Papadapolous told former Australian foreign minister Alexander Downer that the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton that they wanted to pass along. ….And subsequently, Prez Trump wanted AG William Barr to investigate the origins of that probe and the Mueller Special Counsel investigation.

The New York Times has now reported that Mr Trump had asked Australian PM Scott Morrison to help Mr Barr. The suggestion being that the US was the party initiating an overture.

Reuters news agency, reporting on that NYT story out of Sydney on Oct 1, said the NYT reported that the request for help was made “in hopes of discrediting Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s campaign to aid Trump in winning the 2016 national election”.

Reuters said it had confirmation that that phone call was, in fact, made last month: that an Australian government source, who’d spoken on condition of anonymity, “confirmed the two leaders spoke by telephone in September”.

However, Reuters had reviewed a letter that showed that request from Prez Trump was predated by an offer to assist from Australia, made back in May. The offer was made in a letter Joe Hockey, Australia’s ambassador to the US, sent to US Attorney General William Barr.

"The Australian government will use its best endeavours to support your efforts in this matter," Hockey wrote in a May 28 letter, referring to Trump's May 24 announcement of plans to investigate the origins of the FBI investigation. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-whistleblower-australia-pro-idUSKBN1WG2JY

So, in this matter, perhaps there’s no real there-there.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post reported yesterday (Sept 30th) that US Attorney General Mr William Barr personally asked foreign officials to aid his inquiry into CIA & FBI activities.

Barr has already made overtures to British intelligence officials, and last week the attorney general traveled to Italy, where he and Durham met senior Italian government officials and Barr asked the Italians to assist Durham, according to one person familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive issue. It was not Barr’s first trip to Italy to meet intelligence officials, the person said. (Durham is John Durham, the U.S. attorney in Connecticut “who has been assigned the sensitive task of reviewing U.S. intelligence work surrounding the 2016 election and its aftermath”.)​

It would be interesting to me to know if the Australian ambassador had, in fact, received any calls or visits from US officials on this matter that lead him to make that offer of assistance in May. According to WaPo, the request that Prez Trump made to the Aussie PM during their phone call was made at Mr Barr’s request. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...0cd5c4-e3a5-11e9-b403-f738899982d2_story.html

Trump pressed Australia to help investigate Russia probe origin, source says | CNN

 

Frank Underwood

Telly Talk Star
Messages
2,644
Reaction score
557
Medals
3
Member Since
June 2001
That's why they've only considered impeachment when Trump tried to get dirt on an opponent from a foreign government, and not for any of his other Constitutional violations.

Then Dore and Maté have a definition of "corruption" and "corrupt" that's not in any English-language dictionary that I know of. What Dore did was call issues of ethical concern corruption, though he offered no proof of corruption. Maté did not point that out to him, and said he agreed with Dore. Some prize-winning journalist he.
Illegally bombing countries in the Middle East is just an "ethical concern?" Your definitions sound fouled up to me.

Are you aware of when impeachment is applicable? Please enlighten us when you are.
Now who's being petulant. But then you've always taken a passive aggressive stance with me.

If a Muslim ban violates the establishment clause, how is that not an impeachable offense? If Trump violates the emoluments clause, how is that not impeachable? If Trump illegally declares war, how is that not an impeachable offense? These are just "ethical concerns" to you? Now that's what I call rubbish! You sound just like a member of the establishment.

The only folk who call Andy McCabe a liar are folk who think like yourself. Even the DoJ's IG's Office did not call him a liar. That is not what they accused him of, and even what they accused him of they have not proven. Maté chose to mock folk over how they spent their own money. Why was there even a need to do that?
People who think like me, huh? From the Intercept: The funds will be used for his attorneys’ fees for various legal fights he faces. Those courtroom fights relate to a report from the Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General which recommended that McCabe’s be fired after its investigators found that he repeatedly and deliberately lied to the FBI about his role in various leaks. Any amounts left over from this fund will be donated to a non-profit group designated by McCabe. Source: https://theintercept.com/2018/03/31...thy-ex-fbi-official-andrew-mccabe-is-obscene/

Of course people can spend their money however they wish, but if they're going to go public with it, people have a right to express their opinion about it.
 
Last edited:

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
The Intercept doesn't write itself. There're real people behind all that writing.
 

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
Their writing reflects how they think, and act, down to their choice of words.
 

Zable

Telly Talk Dream Maker
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
554
These GOP defenses of Trump called 'disastrous'

 
Top