Below is my column in the Hill newspaper on the implications of the still developing Ukraine story. The testimony yesterday and release of the information on the complaint still lacks the critical nexus needed for a public corruption crime. If you establish the basis for such a crime, then the use of the separate server becomes a serious problem as covering up a crime. But you still need a crime. Otherwise, Trump can argue that he had been the victim of leaks about diplomatic calls and they took the step to better control access to such information. So, if you want impeachment, find the quid.
Here is the column:
The transcript of the call from President Trump to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is enough to make Edwin Edwards blush. The infamous Louisiana governor once bragged, “The only way I can lose this election is if I’m caught in bed with either a dead girl or live boy.”
Even after the July appearance of Robert Mueller before Congress to discuss his findings as the special counsel, Trump apparently felt no qualms about calling Zelensky the following day to press him about investigating his main political opponent, Joe Biden, and son Hunter Biden. It is breathtaking to read Trump trying to convince Zelensky to do him a “favor” by going after the Bidens and suggesting meetings with Attorney General William Barr and his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani.
Yet for those hoping to find a dead promise or a live Russian in the transcript, they will be disappointed again. The transcript lacks a critical element needed for impeachment, which is evidence of a quid pro quo. Trump never connects the investigation with the roughly $400 million in military aid. While he discusses the aid, he never suggests he will not send it. That does not mean a case for impeachment or criminal prosecution cannot be made. Unlike the prior impeachable offenses suggested by Democrats, this allegation of self-dealing could be both an impeachable offense and a federal crime, though neither would be easy to prove.
Past suggested impeachable offenses either have been facially ridiculous, like the comments Trump made about Charlottesville or his criticism of national anthem protest kneelers, or legally flawed, like the Russia intervention or obstruction theories. The closest viable claims are his payments to alleged former mistresses that are in the criminal plea agreement of his former personal lawyer Michael Cohen.
This is different. If a quid pro quo was proven, it would be self-dealing and an abuse of public office, and that can be a crime. Just ask disgraced former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. He was convicted after calling other political figures to leverage the appointment of a new United States senator, to replace the newly elected President Obama, for his own political gain. While some of us were highly critical of that prosecution, because politicians routinely use such decisions to their own benefit, Blagojevich was found guilty and his conviction was later upheld.
Yet such cases have a mixed record. Former Virginia Governor Robert McDonnell was convicted of using his office to benefit a businessman who gave him and his wife various gifts. I was also critical of that prosecution, and it was later overturned by the Supreme Court. Then there was the prosecution of Senator Robert Menendez, who helped a wealthy doctor and donor with various government problems. The doctor in turn spent lavishly on Menendez, who actually pressured officials in cases benefiting the doctor, and helped him secure visas, yet Menendez was acquitted.
So what would Congress need to establish a strong case in light of this transcript? Some have argued that it does not matter if Trump never raised the military funding as leverage with Zelensky, but it does matter. There is nothing illegal in a president complaining about the lack of an investigation into corruption, even by a political opponent. The transcript does not show Trump demanding a political charge but an investigation.
The transcript has material that will help Trump, who has maintained that he held back the aid to try to get other countries to pony up in support of Ukraine. In the call, Trump tells Zelensky, “We spend a lot of effort and a lot of time. Much more than the European countries are doing, and they should be helping you more than they are.” He speaks at length about the need for those countries to contribute, and Zelensky agrees.
Trump further asks for access to a computer server and references Crowdstrike, a cybersecurity company related to the Russia hacking investigation. Former FBI director James Comey referenced Crowdstrike as one of the critical elements in the investigation, and that investigation is being reviewed by United States Attorney John Durham. A computer server and other information connected to the Russia hacking evidence would likely assist Durham in his investigation. The references to Barr in the transcript could be defended on that basis.
The quid may still be out there, but it will not be found in this transcript. The most obvious place to look is with witnesses who may have heard Trump make the linkage. The most intriguing of those possibilities would be former national security adviser John Bolton, who Trump recently fired and then maligned. Bolton reportedly was irate over the freezing of Ukrainian military aid, and he could have the knowledge and motivation to supply information. It also is reasonable for Congress to say that, with a half billion dollars on the table, it is hardly necessary to state the connection. Yet presidents often have such leverage over countries.
The references to Barr can be defended, but they are still a matter of legitimate concern for Congress. Trump repeatedly says he will have Giuliani and Barr call Zelensky, and Zelensky says a new prosecutor is set to look into the matter. Yet the problem for potential prosecution is that nothing came from those referrals. The Ukrainians never contacted Barr, and Barr never had anything to do with the Biden controversy. Barr was also unaware of the call and of Trump making references to him.
Trump is a recidivist in the law of attempt. He often proposes ridiculous actions, like firing a special counsel, but what follows is nothing. Advisers like Barr and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have become masters of listening to his tirades and then going about their business. The chances that Barr would work with Ukrainians to hunt down the Bidens is about as likely as Trump suggesting he would be a shoo in for the Nobel Peace Prize “for a lot of things” if the system was not rigged against him.
As shown by McDonnell and Menendez, these types of cases are difficult to prove, even when actions are taken. This would be an attempt to perform an act that is itself a controversial basis for a criminal charge. Zelensky says the Ukrainians were already looking at all such matters, and Barr was never told, let alone enlisted, to help out. It would be like the McDonnell case in which the Supreme Court rejected the notion that the governor took “official acts” in calling Virginia officials on behalf of the business except, in this instance, the calls to Barr never took place.
Absent a clear quid pro quo, a Senate impeachment trial could be a grotesque scene. The Trump team would certainly point out that the Obama administration directly used a secret court to investigate his political opponents on claims that were based in part on opposition research paid for by the Clinton campaign. The trial would highlight the dubious money given to Hunter Biden by Chinese and Ukrainian interests while his father negotiated financial and political agreements.
While many in the media have chosen to focus on the narrow question of whether Joe Biden pressured Ukraine to fire its corruption prosecutor to protect his son, there is a more important question of whether the family profiteered during his term in the White House. Few people believe the Chinese and Ukrainians searched the world for a financial or energy genius and came up with Hunter Biden. He happened to be the son of the vice president, who reminded the Ukrainians that he would decide whether they received over a billion dollars in loans and support. Hunter Biden has contradicted his father denying he had no knowledge of and never spoke to him about the Ukraine dealings. That would be a painful Senate trial, culminated by Menendez voting as one of the jurors.
Despite efforts of critics to downplay the underlying allegations, the Biden affair would be relevant to the merits of such a trial. If Trump simply picked up the phone and asked a foreign leader to investigate Elizabeth Warren without any outstanding allegations of corruption, it would be impossible to defend. The problem here is that the Biden contracts do appear to involve corruption, precisely the type that Biden lambasted when he bragged about getting the Ukrainian prosecutor fired.
If one agrees that the windfall contracts secured by Hunter Biden were obvious influence peddling, then Trump pushing for an investigation into that possible crime becomes more defensible. It does not, however, make it right. Trump clearly tripped another wire for possible impeachment, immediately after the special counsel made his final report on prior controversies. Congress is justified in investigating, and the transcript is not the entirety of the evidence that might show the intent or act or corruption. All this is why House Democrats still need to find the quid.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He also served as the last lead counsel in a Senate impeachment trial and testified as a constitutional expert in the Clinton impeachment hearings. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.
The most crucial aspects of the Trump-Ukraine “scandal,” which has led to impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump, are not being told, even by Republicans.
Trump was very likely motivated by politics if he indeed withheld military aid to Ukraine in exchange for Kiev launching an investigation into Democratic presidential frontrunner Joe Biden, though the transcript of the call released by the White House between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelinsky does not make certain such a quid-pro-quo.
But what’s not being talked about in the mainstream is the context of this story, which shows that, politics aside, Biden should indeed be investigated in both Ukraine and in the United States.
We know from the leaked, early 2014 telephone conversation between Victoria Nuland, then assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, and Geoffrey Pyatt, then U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, that then Vice President Biden played a role in “midwifing” the U.S.-backed overthrow of an elected Ukrainian government soon after that conversation.
That’s the biggest crime in this story that isn’t being told. The illegal overthrow of a sovereign government.
As booty from the coup, the sitting vice president’s son, Hunter Biden, soon got a seat on the board of Ukraine’s biggest gas producer, Burisma Holdings. This can only be seen as a transparently neocolonial maneuver to take over a country and install one’s own people. But Biden’s son wasn’t the only one.
Left to right: Kerry, post-coup president Petro Poroshenko, Pyatt and Nuland, June 2014. (State Dept.)
A family friend of then Secretary of State John Kerry also joined Burisma’s board. U.S. agricultural giant Monsanto got a Ukrainian contract soon after the overthrow. And the first, post-coup Ukrainian finance minister was an American citizen, a former State Department official, who was given Ukrainian citizenship the day before she took up the post.
After a Ukrainian prosecutor began looking into possible corruption at Burisma, Biden openly admitted at a conference last year that as vice president he withheld a $1 billion credit line to Ukraine until the government fired the prosecutor. As Biden says himself, it took only six hours for it to happen.
Exactly what Biden boasted of doing is what the Democrats are now accusing Trump of doing, and it isn’t clear if Trump got what he wanted as Biden did.
Threats, Bribes and Blackmail
That leads to another major part of this story not being told: the routine way the U.S. government conducts foreign policy: with bribes, threats and blackmail.
Trump may have withheld military aid to seek a probe into Biden, but it is hypocritically being framed by Democrats as an abuse of power out of the ordinary. But it is very much ordinary.
https://consortiumnews.com/2019/09/26/what-isnt-mentioned-about-the-trump-ukraine-scandal-the-routine-corruption-of-us-foreign-policy/
“Mr. Trump did not discuss the delay in the military assistance on the July 25 call with Mr. Zelensky, according to people familiar with the conversation. A Ukrainian official said Mr. Zelensky’s government did not learn of the delay until about one month after the call.” ~ New York Times
Trump apparently felt no qualms about calling Zelensky the following day to press him about investigating his main political opponent, Joe Biden, and son Hunter Biden. It is breathtaking to read Trump trying to convince Zelensky to do him a “favor” by going after the Bidens…
Well Turley, having your breath taken away apparently also sucked whatever oxygen your brain needed to prevent you from going all Adam Schiff on your blog. I’m just surprised you exposed your bias in The Hill. You usually reserve that tripe for your blog’s gladiator games and not allow that to color your legal opinions in places like The Hill.
Clearly it makes sense why you didn’t name your blog Prima Facie; opting instead for Res ipsa loquitur. Your posts lately don’t even seem to meet either standard. That’s a shame.
Reptile food fight… Lizards vs. turtles goes bananas
https://www.facebook.com/KampKenan/videos/976784039322402/
Sorry, Turley, merely soliciting the assistance of a foreign government is a violation of US law. See: 11 CFR § 110.20 – Prohibition on contributions, donations, expenditures, independent expenditures, and disbursements by foreign nationals (52 U.S.C. 30121, 36 U.S.C. 510). No “quid pro quo” needed, but Trump did withhold the assistance, albeit temporarily, which he has no authority to do. It is not serendipitous that this happened along with the request to reopen an investigation that had already concluded no wrongdoing. Then, there’s the matter of his staff hiding this recording of this solicitation for political purposes in a code word stand alone database intended solely for the most-sensitive matters, such as covert operations, etc. That is misuse of this system. Proof of Trump’s crimes does not constitute state secrets nor warrant hiding proof of his crimes in the server dedicated to the most-sensitive government secrets. Doing this establishes consciousness of guilt–and would stand up as proof of guilty mens rea in any court room. Then, there’s the matter of Giuliani acting as a de facto or shadow Secretary of State.
Sounds like you’re already doing the Kellyanne Pivot: Trump’s going to dump on Obama, Biden and anyone else he can think of, he’s got lots of “explanations” but none of that mitigates his crimes which are clear on their face. Nancy Pelosi has previously spoken very eloquently about how divisive the impeachment process would be, and that’s why she was reluctant to proceed until the tide was so strong that it had to be done. Congress cannot let this go by without reacting. Consider this conduct in light of all of the pearl-clutching and chest pounding over Bill Clinton lying about sexual liaisons with an intern, and consider the implications of that compared with Trump withholding military assistance and seeking a “favor’ from a foreign leader in the form of reopening a closed investigation in order to drum up dirt on a possible political opponent. This conduct is reprehensible, and the influence of foreigners in American elections was one of the biggest fears of those who founded our country.
Listen to what he says. This is why we elected Trump.
“There is nothing the political establishment will not do, no lie that they won’t tell, to hold their power and their prestige, at your expense.”
Haha. More awesomeness. You, like many of the gullible rubes, dupes, klan wannabees, pocket-traitors and grifters on the make, manifest the error that “just because everbody that lives in toad swaller B.F.E. thinks the same way I do, that all other ‘Mericans do too.” So sorry for your loss.
this is to “but everbody down to the feed store/bait shop thinks democrats are bad” anon
Mark! Always good to hear what you have to say. And thanks for reminding me to pick up a new bottle of Horse Liniment. Stuff works wonders on my sciatica. Just don’t let it get in your eyes. Ouch. 😉
PS I live in DC. Doh!
PPS Democrats ARE bad. Have you NOT been paying attention??
Sure, that’s why he was booed right after the election when he walked into that Madison Ave eatery and told his upperEast side neighbors their days were numbered and he was giving power to the people. They were furious about that tax cut and all their lobbyist lawyer friends having to work all day in the hot sun as Cabinet and Agency heads.
The influence of foreigners and the reprehensible conduct came from the Democrats, the Hillary Clinton campaign and the rogue Obama admin officials. Open your eyes.
Honey, here’s the reality check for you: Trump isn’t going anywhere. Line up your grief counselors now to help you through this next election.
DOH! Did You Know There’s a Treaty Between the USA & Ukraine Regarding Cooperation For Prosecuting Crimes?
Posted on September 25, 2019 by DCWhispers
http://dcwhispers.com/doh-did-you-know-theres-a-treaty-between-the-usa-ukraine-regarding-cooperation-for-prosecuting-crimes/
Dims/Rinos & the rest of the American/Trump haters irreparably harming the nation & our govt.
It’s past time for Trump to round up those damned Ahole Traitors.
http://news.trust.org/item/20190927093440-cuva6
oky1 Thank you!!
Cindy,
I think both of those reports came from a Drudge Report type clone site
thelibertydaily.com
As the old media is banning everyone that doesn’t like their Fake News new sites are popping up.
good point oky
But, Oky1 and Cindy, that’s not what we have here: Trump asked for a “favor”: reopening a closed investigation, and he held up military aid that was appropriated on a bipartisan basis by Congress.
Natacha, you confuse them with someone who GAF about reality. They’re Russia loving, America hating Trumpsters
Natacha, Anon1,
I suggest you might try to get out of your bubble at the Fake News sites, Wapo, NYT, CNN, MSNBC, etc that most of no one is paying any attention or watching unless they’re stuck in an airport, etc.
Hell even Fox isn’t going after different real news much of the time.
Here is so fun for you. What’s the back story as to why DJ Trump called Shiffty “Liddle”?
Rumour has it anyway. LOL;)
Perhaps this is all very good and advances survival of the fittest. The Left have more to lose it seems
👍🏽
Friends, relatives, sanity, and health: The costs of politics
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221870
In short, there is clearly an empirical basis for the hypothesis that politics, especially the divisive sort of politics characterizing the contemporary civic sphere in the United States, negatively affects social, psychological, and even physical health.
…
Our results also provide insight into the populations most likely to believe politics is adversely affecting them at the time the survey went to the field. They are younger and unemployed; more disagreeable (more critical and quarrelsome), and less emotionally stable (more anxious and easily upset). They tend to be politically liberal, strongly disapprove of President Donald Trump, and have low opinions of their political opposites (they see them as uninformed, closed-minded, and untruthful). They also tend to discuss politics frequently and to be actively involved in a range of political activities.
It may be that the costs of politics were unusually acute when this survey was administered, just two months after the inauguration of an extremely polarizing president. The fact that left-leaning people who disapproved of Trump were among the most consistent in reporting negative health costs raises the possibility that our sample is capturing a moment in time when costs for that group were particularly high. On the other hand, the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama were so deeply divisive [24] that each of the last three presidents was labeled, with empirical support, the most polarizing ever. Our expectation is that, while the ideological leanings of those most adversely affected by politics will change from administration to administration, the tendency of those who are most politically involved and interested to be most adversely affected will persist and this brings us to our final point.
Do me a favorand listen!
https://soundcloud.com/user-519301063/intelligence-chief-joseph-maguire-defends-his-handling-of-the-whistleblower-complaint
https://soundcloud.com/penguin-audio/the-whistle-blower-complaint-released-by-the-house-intelligence-committee-9262019
Professor Turley continues to misstate the facts. I will provide just one example: “It is breathtaking to read Trump trying to convince Zelensky to do him a “favor” by going after the Bidens . . .” Read the transcript, Mr. Turley. Trump never used the word “favor” in connection with the Bidens. Not once. The “favor” had to do with the firm Crowdstrike and their bogus report claiming that the Russians hacked the DNC’s computers. RIF. Reading is fundamental. Apply the RIF concept and cease making stuff up. And the use of the word “breathtaking” in this context is bombastically inappropriate.
“Bombastically!” Hear, hear!
Jonathan: Stop splitting hairs over whether there was am explicit quid pro quo when Trump told the Ukrainian president to dig up dirt on Joe Biden. The whole phone conversation reeked of it. When president Zelensky spoke to Trump he already knew that the President was holding up military aid to Ukraine–so Zelensky told Trump he needed the assistance. Trump immediately replied that he wanted a “favor” to ask. Zelensky was aware of the consequences if he rebuffed Trump’s demands. The rest of the conversation about “corruption” in Ukraine was simply cover. Even a mafia don knows how to mask his orders to underlings to avoid FBI detection. He doesn’t have to say: “I want you to whack this guy”. They know what the boss wants–as did Zelensky. Trump didn’t have to say: “Unless you get dirt on Biden I won’t give you military assistance”. It was implicit in everything Trump said. “Something for something”–that’s the classic definition of quid pro quo. You better go back to your Black’s dictionary, Jonathan.
Your fable collapses when one separates your chaff from the facts. The substitution of your mental meanderings for the literal transcript in order to create your personal set of “facts,” as “Pencilneck” did yesterday, is not viable or plausible. You will soon be seen for the fraud that you are. That leads to the question of your motivation. Obviously, your singular goal is to perpetuate abortion, perversion and “free stuff.” You haven’t a care for the American restricted-vote republic – freedom and self-reliance as established by the Founders. You simply want to meld the new communist America with China in the final act of “globalization” – the ultimate enslavement of all of humanity – the final solution.
You ought to read the actual transcript of the discussion along with the legal statement by the Ukranian prosecutor that was removed because of Joe Biden’s interference in Ukranian affairs.
This link to John Solomon will contrain the prosecutors statement and some other things.
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/463307-solomon-these-once-secret-memos-cast-doubt-on-joe-bidens-ukraine-story
Enough hysteria, incoherence, chaos, anarchy and nascent insurrection.
“Crazy Abe” Lincoln seized power, neutralized the legislative and judicial branches and ruled by executive order and proclamation to “Save the Union.”
President Donald J. Trump must now seize power, neutralize the legislative and judicial branches and rule by executive order and proclamation to “Save the Republic.”
“the people are nothing but a great beast…
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value.”
– Alexander Hamilton
GTFU, loser.
That’s what George Washington said to British Commander General William Howe immediately prior to dispensing with the effeminate twit.
George Washington seldom if ever used profanity or even lost his temper.
I’m sure that is all you could handle yet would never step up to the plate.
Combat Infantryman’s Badge – Purple Heart – 1970 Cambodian Incursion – Vietnam
And you?
Shocking story, very good information.
http://www.bhrigupandit.com
” If a quid pro quo was proven, it would be self-dealing and an abuse of public office, and that can be a crime.”
Unless Biden does it, of course. If a deep state traitor does it, they can brag about it on television and never face any repercussions.
Turley is a swamp rat. The only difference between him and the rest is he disguises his sleaziness a little bit better.
Adam Schiff, sooper genius
OT: Wile E Coyote was one of my favs.
The creator of this cartoon was, in fact, discussing the human desire to find a direct connection with God, but never was able to obtain it. It was always just slightly out of reach. The Road Runner being “God.”
Another good one is Pinky and the Brain, where the opening song says, “One is a genius, the others insane.”
What the creator of this show was inferring is that we really don’t know who is the genius, and who is insane.
Maybe the Brain is, in fact, the insane one, since he is talking about blowing up the world/taking over the world. And since Pinky always ruins his devastating plans, perhaps Pinky is the true genius.
Food for thought.
The more I read U.S. History (current book: The Civil War of 1812 by Alan Taylor), the more I see how “normal” is the foreign influence over our elections and politics, and the outreach of partisans within the US to foreign helpers.
The question raised by the 2016 election meddling by Russia and Ukraine, and this most recent blowup begs the central question about FEC rules banning foreign contributions, and how “anything of value” applies to adverse publicity for one’s opponent.
We live in a global media environment, and cannot control foreign media, nor should we want to. The greatest danger is false-flag ops, psychological warfare based on lies and meant to deceive, confuse and enrage sectors of the American public. These infowarfare campaigns are now, and have always been, a tool of foreign intelligence agencies, with the operative highly trained in opinion-shaping psych war and media manipulation skills.
I don’t see how FEC rules can be usefully interpreted as banning the arrangement of adverse publicity arising from foreign actors. Some kind of red line would have to be defined which segregates off into its own category defamation campaigns — yet our own Supreme Court has ruled that political candidates are “public persons” and deserve a lowered standard of legal protection from defamation campaigns.
Unless that ruling were substantially reversed, I don’t see how adverse publicity campaigns against one’s opponent can be subject to the “anything of value” FEC contribution law.
Things may get to the point with misinformation, propaganda, and mind-control where the Sullivan decision has to be rolled back, but I don’t think we’re there yet.
Even at that point, it’s going to be difficult to balance freedom of the press (including web publishing) with laws banning political hit jobs based upon false-flag ops.
good insights PBINCA
i have a simpler mind. I think that a lot of what is done is done first and then the law catches up later.
that’s how decisive leadership works. it acts. it does not consult a legal matrix for advance approval of every little sentence.
and those adversaries out there who will try and get some leader for doing that based on trivialities. even if it cripples all future leadership, even if the cost to us all outweighs the benefits to them.
hence we must ask, are there any “we” in America anymore? or is that just a cynical remark most operators don’t believe?
I am cynical and questioned who “we” really were decades ago, and nothing has made me think the American “we” is any more illusory than it was back then.
Watching the Democrats make mountains out of every mole hill, listening them project beams with motes in their eyes, makes me ever more convinced, there really is no “We” happening inside the Beltway at all.
The continuing Obama Coup D’etat in America is the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious scandal in American political history.
The co-conspirators are:
Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Andrew Weissmann, Comey, Christopher Wray, McCabe,
Strozk, Page, Laycock, Kadzic, Yates, Baker, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan,
Campbell, Sir Richard Dearlove, Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud, Alexander Downer,
Stefan “The Walrus” Halper, Azra Turk, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan, Gina Haspel,
Clapper, Lerner, Farkas, Power, Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Holder, Brazile, Sessions (patsy),
Obama, anonymous and fraudulent “whistleblower” et al.
“Quid Pro Joe” is done. Now what will the Democrats do next? Work hard on behalf of the American people? LOL.
Democrats and their MSM media pals plus all their Hollywood dumdums have been RESISTING President Donald J. Trump since election day. “Impeach the MotherF’er!” they scream. Rep. Rashida Tlaib is fundraising and selling that message on tee shirts! Imagine that. Hey Republicans, let’s take back Minnesota from these wack jobs.
We are sick of you power-hungry sore loser Democrats. We are sick of the lying fake news media that is in the tank for Democrats. We are sick of Hollywood big mouth activists. We are sick of all y’all.
Message to Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler, Schumer, et al: Your coup attempts, your assinine stonewalling, resisting, sabotaging, leaking, lying, conniving, blockading, theatrics, ETC! is going to backfire on you foolish Democrats. Voters see you for what you are. Voters are smarter than YOU think we are. We are on to you and your sick games. Just Shut Up already and Do your dam jobs on behalf of the American people.
Sooo, here’s a hypothetical for you. Let’s suppose Trump does not get impeached, but the Dems are still convinced that what Trump did in this was “horrible.” Further. let us siuppose that the Dems are able to squeeze out enough illegal alien votes, and corpse votes to let Biden win in 2020. The older Biden, not the cokehead son. Trump swears he is going to run again in 2024.
Now, if Biden is on the phone in 2021 with the President of the Ukraine, what if he asks for some help investigating what Trump did vis a vis the Ukarine in 2019. Is that impeachable???
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
interesting turnabout but Biden will never get the nomination now. this threw him under the bus.
pantsuit takeover of Democratic party. all males to the back of the bus.
What if you we’re intelligent, would you still spout your ridiculous ignorance?
YNOT rarely tries to make sentence long comment and usually just tosses out a slur. Well, thanks for the attempt at conversation, but it still comes off like an insult., Feel free to insult me directly if it pleases you.– “YNOT?”
Not always but comment was for skanky. If the shoe fits feel free to wear it.
…were….
JT: “Despite efforts of critics to downplay the underlying allegations, the Biden affair would be relevant to the merits of such a trial.”
It would be a beautiful thing to see an impeachment trial. The Clinton impeachment trial(which I opposed) lacked the fireworks we would see if they impeached Trump: let’s all throw dirt at each other and see what sticks. Who has the better case for corruption? C’mon Dems, let’s do this- you have the majority to make it happen.
It’s absurd that the Dems who have been hollering for impeachment since before the inauguration won’t vote to start the impeachment hearings. It’s almost like they know how full of it they are- they’re afraid of the outcome.
totally. bring it!
TRUMP MADE FALSE ASSERTIONS TO ZELENSKY
EUROPEAN UNION GENEROUS WITH AID TO UKRAINE
The European Union and its financial institutions have provided more than $16.5 billion in grants and loans to support its reform process since 2014. In addition to those E.U. funds, Germany on its own has pledged millions of dollars in assistance, as has Britain. And Japan, meanwhile, has given $3.1 billion in assistance to Ukraine to the establishment of diplomatic relations in the early 1990s.
In 2014, after Russia annexed the region of Crimea and sparked war in Ukraine’s east, Congress enthusiastically passed legislation that imposed sanctions on Russia and increased ongoing military assistance to Ukraine. The money has provided cybersecurity and intelligence support, as well as training and equipment, to the country’s armed forces.
Speaking to reporters Tuesday, Trump said he had withheld aid — which was eventually released on Sept. 11 after lawmakers raised concerns — and would do it again “until such time as Europe and other nations contribute to Ukraine because they’re not doing it.”
In a White House released transcript of the July call between Trump and Zelensky, both leaders complain about European countries, singling out Germany, for not doing enough to help Ukraine — though it was not clear they were specifically discussing financial assistance.
“Germany does almost nothing for you,” Trump said to Zelensky, according to the transcript. “All they do is talk and I think it’s something that you should really ask them about. When I was speaking to Angela Merkel she talks Ukraine, but she doesn’t do anything.”
Zelensky told Trump he had met with the German chancellor as well as French President Emmanuel Macron and told them that they were not enforcing sanctions against Russia and “not working as much as they should work for Ukraine.”
U.S. assistance (and the threat of withholding it) has played a role in efforts to root out corruption and promote transparency in a country that has long grappled with cronyism.
Edited from: “Trump Boasted About Aid To Ukraine. But U.S. Isn’t Kiev’s Only Friend”
The Washington Post, 9/25/19
WPost: “In 2014, after Russia annexed the region of Crimea and sparked war in Ukraine’s east…”
George Friedman(CEO of Stratfor): The overthrow of Yanukovich “was the most blatant coup in history.” Friedman says that the coup was done by the US.
Even President Poroshenko admitted in court that it was coup.
So, what sparked the war? The US coup sparked the civil war. This is a fact that the establishment wants to keep hidden- it is critical to understanding the events in the Ukraine.
yeah ivan but Democrats have no respect for sovereignty as a concept and so they applaud all revolutionary acts against supposed fascists. Including revolutionary coups against the supposed Orange Man Fascist himself.
They are not bound by any considerations of hypocrisy, consistency, nor conventional morality. In a way that is clear thinking in a total war situation. However at what point did the Democratic leadership decide it was in a total war against the Republican part of the population?
its time to wake up about this folks. this is incipient civil war stuff. it really is.
they’re playing with fire. but the question is not will they get burned, the question is who gets burned first and worst.
it was done by western Ukrainians intent on allying with the West. I am not sure it was “done” by the US. They had plenty of Ukrainians to provide the muscle.
Of course, certainly American mischief makers er I mean, advocates of democracy, were there egging them on and handing out cookies and surely plenty of money under the table. One might call that “strategic support” or something like that, lol
it has an ongoing taint which is clearly continuing to affect people and events
Ivan, Yanukovich was a stooge for Putin and that’s been well-documented. He was totally corrupt. The Ukrainian Revolution could have never happened had Yankovich enjoyed popular support.
Trump’s smart.
The EU is an interesting thing. It allows the US to exert more efficient leverage on the member nations than if we had to cajole them all at once. Likewise, makes it into a more efficient geographic unit for purposes of our trade. Much as I understand why the nations of Europe, and the citizens, hate this bureaucratic monstrosity, it’s convenient for the US in so many ways.
NATO, another interesting thing. For Europe’s benefit, but, we get what we get out of it. And Trump’s making them pay more for the privilege of being part of “our gang.” Well done, Trump!
Ukraine’s ardent wish is to get annexed like Poland. Well, that would be strategically unacceptable to Russia and really a bridge too far. That’s what Putin made clear with the successful annexation of Crimea and through the quasi independence of Donbass. Trump is wise to deconflict with Russia over Eastern Ukraine—even as he executes the Western policy he inherited, by his dialogues with West Ukraine.
Hail to the Chief!
Kurtz, Obama got the NATO pledge to 2% by 2024.
“…Mr. Obama persuaded NATO leaders to increase their military spending at a meeting in Wales in 2014, after a newly aggressive Russia invaded Ukraine. Back then, alliance members pledged to work toward raising spending levels to 2 percent of their gross domestic products by 2024. All 29 allies have begun to increase their military budgets in real terms, and two-thirds of them have plans to reach the 2 percent target by 2024. And they reaffirmed their “unwavering commitment” to these targets in the communiqué issued at the end of the two-day summit in Brussels this week….
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/12/opinion/editorials/trump-nato-obama.html
oh, good. well done obama. and trump’s holding their feet to the fire to pay up their share. good presidential cooperation.
Saw that Hill. Just another of Trump’s daily lies, but in this case it removes another excuse for how his bullying wasn’t about a political favor.
On a humorous note, in Trump’s joint meeting with Zelensky the other day he small talked about remembering a fairly recent Miss Universe Contest that Miss Ukraine won. No, she didn’t..
Anon, I’ve been trying to make an important point regarding a certain CyberSecurity firm Trump thought was in the Ukraine.
Apparently this firm is the subject of endless conspiracy theories. And it would seem that Trump believes these conspiracies. But the filter on this blog will not let me address this; even when I try to alter the firm’s name.
Not familiar with that.
Here let me try
crowdstrike crowstroke crowdsnipe la lah lah