Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

President Donald Trump - Formal Impeachment Inquiry Announced

12357173

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Hmmm... If Donald Trump had demanded the firing of a foreign prosecutor who had been investigating a Trump company, we’d have another special counsel, media hysteria, and valid grounds for impeachment.

    But since it was Biden who did it, it's circle the wagons, and push forward against the guy looking to get answers into election meddling and possible illegal motives and actions by an administration. Question: Is Pelosi actually throwing Biden under the bus with the bogus 'impeachment' thing as it probably will hurt Biden more that Trump? Is Warren now the preferred candidate of the DNC?

    And to be clear, the "favor" Trump was asking for was that Ukraine look backward, at 2016 election meddling. Entirely appropriate given we just spent over two years doing the same thing... wouldn’t you agree?

    News flash: The Ukrainian president says nobody pushed him to investigate Biden. Oh, my!

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Heard it first hand from a barman that's served him a few times. Ring doonbeg if you don't believe it. Go for a haircut in Kilrush and you'll probably find out a bit more about him.
    OMG... you heard something from someone who claims something. Don't tell the Democrats or they'll demand another special council.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Schiff just said the following in his opening statement at the House Intelligence Committee hearing:
    “In essence, what the President Trump communicates is this: We’ve been very good to your country. Very good. No other country has done as much as we have. ... and I’m going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand? Lots of dirt, on this and on that.”

    These people.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,727 ✭✭✭ebbsy


    1) Nobody in the Usa actually cares about Ukraine.

    2) It is not going to win the Democrats any extra votes.

    3) It is not going to result in him being impeached.

    4) It will keep him front and centre in the headlines. That is what he wants.

    5) #Trump2020.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,348 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    ebbsy wrote: »
    1) Nobody in the Usa actually cares about Ukraine.

    To most Americans the Ukraine = Russia and we know how scared they are of Russia.
    2) It is not going to win the Democrats any extra votes.

    You don't know this, it certainly won't lose them any votes.
    3) It is not going to result in him being impeached.

    Again, You don't know this.
    4) It will keep him front and centre in the headlines. That is what he wants.

    For all the wrong reasons.
    5) #Trump2020.

    In jail by 2021 hopefully.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 39,466 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    I watched the Donalds Press Conference, as usual mostly incoherent rambling, but without his usual "energy". It looks to me like he is finished with the whole thing. Resigned really.

    Wouldn't surprise me if it were announced he has some "mystery" illness that ruled him out of 2020, that or he will just drop dead, he wouldn't be the fittest 73 year old, what he tells the doctor to say about him aside.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Hmmm... If Donald Trump had demanded the firing of a foreign prosecutor who had been investigating a Trump company, we’d have another special counsel, media hysteria, and valid grounds for impeachment.

    But since it was Biden who did it, it's circle the wagons, and push forward against the guy looking to get answers into election meddling and possible illegal motives and actions by an administration. Question: Is Pelosi actually throwing Biden under the bus with the bogus 'impeachment' thing as it probably will hurt Biden more that Trump? Is Warren now the preferred candidate of the DNC?

    And to be clear, the "favor" Trump was asking for was that Ukraine look backward, at 2016 election meddling. Entirely appropriate given we just spent over two years doing the same thing... wouldn’t you agree?

    News flash: The Ukrainian president says nobody pushed him to investigate Biden. Oh, my!

    Trump is the President. You can't impeach Joe Biden's son or Joe Biden.
    The far bigger issue is Trump, the President, looking for a personal favour while withholding funds. And it was a personal matter to tackle a political opponent using the position of President.

    If he wants the money he'll play along.....

    Attacking the whistle blower is a dirty tactic. We had similar in Ireland recently. Institutions need whistle blowers. Trump would have you thinking the media and patriotic individuals are biased against him when it's his actions being criticised. If he stopped being a jack ass he'd have more favourable press.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,616 ✭✭✭AllGunsBlazing


    Overheal wrote: »
    As for Americans I wouldn’t be surprised to find a large shift in polling data after the events of the last 48 hours, which none of the polling reported on recently, captures. Quinnipiac had 57% against impeachment last week, not out of bounds to see a flip this week on all that’s happened.


    Why? As long the economy stays out of the toilet most Americans will turn a blind eye to
    almost anything. Nixon and Clinton are proof of that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Trump is the President. You can't impeach Joe Biden's son or Joe Biden.
    The far bigger issue is Trump, the President, looking for a personal favour while withholding funds. And it was a personal matter to tackle a political opponent using the position of President.

    If he wants the money he'll play along.....

    Attacking the whistle blower is a dirty tactic. We had similar in Ireland recently. Institutions need whistle blowers. Trump would have you thinking the media and patriotic individuals are biased against him when it's his actions being criticised. If he stopped being a jack ass he'd have more favourable press.
    Biden and his son could be locked up and have the key thrown away.

    You seem to be quite a fan of fiction.

    He could cure cancer, end hunger and poverty, and rid the world of wars and the press here would still condemn him.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Biden and his son could be locked up and have the key thrown away.

    You seem to be quite a fan of fiction.

    He could cure cancer, end hunger and poverty, and rid the world of wars and the press here would still condemn him.

    FYI: I don't care if Biden and his son go to jail.

    What fiction? I'm going by facts comrade.

    No, I don't think so.

    Biggest witch hunt ever....again?
    Martyr complex
    In psychology a person who has a martyr complex, sometimes associated with the term "victim complex", desires the feeling of being a martyr for their own sake, seeking out suffering or persecution because it either feeds a psychological need or a desire to avoid responsibility.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,173 ✭✭✭Billy Mays


    Well he has promised to cure cancer very shortly so I guess we'll see how the press react when it happens. Or maybe it'll just turn out to be another "Mexico's gonna pay for it" icon14.png


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    FYI: I don't care if Biden and his son go to jail.

    What fiction? I'm going by facts comrade.

    No, I don't think so.

    Biggest witch hunt ever....again?
    Ahhh… I forgot how gullible people are regarding those fake facts.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Registered Users Posts: 81,128 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Schiff just said the following in his opening statement at the House Intelligence Committee hearing:
    “In essence, what the President Trump communicates is this: We’ve been very good to your country. Very good. No other country has done as much as we have. ... and I’m going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand? Lots of dirt, on this and on that.”

    These people.

    He's doing no more embellishing than anyone else on the Hill to be perfectly honest. GOP going to great lengths to spin up the No There There machine.

    But here's the call again, keeping in mind Schiff's characterization:
    UNCLASSIFIED
    Declassified by order of the President
    September 24, 2019
    MEMORANDUM OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
    SUBJECT: Telephone Conversation with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine
    Participants: President Zelenskyy of Ukraine
    Notetakers: The White House Situation Room
    Date, Time July 25, 2019, 9:03-9:33 am EDT
    and Place: Residence

    The President: Congratulations on a great victory. We all watched from the United States and you did a terrific job. The way you came from behind, somebody who wasn't given much of a chance, and you ended up winning easily. It's a fantastic achievement. Congratulations.

    President Zelenskyy: You are absolutely right Mr. President. We did win big and we worked hard for this. We worked a lot but I would like to confess to you that I had an opportunity to learn from you. We used quite a few of your skills and knowledge and were able to use it as an example for our elections and yes it is true that these were unique elections. We were in a unique situation that we were able to achieve a unique success. I'm able to tell you the following; the first time you called me to congratulate me when I won my presidential election, and the second time you are now calling me when my party won the parliamentary election. I think I should run more often so you can call me more often and we can talk over the phone more often.

    The President: (laughter) That's a very good idea. I think your country is very happy about that.

    President Zelenskyy: Well yes, to tell you the truth, we are trying to work hard because we wanted to drain the swamp here in our country. We brought in many many new people. Not the old politicians, not the typical politicians, because we want to have a new format and a new type of government. You are a great teacher for us and in that.

    The President: Well it is very nice of you to say that. I will say that we do a lot for Ukraine [1]. We spend a lot of effort and a lot of time [2]. Much more than the European countries are doing and they should be helping you more than they are [3]. Germany does almost nothing for you. 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. A lot of the European countries are the same way so I think it's something you want to look at but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine [4]. I wouldn't say that it's reciprocal necessarily because things are happening that are not good but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine [5].

    President Zelenskyy: Yes you are absolutely right. Not only 100%, but actually 1000% and I can tell you the following; I did talk to Angela Merkel and I did meet with her I also met and talked with Macron and I told them that they are not doing quite as much as they need to be doing on the issues with the sanctions. They are not enforcing the sanctions. They are not working as much as they should work for Ukraine. It turns out that even though logically, the European Union should be our biggest partner but technically the United States is a much bigger partner than the European Union and I'm very grateful to you for that because the United States is doing quite a lot for Ukraine. Much more than the European Union especially when we are talking about sanctions against the Russian Federation. I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost. ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.

    The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you're surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible.

    President Zelenskyy: Yes it is very important for me and everything that you just mentioned earlier. For me as a President, it is very important and we are open for any future cooperation. We are ready to open a new page on cooperation in relations between the United States and Ukraine. For that purpose, I just recalled our ambassador from United States and he will be replaced by a very competent and very experienced ambassador who will work hard on making sure that our two nations are getting closer. I would also like and hope to see him having your trust and your confidence and have personal relations with you so we can cooperate even more so. I will personally tell you that one of my assistants spoke with Mr. Giuliani just recently and we are hoping very much that Mr. Giuliani will be able to travel to Ukraine and we will meet once he comes to Ukraine. I just wanted to assure you once again that you have nobody but friends around us. I will make sure that I surround myself with the best and most experienced people. I also wanted to tell you that we are friends. We are great friends and you Mr. President have friends in our country so we can continue our strategic partnership. I also plan to surround myself with great people and in addition to that investigation, I guarantee as the President of Ukraine that all the investigations will be done openly and candidly.. That I can assure you.

    The President: Good because I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that's really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me.

    President Zelenskyy: I wanted to tell you about the prosecutor. First of all, I understand and I'm knowledgeable about the situation. Since we have won the absolute majority in our Parliament, the next prosecutor general will be 100% my person, my candidate, who will be approved, by the parliament and will start as a new prosecutor in September. He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue. 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. On top of that, I would kindly ask you if you have any additional information that you can provide to us, it would be very helpful for the investigation to make sure that we administer justice in our country with regard to the Ambassador to the United States from Ukraine as far as I recall her name was Ivanovich. It was great that you were the first one who told me that she was a bad ambassador because I agree with you 100%. Her attitude towards me was far from the best as she admired the previous President and she was on his side. She would not accept me as a new President well enough.

    The President: Well, she's going to go through some things. I will have Mr. Giuliani give you a call and I am also going to have Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom of it. I'm sure you will figure it out. I heard the prosecutor was treated very badly and he was a very fair prosecutor so good luck with everything. Your economy is going to get better and better I predict. You have a lot of assets. It's a great country. I have many Ukrainian friends, their incredible people.

    President Zelenskyy: I would like to tell you that I also have quite a few Ukrainian friends that live in the United States. Actually last time I traveled to the United States, I stayed in New York near Central Park and I stayed at the Trump Tower. I will talk to them and I hope to see them again in the future. I also wanted to thank you for your invitation to visit the United States, specifically Washington DC. On the other hand, I also want to ensure you that we will be very serious about the case and will work on the investigation. As to the economy, there is much potential for our two countries and one of the issues that is very important for Ukraine is energy independence. I believe we can be very successful and cooperating on energy independence with United States. We are already working on cooperation. We are buying American oil but I am very hopeful for a future meeting. We will have more time and more opportunities to discuss these opportunities and get to know each other better. I would like to thank you very much for your support.

    The President: Good. Well, thank you very much and I appreciate that. I will tell Rudy and Attorney General Barr to call. Thank you. Whenever you would like to come to the White House, feel free to call. Give us a date and we'll work that out. I look forward to seeing you.

    President Zelenskyy: Thank you very much. I would be very happy to come and would be happy to meet with you personally and get to know you better. I am looking forward to our meeting and I also would like to invite you to visit Ukraine and come to the city of Kyiv which is a beautiful city. We have a beautiful country which would welcome you. On the other hand, I believe that on September 1 we will be in Poland and we can meet in Poland hopefully. After that, it might be a very good idea for you to travel to Ukraine. We can either take my plane and go to Ukraine or we can take your plane, which is probably much better than mine.

    The President: Okay, we can work that out. I look forward to seeing you in Washington and maybe in Poland because I think we are going to be there at that time.

    President Zelenskyy: Thank you very much Mr. President.

    The President: Congratulations on a fantastic job you've done. The whole world was watching. I'm not sure it was so much of an upset but congratulations.

    President Zelenskyy: Thank you Mr. President bye-bye.
    - - End of conversation - -


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Ahhh… I forgot how gullible people are regarding those fake facts.

    Please point out the fake facts.

    A) Trump asked the Ukrainian President to investigate Biden's son.

    B) Trump withheld funds earmarked for the Ukraine.

    ??

    The only open for debate is the shake down:
    A lot of the European countries are the same way so I think it's something you want to look at but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine [4]. I wouldn't say that it's reciprocal necessarily because things are happening that are not good but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine [5].

    I will have Mr. Giuliani give you a call and I am also going to have Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom of it. I'm sure you will figure it out. I heard the prosecutor was treated very badly and he was a very fair prosecutor so good luck with everything. Your economy is going to get better and better I predict. You have a lot of assets. It's a great country. I have many Ukrainian friends, their incredible people.

    Dc7XzyLU8AAYmOg.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Please point out the fake facts.

    A) Trump asked the Ukrainian President to investigate Biden's son.

    B) Trump withheld funds earmarked for the Ukraine.
    A) Again, the "favor" he asks is that Ukraine look backward, at meddling in 2016 election. It is later that Zelensky introduces the topic of Giuliani and "that investigation." And only after that, does Trump mention Biden. Trump says “good” and expresses worries that a “good” prosecutor was “shut down.” Mentions “Biden’s son” and that Biden bragged he “stopped the prosecution.” Ends that bit with “It sounds horrible to me.”

    B) The hold up of funds were because of the lack of support from other countries to Ukraine and concerns about corruption in the country. Plus, what happened to that billion+ of US dollars given to Ukraine after they fired the prosecutor, after Biden's threat, who was investigating illegalities of the company Biden’s son recently got a job with? I hear they just went missing.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Seems by the time the Urkaine phone call transcript was released the public already knew more about what transpired on the call than that whistleblower knew when they filed the complaint.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Registered Users Posts: 81,128 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    notobtuse wrote: »
    A) Again, the "favor" he asks is that Ukraine look backward, at meddling in 2016 election.
    False. Trump specifically cited events as late as 2018:

    Trump: There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me.

    https://www.mediamatters.org/sean-hannity/trump-said-biden-was-bragging-about-getting-ukraine-prosecutor-fired-here-are-14-times
    It is later that Zelensky introduces the topic of Giuliani and "that investigation." And only after that, does Trump mention Biden. Trump says “good” and expresses worries that a “good” prosecutor was “shut down.” Mentions “Biden’s son” and that Biden bragged he “stopped the prosecution.” Ends that bit with “It sounds horrible to me.”
    Later as in 'moments later.' This is all the same bloody conversation. Clearly he wants dirt on Biden, his chief political rival.
    B) The hold up of funds were because of the lack of support from other countries to Ukraine and concerns about corruption in the country. Plus, what happened to that billion+ of US dollars given to Ukraine after they fired the prosecutor, after Biden's threat, who was investigating illegalities of the company Biden’s son recently got a job with? I hear they just went missing.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trump-ordered-hold-on-military-aid-days-before-calling-ukrainian-president-officials-say/2019/09/23/df93a6ca-de38-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html
    "President Trump told his acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, to hold back almost $400 million in military aid for Ukraine at least a week before a phone call in which Trump is said to have pressured the Ukrainian president to investigate the son of former vice president Joe Biden, according to three senior administration officials.

    Officials at the Office of Management and Budget relayed Trump’s order to the State Department and the Pentagon during an interagency meeting in mid-July, according to officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. They explained that the president had “concerns” and wanted to analyze whether the money needed to be spent.

    Administration officials were instructed to tell lawmakers that the delays were part of an “interagency process” but to give them no additional information — a pattern that continued for nearly two months, until the White House released the funds on the night of Sept. 11.

    Trump’s order to withhold aid to Ukraine a week before his July 25 call with Volodymyr Zelensky is likely to raise questions about the motivation for his decision and fuel suspicions on Capitol Hill that Trump sought to leverage congressionally approved aid to damage a political rival. The revelation comes as lawmakers clash with the White House over a related whistleblower complaint made by an intelligence official alarmed by Trump’s actions — and as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is said to be exploring whether it’s time to allow impeachment proceedings.

    [Trump denies explicitly tying U.S. military aid to demand for Ukrainian probe of Biden]

    Republican senators on the Senate Appropriations Committee said Sept. 12 that the aid to Ukraine had been held up while the Trump administration explored whether Zelensky, the country’s new president, was pro-Russian or pro-Western. They said the White House decided to release the aid after Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) threatened to freeze $5 billion in Pentagon funding for next year unless the money for 2019 was distributed.

    One senior administration official said Monday that Trump’s decision to hold back the funds was based on his concerns about there being “a lot of corruption in Ukraine” and that the determination to release the money was motivated by the fiscal year’s looming close on Sept. 30.

    There was concern within the administration that if they did not spend the money, they would run afoul of the law, this official said, noting that, eventually, Trump gave the OMB’s acting director, Russell Vought, permission to release the money. The official emphatically denied that there was any link between blocking the aid and pressing Zelensky into investigating the Bidens, stating: “It had nothing to do with a quid pro quo.”

    But on Capitol Hill, Democrats were calling for an investigation of what they viewed as potential “extortion,” as Sen. Robert Menendez (N.J.), the Foreign Relations Committee’s ranking Democrat, put it Monday. Trump, he said, is trying to “reshape American foreign policy” to advance his personal and political goals.

    “I don’t think it really matters . . . whether the president explicitly told the Ukrainians that they wouldn’t get their security aid if they didn’t interfere in the 2020 elections,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). “There is an implicit threat in every demand that a United States president makes of a foreign power. . . . That foreign country knows that if they don’t do it, there are likely to be consequences.”

    Trump on Monday repeated his denial of doing anything improper and insisted that his July 25 conversation with Zelensky was “a perfect phone call.” He also hinted that he may release a transcript of it.

    White House spokesman Hogan Gidley rejected claims that Trump was engaged in a quid pro quo. “But because the media wants this story to be true so badly, they’ll once again manufacture a frenzy and drive ignorant, fake stories to attack this president,” Gidley said.

    Zelensky’s “entire” administration was concerned “that the aid that was being cut off to Ukraine by the president was a consequence for their unwillingness, at the time, to investigate the Bidens,” Murphy said, citing his interactions with numerous Ukrainian officials during an early September trip there. Murphy said he heard “directly” from Zelensky about “his concern about why the aid was being cut off to Ukraine,” though the Ukraine’s new president did not specifically broach the subject of a quid pro quo.

    Hunter Biden served for nearly five years on the board of Burisma, Ukraine’s largest private gas company, whose owner came under scrutiny by Ukrainian prosecutors for possible abuse of power and unlawful enrichment. Hunter Biden was not accused of any wrongdoing in the investigation. As vice president, Joe Biden pressured Ukraine to fire its top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, who Biden and other Western officials said was not sufficiently pursuing corruption cases — at one point, threatening to withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees. At the time, the investigation into Burisma was dormant, according to former Ukrainian and U.S. officials.

    [Greg Miller on Post Reports: ‘Giuliani, more than a year ago, began fixating on Ukraine’]

    Trump’s allies have frequently said he has been better about distributing military aid, and specifically lethal aid, to Ukraine than his predecessor. Yet according to Democratic and Republican aides, no administration has withheld funds as long and as mysteriously as the Trump administration did this year since the United States began helping Ukraine fend off Russian-backed separatists in the country’s eastern provinces.

    Congressional officials were notified twice this year, on Feb. 28 and again on May 23, that the administration intended to release large tranches of military aid to Ukraine. Congress approved two large pots of military aid for Ukraine during fiscal 2019: $250 million, to be managed by the Pentagon, for equipment such as sniper rifles, counter-artillery radar systems, ammunition and grenade launchers; and $141 million, to be funneled through the State Department, for maritime security, NATO interoperability and various initiatives to help Ukraine’s military fend off Russian aggression.

    Despite those notifications, the money was not transmitted until this month.

    According to administration officials, discussions about Ukrainian aid began in June. Withholding aid from foreign governments is something the president has frequently requested, such as with Central American countries when he said they were not doing their part to help the United States with immigrants amassing at the southern border.

    Former national security adviser John Bolton wanted to release the money to Ukraine because he thought it would help the country while curtailing Russian aggression. But Trump has said he was primarily concerned with corruption.

    “It’s very important to talk about corruption,” Trump told reporters. “If you don’t talk about corruption, why would you give money to a country that you think is corrupt?”

    Besides Bolton, several other administration officials said they did not know why the aid was being canceled or why a meeting was not being scheduled.

    The decision was communicated to State and Defense officials on July 18, officials familiar with the meeting said.

    By mid-August, lawmakers were acutely aware that the OMB had assumed all decision-making authority from the Defense and State departments and was delaying the distribution of the aid through a series of short-term notices. Several congressional officials questioned whether the OMB had the legal authority to direct federal agencies not to spend money that Congress had already authorized, aides said.

    Spokespeople for the Pentagon and the State Department declined to comment.

    Mid-August is also when a whistleblower from the intelligence community filed a complaint regarding Trump and Ukraine to Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson. Atkinson informed the House and Senate intelligence committees of the complaint’s existence Sept. 9 — the same day three House committees launched an investigation to determine whether Trump and his lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, had improperly pushed Ukraine to investigate the Bidens.

    Capitol Hill has not been briefed on the details of the whistleblower complaint, on orders of the acting director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire, who after consulting with the Justice Department and the White House declined to transmit the complaint to lawmakers. On Thursday, Maguire is set to testify publicly before the House Intelligence Committee and in a closed session before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

    Shane Harris, Anne Gearan and Paul Sonne contributed to this report. Correction: This story was updated to clarify that, during his visit to Ukraine earlier this month, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) learned of concerns from several officials in President Volodymyr Zelensky’s administration that U.S. aid was being withheld because of the Ukrainian government’s unwillingness to investigate the Bidens. Zelensky, however, did not specifically draw a connection to the Bidens when he met with Murphy.
    "


  • Registered Users Posts: 81,128 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Seems by the time the Urkaine phone call transcript was released the public already knew more about what transpired on the call than that whistleblower knew when they filed the complaint.

    That's conjecture.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Overheal wrote: »
    He's doing no more embellishing than anyone else on the Hill to be perfectly honest. GOP going to great lengths to spin up the No There There machine.

    Give me a break. Schiff said the 'essence' of what Trump was trying to communicate to Zelensky was that he wanted him to "make up dirt" about Biden. You do understand that 'make up' suggests fabrication, right? For the chair of the House to suggest the President of the United States was asking the leader of a foreign country to make up dirt about another US politician is disgusting.


    https://twitter.com/stclairashley/status/1177230245843394561


  • Registered Users Posts: 81,128 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Give me a break. Schiff said the 'essence' of what Trump was trying to communicate to Zelensky was that he wanted him to "make up dirt" about Biden. You do understand that 'make up' suggests fabrication, right? For the chair of the House to suggest the President of the United States was asking the leader of a foreign country to make up dirt about another US politician is disgusting.


    https://twitter.com/stclairashley/status/1177230245843394561

    Again, no more egregious than lawmakers pretending theres No There There, or that the Mueller Report proved there was no evidence of obstruction of justice. I can't hold Schiff to a standard that doesn't exist for Republicans.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 81,128 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    And to be crystal clear yes we can all see that Schiff is grandstanding a good bit here with his remarks.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 579 ✭✭✭Veritas Libertas


    notobtuse wrote: »
    She can sue me if I was making stuff up, lying, and being disingenuous which resulted in harm to her. Not so with the press if they did the same unless you can prove malice on their part... which they skirt by claiming 'oops' we'll make a correction buried somewhere on page B12 after the lies have been running on page 1 for days... hey, no malice intended (wink) (wink). The press should fall under the same laws as me.

    I agree with the problem you are outlining, I just can't agree with your solution.

    The press need their freedom to do their job. We as customers should recognize when they're doing what you speak; and start voting with our wallets and stop funding these slimey bastards.

    To lower the standard for libel for the press would cause far more problems than it would solve.


  • Registered Users Posts: 39,466 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Give me a break. Schiff said the 'essence' of what Trump was trying to communicate to Zelensky was that he wanted him to "make up dirt" about Biden. You do understand that 'make up' suggests fabrication, right? For the chair of the House to suggest the President of the United States was asking the leader of a foreign country to make up dirt about another US politician is disgusting.

    You do know Schiff would be privy to a lot more information than you or your 12 toed twitter sources?


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,727 ✭✭✭ebbsy


    There is really nothing to see here. Trump has released the transcript straight away. The Democrats are going to be concentrating on this for ages. They will take their eye off 2020. Trump will use this to play to the crowd.

    There's only one winner next year and that's president Trump. God bless him and God bless the USA.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    notobtuse wrote: »
    A) Again, the "favor" he asks is that Ukraine look backward, at meddling in 2016 election. It is later that Zelensky introduces the topic of Giuliani and "that investigation." And only after that, does Trump mention Biden. Trump says “good” and expresses worries that a “good” prosecutor was “shut down.” Mentions “Biden’s son” and that Biden bragged he “stopped the prosecution.” Ends that bit with “It sounds horrible to me.”

    He wanted an investigation into Biden.

    B) The hold up of funds were because of the lack of support from other countries to Ukraine and concerns about corruption in the country. Plus, what happened to that billion+ of US dollars given to Ukraine after they fired the prosecutor, after Biden's threat, who was investigating illegalities of the company Biden’s son recently got a job with? I hear they just went missing.[/QUOTE]

    He held back funds. Those marked for military aid.

    The why is open for debate.


  • Registered Users Posts: 39,466 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    ebbsy wrote: »
    There is really nothing to see here. Trump has released the transcript straight away.

    It's not the transcript.

    It's a version of it. The version they chose to release.

    I'm guessing here but I don't think it would be a stretch to suggest the whistleblower was one of the people tasked with recording the conversation.

    In impeachment proceedings executive privilege goes out the window, everyone and anyone can be called to give evidence under oath.

    To say there is nothing to see here is fundamentally daft.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    ebbsy wrote: »
    There is really nothing to see here. Trump has released the transcript straight away. The Democrats are going to be concentrating on this for ages. They will take their eye off 2020. Trump will use this to play to the crowd.

    There's only one winner next year and that's president Trump. God bless him and God bless the USA.

    But there is. He asked for a favour which involved a political opponent. Whether the U.S. cares or not is another issue.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    I agree with the problem you are outlining, I just can't agree with your solution.

    The press need their freedom to do their job. We as customers should recognize when they're doing what you speak; and start voting with our wallets and stop funding these slimey bastards.

    To lower the standard for libel for the press would cause far more problems than it would solve.
    The standard for libel shouldn't be lowered, just applied equally to everyone. The problem is the mainstream media and press won't stop their agenda driven lies and deception against Trump and republicans unless they're hit in the pocketbook, as things stand. The press knows they don't need to adhere to journalistic standards, as long as some old stupid Supreme Court ruling (that should be revisited) gives them free license to commit malice, libel and slander.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Registered Users Posts: 39,466 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    The standard for libel shouldn't be lowered, just applied equally to everyone. The problem is the mainstream media and press won't stop their agenda driven lies and deception against Trump and republicans unless they're hit in the pocketbook, as things stand. The press knows they don't need to adhere to journalistic standards, as long as some old stupid Supreme Court ruling (that should be revisited) gives them free license to commit malice, libel and slander.

    Jesus Christ the POTUS has told 12,000+ lies.

    Let me guess you don't think he hasn't told any?

    Are you on wind up or do we need to be worried about you?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 107 ✭✭noel1980


    notobtuse wrote: »
    The standard for libel shouldn't be lowered, just applied equally to everyone. The problem is the mainstream media and press won't stop their agenda driven lies and deception against Trump and republicans unless they're hit in the pocketbook, as things stand. The press knows they don't need to adhere to journalistic standards, as long as some old stupid Supreme Court ruling (that should be revisited) gives them free license to commit malice, libel and slander.

    They're now saying "Trump solicited foreign interference in the 2020 election" ... :pac:


Advertisement