nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
are they trying to distract us
Impeachment
- Thread starter 57Brave
- Start date
are they trying to distract us
Runnin
Well-known member
Former Government Ethic's Chief Walter Shaub slams Reps for allowing Trump to run wild. They would never allow a Dem President to get away with any of this. Seems like a lot.
a. Soliciting foreign attacks on our elections;
b. Using federal appropriations or other resources to pressure foreign governments to help them win reelection;
c. Implementing an across-the-board refusal to comply with any congressional oversight at all;
d. Firing the heads of the government's top law enforcement agencies for allowing investigations of the president;
e. Retaliating against whistleblowers and witnesses who testify before Congress;
f. Investigating investigators who investigate the president;
g. Attempting to retaliate against American companies perceived as insufficiently supportive of the president;
h. Attempting to award the president's own company federal contracts;
i. Using personal devices, servers or applications for official communications;
j. Communicating secretly with foreign leaders, with foreign governments knowing things about White House communications that our own government doesn't know;
k. Abandoning steadfast allies abruptly without prior warning to Congress to cede territory to Russian influence;
l. Destroying or concealing records containing politically damaging information;
m. Employing white nationalists and expressing empathy for white nationalists after an armed rally in which one of them murdered a counter protester and another shot a gun into a crowd;
n. Disseminating Russian disinformation;
o. Covering for the murder of a journalist working for an American news outlet by a foreign government that is a major customer of the president's private business;
p. Violating human rights and international law at our border;
q. Operating a supposed charity that was forced to shut down over its unlawful activities;
r. Lying incessantly to the American people;
s. Relentlessly attacking the free press;
t. Spending 1/4 of days in office visiting his own golf courses and 1/3 of them visiting his private businesses;
u. Violating the Emoluments Clauses of the U.S. Constitution;
w. Misusing the security clearance process to benefit his children and target perceived enemies;
x. Drawing down on government efforts to combat domestic terrorism in order to appease a segment of his base;
y. Refusing to aggressively investigate and build defenses against interference in our election by Russia, after the country helped him win an election;
z. Engaging in a documented campaign of obstruction of a Special Counsel's investigation.
aa. Lying about a hush money payoff and omitting his debt to his attorney for that payoff from his financial disclosure report (which is a crime if done knowingly and willfully);
bb. Coordinating with his attorney in connection with activities that got the attorney convicted of criminal campaign finance violations;
cc. Interfering in career personnel actions, which are required by law to be conducted free of political influence;
dd. Refusing to fire a repeat Hatch Act offender after receiving a recommendation of termination from the president's own Senate-confirmed appointee based on dozens of violations;
ee. Calling members of Congress names and accusing them of treason for conducting oversight;
ff. Attacking states and private citizens frequently and in terms that demean the presidency (see Johnson impeachment);
gg. Using the presidency to tout his private businesses and effectively encouraging a party, candidates, businesses and others to patronize his business;
hh. Causing the federal government to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars at his businesses and costing taxpayers well over $100 million on boondoggle trips to his properties;
ii. Hosting foreign leaders at his private businesses;
jj. Calling on the Justice Department to investigate political rivals;
kk. Using the presidency to endorse private businesses and the books of various authors as a reward for supporting the president;
ll. Engaging in nepotism based on a flawed OLC opinion;
mm. Possible misuse of appropriated funds by reallocating them in ways that may be illegal;
nn. Repeatedly criticizing American allies, supporting authoritarian leaders around the world, and undermining NATO; and . . . (STAY TUNED). . .
a. Soliciting foreign attacks on our elections;
b. Using federal appropriations or other resources to pressure foreign governments to help them win reelection;
c. Implementing an across-the-board refusal to comply with any congressional oversight at all;
d. Firing the heads of the government's top law enforcement agencies for allowing investigations of the president;
e. Retaliating against whistleblowers and witnesses who testify before Congress;
f. Investigating investigators who investigate the president;
g. Attempting to retaliate against American companies perceived as insufficiently supportive of the president;
h. Attempting to award the president's own company federal contracts;
i. Using personal devices, servers or applications for official communications;
j. Communicating secretly with foreign leaders, with foreign governments knowing things about White House communications that our own government doesn't know;
k. Abandoning steadfast allies abruptly without prior warning to Congress to cede territory to Russian influence;
l. Destroying or concealing records containing politically damaging information;
m. Employing white nationalists and expressing empathy for white nationalists after an armed rally in which one of them murdered a counter protester and another shot a gun into a crowd;
n. Disseminating Russian disinformation;
o. Covering for the murder of a journalist working for an American news outlet by a foreign government that is a major customer of the president's private business;
p. Violating human rights and international law at our border;
q. Operating a supposed charity that was forced to shut down over its unlawful activities;
r. Lying incessantly to the American people;
s. Relentlessly attacking the free press;
t. Spending 1/4 of days in office visiting his own golf courses and 1/3 of them visiting his private businesses;
u. Violating the Emoluments Clauses of the U.S. Constitution;
w. Misusing the security clearance process to benefit his children and target perceived enemies;
x. Drawing down on government efforts to combat domestic terrorism in order to appease a segment of his base;
y. Refusing to aggressively investigate and build defenses against interference in our election by Russia, after the country helped him win an election;
z. Engaging in a documented campaign of obstruction of a Special Counsel's investigation.
aa. Lying about a hush money payoff and omitting his debt to his attorney for that payoff from his financial disclosure report (which is a crime if done knowingly and willfully);
bb. Coordinating with his attorney in connection with activities that got the attorney convicted of criminal campaign finance violations;
cc. Interfering in career personnel actions, which are required by law to be conducted free of political influence;
dd. Refusing to fire a repeat Hatch Act offender after receiving a recommendation of termination from the president's own Senate-confirmed appointee based on dozens of violations;
ee. Calling members of Congress names and accusing them of treason for conducting oversight;
ff. Attacking states and private citizens frequently and in terms that demean the presidency (see Johnson impeachment);
gg. Using the presidency to tout his private businesses and effectively encouraging a party, candidates, businesses and others to patronize his business;
hh. Causing the federal government to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars at his businesses and costing taxpayers well over $100 million on boondoggle trips to his properties;
ii. Hosting foreign leaders at his private businesses;
jj. Calling on the Justice Department to investigate political rivals;
kk. Using the presidency to endorse private businesses and the books of various authors as a reward for supporting the president;
ll. Engaging in nepotism based on a flawed OLC opinion;
mm. Possible misuse of appropriated funds by reallocating them in ways that may be illegal;
nn. Repeatedly criticizing American allies, supporting authoritarian leaders around the world, and undermining NATO; and . . . (STAY TUNED). . .
Runnin
Well-known member
My favorite piece of titillating impeachment news? So far I have 2.
-- the Trump/Sondland phone call from the restaurant in Kiev.
-- that Lev Parnas hosted Devin Nunes around the Ukraine looking for dirt on Joe Biden.
Honorable mention - The "drug deal" line will go down in history.
-- the Trump/Sondland phone call from the restaurant in Kiev.
-- that Lev Parnas hosted Devin Nunes around the Ukraine looking for dirt on Joe Biden.
Honorable mention - The "drug deal" line will go down in history.
Last edited:
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
are we going to all have start pronouncing Chicken Kiev differently...that's my main concern
Runnin
Well-known member
So, if Nunes met with former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Victor Shokin last December, how is it that they still haven't provided any dirt on the Bidens? Are unverifiable rumors from Eastern Europe that hard to manufacture?
Since last December is a looong time to be working on this project. What/Who prompted Nunes to run this fool's errand?
Since last December is a looong time to be working on this project. What/Who prompted Nunes to run this fool's errand?
Last edited:
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Rudy actually says he's gonna unleash all of his findings soon...very soon. Will lead to Obama's impeachment.
Runnin
Well-known member
Yes, that's pretty good, too.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/24/giu...f.html?__source=sharebar|twitter&par=sharebar
Parnas also saying Nunes canceled a trip to Ukraine this year because he would have had to notify Schiff. Kind of funny to see Nunes dismiss Googliani's goons as criminals. Might want to explain why criminals are working for and with Trump and his personal attorney then Ranking Member. He is digging a deep hole for himself if there is proof. Going to be hard to pivot to "yeah I knew them and worked with them to dig up dirt on the Biden's but theres nothing wrong with that" or to claim he didnt know they were criminals.
Parnas also saying Nunes canceled a trip to Ukraine this year because he would have had to notify Schiff. Kind of funny to see Nunes dismiss Googliani's goons as criminals. Might want to explain why criminals are working for and with Trump and his personal attorney then Ranking Member. He is digging a deep hole for himself if there is proof. Going to be hard to pivot to "yeah I knew them and worked with them to dig up dirt on the Biden's but theres nothing wrong with that" or to claim he didnt know they were criminals.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
They were two Ukrainian oligarchs with American legal problems. One had been indicted on federal bribery charges. The other was embroiled in a vast banking scandal and was reported to be under investigation by the F.B.I.
And they had one more thing in common: Both had been singled out by Rudolph W. Giuliani and pressed to assist in his wide-ranging hunt for information damaging to one of President Trump’s leading political rivals, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
That effort culminated in the July 25 phone call between the American and Ukrainian presidents that has taken Mr. Trump to the brink of impeachment and inexorably brought Mr. Giuliani’s Ukrainian shadow campaign into the light.
In public hearings over the last two weeks, American diplomats and national-security officials have laid out in detail how Mr. Trump, at the instigation and with the help of Mr. Giuliani, conditioned nearly $400 million in direly needed military aid on Ukraine’s announcing investigations into Mr. Biden and his son, as well as a debunked conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 presidential election.
But interviews with the two Ukrainian oligarchs — Dmitry Firtash and Ihor Kolomoisky — as well as with several other people with knowledge of Mr. Giuliani’s dealings, point to a new dimension in his exertions on behalf of his client, Mr. Trump. Taken together, they depict a strategy clearly aimed at leveraging information from politically powerful but legally vulnerable foreign citizens.
In the case of Mr. Firtash, an energy tycoon with deep ties to the Kremlin who is facing extradition to the United States on bribery and racketeering charges, one of Mr. Giuliani’s associates has described offering the oligarch help with his Justice Department problems — if Mr. Firtash hired two lawyers who were close to President Trump and were already working with Mr. Giuliani on his dirt-digging mission. Mr. Firtash said the offer was made in late June when he met with Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, both Soviet-born businessmen involved in Mr. Giuliani’s Ukraine pursuit.
Mr. Parnas’s lawyer, Joseph A. Bondy, confirmed that account and added that his client had met with Mr. Firtash at Mr. Giuliani’s direction and encouraged the oligarch to help in the hunt for compromising information “as part of any potential resolution to his extradition matter.”
Mr. Firtash’s relationship to the Trump-allied lawyers — Victoria Toensing and Joseph diGenova — has led to intense speculation that he is, at least indirectly, helping to finance Mr. Giuliani’s campaign. But until now he has stayed silent, and many of the details of how and why he came to hire the lawyers have remained murky.
In the interview, Mr. Firtash said he had no information about the Bidens and had not financed the search for it. “Without my will and desire,” he said, “I was sucked into this internal U.S. fight.” But to help his legal case, he said, he had paid his new lawyers $1.2 million to date, with a portion set aside as something of a referral fee for Mr. Parnas.
And in late August, Ms. Toensing and Mr. diGenova did as promised: They went to the Justice Department and pleaded Mr. Firtash’s case with the attorney general, William P. Barr.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/25/us/giuliani-ukraine-oligarchs.html
So was Rudy trading on chosen one's supervisory authority over the DoJ? Was he acting on behalf of chosen one and at the direction of chosen one in this matter? Will he be called in as a fact witness during the impeachment trial?
And they had one more thing in common: Both had been singled out by Rudolph W. Giuliani and pressed to assist in his wide-ranging hunt for information damaging to one of President Trump’s leading political rivals, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
That effort culminated in the July 25 phone call between the American and Ukrainian presidents that has taken Mr. Trump to the brink of impeachment and inexorably brought Mr. Giuliani’s Ukrainian shadow campaign into the light.
In public hearings over the last two weeks, American diplomats and national-security officials have laid out in detail how Mr. Trump, at the instigation and with the help of Mr. Giuliani, conditioned nearly $400 million in direly needed military aid on Ukraine’s announcing investigations into Mr. Biden and his son, as well as a debunked conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 presidential election.
But interviews with the two Ukrainian oligarchs — Dmitry Firtash and Ihor Kolomoisky — as well as with several other people with knowledge of Mr. Giuliani’s dealings, point to a new dimension in his exertions on behalf of his client, Mr. Trump. Taken together, they depict a strategy clearly aimed at leveraging information from politically powerful but legally vulnerable foreign citizens.
In the case of Mr. Firtash, an energy tycoon with deep ties to the Kremlin who is facing extradition to the United States on bribery and racketeering charges, one of Mr. Giuliani’s associates has described offering the oligarch help with his Justice Department problems — if Mr. Firtash hired two lawyers who were close to President Trump and were already working with Mr. Giuliani on his dirt-digging mission. Mr. Firtash said the offer was made in late June when he met with Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, both Soviet-born businessmen involved in Mr. Giuliani’s Ukraine pursuit.
Mr. Parnas’s lawyer, Joseph A. Bondy, confirmed that account and added that his client had met with Mr. Firtash at Mr. Giuliani’s direction and encouraged the oligarch to help in the hunt for compromising information “as part of any potential resolution to his extradition matter.”
Mr. Firtash’s relationship to the Trump-allied lawyers — Victoria Toensing and Joseph diGenova — has led to intense speculation that he is, at least indirectly, helping to finance Mr. Giuliani’s campaign. But until now he has stayed silent, and many of the details of how and why he came to hire the lawyers have remained murky.
In the interview, Mr. Firtash said he had no information about the Bidens and had not financed the search for it. “Without my will and desire,” he said, “I was sucked into this internal U.S. fight.” But to help his legal case, he said, he had paid his new lawyers $1.2 million to date, with a portion set aside as something of a referral fee for Mr. Parnas.
And in late August, Ms. Toensing and Mr. diGenova did as promised: They went to the Justice Department and pleaded Mr. Firtash’s case with the attorney general, William P. Barr.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/25/us/giuliani-ukraine-oligarchs.html
So was Rudy trading on chosen one's supervisory authority over the DoJ? Was he acting on behalf of chosen one and at the direction of chosen one in this matter? Will he be called in as a fact witness during the impeachment trial?
Last edited:
Runnin
Well-known member
What was public opinion at when the GOP led House voted to impeach?
Who cares?
A few democrats are starting to say impeachment isnt the answer. Sure, they pivot to censorship but in reality they dont want to lose their congressional seats because americans see through this joke of a coup.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
President Trump had already been briefed on a whistle-blower’s complaint about his dealings with Ukraine when he unfroze military aid for the country in September, according to two people familiar with the matter.
Lawyers from the White House counsel’s office told Mr. Trump in late August about the complaint, explaining that they were trying to determine whether they were legally required to give it to Congress, the people said.
The revelation could shed light on Mr. Trump’s thinking at two critical points under scrutiny by impeachment investigators: his decision in early September to release $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine and his denial to a key ambassador around the same time that there was a “quid pro quo” with Kyiv. Mr. Trump used the phrase before it had entered the public lexicon in the Ukraine affair.
Mr. Trump faced bipartisan pressure from Congress when he released the aid. But the new timing detail shows that he was also aware at the time that the whistle-blower had accused him of wrongdoing in withholding the aid and in his broader campaign to pressure Ukraine’s new president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to conduct investigations that could benefit Mr. Trump’s re-election chances.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/26/...tion=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
So when chosen one told Sondland "NO QUiD PRO QUO. I WANT NOTHiNG. I WANT NOTHiNG." those were the words of a man who had been busted. Whose scheme had blown up in his face.
Lawyers from the White House counsel’s office told Mr. Trump in late August about the complaint, explaining that they were trying to determine whether they were legally required to give it to Congress, the people said.
The revelation could shed light on Mr. Trump’s thinking at two critical points under scrutiny by impeachment investigators: his decision in early September to release $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine and his denial to a key ambassador around the same time that there was a “quid pro quo” with Kyiv. Mr. Trump used the phrase before it had entered the public lexicon in the Ukraine affair.
Mr. Trump faced bipartisan pressure from Congress when he released the aid. But the new timing detail shows that he was also aware at the time that the whistle-blower had accused him of wrongdoing in withholding the aid and in his broader campaign to pressure Ukraine’s new president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to conduct investigations that could benefit Mr. Trump’s re-election chances.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/26/...tion=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
So when chosen one told Sondland "NO QUiD PRO QUO. I WANT NOTHiNG. I WANT NOTHiNG." those were the words of a man who had been busted. Whose scheme had blown up in his face.
The part I find hilarious is, Trump's been going on about how the July 25th call was perfect.
On 9/9 he gave the call to Sondland that said "i want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid quo pro. tell Zelensky to do the right thing". If the 7/25 call was perfect, why would Trump be telling Sondland this. Is he implying Zelensky initiated the qpq interest?
Trump knew there was no quid pro quo previously because the phone call was perfect, why would he tell Sondland there's no quid pro quo?
On 9/9 he gave the call to Sondland that said "i want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid quo pro. tell Zelensky to do the right thing". If the 7/25 call was perfect, why would Trump be telling Sondland this. Is he implying Zelensky initiated the qpq interest?
Trump knew there was no quid pro quo previously because the phone call was perfect, why would he tell Sondland there's no quid pro quo?
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
When Trump says he just wants Zelensky to do the right thing he means to open investigations he wants, so even in his denial he is saying he wants something from Zelensky. What I want someone to ask Trump is what he would have done if Zelensky straight up told him those were Russian conspiracy theories that were already debunked. I know he would lie, but I would find it hard to believe the teflon Don wouldnt have retaliated.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
“What was Rudy Giuliani doing in Ukraine on your behalf?” asked O’Reilly.
“Well, you have to ask that to Rudy,” Trump responded. “But Rudy…I don’t even know…I know he was going to go to Ukraine and I think he cancelled the trip.”
“But you know, Rudy has other clients other than me,” he continued. “I’m one person-”
O’Reilly cut him off: “So you didn’t direct him to go there on your behalf?”
“No,” Trump said.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/...laims-he-didnt-tell-giuliani-to-go-to-ukraine
Googliani, meet the underside of a bus everyone but he saw coming.
“Well, you have to ask that to Rudy,” Trump responded. “But Rudy…I don’t even know…I know he was going to go to Ukraine and I think he cancelled the trip.”
“But you know, Rudy has other clients other than me,” he continued. “I’m one person-”
O’Reilly cut him off: “So you didn’t direct him to go there on your behalf?”
“No,” Trump said.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/...laims-he-didnt-tell-giuliani-to-go-to-ukraine
Googliani, meet the underside of a bus everyone but he saw coming.
Guiliani said if he does get thrown under the bus he's going to release the super duper secret folder on Biden. Isn't this something Trump wants?