Impeachment

[Seattle Husker]

What's interesting is that this actually has no bearing on the case against Trump or the truth of the whistleblower's allegations. However, it has significant political implications, because it basically eviscerates the narrative that the Democrats are honest statesmen just looking for the truth. Schiff has been exposed as a dishonest, partisan hack, and that's going to hurt them.

Frankly, Pelosi was dumb to turn the investigation over to him. She should have given it to Judiciary, because Nadler is a much smarter and more respected political operator than Schiff is. Even before he got caught lying about this, his credibility was shot after bluffing about Russian collusion for 2 years.

They should have learned from history. Consider Watergate. Democrats pursued the matter, but they were careful about it. They didn't crap in their pants every five minutes, and the guy running the congressional investigation (Rep. Peter Rodino) didn't act like raging partisan. He was pretty evenhanded and measured. Furthermore, since he wasn't setting himself on fire every day, two things occurred. First, if Watergate hadn't turned up anything, it wouldn't have discredited him, because his work looked like a real pursuit of facts rather than a political hit. Second, by not being overly partisan, he made it politically possible for Republicans to assist. That gave the matter the credibility of being bipartisan, which is ultimately what brought Nixon down. Republican senators weren't willing to protect him. If Rodino had shown himself to be a massively dishonest political hack from the beginning, that would not have occurred.

Pelosi should have assigned a less partisan Democrat to be the frontman of the inquiry, that's for certain. Nadler's hearing in which he allowed Lewandowski to turn it into a 3-ring circus did him in. Elijah Cummings would have been my preference.

@Mr. Deez Did you see the NYT story about Volkers/Sondlands efforts to write a press release for Ukraine that committed them to the desired Trump investigations? This included follow-up texts that pushed Zelinsky reps to say they needed to release it in order to lock down a 1:1 meeting between Zelensky and Trump.

Volker reportedly supplied the Press Release and text messages to Schiff's committee. Given he immediately resigned as special envoy and has been so forthcoming Volker appears to be singing.

Rudy Guliani is already denying any knowledge of the Press Release which is expected. Given Rudy's claim that Volker was coordinating meetings with Guiliani/Ukrainian contacts and Rudy's public push of the investigation it's a little far fetched to think he had no knowledge of the Press Release.

Previously I thought this was simply Trump and Guiliani being overconfident idiots. Now I'm concerned they msy have coopted others into their hair brained political scheme.

 

[Joe Fan]

Noam Chomsky once claimed (maybe in 1990) every American President since Truman (or Eisenhower) would be hung if the Nuremberg Trial standards were applied. He updated that to confirm Clinton, Bush #2 and Obama had committed crimes against humanity.
His opinion of course.

There is no telling how many deaths Chomsky's ideas would cause if put into action. But safe to assume it would be in the 10s of millions. How do we know this? Because we have already seen it happen.

I imagine the people who want to eat babies to fix the weather are big Chomsky fans

 

[Seattle Husker]

Ted Cruz is great.

John Brennan is criminal. Didn't Snowden have to leave the country because he was a whistleblower on Brennan? So he is a hypocrite too. Of all the people in political circles this should be the first guy arrested and sent to prison and maybe even punished for treason. A true villian this guy.

Snowden left the country because he WASN'T a whistleblower but rather a traitor. There were proper channels for him to go through just as the current Whistleblower's are enduring. Rather, Snowden handed over his information to the Russian puppet organization then esacaped to Russia. That's treason, not patriotism.

 

[Seattle Husker]

An impeachable act?
(if Trump had done it, no doubt)

Opinion = News? I see where the cognitive dissonance eminates from.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Noam Chomsky once claimed (maybe in 1990) every American President since Truman (or Eisenhower) would be hung if the Nuremberg Trial standards were applied. He updated that to confirm Clinton, Bush #2 and Obama had committed crimes against humanity.

His opinion of course.

I'm open to hearing his rationale, but that seems like a bit of a stretch. Having said that, I'm more than willing to accept that we applied double standards to at least some of the Nürnberg defendants. It's a ***** to lose a world war.

 

[bystander]

Elijah Cummings would have been my preference.

Hard to believe you think he's not partisan or extreme in his emotional make-up. I would pick any Democrat that AOC has attacked. Henry Cuellar in Laredo would be a decent choice because the Liberals want him out.

 

[bystander]

I'm open to hearing his rationale, but that seems like a bit of a stretch. Having said that, I'm more than willing to accept that we applied double standards to at least some of the Nürnberg defendants. It's a ***** to lose a world war.

Not necessarily agreeing with Chomsky but he is no fan of our actions and spares no President.

If the Nuremberg Laws were Applied…

 

[Seattle Husker]

And yet so far, I'm not aware of actual subpoenas being issued, which makes me wonder why. Could it be because subpoenas have to comply with the law and have a judicial remedy for abuse?

As we've witnessed from the other investigations subpoenas greatly slow down the investigation process because the White House fights nearly ever single one. If you're the Dems, you can't spend 2-3 years on an impeachment inquiry. The R's know this which is why they are using the "no subpoenas" line. The public would lose interest just as they did with the Clinton investigation and backfire on the party pushing impeachment.

The best strategy for the R's is to stonewall, delay while claiming transparency. A quick investigation with surfacing of facts detrimental to Trump is th quickest way for the R's to lose badly in 2020.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Hard to believe you think he's not partisan or extreme in his emotional make-up. I would pick any Democrat that AOC has attacked. Henry Cuellar in Laredo would be a decent choice because the Liberals want him out.

It has to be a committee chaiman...not any run of the mill Democrat. Cummings has the most credibility of being fair among those chairmen.

 

[Mr. Deez]

As we've witnessed from the other investigations subpoenas greatly slow down the investigation process because the White House fights nearly ever single one. If you're the Dems, you can't spend 2-3 years on an impeachment inquiry. The R's know this which is why they are using the "no subpoenas" line. The public would lose interest just as they did with the Clinton investigation and backfire on the party pushing impeachment.

The best strategy for the R's is to stonewall, delay while claiming transparency. A quick investigation with surfacing of facts detrimental to Trump is th quickest way for the R's to lose badly in 2020.

That might be the excuse, but it's weak. It doesn't have to take 2 years. Courts can grant relief quicky when they want to. See the Bush v. Gore battle. If you want the legitimacy that comes with following the law, you have to follow the law and its procedures. You can't short cut it.

 

[Garmel]

Hmm. When this nonsense blows over I wonder when the next "whistleblower" comes out of the woodworks.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Didn't Snowden have to leave the country because he was a whistleblower on Brennan?

He could have been a whistleblower. He chose treason instead.

 

[Garmel]

I still favor the inquiry. I don't necessarily favor impeachment. My mind is open depending on what is found.

I would favor an inquiry if there was something actually illegally done. Before you say "that's what the inquiry is for", I'll counteract that we don't let fishing expeditions start every time the dems get butthurt over something Trump did.

 

[Seattle Husker]

That might be the excuse, but it's weak. It doesn't have to take 2 years. Courts can grant relief quicky when they want to. See the Bush v. Gore battle. If you want the legitimacy that comes with following the law, you have to follow the law and its procedures. You can't short cut it.

Where has the court acted quickly on Congressional subpoenas since Trump began packing the courts? The only fast acting court seems to be that Circuit out West.

From my perspective, the Congressional subpoenas have been rendered impotent since Eric Holder defied Congress with Fast and Furious. The impotence has gotten worse under the current administration as time after time the White House directs the admin to ignore them.

As an aside, I do think the legal process is the most appropriate but that also assumes their are good faith actors on the other side. I'm increasingly convinced there aren't. Trump has the Republican party by the throat and none will stand up to his unethical, if not illegal, governing practices. Rather than stand up for principles they quietly retire like cowards.

 

[Joe Fan]

(1) Why do you suppose the purported "whistle blower" neglected to mention this?
and
(2) Did he have a legal duty to make this disclosure? Possibly (see 2d tweet)

 

[Joe Fan]

Slightly larger pic of the form
click once to enlarge

 

[Seattle Husker]

Though I appreciate Volker's transparency the texts are pretty ****** up and damning. They completely reinforce the narrative the Dems have been pushing, even absent any corroboration from Guiliani.

The pressure being exerted by the Trump Administration and quid pro quo is coming into view.

A taste of the texts released last night from the article above:

In a July 19 text to Giuliani, Volker thanked him for a breakfast meeting that morning and moved to connect him with Yermak. Volker suggested they all schedule a call together the following Monday.

During an exchange between Volker, Sondland and Taylor later that day, Volker wrote that he had breakfast with Giuliani that morning and was "teeing up call w Yermak Monday. Must have helped."

"Most impt is for Zelensky to say that he will help investigation - and address any specific personnel issues - if there are any,” Volker added.
...
On July 21, Taylor warned that "Zelensky is sensitive about Ukraine being taken seriously, not merely as an instrument in Washington domestic, reelection politics."

Sondland replied, "Absolutely, but we need to get the conversation started and the relationship built, irrespective of the pretext. I am worried about the alternative."
...
On the morning of July 25, Volker offered advice to Yermak ahead of the Trump-Zelensky call later that day.

“Heard from White House - assuming President Z convinces trump he will investigate / 'get to the bottom of what happened' in 2016, we will nail down date for visit to Washington,” Volker wrote.
...
On Aug. 9, Volker and Sondland discussed setting up a White House meeting after the Ukrainian president issued a statement announcing an investigation.

"I think [Trump] really wants the deliverable," Sondland wrote. "To avoid misunderstandings, might be helpful to ask Andrey for a draft statement (embargoed) so that we can see exactly what they propose to cover."

That same day, Volker sought guidance from Giuliani about the proposed statement from the Ukrainians.

"Hi Mr Mayor! Had a good chat with Yermak last night. He was pleased with your phone call. Mentioned Z making a statement. Can we all get on the phone to make sure I advise Z correctly as to what he should be saying? Want to make sure we get this done right."

"Yes you can call now going to Fundraiser at 12:30," Giuliani replied.
...
On Sept. 1, Taylor asked Sondland about the prerequisites for a White House visit.

"Are we now saying that security assistance and WH meeting are conditioned on investigations?" Taylor asked.

"Call me," Sondland replied.

On Sep. 8, Sondland informed Volker and Taylor about "multiple convos with Ze, Potus" and suggested they discuss.

"The nightmare is they give the interview and don't get the security assistance. The Russians love it. (And I quit.)," Taylor wrote.

This next quote is the money shot. Even people in the Ukrainian discussion were concerned of Trump's quid pro quo. Taylor is a Ukranian Embassy official for the US. Based only on this text message exchange, he was VERY uncomfortable withbthe Trump cabal tactics.

"As I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign," Taylor added.

 

[LongestHorn]

https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/_c...etter-on-state-departmnent-texts-10-03-19.pdf

haha

 

[Seattle Husker]

What's sad about this saga is that it appears the Trump Admin is prepared to trade a critical US ally for their own political ambitions. It's plain as day in the insider texts.

By all accounts, Zelensky is a good dude trying to do the right thing for his country. The Trump cabal couldn't care less if it helps their reelection chances.

The US State Dept was trying to push back. Pompeo is nutless, which is disappointing to now discover.

 

[Seattle Husker]

(1) Why do you suppose the purported "whistle blower" neglected to mention this?
and
(2) Did he have a legal duty to make this disclosure? Possibly (see 2d tweet)

The Firehouse of Falsehood continues.

 

[LongestHorn]

Not just sad. And not just illegal. It’s a national security felony.

 

[Joe Fan]

John Cornyn (or someone in his office) sort of made a thread
I guess he's seen the polling and thought it was a safe time to pop up

 

[Seattle Husker]

Not just sad. And not just illegal. It’s a national security felony.

Sonderland's and Guiliani's responses "call me" represent that they didn't want their responses documented. Taylor's response is classic CYA "as I stated on the call...". How long until Taylor gets roasted by the right as a "Deep State operator"?

 

[Seattle Husker]

John Cornyn (or someone in his office) sort of made a thread
I guess he's seen the polling and thought it was a safe time to pop up

No charges against him...because it is unlawful to indict a sitting POTUS. I think Cornyn accidentally hit "submit" too early.

Me thinks Cornyn should have waited for more shoes to drop (like the text messages) before sticking his neck out for Trump.

 

[Joe Fan]

...Your people are refusing to use subpoenas. Instead of subpoenas, they are sending strongly worded letters. A reasonable person might ask why that is the case. I would ask you why you think they are doing this but you didnt even know this is what they are doing

 

[Mr. Deez]

Where has the court acted quickly on Congressional subpoenas since Trump began packing the courts? The only fast acting court seems to be that Circuit out West.

Packing the courts? Turn off Rachel Maddow for a minute. Subpoenas would go through the US District Court for the District of Columbia. That court has 15 judges. 11 are Democratic appointees. That excuse is nonsense. And frankly the bottom line is that if they want to be taken seriously, they should follow the normal process. If they don't, then it looks like partisan hackery, and frankly, the Administration isn't under any obligation to cooperate. I'd basically make all the same objections I'd make with a subpoena and force their hand.

And FWIW, US v. Nixon went from subpoena to Supreme Court ruling in 4 months - not 2 or 3 years.

From my perspective, the Congressional subpoenas have been rendered impotent since Eric Holder defied Congress with Fast and Furious. The impotence has gotten worse under the current administration as time after time the White House directs the admin to ignore them.

All someone has to do is show the balls to go to court. It's pretty easy. I did it many times myself. You just have to be willing to explain yourself, and that's where things break down.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Packing the courts? Turn off Rachel Maddow for a minute. Subpoenas would go through the US District Court for the District of Columbia. That court has 15 judges. 11 are Democratic appointees. That excuse is nonsense.

First and foremost, I'm insulted by the accusation that I watch Maddow. If you do not take that back I'll be forced to escalate.

On the court packing you know more about this district than I do. I'm probably colored by JoeFans consistent boasting about packing the court and the travesty of what McConnell did to Garland.

And FWIW, US v. Nixon went from subpoena to Supreme Court ruling in 4 months - not 2 or 3 years.

That was a different time, my friend. Tribalism wasn't as rampant in Congress nor encouaged in the courts.

All someone has to do is show the balls to go to court. It's pretty easy. I did it many times myself. You just have to be willing to explain yourself, and that's where things break down.

Eric Holder was held in contempt. What were the ramifications?

 

[Joe Fan]

I doubt if the lefties actually care, but below is the actual statement of Volker, which supports Rudy's version while directly undermining the narrative spun by Adam Schiff

And, if you dont want to read it, here is the story -- Ukraine, under both Poroshenko and Zelensky, had been trying to deliver information about Obama officials/Dem party officials (DNC/Hillary Clinton) requesting Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election. Both the Poroshenko and Zelensky admins tried to get this information to US officials. But State didnt want it. In fact, the State Department folks in Ukraine even went so far as to regularly refuse visas to Ukrainian emissaries who might be able to transmit this damaging information to the Trump Admin.

Failing to get help from State, they then tried a workaround, hiring an expensive US lawyer to "hand deliver" the evidence directly to DOJ. He gave the info to DOJ in New York.

However, after delivery the Ukrainians still did not hear back from the US Govt. They, now led by Zelensky, interpreted the silence as the US being upset about the Ukraine involvement in the election overall. They were concerned by what appeared to them as a potentially serious diplomatic breakdown. And so Zelensky himself made a personal request to State in the form of Kurt Volker.

Volker then reached out to Rudy Giuliani; and asked him if he would meet with Zelensky’s top lawyer, Andrei Yermak.

Rudy agreed to act as a diplomatic intermediary and met with Yermak in Spain. After the meeting, Rudy then contacted the part of State in charge of Ukraine/Europe and debriefed them on the totality of the subject matter from Yermak. All of this preceded the phone call between Trump and Zelensky. Trump subsequently released a declassified, unredacted transcript of that telephone conversation with Zelenskyy dated July 25. See https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

 

[Garmel]

Though I appreciate Volker's transparency the texts are pretty ****** up and damning. They completely reinforce the narrative the Dems have been pushing, even absent any corroboration from Guiliani.

The pressure being exerted by the Trump Administration and quid pro quo is coming into view.

A taste of the texts released last night from the article above:


This next quote is the money shot. Even people in the Ukrainian discussion were concerned of Trump's quid pro quo. Taylor is a Ukranian Embassy official for the US. Based only on this text message exchange, he was VERY uncomfortable withbthe Trump cabal tactics.

You left out the most important lines in the article. I wonder why. You'd make a fine addition to the House of Reps.

""Sondland replied nearly five hours later that he believed Taylor was "incorrect about President Trump's intentions."

"The president has been crystal clear no quid pro quo's of any kind. The president is trying to evaluate whether Ukraine is truly going to adopt the transparency and reforms that President Zelensky promised during his campaign. I suggest we stop the back and forth by text," Sondland said."

 

[LongestHorn]