What’s Putin’s Puppet hiding? [Archive] - Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

detbuch

09-21-2019, 10:35 AM

I have no problem with another investigation into this.
I have a big problem with means and methods

Good, let's investigate the Biden's activities in Ukraine. That, of course, would involve the Ukraine legal apparatus.

Do you have a problem with this story in Redstate:

What do I win?
Earlier this morning, I wrote a piece predicting that this story about Trump and Ukraine, supposedly involving a quid pro quo and an investigation request into Joe Biden, would blow up. The centerpiece of this was Biden being on tape bragging that he threatened to withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees if Ukraine didn’t fire a prosecutor. That prosecutor just happened to be going after his son’s company. Just a coincidence, I’m assured.

Somehow though, this became a Trump scandal because a supposed “whistle-blower” claimed that the President had pressured Ukraine to investigate Biden’s very apparent corruption. I know, it makes no sense, but that’s how it works in the age of orange man bad. Somehow being on tape extorting a country wasn’t a big deal, but Trump wanting an investigation into it by our ally was impeachable. The media immediately went into leak and supposition mode, claiming that Trump had threatened the new Ukrainian President by withholding of $250 million in military aid they desperately needed.
This was it we were told. It was the scandal that would finally bring Trump down. And then, like always happens, more information started to trickle out that countered the hysteria.

Per The Wall Street Journal:
President Trump in a July phone call repeatedly pressured the president of Ukraine to investigate Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden ’s son, urging Volodymyr Zelensky about eight times to work with Rudy Giuliani, his personal lawyer, on a probe, according to people familiar with the matter.
“He told him that he should work with [Mr. Giuliani] on Biden, and that people in Washington wanted to know” whether allegations were true or not, one of the people said. Mr. Trump didn’t mention a provision of foreign aid to Ukraine on the call, said this person, who didn’t believe Mr. Trump offered the Ukrainian president any quid-pro-quo for his cooperation on an investigation…
And there it is. There was no quid-pro-quo. He did not threaten to withhold military aid. He simply asked several times on a single phone call for them to look into it. He never even called back to press the issue further. None of the nonsensical gnashing of teeth we heard all day about this supposedly being an impeachment bombshell is true. A President asked an ally to investigate corruption that Biden himself admitted to on tape.
Some still can’t let this go though. We have certain conservatives of the anti-Trump bent asserting that the President didn’t actually have to say the words to be asking for a quid-pro-quo. Actually, yes, yes he does have to say the words. Especially when we know the military aid went through anyway despite no investigation being opened by Ukraine. The idea that we are now going to go after Trump based on suppositions of what Ukraine should have deemed from a perfectly legal request is asinine.
Look, I realize some had a lot invested in this, but how many times must they learn this lesson? How hard is it to wait 24 hours and see what else comes out? If a story fits a partisan narrative too perfectly, it’s probably not true or lacking context.
The other thing I’m hearing is that even if this wasn’t illegal or impeachable, it was still wrong because he asked a foreign leader to help him in a way that would benefit him politically. Frankly, I could not care less. These are the new rules. In 2016, the Obama administration went after the Trump campaign based on what they claimed were legitimate suspicions. We have Biden on tape. I’d say that’s a legitimate suspicion. Further, the DNC used Ukraine to get dirt on Paul Manafort. The Hillary campaign hired a foreign spy to build a dossier of opposition research on Trump. So spare me the moral lectures on using foreign sources.
This is politics, not religion and the only way you gather information on corruption by opponents in foreign countries is by using foreign sources. Democrats, the media, and some anti-Trump Republicans do not get to change the rules all the sudden when they don’t benefit them anymore. The precedent was set in 2016 and they will be made to live by it.
Meanwhile, the scramble is on to try to salvage what little is left of this story exploding in their faces. We’ll get all the usual excuses and claims that even though Trump didn’t do it, he’s still bad. The Washington Post will push out a dozen editorials all saying the same thing. The song and dance never changes. For all practical purposes though, this story is dead and done as far as Trump goes.
Biden’s involvement on the other hand? That story will only grow.

scottw

09-21-2019, 11:32 AM

Biden being on tape bragging that he threatened to withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees if Ukraine didn’t fire a prosecutor. That prosecutor just happened to be going after his son’s company. Just a coincidence,

.

geeze...I wonder why the dummycraps aren't calling for an investigation of this?

Pete F.

09-21-2019, 02:24 PM

Sea Dangles

09-21-2019, 03:11 PM

Good job
Another gotcha!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

detbuch

09-21-2019, 03:22 PM

Here’s the problem with it
The viral image said that when Hunter Biden was serving as "a director to Ukraine’s largest private gas producer," his father "threatened to withhold $1 BILLION in U.S. aid to Ukraine if they didn’t fire a prosecutor looking into" the gas company.

The image gets individual pieces of this assertion right -- Hunter Biden was a director of the company, and Joe Biden did leverage U.S. aid to fire a prosecutor. But it overreaches by assuming that Joe Biden acted to protect the company his son was affiliated with. In reality, there was widespread agreement in the West that the existing prosecutor had to go, and it’s not clear that the company would have benefited from his ouster anyway, given evidence that its cases had long been dormant.

That said, experts criticize the Bidens for their arrangement, saying it could have been a significant conflict of interest.

Now look at Trump and follow the Kushner financing of his 666 property.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How about, NOW, we stop all these politically driven "investigations" and get on with actually solving the real problems our Republic has. Its life is hanging on by the threads of its tattered flag and we're wondering if it wouldn't be better to become a socialist "Democracy."

But, what the hell, who cares. I mean the world will end in twelve years if we don't stop eating hamburgers. The world would be better if we all just dissolved the borders that divide us, became an open planet where everyone has free healthcare, free just about everything actually . . . and who wouldn't abandon their present awful religions and authoritarian governments and join We are the People of the World?

Pete F.

09-21-2019, 10:00 PM

And you think this con man is the Chosen One.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

detbuch

09-21-2019, 10:44 PM

And you think this con man is the Chosen One.

Since you're not quoting a specific post with yours, not sure if you're referring to me. If you are, I don't know what you mean by "the Chosen One." But it does appear, if you're referring to Trump, that you've chosen him as an object of ceaseless and endless sorts of denigration, slander, belittlement, and thoroughly mean spirited attacks.

As for me, I did vote for him. So that was a choice. And he was the one chosen by me at the ballot box. But I certainly don't view him as a capitalized "Chosen One." He's just a guy, not a Messiah.

You're a Strange Fellow when you attribute thoughts to those who never expressed them--a sort of oracle, mentalist, clairvoyant, but who's powers are too weak to come up with the right vision.

Sea Dangles

09-22-2019, 06:24 AM

He just has TDS.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-22-2019, 07:01 AM

And when the whistleblower turns out to be Dan Coats or Sue Gordon, will you continue to claim BS.
The Toady Lindsey Graham thinks the whistleblower should be prosecuted, for doing something within the law.
If Trumplicans want to end meaningless investigations, they could have started years ago with the endless Clinton ones that Kavanaugh was rewarded for.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sea Dangles

09-22-2019, 07:09 AM

Thank you for conceding it is a meaningless investigation. At least you validate it as two wrongs trying to make a right.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

spence

09-22-2019, 09:26 AM

Thank you for conceding it is a meaningless investigation. At least you validate it as two wrongs trying to make a right.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Inspector General refers a whistleblower complaint as urgent and it’s meaningless?

Who has TDS again?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sea Dangles

09-22-2019, 03:43 PM

Inspector General refers a whistleblower complaint as urgent and it’s meaningless?

Who has TDS again?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Funny that the person who needed a safe space immediately following the election would dare ask this question. I hope that clarified your misunderstanding.
Oh,and PeteF is the one who referred to the investigation as meaningless.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-23-2019, 03:42 AM

We're maybe hours from learning the promise Trump made and to which leader, less than 24 from him calling it fake news, two days away from Republicans being "troubled," three away from the WH admitting the story is true but Trump was "joking," four from the GOP falling into line.

Mitt Romney, a little late.
If the President asked or pressured Ukraine’s president to investigate his political rival, either directly or through his personal attorney, it would be troubling in the extreme. Critical for the facts to come out.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-23-2019, 03:46 AM

Thank you for conceding it is a meaningless investigation. At least you validate it as two wrongs trying to make a right.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Just bear in mind that 49 Republicans in the house and 8 in the Senate lost their seats after spending a year defending Nixon's corruption.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sea Dangles

09-23-2019, 06:13 AM

Just bear in mind that 49 Republicans in the house and 8 in the Senate lost their seats after spending a year defending Nixon's corruption.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thank you for exposing that information Pete. You are truly one of God’s soldiers.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

scottw

09-23-2019, 07:14 AM

he's replying to his own posts now soooooo......that's like talking to yourself...right?

Pete F.

09-23-2019, 08:21 AM

Deep thoughts by scottw

he likes to remind us that he's not very bright...

I laugh too much for an angry person...why do you constantly tell everyone that they are angry? I think you are projecting

that's insightful :doh:

Not insults. “Love taps”. Some people are just wound WAY too tight
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

pretty sure nobody does :rotf2:

oh stop...you know I love you

it's tough reading....

that would be awesome

:bl:

they are going to lock you up Peto

geeze...I wonder why the dummycraps aren't calling for an investigation of this?

he's replying to his own posts now soooooo......that's like talking to yourself...right?

Pete F.

09-23-2019, 08:25 AM

And then we have clever thoughts from the leader of the Trump Defense Society

If you had written we are then you wouldn’t be in this mess. But thanks for giving the three stooges a hat trick.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Stay tuned as PaulS is about to say something clever.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Did he intend to say we will?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Great to see Trump’s approval ratings surpassed Obama.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I guess this is clever,using the PeteF. grading curve.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I believe you have an acute case of TDS.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I simply support our leader.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I know you get confused easily PeteF.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hey Stupe,Simply.
Not simple.
Even pAul is laughing at you. In his “I will blow you” emoticon.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Story or fable?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Smarten up
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Good job
Another gotcha!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He just has TDS.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thank you for conceding it is a meaningless investigation. At least you validate it as two wrongs trying to make a right.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Funny that the person who needed a safe space immediately following the election would dare ask this question. I hope that clarified your misunderstanding.
Oh,and PeteF is the one who referred to the investigation as meaningless.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thank you for exposing that information Pete. You are truly one of God’s soldiers.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

scottw

09-23-2019, 08:43 AM

RIROCKHOUND

09-23-2019, 09:18 AM

[QUOTE=scottw;1174612]

Pete and Dangles need to learn how to use the ignore tool.... :musc:

Sea Dangles

09-23-2019, 09:21 AM

I am so grateful to have a leader putting America first. It’s super to see somebody making the USA great again.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-23-2019, 09:35 AM

I am so grateful to have a leader putting America first. It’s super to see somebody making the USA great again.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Proof there are "Republican" Comedians

spence

09-23-2019, 10:15 AM

Funny that the person who needed a safe space immediately following the election would dare ask this question. I hope that clarified your misunderstanding.
Oh,and PeteF is the one who referred to the investigation as meaningless.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I think he was being a little bit sarcastic. As for safe spaces you keep bringing this up but I have no idea what you're talking about.

spence

09-23-2019, 10:21 AM

How about, NOW, we stop all these politically driven "investigations" and get on with actually solving the real problems our Republic has.

I'm not sure how the Ukraine issue Trump has hanging over his head can be considered a "politically driven investigation."

A whistle-blower did their job. The Inspector General did their job. Now it's time for Congress to do their job and lookie we have another cover up. If anyone is being political here it's the Administration.

Sea Dangles

09-23-2019, 10:31 AM

I think he was being a little bit sarcastic. As for safe spaces you keep bringing this up but I have no idea what you're talking about.

Hyperbole Jeff?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

detbuch

09-23-2019, 03:06 PM

I'm not sure

I don't blame you. How can you be sure if all the facts are not known?

spence

09-23-2019, 03:07 PM

I don't blame you. How can you be sure if all the facts are not known?
Sounds like a good reason to release the whistle blower report to Congress so they can provide oversight, just like a healthy government is intended to perform.

Got Stripers

09-23-2019, 03:14 PM

Sounds like a good reason to release the whistle blower report to Congress so they can provide oversight, just like a healthy government is intended to perform.

Oversight, three equal branches, treasonous speech.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-23-2019, 03:17 PM

As expected, liberals spent most of the weekend screaming “IMPEACH!” over news that President Donald Trump had again done something that is likely an impeachable offense.

This time around it involves a phone call with the incoming Ukranian president, a whistleblower report regarding that phone call that a Trump appointee found to be of “urgent concern” and a blatant attempt by the president of the United States to get a foreign country to interfere in the 2020 election.

Will these libs ever just give it a rest?

Because he’s super good at doing crimes, Trump and his attorney, Rudy Giuliani, spent the weekend effectively acknowledging that they did, in fact, try to get a foreign power to launch an investigation into widely debunked allegations against Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.

That’s just good presidenting right there: You know there’s a debunked scandal against your potential opponent. You know facts are stupid. So you lean on a foreign country to reincarnate a dead scandal and then let that zombie scandal eat what’s left of your supporters’ brains.

What president wouldn’t do that, aside from all presidents who came before Trump?

To make this easy for the weak-minded lefties, I’m going to detail five iron-clad reasons Trump should not be impeached for committing — and admitting to committing — an impeachable offense.

The story behind Joe Biden’s son, Ukraine and Trump’s claims »
1) Trump is pulling a reverse-Nixon, and you can’t impeach a president who pulls a reverse-Nixon.

In 1973, President Richard Nixon famously denied involvement in the Watergate cover-up by saying, “I am not a crook!” Articles of impeachment would’ve been filed against Nixon had he remained in office.

But Trump’s reverse-Nixon has him effectively saying, “I am a crook!”

On Sunday, in perfectly normal and easy-to-understand English, the president spoke about the call in which he reportedly pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to relaunch a closed investigation into Biden: “The conversation I had was largely congratulatory, was largely corruption, all of the corruption taking place, was largely the fact that we don’t want our people, like Vice President Biden and his son, creating to the corruption already in the Ukraine.”

So there it is. Did the president of the United States ask the president of a foreign country that was eagerly awaiting $250 million in U.S. aid to target a political opponent? Yes. Is that a clear attempt by Trump to use the power of his office to benefit himself and put self-interest above the interest of the nation? Heck yeah! Is the administration breaking the law and engaging in a cover-up by keeping the whistleblower report relating to this matter from congressional oversight committees? Yeppers.

But because Trump up and admitted it all — successfully pulling off the never-before-achieved reverse-Nixon — there’s no way Congress can impeach. Look it up, it’s in the Constitution. Probably.

2) Trump is having fun committing impeachable offenses, and it would be mean to stop him now.

On Sunday, New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman tweeted about the Ukraine scandal: “The president, per people close to him, is enjoying all this as it plays out.”

Clearly, Trump gets a real kick out of “triggering the libs” by mowing down the fundamental standards of our democracy and “faithfully executing the Office of President of the United States” only in the literal, murdering it sense.

Don’t take that away from him. Maybe he’s the self-proclaimed most successful president ever because he gets to commit impeachable offenses without consequence. Everyone deserves some joy in life.

3) You can’t impeach Trump for doing bad things because other people may also have done bad things, possibly.

The minute you bring up any alleged misdeed by Donald Trump, his supporters scream, “OH YEAH, WELL WHAT ABOUT THAT TIME (INSERT NAME OF EVIL LIBERAL) DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING?!?”

They will have no factual basis for their argument, but that doesn’t matter because they say it forcefully and refuse to admit they’re wrong. That, as any first-year law student will tell you, makes it true.

Biden: ‘Trump deserves to be investigated’ over Ukraine call »
For example, if I murder someone, I can just make up a story about how another person murdered someone and didn’t get charged, and that would insulate me from prosecution.

So did Trump violate his oath of office? Yes. But did Hillary Clinton violate her oath of office when she was president by allowing aliens to lure rural Americans to untoward sex parties in the basement of a pizza parlor? Absolutely.

Game. Set. Match.

4) Impeaching Trump would damage the Democrats’ carefully honed “We’re too afraid to impeach Trump” brand.

Congressional Democrats have spent the past three years not flexing their political muscles and pretending Trump is a normal political figure who can be contained by silly things like “rules” and “laws” and “basic common decency.”

Their inaction has emboldened Trump to think he can just get on the phone with a foreign leader and ask him to dig up dirt on a political opponent. Why would Democrats want to undo all the non-good they’ve done by suddenly cracking down on a lawless president? Totally off-brand.

5) Impeachment will rile up Trump’s base and divide the country, two things that are definitely not already happening.

If Democrats try to impeach President Trump, his supporters — known for their calm demeanor and openness to hearing both sides — might get angry. That would be terrible for Democrats’ chances of winning over people who think Trump — who according to the Washington Post’s fact-checker has told more than 12,000 false or misleading claims in less than 1,000 days — is a great truth-teller.

It also might divide the country by exposing the extent of Trump’s corruption and giving the truth a chance to win out.

Which would be terrible. For Donald Trump.

rhuppke@chicagotribune.com

detbuch

09-23-2019, 03:39 PM

Sounds like a good reason to release the whistle blower report to Congress so they can provide oversight, just like a healthy government is intended to perform.

Sounds like a good witch hunt. Another one.

Now that you and the Dems and the media insist on investigating abuse of power, Biden's flagrant abuse of it can be thoroughly investigated. Since that's what instigated all this.

wdmso

09-23-2019, 04:13 PM

Sounds like a good witch hunt. Another one.

Now that you and the Dems and the media insist on investigating abuse of power, Biden's flagrant abuse of it can be thoroughly investigated. Since that's what instigated all this.

Whos the POTUS. Clearly not Biden
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

spence

09-23-2019, 04:56 PM

Now that you and the Dems and the media insist on investigating abuse of power, Biden's flagrant abuse of it can be thoroughly investigated. Since that's what instigated all this.
I'm curious, are you being hand fed or just paid to say these things.

wdmso

09-23-2019, 05:17 PM

detbuch

09-23-2019, 06:38 PM

Whos the POTUS. Clearly not Biden
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Biden was Vice-President.

detbuch

09-23-2019, 06:41 PM

I'm curious, are you being hand fed or just paid to say these things.

Is that all that you're curious about? You might want to elevate your perspective on who or what I am. On the other hand, that might be too strenuous. I'm OK with your low opinion of me. It's consistent with a lot of other things you say.

Got Stripers

09-23-2019, 06:45 PM

detbuch

09-23-2019, 06:46 PM

Mr Biden was not the only public official - in the US, among EU countries and in Ukraine - calling for Mr Shokin's removal.Mr Shokin's replacement, Yuriy Lutsenko, continued to investigate Burisima for 10 months before ending all legal proceedings.. again facts and truth can not sway the rights love for conspiracy theories .. this is why they their not intrested when Trump does what he does its true. The only conspiracy they see is everyones out to get Trump
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Calling for his removal is one thing. Threatening to withdraw promised money if it was not done is another.

BTW, Mr. Shokin has been interviewed about the matter, and he said that he was investigating Biden's son's actual qualifications and reasons for being hired by Burisma.

Sea Dangles

09-23-2019, 07:05 PM

Trump being Trump, many keep forgetting why he ran in the first place and that his abuse of rules, regulations and the law is his MO throughout his life. He ran for fame and family fortune, if you think it was to make America great again, your either blind, deaf, dumb or a just a plain fool.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
This is fair because it is just an opinion from a liberal fool. Trump keeps fighting for your rights,so enjoy them.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Got Stripers

09-23-2019, 07:20 PM

This is fair because it is just an opinion from a liberal fool. Trump keeps fighting for your rights,so enjoy them.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I already pegged you, read my last sentence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-23-2019, 07:40 PM

Trumplicans BEFORE 10 DAYS AGO: Trump has never colluded with any foreign power and there has to be something seriously wrong with you to think otherwise

Trumplicans AFTER 10 DAYS AGO: Uh it's like the president's *job* to collude with foreign powers and if you didn't hate America you'd know it
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

detbuch

09-23-2019, 08:23 PM

Sea Dangles

09-23-2019, 09:37 PM

Pete F.

09-23-2019, 10:18 PM

Has Trump and some foreign power cooperated in some illegal action?
Keep believing

Three anonymous officials say Trump ordered a hold on a $400 million aid payment to Ukraine days before the Biden call.

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 Biden’s son

Giuliani to Hannity: 'I wasn't acting on my own, I was following instructions of the state Department.'

Bolton argued to meet with Ukraine’s president and restore funding as a way to curb Russian aggression. Trump for some time was unmoved. He urged Biden probe. Giuliani urged probe. His aides began to worry move was illegal & GOP senators challenged.

Stunning. Now you can see people are ratting out Trump, leaking and moving the story forward. You’ll see how fast a weak bully goes down.

And just wait till the Russian twist shows up.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

detbuch

09-23-2019, 11:14 PM

Keep believing

You said "Trumplicans AFTER 10 DAYS AGO: Uh it's like the president's *job* to collude with foreign powers"

You specifically said "collude." For there to be collusion with a foreign power, the foreign power must reciprocate.

I'll ask again, has Trump and some foreign power cooperated, colluded, in some illegal action?

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 02:14 AM

You said "Trumplicans AFTER 10 DAYS AGO: Uh it's like the president's *job* to collude with foreign powers"

You specifically said "collude." For there to be collusion with a foreign power, the foreign power must reciprocate.

I'll ask again, has Trump and some foreign power cooperated, colluded, in some illegal action?

Spin spin spin

Fox News host Shep Smith on Monday dispelled the deflection President Donald Trump uses whenever he gets confronted about his controversial call with the Ukrainian president, during which Trump reportedly pressured the president to investigate 2020 rival Joe Biden.

“There is no known evidence that Biden did anything wrong,” Smith said following a clip of Trump parroting his baseless claim that Biden had engaged in corrupt behavior in Ukraine.

The Fox host pointed out that the Ukrainian prosecutor at the heart of Trump’s conspiracy theory–that Biden had pushed for the prosecutor’s ouster for investigating a company with ties to Biden’s son–was widely considered corrupt, which led to his ouster.

“The real issue here is the phone call,” Smith said. “The claim that the President pressured a foreign leader to investigate a political rival and the failure to pass the whistleblower complaint to Congress.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 02:21 AM

It wasn’t clear why Rudy Giuliani took a day in November 2017 to travel to the Ukrainian city of Kharkiv.

Now, more light has been shed on Giuliani and his oddball Ukrainian associates – according to a new profile of Russian-Ukrainian oligarch Pavel Fuchs, Giuliani is working to “create a U.S. office for supporting investment in the city.” The profile was published Nov. 12 in the Ukrainian magazine Novoye Vremya.

Fuchs – known mainly for negotiating with the Trump Organization for a Trump Moscow project – has arguably been one of Giuliani’s murkiest connections in his global consulting business.

For more than a decade, the former New York City mayor has consulted for unsavory clients around the world, from a recent sojourn to Armenia to a 2004 journey to meet a Russian billionaire in the steel town of Magnitogorsk.

But Fuchs – photographed above in New York with Giuliani in July 2017 – could mark a new low in Giuliani’s foreign consulting career.

Fuchs, a Kharkiv native, has reportedly been under investigation in Ukraine for alleged corruption surrounding a deal to buy $160 million in frozen assets of the country’s former President Viktor Yanukovych, who was deposed in February 2014. Yanukovych was the former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s prime Ukraine client for more than a decade. Manafort pleaded guilty to federal criminal charges arising from his Ukraine work and is now cooperating with special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe.
Fuchs built his wealth in Moscow throughout the 1990s and 2000s, amassing investments in energy, banking, and real estate.

In an Al Jazeera profile, Fuchs was quoted as telling a Russian TV host, “when I was young, I beat people up.”

“I don’t like it when someone lies to me,” he added.

Most notably, Fuchs was contracted to build Moscow-City, a complex of skyscrapers in the Russian capital along the Moscow river.

Fuchs’s position as a major real estate developer in Russia brought him into contact with the Trump Organization in June 2008, when the group was in negotiations to franchise its name to one of the towers in Fuchs’s Moscow-City complex.
“We were going to name one of the Moscow-City towers ‘Trump Tower’,” Fuchs recalled in a November 2017 interview. “Donald Trump’s son also wanted to enter the Russian luxury real estate market, he flew to us for negotiations many times.”

By 2017 – the year of Fuchs’s first documented meeting with Giuliani – he had relocated to Ukraine.

Fuchs pops up in photographs with Kharkiv’s mayor, Gennady Kernes, and was named an “honorary citizen” by him in 2014.

Kernes, who flaunts his love of New York City-related apparel on his Instagram account, initially sided with the outgoing Ukraine regime during the 2014 protests. After the revolution, he switched allegiances, but was accused and investigated over allegedly organizing the kidnapping and torture of protestors in his city. That case went nowhere, but accusations of reprisals and grand corruption have continued to dog the mayor.

Kernes’s city hired U.S. lobbyist Shai Franklin in 2016 to represent the city’s economic interests in Washington, though that relationship doesn’t appear from FARA filings to have continued.

By May 2017, Giuliani’s company Giuliani Security had inked an agreement with Kharkiv city government to review the city’s security services. A New York firm called Triglobal Strategic Ventures, a company the New York Times reported as “provid image consulting to Russian oligarchs and clients with deep Kremlin ties,” too credit in a press release for introducing the Ukraine city and Giuliani’s firm.

The New York City meeting with Fuchs occurred in July 2017, and Giuliani visited Kharkiv in November 2017. Giuliani hosted a delegation from Kharkiv in New York City in March.

It’s not clear whether Giuliani has undertaken any activities to promote Kharkiv – or Fuchs – in the U.S. A review of FARA found no record of Giuliani ever registering as a foreign lobbyist.
[i]Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 02:23 AM

Last year, Ukrainian lawmakers admitted that Poroshenko's government halted cooperation with Mueller regarding Manafort/corruption because they didn't want to upset Trump while they were buying US anti-tank missiles. This seems strangely forgotten.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 02:32 AM

Calling for his removal is one thing. Threatening to withdraw promised money if it was not done is another.

BTW, Mr. Shokin has been interviewed about the matter, and he said that he was investigating Biden's son's actual qualifications and reasons for being hired by Burisma.
“Shokin has not brought any cases of corruption to court involving [ousted] Yanukovich [Paul Manafort’s client & Putin’s man in Ukraine] or his partners. Nor has he prosecuted the hundreds of high-level corruption cases ...brought to his office....”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 02:34 AM

“Clearly,” said the senior adviser to the Ukraine's interior minister, “Trump is now looking for kompromat to discredit his opponent Biden, to take revenge for his friend Paul Manafort, who is serving seven years in prison.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 02:47 AM

Sea Dangles

09-24-2019, 06:17 AM

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 06:33 AM

Wow,Pete might be hospitalized with an acute case of TDS. DIZZINESS and INSOMNIA to follow. Get well soon as God needs your help fighting these allegations of wrongdoing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

“When I took over the United States.” — Donald J. Trump, Dictator-wannabe, September 23, 2019 (referring at the UN to the start of his presidency).

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sea Dangles

09-24-2019, 07:25 AM

Thank goodness we have a steward that puts America First.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Got Stripers

09-24-2019, 07:37 AM

Thank goodness we have a steward that puts America First.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You are so full of sh*t, Trump is out for Trump and family first. Please explain how extorting a foreign government in order to help his efforts in the 2020 election is good for America. I think you need to loosen the MAGA hit band, clearly it’s lessoning blood flow to brain cells you can ill afford to loss at this point.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

scottw

09-24-2019, 07:48 AM

yes...please explain

President Obama defers his authority and says, ‘I'm making Joe Biden my point man in Ukraine. He's going to take care of this crisis. He's going to build out the government, we're going to get this situation dealt with.’ And so Biden starts jumping across the pond and visiting Ukraine on a regular basis, meeting with the president.

“Well, a funny thing happened. Not just a few weeks after Biden takes over the portfolium, a natural gas company called Burisma Holdings in Ukraine, hires Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden to join its board. And that in and of itself is a little suspicious, right? There's no evidence that Hunter Biden had any experience in Ukraine law or Ukraine natural gas, but he's suddenly added to the board. So his son cashes in and gets a great job in Ukraine and it goes on for a couple of years.”

Solomon explained that later Ukrainian authorities began investigating transfers being made to Hunter Biden:

“They have a wide ranging and criminal investigation and they determined in late fall 2015 according to the very records I've seen in Ukrainian court, that they want to interview Hunter Biden. "Why are you taking this money as a board member? What is it for and is there any chance the money is really to influence your father who is a vice president in charge of Ukraine policy?"

“It is at that moment that Joe Biden steps into the picture in a different role. He has a conversation with president Poroshenko, now the Western friendly president, and tells him, ‘I want you to fire the general prosecutor in your country. I want him gone.’

Poroshenko questions, ‘Why? What has he done wrong?’

Biden tells him, ‘Don't worry, he's done something wrong. Just get rid of them.’

Well, the president doesn't oblige and continues to leave that prosecutor general, named Viktor Shokin, in charge for several months. Multiple requests come in from both the vice president and the US embassy demanding that they fire this prosecutor. President Poroshenko doesn't have a reason to fire him.”

Here is where the true scandal is revealed, Solomon explained that Biden continued to pressure the Ukrainian leader. In March of 2016, four months after Joe Biden made the first request for the prosecutor to be fired, Vice President Joe Biden makes a call and says, "If you do not fire that prosecutor, I am going to withhold the next $1 billion in US loan guarantees to the Ukraine."

This is a devastating threat because Ukraine is so cash short. At that point, President Poroshenko finally obliges and fires the prosecutor.

Of course, this has largely gone unreported by the media.

seems like Trump is seeking justice and Biden was trying to prevent justice...family first and all

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 08:36 AM

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 08:58 AM

Channeling Michael Weiner aka Savage?

Removing Shokin was hardly Biden's unique idea. “Everyone in the Western community wanted Shokin sacked,” Anders Aslund, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, told the Wall Street Journal. “The whole G-7, the IMF, the EBRD, everybody was united that Shokin must go, and the spokesman for this was Joe Biden.”

The people of Ukraine wanted Shokin gone as well, and demonstrated for his removal around the time of Biden’s threat. Shortly after that demonstration, Shokin was dismissed.

pete, come on. there is video of biden saying he threatened to withhold aid unless they fired the prosecutor. it’s on video. biden was laughing and bragging, and he’s done. he was then only one with a great chance to beat trump, and he’s done.

this whole thing doesn’t seem suspicious to you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

spence

09-24-2019, 09:06 AM

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 09:17 AM

Jim, the reason everybody wanted the prosecutor removed was because he WASN'T FIGHTING CORRUPTION.

You're been duped by a narrative that's 180 degrees to what really happened.

so you don’t think its unusual
for the vice president to withhold huge amounts of aid, unless they fire one prosecutor? we give zillions of dollars to corrupt governments every year. what was so special about this prosecutor in Ukraine that the VP was so concerned he be fired?

so tell me what really happened regarding biden’s son. was he enjoying a lucrative position on an energy company board? how was he qualified? and was he appointed to the board shortly after biden was tapped as obama’s
point man on Ukraine? did biden not only draw a big salary in the board, but also see a lot of ukrainian money flow into his investment firm?

you’re right, i’m not following this very closely. so tell me where i’m
wrong, and what the truth is.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

detbuch

09-24-2019, 09:35 AM

Spin spin spin

Yes, you try spinning your way out of answering my question. You couldn't answer my question because your "Trumplicans AFTER 10 DAYS AGO" stuff is pure crap.

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 10:10 AM

pete, come on. there is video of biden saying he threatened to withhold aid unless they fired the prosecutor. it’s on video. biden was laughing and bragging, and he’s done. he was then only one with a great chance to beat trump, and he’s done.

this whole thing doesn’t seem suspicious to you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A timeline from Ukraine's 2014 revolution to President Donald Trump's push for a Ukrainian probe of former Vice President Joe Biden.

February 2014 Ukraine is thrust into violent revolution, with thousands of anti-government protesters marching on the capital, Kyiv. As a result, the country's government is overthrown and its pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych, is removed from office. He remains exiled in Moscow.

April 2014 Vice President Joe Biden leads a U.S. delegation to Kyiv tasked with rooting out corruption and advocating for Ukraine to diminish its reliance on Russian oil. The Obama administration had pledged aid money to support a fledgling Ukrainian administration recovering from a revolution that ousted the country's previous leader.

"You have to fight the cancer of corruption that is endemic in your system right now," Biden told the Ukrainian parliament during the first of several post-revolution visits to the country. "And with the right investments and the right choices, Ukraine can reduce its energy dependence and increase its energy security."

May 2014 Within months of his dismissal from the Navy Reserves after testing positive for cocaine, the vice president's son, Hunter Biden, joins the board of Burisma, Ukraine's premier oil and gas company.

Hunter Biden and his associate at a business entity called Rosemont Seneca Partners -- where Hunter Biden was a managing partner -- both obtained board seats around the same time. According to banking records reviewed by ABC News, Seneca Partners began collecting $166,666 payments each month.

May 2014 The Obama White House deflects questions from ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Jonathan Karl about potential conflicts of interest in light of Hunter Biden's new role at Burisma and the vice president's diplomatic role with Kyiv.

During a daily press briefing, press secretary Jay Carney said, "Hunter Biden and other members of the Biden family are obviously private citizens, and where they work does not reflect an endorsement by the administration or by the vice president or president."

March 2016 Viktor Shokin is fired as prosecutor general, Ukraine's most senior law enforcement position.

The circumstances surrounding Shokin's 2016 dismissal have become central to the debate in 2019 over whether the vice president inappropriately called for Shokin to be fired.

In an interview with ABC News in April 2019, Shokin said he believed Biden pressured the government to fire him because he was leading an investigation into Burisma. But the assertion that Biden acted to help his son has been undercut by widespread criticism of Shokin from several high-profile international leaders, including members of the European Union and International Monetary Fund, who said Biden's recommendation was well justified. Once Shokin was removed, the European Union's envoy to Ukraine, Jan Tombinski, lauded the decision as "an opportunity to make a fresh start."

Dec. 1, 2017 In a press release, Burisma announces that all charges against the company and its president, Mykola Zlochevsky, were dropped by the Ukrainian prosecutor general's office.

Jan. 23, 2018 During an appearance at the Council on Foreign Relations, the former vice president touted his record of fighting corruption by boasting about his threat to withhold a billion dollar U.S. loan guarantee to Kiev if Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko failed to "take action against the state prosecutor" -- referring to Shokin.

"'I'm going to be leaving here in six hours,'" Biden recalled telling Poroshenko. "'If the prosecutor's not fired, you're not getting the money.' Well, son of a bitch, he got fired."

April 2019 Hunter Biden's directorship at Burisma expires and he decides not to renew his seat.

"In this political climate," he said in a statement to ABC News, "where my qualifications and work are being attacked by Rudy Giuliani and his minions for transparent political purposes, I have decided not to renew my directorship."

April 25, 2019 Joe Biden launches his 2020 presidential campaign.

Early May 2019 Rudy Giuliani, the president's personal attorney, announces plans to go and then abruptly cancels a visit to Ukraine to convince the Ukrainian government to reopen an investigation into Joe Biden's role in the dismissal of Shokin.

In a spate of television interviews on Fox News, Giuliani predicted that, "there's no way [Biden] gets from here to the election without this being investigated."

May 16, 2019 Ukraine's prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, tells Bloomberg that he had found no evidence of wrongdoing by Joe Biden or his son, Hunter.

"I do not want Ukraine to again be the subject of U.S. presidential elections," Lutsenko said. "Hunter Biden did not violate any Ukrainian laws -- at least as of now, we do not see any wrongdoing. A company can pay however much it wants to its board."

June 2019 Responding to questions about his son's foreign business dealings, Joe Biden's campaign for president tells ABC News exclusively that if Biden wins the White House he will issue an executive order on his first day in office to "address conflicts of interest of any kind."

July 2019 In an interview with The New Yorker, Hunter Biden said he only had one interaction with his father about joining Burisma: "Dad said, 'I hope you know what you are doing,' and I said, 'I do.'"

In a statement to ABC News a month earlier, Hunter Biden said, "at no time have I discussed with my father the company's business, or my board service. Any suggestion to the contrary is just plain wrong."

Sept. 19, 2019 The Wall Street Journal reported that President Donald Trump pressured Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky, "about eight times to work with Rudy Giuliani on a probe" into Joe Biden.

The July phone call with Zelensky is the subject of a whistleblower complaint filed with the Intelligence Community Inspector General in August, which is now tied up in a dispute between the director of national intelligence and House Democrats about whether Congress should have access to the details of the complaint.

Sept. 21 and 22, 2019 Joe Biden spends the weekend defending himself from Trump. In a statement, the Biden campaign called on the president to release the transcript from his July phone call with the Ukrainian president.

Biden also told reporters that he and his son never discussed Hunter Biden's business with Burisma, despite Hunter Biden's comments to The New Yorker in July that he and Joe Biden had discussed the matter once.

Sept. 23, 2019 During a visit to New York for the U.N. General Assembly, Trump doubles down on the Bidens' actions in Ukraine.

"The one who's got the problem is Biden. If you look at what Biden did, Biden did what they would like to have me do, except there's one problem, I didn't do it," Trump said. "What Biden did is a disgrace, what his son did is a disgrace."

Meanwhile here in Trumplandia, the Trump family business which Trump still controls is working worldwide with foreign governments.
Ivanka Trump gets initial approval from China for 16 new trademarks—including for ‘voting machines’
Trump is the only president for at least 40 years who has not liquidated his business assets or put them in a blind trust.

The Department of Justice has adopted a narrow interpretation of a law meant to bar foreign interests from corrupting federal officials, giving Saudi Arabia, China and other countries leeway to curry favor with Donald Trump via deals with his hotels, condos, trademarks and golf courses, legal and national security experts say.
For 150 years justice department lawyers have interpreted the clause in a way that barred any foreign payments or gifts except for ones Congress approved. But filings by the department since June 2017 reveal a new interpretation that "… would permit the president – and all federal officials – to accept unlimited amounts of money from foreign governments, as long as the money comes through commercial transactions with an entity owned by the federal official."

The justice department stance now closely parallels arguments made in a January 2017 position paper by Trump Organization lawyer Sheri Dillon and several of her law partners. On 11 January 2017, just days before he was sworn in, Dillon said Trump isn’t accepting any payments in his “official capacity” as president, as the income is only related to his private business. “Paying for a hotel room is not a gift or a present, and it has nothing to do with an office,” Dillon said.
A chief focus of critics and the emolument lawsuits has been the Trump International Hotel which has become a mini mecca for numerous foreign delegations – including ones from Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Turkey and the Philippines – who have used it for overnight stays and various meetings.

The hotel is leased from the GSA for 60 years and located on Pennsylvania Avenue just a few blocks from the White House. The IG’s report this January said the lease should have been reviewed again with Trump’s election to determine if it was in violation of the emoluments clause.

Critics of Trump’s ongoing ties to the Trump International and his business empire also note that some countries with major political and business problems in Washington have frequented his properties. “It appears that President Trump may be benefiting from foreign use of his properties designed to influence his decisions,” said the former Republican congressman Mickey Edwards.

Trump claims that profits from foreign influences are being donated, but defines profits in such a way as to launder the money.

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 10:24 AM

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 11:04 AM

cool timeline pete. i didnt for a huge cut and paste. i asked if you thought anything looked suspicious.

of all the corrupt and tyrannical officials in the world, the one biden brags about getting fired , is a ukranian prosecutor who no one has ever heard of, and who was possibly about to question biden’s son.

what are YOUR thoughts in that. i’m not asking you to paste a 10,000 word essay by Rachael Maddow.

Biden is done. he had the best chance by far to beat trump, and he’s done.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You think that Biden bragged in public that he got rid of a corrupt prosecutor whom they replaced with another, so that his son would not be prosecuted.
I think he claimed too much credit for it, it was the decision of the US and the European community as a group that made that happen. In those days it was not America Alone.

Here's a more detailed timeline, also not from Rachel Maddow.
https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timeline-trump-giuliani-bidens-and-ukrainegate/

spence

09-24-2019, 11:09 AM

cool timeline pete. i didnt for a huge cut and paste. i asked if you thought anything looked suspicious.
I think the worst you could say is there was a potential conflict of interest. That being said, I've not seen one shred of evidence that there actually was one nor anything to support the conspiracy theories put forth by Rudy and Trump.

I don't know why you think Biden is done, if anything the odds of impeachment just went way up.

scottw

09-24-2019, 11:37 AM

if anything the odds of impeachment just went way up.

man I hope so!

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 11:40 AM

You think that Biden bragged in public that he got rid of a corrupt prosecutor whom they replaced with another, so that his son would not be prosecuted.
I think he claimed too much credit for it, it was the decision of the US and the European community as a group that made that happen. In those days it was not America Alone.

Here's a more detailed timeline, also not from Rachel Maddow.
https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timeline-trump-giuliani-bidens-and-ukrainegate/

for the second time, pete...of all the evil and corrupt government officials in the world, why did Biden pick this guy, who no one ever heard of, to get rid of? it’s a coincidence and nothing more, that the guy might have been investigating Hunter?

there were no bigger threats to world peace and stability, than a prosecutor in the Ukraine?

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

spence

09-24-2019, 11:46 AM

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 11:50 AM

So I guess you missed the part about the Ukrainian revolution kicking out the Russian puppet and installing a pro European government in 2014? Many countries including the US wanted to support Ukraine's new path but endemic corruption made that risky, hence why most of the democratic world wanted Ukraine's top prosecutor out because he was part of the problem.

ok. what specifically did the prosecutor do, that made it reasonable for the executive branch of the US government, to force the ukrainians to fire him?

we give aid to countries led
by murderers. we don’t threaten to withhold aid to pakistan, even though they jailed the doctor who helped us get Bin Laden.

this guy was worse? please explain...i can’t wait.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

detbuch

09-24-2019, 11:55 AM

So I guess you missed the part about the Ukrainian revolution kicking out the Russian puppet and installing a pro European government in 2014? Many countries including the US wanted to support Ukraine's new path but endemic corruption made that risky, hence why most of the democratic world wanted Ukraine's top prosecutor out because he was part of the problem.

Why wasn't the wonderful Ukrainian revolution not interested in ousting its top prosecutor and being just a puppet, not of the Russians, but of "most of the democratic world" until it was warned that if it did not want to be a puppet it would not get a big loan from the US?

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 11:59 AM

Spence, we give aid to Mexico and Syria. corruption there isn’t part of the problem?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 12:27 PM

for the second time, pete...of all the evil and corrupt government officials in the world, why did Biden pick this guy, who no one ever heard of, to get rid of? it’s a coincidence and nothing more, that the guy might have been investigating Hunter?

there were no bigger threats to world peace and stability, than a prosecutor in the Ukraine?

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You complain when I cut and paste, but are incapable of clicking on a link and reading for yourself.

https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timeline-trump-giuliani-bidens-and-ukrainegate/

Click and you'll find out what our ambassador, UK, IMF and G7 said about the prosecutor you never heard of. A one sentence answer cannot do six years of history justice, though it works great to incite the uninformed.

Ukraine had played a key role in Russia's success long before President Vladimir Putin rose to power. Ukraine's fertile black-earth farmland had long been a key Russian breadbasket, while the Donbas region is a major locus of heavy industry and mineral reserves. Its Black Sea ports, particularly in Crimea, are crucial to the Russian navy.

Watch now as Russia gets Donbas and sanctions removed, Zelensky sells out his country to get aid from the US and Trump gets manufactured dirt on Biden. Putin's puppet at work.

spence

09-24-2019, 12:29 PM

Spence, we give aid to Mexico and Syria. corruption there isn’t part of the problem?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
You're talking about counter narcotics and humanitarian aid, not loan guarantees for economic development.

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 12:36 PM

You're talking about counter narcotics and humanitarian aid, not loan guarantees for economic development.

i see!

and it’s just a coincidence that this guy was supposedly going to question biden’s son.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

spence

09-24-2019, 12:56 PM

i see!

and it’s just a coincidence that this guy was supposedly going to question biden’s son.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
No, I don't believe there was an investigation of Burisma active or pending at the time.

You do love your conspiracy theories though.

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 01:03 PM

No, I don't believe there was an investigation of Burisma active or pending at the time.

You do love your conspiracy theories though.

i ask questions, regardless of politics. you support everything from the left, nothing from
the right.

if that’s not true, please tell
us some major policy issues, where you don’t agree with the left.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sea Dangles

09-24-2019, 01:28 PM

I think the worst you could say is there was a potential conflict of interest. That being said, I've not seen one shred of evidence that there actually was one nor anything to support the conspiracy theories put forth by Rudy and Trump.

I don't know why you think Biden is done, if anything the odds of impeachment just went way up.
Jeff,is this the code red you speak of? Any predictions?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sea Dangles

09-24-2019, 01:32 PM

You are so full of sh*t, Trump is out for Trump and family first. Please explain how extorting a foreign government in order to help his efforts in the 2020 election is good for America. I think you need to loosen the MAGA hit band, clearly it’s lessoning blood flow to brain cells you can ill afford to loss at this point.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I was not aware he had extorted a foreign government. Certainly this can not be good. Let’s launch another investigation.

Oh,and did you mean lose or loss? Spellcheck,cheaters ,or just extra stupid still?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

spence

09-24-2019, 02:03 PM

Jeff,is this the code red you speak of? Any predictions?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
If this story doesn't change direction and quick it very well could be. Looks like the whistle blower might testify this week.

Sea Dangles

09-24-2019, 02:09 PM

If this story doesn't change direction and quick it very well could be. Looks like the whistle blower might testify this week.

Yes or no snowflake
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 02:16 PM

Adam Schiff
@RepAdamSchiff
We have been informed by the whistleblower’s counsel that their client would like to speak to our committee and has requested guidance from the Acting DNI as to how to do so.

We‘re in touch with counsel and look forward to the whistleblower’s testimony as soon as this week.

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 02:18 PM

If this story doesn't change direction and quick it very well could be. Looks like the whistle blower might testify this week.

the whistle blower
who didn’t even hear the conversation, but heard someone else describe the conversation?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sea Dangles

09-24-2019, 02:18 PM

Thanks for the update Peto. Let us know of any further developments.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 02:26 PM

the whistle blower
who didn’t even hear the conversation, but heard someone else describe the conversation?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How do you know that?

Asking for Fudgie the Whale

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 02:29 PM

How do you know that?

Asking for Fudgie the Whale

you can google it. it’s being reported that the whistleblower didn’t hear the call firsthand.

but as we see with kavanaugh, hearsay is sufficient to punish conservatives

trump also said he’s release the transcript of the call.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 02:34 PM

Meanwhile Trump tweets: I am currently at the United Nations representing our Country, but have authorized the release tomorrow of the complete, fully declassified and unredacted transcript of my phone conversation with President Zelensky of Ukraine....

And Michael McFaul tweets: This is a big mistake -- terrible precedent, as no foreign leaders in future will speak candidly with the president on any future calls. Don't release Trump-Zelensky or Trump-Putin transcripts of calls. Instead, release whistleblower's complaint to Congress, as required by law.

The complaint is rumored to be about multiple instances, one transcript does not tell the whole story. Perhaps that's the plan?

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 02:37 PM

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 02:45 PM

you can google it. it’s being reported that the whistleblower didn’t hear the call firsthand.

but as we see with kavanaugh, hearsay is sufficient to punish conservatives

trump also said he’s release the transcript of the call.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Reported on Faux, repeated by the Town Hall, Daily Wire, McCarthy, Nunes, Trump and the rest of the chorus.

Odd that the IG, a Trump appointee felt it was credible and urgent.

spence

09-24-2019, 02:51 PM

you can google it. it’s being reported that the whistleblower didn’t hear the call firsthand.

but as we see with kavanaugh, hearsay is sufficient to punish conservatives

trump also said he’s release the transcript of the call.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Someone with access to sensitive information like that isn't hearsay Jim, there's no way the IG would have deemed the complaint urgent if it wasn't sourced.

I haven't done this in a while but I'm mooting your post.

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 02:51 PM

Reported on Faux, repeated by the Town Hall, Daily Wire, McCarthy, Nunes, Trump and the rest of the chorus.

Odd that the IG, a Trump appointee felt it was credible and urgent.

look at percentage of favorable/unfavorable coverage of obama and trump, for fox and every other American tv station.

fox has a major clown in prime
time, sean hannity. cnn and msnbc have nothing but sean hannity-like ideologues, throughout prime
time.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i’ll ask again for a list of
meaningful policies, for which you disagree with liberals. or admit there aren’t any.

i think conservatives are dead wrong on gay marriage and the death penalty, and i think conservatives are too fanatically opposed to gun control.

you call me a trumplican. show me you’re anywhere near that independent.

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 02:58 PM

Someone with access to sensitive information like that isn't hearsay Jim, there's no way the IG would have deemed the complaint urgent if it wasn't sourced.

I haven't done this in a while but I'm mooting your post.

it’s hearsay if the person reporting it, isn’t the one with access to the information. if they are repeating what someone else claims they said or heard, it’s hearsay. like the last kavanaugh accusation. in that case, hearsay was enough for all the major presidential
candidates to demand his impeachment.

let’s have the hearing, one more circus.

any chance you can ever list things you disagree with liberals
on? or at least admit that you wouldn’t dare disagree with obama
on anything, which is why you disappeared here for a month after the election, hiding under your bed s#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g your thumb.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

spence

09-24-2019, 03:08 PM

it’s hearsay if the person reporting it, isn’t the one with access to the information.
How do you know that? So you think a non-partisan IG is going to forward a potentially impeachable or criminal complaint without being damn sure it's credible? This is stretching reality.

any chance you can ever list things you disagree with liberals
on? or at least admit that you wouldn’t dare disagree with obama
on anything, which is why you disappeared here for a month after the election, hiding under your bed s#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g your thumb.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
It's a silly question as most issues fall on a spectrum. As for your other remark my brain was focused elsewhere for a bit, had nothing to do with the election.

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 03:20 PM

How do you know that? So you think a non-partisan IG is going to forward a potentially impeachable or criminal complaint without being damn sure it's credible? This is stretching reality.

It's a silly question as most issues fall on a spectrum. As for your other remark my brain was focused elsewhere for a bit, had nothing to do with the election.

i don’t know if it was hearsay, but it’s being reported. that’s why i asked you a question, that’s what that “?” thing at the end of a sentence implies.

it’s not remotely a silly question. it gets at whether or not you have the ability to think for yourself, or if you’re the exact mirror image of sean hannity.

do you think i believe your absence after the election, was a coincidence? give me a little credit.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

RIROCKHOUND

09-24-2019, 03:23 PM

i don’t know if it was hearsay, but it’s being reported. that’s why i asked you a question, that’s what that “?” thing at the end of a sentence implies.

it’s not remotely a silly question. it gets at whether or not you have the ability to think for yourself, or if you’re the exact mirror image of sean hannity.

do you think i believe your absence after the election, was a coincidence? give me a little credit.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

All I will say about the third point is bitches be crazy......
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 03:31 PM

MCCONNELL has hotlined the resolution calling for the release of the whistleblower report.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 04:06 PM

MCCONNELL has hotlined the resolution calling for the release of the whistleblower report.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and if he did that, it’s probably because he knows it’s a nothingburger.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Got Stripers

09-24-2019, 04:19 PM

About time Nancy!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

spence

09-24-2019, 04:34 PM

and if he did that, it’s probably because he knows it’s a nothingburger.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
More likely it's because if the GOP looks like they're engaged in a cover up they'll lose the Senate.

Sea Dangles

09-24-2019, 04:53 PM

Jim in CT

09-24-2019, 04:56 PM

More likely it's because if the GOP looks like they're engaged in a cover up they'll lose the Senate.

in all seriousness, have you seen which seats are up? favorable
to which side? 2018 was a dream board for the gop and they didn’t do much. i’m guessing the 33 seats up this time are more favorable to democrats.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

spence

09-24-2019, 05:34 PM

in all seriousness, have you seen which seats are up? favorable
to which side? 2018 was a dream board for the gop and they didn’t do much. i’m guessing the 33 seats up this time are more favorable to democrats.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Even more reason to rally.

scottw

09-24-2019, 05:40 PM

I love when the dummycraps get their panties all in a bunch...sounds like it's full on wedgies

I heard they've tried to impeach every republican president since Eisenhower so this should not surprise anyone....

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 05:40 PM

Got Stripers

09-24-2019, 05:49 PM

Time to cover their political arses.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 05:55 PM

Wow, @HeidiNBC reporting that Trump called Pelosi today and asked “if they could work something out on this whole whistleblower thing.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

spence

09-24-2019, 06:15 PM

Wow, @HeidiNBC reporting that Trump called Pelosi today and asked “if they could work something out on this whole whistleblower thing.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
It's called desperation.

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 07:05 PM

Implicated in this mess so far:

POTUS
VPOTUS
SecState
WH COS
OMB director
AG

... Who else am I forgetting?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

spence

09-24-2019, 07:23 PM

The Senate has *unanimously* agreed to Schumer's resolution calling for the whistleblower complaint to be turned over the intelligence committees immediately.

Reminder: Coming from this White House, neither transcripts nor weather maps can be trusted
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
At least we might have the chance for the whistle blower to confirm the contents of the complaint. I don’t trust at all the WH to release an accurate transcript. Maybe we’ll even see Barr give another one of his interpretations in advance :hihi:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-24-2019, 09:28 PM

As senior director of the WH Situation Room, I managed POTUS head-of-state calls. So, what light can I shed on the Trump-promised phone transcript?
First off: unless this administration has changed procedures in place for many years, there are no WH tapes of this phone call. As I used to say, the WH became averse to taping Presidential phone calls in about 1974.
Could there be recordings made by the foreign head-of-state's government or a foreign intelligence service? Sure, particularly when the call is made over a non-secure phone.
Could there be recordings made by the US Intelligence Community? No. Law, regulation, and practice forbids such collection of USG officials. Besides, there's no foreign intelligence value in doing so, as the US official is aware of the call's contents.
Yes, there should be transcripts of the call. It is a long-standing practice, intended to not only memorialize the call but to protect the President against the foreign leader/gov't making egregious claims about the call.
The White House Situation Room and the responsible NSC directorate develop the transcript. WHSR, which monitors the call, develops a verbatim working transcript which is reviewed and finalized by the NSC directorate and captured in a memorandum of conversation (MEMCON).
This MEMCON can vary greatly from a lightly edited full transcript to a vaguely worded summary of the call. Sharing of the MEMCON outside of the WH and across gov't has varied from Admin to Admin and the sensitivity of the call, but has always been very limited.
Who in the USG listens to the call as it happens? This varies from call to call. I managed the very rare call in which only myself and WHSR heard the actual call. In most cases, the call was listened to live by several people.
Call participants often included the Nat'l Sec Advisor or his/her deputies, the WH Chief of Staff, an appropriate NSC Sr Director and members of his/her staff. Extremely rare for a non-WH person to be present for the call and we never looped in anyone outside the 18 acres.
As to the foreign side of the call, we assumed similar participation.
Could the President make calls on his own directly to a foreign head of state? Sure, but these are very busy people who aren't always available for impromptu calls. The procedures were developed over time for both the convenience and the protection of the President.
Posted on Twitter by Larry Pfeiffer Former Director WH Situation Room
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

scottw

09-25-2019, 03:51 AM

hopefully he wasn't promising any terrorist regimes planeloads of cash in secret...that would be awful

scottw

09-25-2019, 05:07 AM

can we investigate this guy too?

Earlier this month, during a bipartisan meeting in Kiev, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) delivered a pointed message to Ukraine’s new president, Volodymyr Zelensky.

While choosing his words carefully, Murphy made clear — by his own account — that Ukraine currently enjoyed bipartisan support for its U.S. aid but that could be jeopardized if the new president acquiesced to requests by President Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani to investigate past corruption allegations involving Americans, including former Vice President Joe Biden’s family.

Murphy boasted after the meeting that he told the new Ukrainian leader that U.S. aid was his country’s “most important asset” and it would be viewed as election meddling and “disastrous for long-term U.S.-Ukraine relations” to bend to the wishes of Trump and Giuliani.

"I told Zelensky that he should not insert himself or his government into American politics. I cautioned him that complying with the demands of the President's campaign representatives to investigate a political rival of the President would gravely damage the U.S.-Ukraine relationship. There are few things that Republicans and Democrats agree on in Washington these days, and support for Ukraine is one of them," Murphy told me today, confirming what he told Ukraine's leader.

The implied message did not require an interpreter for Zelensky to understand: Investigate the Ukraine dealings of Joe Biden and his son Hunter, and you jeopardize Democrats' support for future U.S. aid to Kiev.

The Murphy anecdote is a powerful reminder that, since at least 2016, Democrats repeatedly have exerted pressure on Ukraine, a key U.S. ally for buffering Russia, to meddle in U.S. politics and elections.

And that activity long preceded Giuliani’s discussions with Ukrainian officials and Trump’s phone call to Zelensky in July, seeking to have Ukraine formally investigate whether then-Vice President Joe Biden used a threat of canceling foreign aid to shut down an investigation into $3 million routed to the U.S. firm run by Biden’s son.

scottw

09-25-2019, 05:10 AM

and this? :jester:

"as early as January 2016, when the Obama White House unexpectedly invited Ukraine’s top prosecutors to Washington to discuss fighting corruption in the country.

The meeting, promised as training, turned out to be more of a pretext for the Obama administration to pressure Ukraine’s prosecutors to drop an investigation into the Burisma Holdings gas company that employed Hunter Biden and to look for new evidence in a then-dormant criminal case against eventual Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, a GOP lobbyist.

U.S. officials “kept talking about how important it was that all of our anti-corruption efforts be united,” said Andrii Telizhenko, the former political officer in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington who organized and attended the meetings.

Nazar Kholodnytsky, Ukraine’s chief anti-corruption prosecutor, told me that, soon after he returned from the Washington meeting, he saw evidence in Ukraine of political meddling in the U.S. election. That's when two top Ukrainian officials released secret evidence to the American media, smearing Manafort. "

Pete F.

09-25-2019, 06:06 AM

Peto...you should try to appreciate....that wile you consume thousands of words to say absolutely nothing...others can efficiently and concisely use only a few words to convey succinct messages....:huh:
I see you’ve learned how to cut and paste.
Who controlled the House and Senate, then also the WH during that time?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-25-2019, 06:10 AM

Manafort was convicted of massive and systemic tax evasion, smeared himself.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

scottw

09-25-2019, 06:17 AM

I see you’ve learned how to cut and paste.
Who controlled the House and Senate, then also the WH during that time?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

pretty sure obama was president

Pete F.

09-25-2019, 06:26 AM

It says, perhaps not clearly enough (Then also)

Foreign Policy mag draws a different conclusion than The Hill.
In what top Democratic lawmakers called a “political hit job,” U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch has been recalled by the Trump administration two months early following political attacks by right-wing media figures and a senior Ukrainian official.

Yovanovitch, an experienced career diplomat who has served in Republican and Democratic administrations and has been ambassador to Ukraine since 2016, will leave her post later in May, two months before she was scheduled to step down. The attacks, which four current and former U.S. officials who spoke to Foreign Policy said are unfounded, drew the attention of top Democratic lawmakers, who urged U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in a private letter last month to publicly defend her.

Now, those lawmakers are bringing their concerns into the public. “The White House’s outrageous decision to recall her is a political hit job and the latest in this Administration’s campaign against career State Department personnel,” said Democratic Reps. Steny Hoyer, House majority leader, and Eliot Engel, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, in a joint statement made public Tuesday. “It’s clear that this decision was politically motivated, as allies of President Trump had joined foreign actors in lobbying for the Ambassador’s dismissal.”

Yovanovitch’s early dismissal will leave the U.S. Embassy in Kiev without a top diplomat at an important juncture in Ukraine, during the transition of newly elected President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Yovanovitch, who was outspoken about the need to crack down on corruption in the country, was thrust into the spotlight in March when Ukraine’s top prosecutor claimed, without evidence, that the ambassador had outlined a list of people he should not prosecute when he first met her. The U.S. State Department called the claim by Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko an “outright fabrication.” In April, he walked back the statement in a separate interview.

Lutsenko’s allegations about Yovanovitch came two weeks after she issued scathing remarks about Ukraine’s anti-corruption efforts and called on the authorities to fire special anti-corruption prosecutor Nazar Kholodnytsky. In wiretapped phone conversations, Kholodnytsky allegedly coached suspects on how to avoid corruption charges.

Lutsenko made his claim against Yovanovitch in an interview with Hill.TV’s John Solomon, which aired on March 20. That same day, the Hill published two further pieces based off what appears to be the same interview with Lutsenko, in which the prosecutor said he had opened a probe into alleged attempts by Ukrainian law enforcement to tip the 2016 U.S. presidential election in favor of Hillary Clinton by leaking financial ledgers with details of payments made to Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort by former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych.

Coming weeks before special counsel Robert Mueller published his report on Russian election interference in the 2016 election, Lutsenko’s allegation about Ukrainian interference was seized upon by Trump and his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, with the president tweeting out the headline to the Hill article, “John Solomon: As Russia Collusion fades, Ukrainian plot to help Clinton emerges.”

Yovanovitch then faced a slew of criticism from Fox News personalities and other right-wing media figures, who accused her of denigrating the president in private conversations. In March, Fox News host Laura Ingraham said that former Republican Rep. Pete Sessions sent a letter to Pompeo in May 2018 calling for the “expulsion” of Yovanovitch as ambassador to Ukraine “immediately.” The then-congressman said that he had evidence the ambassador had been critical of the Trump administration in private, though the current and former U.S. officials who spoke to Foreign Policy say that claim was unfounded.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/05/07/us-ambassador-to-ukraine-recalled-in-political-hit-job-lawmakers-say-marie-yovanovitch-lutsenko-right-wing-media-accusations-congress-diplomats-diplomacy/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

scottw

09-25-2019, 06:28 AM

In what top Democratic lawmakers called a “political hit job,”

we know they are full of crap :)

Pete F.

09-25-2019, 08:01 AM

Meet Rudy's team

Two Soviet-born Florida businessmen — one linked to a Ukrainian tycoon with reputed mafia ties — are key hidden actors behind a plan by U.S. President Donald J. Trump’s personal attorney to investigate the president’s rivals.

Trump’s attorney, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, said in May that he planned to visit then-incoming Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to win support for probes into potentially damaging claims raised by senior Ukrainian officials.

Among them was the misleading contention that Trump’s main 2020 Democratic rival, Joe Biden, improperly pressured Ukraine’s government to fire a top prosecutor; that American diplomats in Ukraine had exhibited pro-Democrat bias; and that local officials conspired to undermine Trump’s presidential campaign and help Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Giuliani set off a firestorm in the conservative media by promoting the allegations.

“We’re not meddling in an election; we’re meddling in an investigation, which we have a right to do,” he told the New York Times.

The claims he was pressing have since largely been debunked, but remain politically potent as the next U.S. elections approach.

investigations/Fruman-Trump.jpg
Igor Fruman with U.S. President Donald J. Trump.
Credit: Campaign Legal Center
Within days of announcing the planned trip to Ukraine, Giuliani called it off amid a storm of criticism that he was inappropriately interfering in U.S. relations with a foreign country. His efforts in Ukraine, however, have continued.

At the center of Giuliani’s back-channel diplomacy are the two businessmen, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, who Giuliani has publicly identified as his clients.

Until now, the men have escaped detailed scrutiny. But a joint investigation by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) and BuzzFeed News, based on interviews and court and business records in the United States and Ukraine, has uncovered new information that raises questions about their influence on U.S. political figures.

Both men were born in the Soviet Union and immigrated to the United States. Parnas came with his family at the age of four. Fruman first arrived as a young adult in the 1980s, but later moved to Ukraine and established a series of businesses. Both now live in South Florida.

Since late 2018, the men have introduced Giuliani to three current and former senior Ukrainian prosecutors to discuss the politically damaging information.

The effort has involved meetings in at least five countries, stretching from Washington, D.C. to the Israeli office of a Ukrainian oligarch accused of a multi-billion dollar fraud, and to the halls of the French Senate.

Parnas and Fruman’s work with Giuliani has been just one facet of their political activity.

Since early last year, the men have emerged from obscurity to become major donors to Republican campaigns in the United States. They have collectively contributed over half a million dollars to candidates and outside campaign groups, the lion’s share in a single transaction that an independent watchdog has flagged as a potential violation of electoral funding law.

The men appear to enjoy a measure of access to influential figures. They’ve dined with Trump, had a “power breakfast” with his son Donald Jr., met with U.S. congressmen, and mixed with Republican elites.

Months before their earliest known work with Giuliani, Parnas and Fruman also lobbied at least one congressman — former U.S. Rep. Pete Sessions, a Texas Republican — to call for the dismissal of the United States’ ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch. She stepped down a year later after allegations in the conservative media that she had been disloyal to Trump.

While setting up meetings for Giuliani with Ukrainian officials, the men also promoted a business plan of their own: Selling American liquefied natural gas to Ukraine to replace Russian imports disrupted by war.

In a series of interviews, Parnas said he and Fruman weren’t paid by anyone for their work in Ukraine and that he and his partner have done nothing illegal.

investigations/Power-breakfast.jpg
Parnas and Fruman meet with the president’s son, Donald Trump Jr., and Republican fundraiser Tommy Hicks Jr. in Beverly Hills in May 2018.
Credit: Deleted Facebook post
“All we were doing was passing along information,” he said. “Information coming to us — either I bury it or I pass it on. I felt it was my duty to pass it on.”

He said their political activities were motivated by sincere conviction that they had uncovered wrongdoing that should be investigated.

“We’re American citizens, we love our country, we love our president,”he said.

The men make for unlikely back-channel diplomats. Parnas, 47, is a former stockbroker with a history of unpaid debts, including half a million dollars owed to a Hollywood movie investor. Fruman, 53, has spent much of his career in Ukraine, and has ties to a powerful local businessman reputed to be in the inner circle of one of the country’s most infamous mafia groups.

Giuliani and Fruman didn’t respond to multiple requests for interviews or to written questions. The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

Kenneth McCallion, an ex-federal prosecutor who has represented former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yuliya Tymoshenko in U.S. court, said that Parnas and Fruman were “playing with fire” by lobbying in the United States and Ukraine without registering as foreign agents.

“Trump has either authorized Giuliani to engage in private diplomacy and deal-making, or even worse, remains silent while Giuliani and his dodgy band of soldiers of fortune engage in activities that severely undermine U.S. credibility and are contrary to fundamental U.S. interests,” McCallion said.

‘It Opened Giuliani’s Eyes’
Parnas and Fruman’s work with Giuliani has largely centered on efforts to connect the president’s personal attorney with current and former senior Ukrainian prosecutors believed to hold information harmful to Trump’s rivals.

In late 2018, Parnas and Fruman organized a Skype call between Giuliani and Viktor Shokin, who served as Ukraine’s prosecutor general until he was dismissed by parliament in 2016 amid allegations he was blocking anti-corruption efforts.

Parnas and Giuliani visited the French Senate building, where Giuliani attended a meeting that included Nazar Kholodnitsky, the head of Ukraine’s Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, according to social media posts and interviews. (Kholodnitsky has faced calls to step down after wiretaps in his office last year allegedly caught him interfering in corruption cases.)

By the new year, Parnas said, he and Fruman had also connected Giuliani with Shokin’s replacement as top prosecutor, Yuriy Lutsenko. The Ukrainian official and Giuliani met in New York in January and again in Warsaw the following month.

“[Lutsenko] brought documentation, verification. It opened Giuliani’s eyes,” Parnas said.

Shortly after their February meeting in Poland, both Lutsenko and Giuliani began airing a series of allegations in the U.S. media.

In March and April, the online publication The Hill published a series of opinion pieces largely based on an interview with Lutsenko. The articles relayed the allegations about the Bidens, and went further.

Lutsenko also claimed that officials at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv had worked with Ukrainian law enforcement to interfere in the 2016 U.S. election by coordinating the disclosure of the so-called “black ledger,” a document that appeared to detail millions of dollars in secret payments from Ukraine’s former ruling party to Paul Manafort, then Trump’s campaign manager. Some of those payments were later verified to be real.

The revelation of the black ledger in 2016 contributed to Manafort’s resignation from the Trump campaign, and helped lead to his prosecution and conviction by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Since then, prominent Trump supporters have used allegations that the ledger’s disclosure was motivated by anti-Trump bias to cast doubt on the origins of Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

investigations/Lutsenko.jpg
Ukrainian General Prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko.
Credit: Vadim Chuprina, Creative Commons
Lutsenko also told The Hill that Yovanovitch, who was still the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, had handed him a “do not prosecute” list at their first meeting. The Hill characterized the claim as evidence that Yovanovitch was favoring Democrats in the middle of a presidential election because the purported list contained the names of supposed Democrat allies in Ukraine’s parliament and civil society groups.

The State Department has forcefully rejected the claims. In a statement, the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv told reporters: “The allegation of a ‘do not prosecute’ list is an outright fabrication. Such allegations only help the corrupt.”

Still, the allegations caught like wildfire in U.S. conservative media, and were amplified by Giuliani in a series of interviews with cable news and newspapers.

Trump called claims that Ukrainian officials had helped Clinton’s candidacy “big” and “incredible” in an April interview with Fox News, and said that he would leave it to Attorney General William Barr to decide whether to look into them. Barr announced a probe into the origins of the Mueller investigation — in which Manafort’s Ukrainian work became a focus — the following month.

Parnas said he expected all the information he and Fruman had helped advance to become an important part of Barr’s inquiry, and that it would dominate the debate in the run-up to the 2020 election.

“It’s all going to come out,” he said. “Something terrible happened and we’re finally going to get to the bottom of it.”

Debunked But Not Dead
Experts have largely dismissed most of the allegations raised by the prosecutors and relayed by Giuliani as being at best unfounded, and at worst deliberate disinformation.

Both Shokin and Lutsenko are widely viewed among Ukrainian reformers as lacking credibility, and civil society groups have accused them of covering for suspects in major corruption cases.

Joe Biden had indeed pushed for Shokin’s dismissal, threatening that the U.S. would withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees if he remained.

“I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’” Biden recounted in a 2018 speech at the Council on Foreign Relations. “Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.”

However, Biden was not alone in his disdain for Shokin. The former top prosecutor was dismissed by parliament after a chorus of criticism by European diplomats and international organizations, and even street protests calling for his resignation.

Local anti-corruption activists had become convinced Shokin was quashing investigations into Burisma’s owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, and other oligarchs, said Daria Kaleniuk, the director of the Anti-Corruption Action Center, a Ukrainian transparency group.

“Shokin was not dismissed because he wanted to investigate Burisma,” Kaleniuk said. “Quite the contrary. He was dismissed because of a lack of willingness to investigate this particular case as well as other important cases involving high-level associates of [ousted former President Viktor] Yanukovych.”

As for Lutsenko, Kaleniuk said his claims were likely motivated by a desire to hold on to his job as top prosecutor with the incoming Zelensky administration, as well as to find friends in the United States government, where he has long been viewed as toxic.

“He wanted to become a person with whom people in the United States wanted to talk, and then probably he found Giuliani and found a sexy story that fit into the Giuliani agenda,” Kaleniuk said.

Hunter Biden’s work for Burisma, however, still raises eyebrows in Ukraine. The younger Biden’s paid tenure on Burisma’s board came at a time the company and its owner faced multiple corruption investigations. He was likely hired simply to impart his famous last name, Kaleniuk said.

“I think [working for Burisma] was wrong from an ethical point of view,” she said.

In a statement, Hunter Biden defended his previous position on Burisma’s board, saying he worked to help reform the company’s “practices of transparency, corporate governance and responsibility.”

“At no time have I discussed with my father the company’s business, or my board service. Any suggestion to the contrary is just plain wrong,” Biden said.

There is also no known documentary evidence that U.S. officials had worked with Ukrainians to release the black ledger.

Though Giuliani’s visit was canceled and many of his claims debunked, the allegations emerging from Ukraine remain very much alive in the lead-up to the 2020 U.S. election.

The accusation that Yovanovitch had exhibited political bias was reported to be behind her stepping down as ambassador in May.

Lutsenko and Shokin did not respond to requests for interviews. Reporters were unable to reach Yovanovitch.

From the Black Sea to Boca
The previous business dealings of both Parnas and Fruman raise serious concerns about their newfound access to senior American political figures.

A resident of upscale Boca Raton, Parnas once ran an electronics business that was successfully sued for its role in a fraudulent penny stock promotion scheme. He has also worked for three brokerages that later lost their licenses for fraud and other violations. He has never been personally charged.

Court records also show that judges have awarded a series of default judgements against Parnas for multiple unpaid debts. These include over $500,000 he owes to an investor in a Hollywood movie that he had promoted but was never made. He has also been sued a dozen times over the last decade for failing to pay rent on various Palm Beach County properties and has been evicted from two homes.

Fruman’s backstory is even more colorful.

More to come

Pete F.

09-25-2019, 08:11 AM

His network of businesses extends from the United States to the city of Odesa, a Ukrainian Black Sea port notorious for corruption and organized crime.

Reporters found that Fruman has personal ties to a powerful local: Volodymyr “The Lightbulb” Galanternik, a shadowy businessman commonly referred to as the “Grey Cardinal” of Odesa.

Galanternik is described by local media and activists as a close associate of Gennadiy Trukhanov, the mayor of Odesa who was shown in the late 1990s to be a senior member of a feared organized criminal group involved in fuel smuggling and weapons trading.

Galanternik also owns a luxury apartment in the same London building as the daughter of another leader in the gang, Aleksander “The Angel” Angert, OCCRP has previously reported.

Vitaly Ustymenko, a local civic activist, describes Galanternik as an overseer of the clique’s economic domination of the city.

“[Galanternik] is not ‘one of the’ — he is actually the most powerful guy in Odesa, and maybe in the region,” Ustymenko said.

Fruman’s recent ex-wife, Yelyzaveta Naumova, is the self-declared best friend of Galanternik’s wife, Natasha Zinko, according to her Instagram posts. Galanternik and Zinko also celebrated the New Year in 2016 with the Frumans in South Florida, according to a photo posted online by an acquaintance of Fruman.

Galanternik’s name is seldom tied directly to his businesses. Instead he operates via a network of offshore companies and trusted proxy individuals. But there are signs that either Fruman or his long-standing local partner, Serhiy Dyablo, may have a business relationship with Galanternik via two Odesa firms (see box).

🔗FRUMAN’S ODESA TIES
Ukrainian records show what appears to be overlap between the web of businesses belonging to Fruman and his partner Dyablo and Galanternik’s empire.

Companies linked to Fruman include a New York-registered business, F.D. Import & Export. In Ukraine, Fruman jointly established a series of companies with Dyablo. Largely grouped under the brand name Otrada, the companies include a hotel, apartment buildings, a series of luxury boutiques, and a beach club on Odesa’s shoreline called “Mafia Rave.” Fruman is listed on Otrada Luxury Group’s website as its president and CEO.Fruman, Dyablo, and F.D. Import & Export previously held controlling stakes in many of these companies, but local registry documents show those holdings are mostly now under the ownership of Fruman’s ex-wife Naumova, Dyablo’s wife Inna, and a 74-year-old woman, Lyudmila Kalmykova.

Kalmykova appears to be a proxy shareholder. A reporter who visited several of the Otrada businesses found that employees had never heard of her, instead identifying Dyablo as their boss. Her relationship with the other shareholders is unknown, although members of Dyablo’s family are among her relatively low number of Facebook friends.

On paper, Kalmykova is in business with two long-standing business partners of Galanternik.

The two Galanternik partners are co-owners, along with Kalmykova, of a warehousing company on the outskirts of Odesa. One of those partners is also a co-owner, along with Kalmykova and another person, of a property development company that is registered in the same Odesa building as several of Fruman and Dyablo’s companies. That company began winding up in early July.

Reporters were unable to reach Kalmykova for comment.

In an interview, Parnas said that Fruman and Galanternik knew each other through their wives, but said there were no business connections between the two men.

Galanternik and Fruman did not respond to written questions. Neither Dyablo nor Naumova responded to multiple requests for interviews.

“Where is the money coming from?”
Parnas and Fruman’s work with Giuliani was just one part of a broader foray into U.S. politics.

In 2018, the men made hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations to Republican causes while enjoying VIP access to party and Trump administration circles.

Filings with the U.S. Federal Election Commission (FEC) show that Fruman and Parnas spread their money widely.

Fruman kicked off the effort on Feb. 20, giving $2,700 each to two pro-Trump groups, Trump Victory and Donald J. Trump for President.

Less than two weeks later, Fruman and Parnas attended a fundraiser for Trump’s re-election at his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida.

This was followed by a several-month-long spree of donations — of a total value of at least $576,500 — to campaigns including the successful 2018 Senate bid of former Florida governor Rick Scott, and the re-elections of Texas Representative Pete Sessions and South Carolina Representative Joe Wilson. All are Republicans.

The lion’s share of these donations, however, was just one $325,000 payment, made on May 17, 2018, to America First Action. The group is one of the largest pro-Trump Super Political Action Committees (commonly known as Super PACs), a kind of outside campaign organization that is allowed to raise unlimited funds in support of a candidate, but is barred from working directly with their campaign.

That payment was declared as coming from a Delaware company, Global Energy Producers LLC, set up by Fruman and Parnas just weeks before as part of their plan to sell gas to Ukraine.

The donation is subject to an ongoing complaint to the FEC by the Campaign Legal Center, a watchdog group, alleging the company is likely a shell intended to hide other donors.

Parnas said the complaint was unfounded. “We have a real business,” he said.

Parnas said the contributions were designed to get the attention of key lawmakers at a time he and Fruman were launching their gas export business. “We’ve got a business. We just want to get recognized,” he said.

However, Parnas and Fruman’s plans to sell American gas to Ukraine has so far not borne fruit. In response to inquiries, Naftogaz, Ukraine’s natural gas monopoly, said that Global Energy Producers has not participated in any tenders to sell gas to Ukraine and has concluded no contracts. The company’s website contains only a countdown timer that has already reached zero.

The donation ascribed to Global Energy Producers in fact came from the bank account of another company belonging to Parnas. Days earlier, that company had received a wire transfer of $1.26 million from the trust fund of a Florida lawyer who specializes in real estate, court records show.

Parnas said that money came from the sale of a Florida condominium, but did not provide documents to back up his claim.

Within months of Parnas and Fruman’s six-figure donations, and even as their work with Giuliani began, allegations emerged in a public lawsuit in Florida that they had jilted an early investor in their Ukraine gas venture.

Felix Vulis, the head of Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation, a firm owned by a trio of Kazakhstani oligarchs, asserted that Parnas and Fruman had failed to repay a two-month $100,000 loan he had given to Global Energy Producers earlier in the year. The two men had boasted about their relationship with Guiliani and other influential figures while asking for the loan, according to the complaint.

Vulis has yet to be paid, according to his lawyer, Robert Stok.

The men said “they had all this influence,” Stok said. “They said Trump and his associates were going to back their company. That they had direct access to the White House.”

Tony Andre, a Florida lawyer who has been trying to collect the $500,000 movie deal judgement against Parnas, also expressed astonishment at what he sees as the businessman’s brazenness.

“Someone takes a half million dollars from you and he’s hanging with the president and the president’s lawyer,” Andre said.

“I’ve never seen anything like this,” he said. “Where is the money coming from?”

Dinner with the President
Amid their donation spree, Parnas and Fruman took part in an impressive series of meetings with senior Republicans.

On or about May 1, 2018, while staying at the Trump International Hotel in the U.S. capital, both men had dinner with the president in a meeting documented by Parnas in a now-deleted Facebook post.

Later that month, the two men had a “power breakfast” in Beverly Hills with Donald Trump Jr. and Tommy Hicks Jr., who has since become co-chair of the Republican National Committee, according to a now-deleted Facebook post by Parnas. At the time, Hicks was head of America First Action, which had received the men’s $325,000 donation in the same month.

Parnas also had meetings in May on Capitol Hill with several Republican congressmen.

Among them was Sessions, the Texas Republican, according to a now-deleted May 9 Facebook post by Parnas. In a meeting also attended by Fruman, the two men urged the dismissal of the United States’ ambassador in Kyiv, Marie Yovanovitch.

On the same day that Parnas posted pictures of the meeting, Sessions wrote a private letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo calling for Yovanovitch’s dismissal.

Parnas said he and Fruman told Sessions that Yovanovitch was disloyal to the president and questioned whether she should serve. “She was bad-mouthing our president about getting impeached,” said Parnas.

Sessions, however, said he had been the one to bring up concerns about Yovanovitch with Parnas and Fruman, but that he could not remember when or where the discussion took place.

“I do know both these gentlemen,” Sessions said. “They are Republicans. They are people who have an interest in foreign affairs. They have a strong interest in America not backing away from Ukraine.”

The next month, Parnas and Fruman donated a total of $5,400 to Sessions’ unsuccessful 2018 re-election campaign, FEC records show.

Yovanovitch stepped down this May following a flurry of negative stories about her in the conservative media, which included the publication in The Hill of a leaked copy of Sessions’ letter. The press blitz also included frequent reference to Lutsenko’s inflammatory allegations against the ambassador.

THE YOVANOVITCH FALLOUT
Ambassador Yovanovitch’s departure from Kyiv was politically charged.

According to the State Department, her rotation in Ukraine had simply ended. But Congressional Democrats and veterans of the diplomatic corps have said she had become a partisan target who was pulled from her job two months early.

The affair hurt the United States’ relationship with Ukraine, said Nina Jankowicz, a Global Fellow at the Kennan Institute.

"[Yovanovitch’s retirement] was a clear indication Trump was using Ukraine as a political football and that he wasn’t concerned about its democratic future,” Jankowicz said.

“To take the word of a corrupt foreign prosecutor general over a career diplomat — one who has served both Republicans and Democrats — is an affront to the Foreign Service and undermines the credibility of our diplomats everywhere.”

Given Parnas and Fruman’s relationships with senior Ukrainian officials and their business interests in the country, their lobbying against a U.S. ambassador raises questions about their compliance with the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

The act requires Americans operating on behalf of a foreign entity in the United States to declare their work to the Department of Justice. Parnas and Fruman did not do so.

Their lobbying of Sessions raises “the thorniest red flag,” said Ron Oleynik, a Washington attorney who advises clients on FARA compliance. “That, to me, is clearly trying to influence an office of the United States toward Ukraine.”

Parnas, however, said they acted on their own accord.

“I just kept hearing [about Yovanovitch] from different people,” he said.

Introduction to an Oligarch
After setting up meetings between Giuliani and Ukrainian prosecutors, Parnas and Fruman set their sights on connecting with Ukraine’s new president, former television comic Zelensky.

As Zelensky stormed to a landslide victory in the April election, Parnas and Fruman flew to Israel to meet Ihor Kolomoisky, a Ukrainian oligarch who is alleged to have stolen $5.5 billion from the country’s largest private bank. Earlier that month, the Daily Beast reported that Kolomoisky, who is a key Zelensky backer, was under FBI investigation for financial crimes.

Fruman and Parnas were introduced to the oligarch by Alexander Levin, another pro-Trump Ukrainian-American businessman, on the pretence that they wanted to talk about their plan to sell gas to Ukraine, Kolomoisky said in an interview.

However, once inside the meeting, the two men told Kolomoisky that they wanted his help getting in touch with Zelensky, in order to help set up a meeting between Giuliani and the president-elect.

Offended, Kolomoisky said, he then stormed out of the meeting.

“I told them I am not going to be a middleman in anybody’s meetings with Zelensky,” Kolomoisky said. “Not for them, not for anybody else. They tried to say something like, ‘Hey, we are serious people here. Giuliani. Trump.’ They started throwing names at me.”

In response to inquiries, Levin said of Parnas and Fruman: “I met these gentlemen for the first time in March of 2019. I have no information about what they have done in the past, or what they have done since they met with me. I plan no involvement with them in the future.”

“I broke no laws and any suggestion otherwise constitutes slander.”

Despite the debacle in Israel, Parnas and Fruman continued their efforts to connect Giuliani with Zelensky. By mid-May, in the lead-up to Zelensky’s inauguration, both men were in Kyiv, staying in the city’s Hilton as they set up appointments around town.

The official reason for Giuliani’s visit was to give a paid speech for American Friends of Anatevka, a New York-based charity run by Fruman that supports the reconstruction of a Jewish village outside of Kyiv that was the setting of the musical “Fiddler on the Roof.” The meeting with Zelensky was intended to take place on the sidelines of the event.

Though Giuliani cancelled his trip, Parnas and Fruman managed to hold meetings with two figures close to Zelensky: Serhiy Shefir, who has since been appointed as an aide to the president, and Ivan Bakanov, now acting head of Ukraine’s secret police. The meetings failed to lead to a meeting between Giuliani and Zelensky.

The two men also held a meeting with Ukraine’s national gas monopoly, Naftogaz, in order to pitch their plan to sell liquified natural gas (LNG) to the country, company spokeswoman Aliona Osmolovska confirmed in response to reporters’ questions.

“Among other initiatives, we had meetings with a number of potential suppliers of LNG. In this context, we have been approached by Mr. Parnas and Mr. Furman [sic], and met them,” Osmolovska wrote.

While Parnas and Fruman were in Kyiv, Kolomoisky, who had just returned from years of exile abroad, gave an impromptu interview to a local media outlet where he denounced the men as “scammers” and said he would take them “into daylight soon.”

Giuliani responded quickly. In a series of tweets, he labeled Kolomoisky a “notorious oligarch.”

“This is real test for President [Zelensky],” Giuliani tweeted. “Will [Kolomoisky] be arrested?”

Parnas and Fruman responded by filing a criminal complaint with Ukrainian police, alleging that Kolomoisky had threatened their lives. They also lodged a defamation suit against the oligarch, their lawyer Alina Samarets said.

Giuliani personally joined at least one call to discuss the case, Samarets said.

Despite these setbacks, Parnas told reporters that his and Fruman’s work in Ukraine would continue.

“It’s all going to come out.”

From reporting by Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project

https://www.occrp.org/en/investigations/meet-the-florida-duo-helping-giuliani-dig-dirt-for-trump-in-ukraine

spence

09-25-2019, 09:25 AM

Transcript out. Not looking good.

Pete F.

09-25-2019, 09:49 AM

Attached is a portion of the memorandum of telephone conversation, remember this is not a transcript. There is a difference. It is also not the whistleblowers complaint which is alleged to consist of multiple instances.

Of course they could not provide an electronic document, probably don't have the technology. Here's part and the link for the image.

•t:�;'HP) 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 si�uation with Ukraine, they s_ay Crowdstrike ... I guess
you have one of your weal thy people... The server, they say
Ukraine has.it� There- are a lot. of things that went on, the·
:whole situation .. I think you 1 re _surrounding yourse·lf with some
of the same people. I .
would like to have the Attorney General
call you or your people and I would like you t� ·get to the
bottom of it�. As you sa� yest�rday, that whole nonsetise ended
with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mue�le_r, 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.

(l!l-,'HP) 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 �ooperation 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 wtll work hard on making sure that our two
nations are getting clciser. I would also like and hope to see
him having your trust and y9ur .confidence and _ have persona·1
relations·with you so we c�n cooperate even �ore so. I·
wili.
personally tell you that one· of my assistants· spoke with Mr.
Giuliani just.recently and we are hoping very much that Mr.
G1uliani will be able to travel to Ukraine and. we will meet once
· he co�es to Ukraine. I just wanted to assure you once again_that
you _have nobody but friends around-us. I w.ill make sure -that-I
surro�nd 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·�artn�rship. 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 ..

(:9/MF� The Pre·sident: 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
�ery good prosecutor down and you had some �ery bad people
involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the_
mayor bf New York Ci:ty, a great mayor, and I would like him tocall you. I will ask him to call yoti 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 $tates,· the woman., was bad
news �nd th� people she was dealing with in .the Ukraine .were bad
news so I jtist wan� to_let you know that� The ot�er thing,
There's a lot 6f. talk about Biden's son,. that Eiden 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.
(S;'ti!F) President Zelenskyy: I wanted to tell ·you about the
prosecutor� First df �11 I understand arid I'm kn6wledgeable
.abotit the situation. Sine� we ha�e �on· the ab�olute majority in
our Parliament; the next prosecutor .general will be 100%_ my
person, my c'andidate, who will be approved, by the parliament and
will start. a_s 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 �ctually the issui of �aking sure to res�o�e the honesty
so we will take care of.that and wi11·wo:tk 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 µs, it would_
be very helpful · for the investigation t·o make· su.re that we
administer justice i':r1 our country with regc:ird: to the Ambassador
to the United States from Ukraine as far as I recall her name
was Ivanovicli. 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 to.wards me was far from the best as she admired the
previous President and she was on his· side. She would not accept
�e as a new President· well enough.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

As John Gotti would say: "You know that thing with Mikey, yeah he's a good kid, but it might be a good idea if , you know, if he has a drink with Vinny, you remember Vinny, yeah, & that thing you were worried about will go away forever you know what I mean"

Jim in CT

09-25-2019, 10:05 AM

Transcript out. Not looking good.

it’s not good that trump
asked them to look into possible corruption? but it was great when Biden explicitly threatened to withhold money unless they cracked down on corruption?

so it’s noble to insist that ukraine get tough on corruption, unless doing so makes democrats look bad. is that about right?

i guess your side realizes the prospects of winning the next election aren’t great, so they’re obsessing with undoing the results of the previous one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

spence

09-25-2019, 10:27 AM

it’s not good that trump
asked them to look into possible corruption? but it was great when Biden explicitly threatened to withhold money unless they cracked down on corruption?
I can't believe you just said that.

Jim in CT

09-25-2019, 10:54 AM

I can't believe you just said that.

i take that as a compliment.

Spence, i’m not saying that trump
didn’t have self serving, political reasons for asking ukraine to investigate biden. obviously he did.

but if the goal is to reduce corruption in ukraine, i’m sorry to tell you that only hard-core liberal zealots ( and you have to admit you qualify), would conclude that the Biden - Ukraine connection doesn’t look fishy.

look, selfishly i hope that impeachment proceedings proceed, because i believe they’ll
hurt democrats. Flame on!

And Biden is toast. You asked why i said that, i said it because (1) that party isn’t going to nominate an 85 year old, rich white guy, and (2) he’s tanking in the polls. the nominee will likely be from the progressive wing.

if the dems were rational, they’d go with Harris, or at least with someone who can get blacks to come out in the numbers Obama did. Reduced black support hurt Hilary. I don’t see blacks, especially black women, rallying behind Princess Lies Through Her Teeth.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-25-2019, 10:57 AM

it’s not good that trump
asked them to look into possible corruption? but it was great when Biden explicitly threatened to withhold money unless they cracked down on corruption?

so it’s noble to insist that ukraine get tough on corruption, unless doing so makes democrats look bad. is that about right?

i guess your side realizes the prospects of winning the next election aren’t great, so they’re obsessing with undoing the results of the previous one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As John Gotti would say: "You know that thing with Mikey, yeah he's a good kid, but it might be a good idea if , you know, if he has a drink with Vinny, you remember Vinny, yeah, & that thing you were worried about will go away forever you know what I mean"

Pete F.

09-25-2019, 11:37 AM

i take that as a compliment.

Spence, i’m not saying that trump
didn’t have self serving, political reasons for asking ukraine to investigate biden. obviously he did.

Trump: 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. 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.

Trump: We do a lot for Ukraine.

Zelenskyy: We are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.

Here's the quid pro co

Trump: I would like you to do us a favor though.

Trump: I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike.…

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…

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 ..

but if the goal is to reduce corruption in ukraine, i’m sorry to tell you that only hard-core liberal zealots ( and you have to admit you qualify), would conclude that the Biden - Ukraine connection doesn’t look fishy.

Just when did Trump's goal become the ending of corruption? There was no mention of it in this memo or any other time prior to the other day.

Asking Ukraine to go after Biden/Trump's political opponents is NEARLY THE ONLY THING TRUMP TALKED ABOUT IN THE PHONE CALL (after he got done saying how much the US government does for Ukraine).

look, selfishly i hope that impeachment proceedings proceed, because i believe they’ll
hurt democrats. Flame on!

And Biden is toast. You asked why i said that, i said it because (1) that party isn’t going to nominate an 85 year old, rich white guy, and (2) he’s tanking in the polls. the nominee will likely be from the progressive wing.

if the dems were rational, they’d go with Harris, or at least with someone who can get blacks to come out in the numbers Obama did. Reduced black support hurt Hilary. I don’t see blacks, especially black women, rallying behind Princess Lies Through Her Teeth against the most honest President ever
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump used US taxpayers’ money to try to gather dirt on his electoral opponent.

REMINDER: The whistleblower complaint reportedly is NOT just about the Ukraine phone call - there are additional bad (possibly criminal) things Trump and Bill Barr did. That's why Trump and Barr are still fighting to cover it up.

House Dems can now subpoena Giuliani and his phone records, because Giuliani held up his cell on Fox News and said it contained evidence that the State Department told him to solicit Ukrainian meddling in our election for Trump

Jim in CT

09-25-2019, 11:42 AM

Trump used US taxpayers’ money to try to gather dirt on his electoral opponent.

REMINDER: The whistleblower complaint reportedly is NOT just about the Ukraine phone call - there are additional bad (possibly criminal) things Trump and Bill Barr did. That's why Trump and Barr are still fighting to cover it up.

House Dems can now subpoena Giuliani and his phone records, because Giuliani held up his cell on Fox News and said it contained evidence that the State Department told him to solicit Ukrainian meddling in our election for Trump

wow, a lot to digest. you’re opposed to using taxpayer
money to get dirt on a political opponent. how about using political dirt in an opponent, get get a FISA warrant to spy on an american citizen, how does that sit with you?

the democrats are probably getting ready to step on another rake.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pete F.

09-25-2019, 11:48 AM

Are you speaking of the often investigated Carter Page. Who appointed the judge that sat on that FISA warrant?

Speaking of rake stepping

When Justice Department officials examined whether Trump’s call w/Zelensky violated campaign-finance laws—and concluded it didn’t—they didn’t take into consideration that Trump was withholding aid to Ukraine, officials told reporters.
.

Jim in CT

09-25-2019, 11:54 AM

Pete F.

09-25-2019, 11:59 AM

wow, a lot to digest. you’re opposed to using taxpayer
money to get dirt on a political opponent. how about using political dirt in an opponent, get get a FISA warrant to spy on an american citizen, how does that sit with you?

the democrats are probably getting ready to step on another rake.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That is what happens when you are suspected of doing something illegal, I'd find interesting what they found in their investigation to continue it, even after Page left the campaign. That is why the request grows each time and is renewed.

If you take the time to read this perhaps you'll understand what a FISA warrant is and is not.

One of the two concrete findings from the Mueller report made public thus far, in a letter by Attorney General William Barr, is that Mueller’s “investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” Presumably that extends to Page, who briefly served as a foreign policy advisor to the Trump campaign. On face, that would seem to imply that the evidence before Mueller was insufficient to demonstrate that Page was an “agent of a foreign power,” as the FBI had asserted to the FISA court in seeking its surveillance order.

If that’s true, it wouldn’t necessarily mean the FBI acted improperly in obtaining that initial order. Sometimes intelligence agencies follow leads based on information from sources they assess to be reliable, and that information turns out to be wrong. We know, for example, that only a very tiny fraction of the “assessments” the FBI opens each year blossom into full-blown investigations, but it’s impossible to know how many of those full-blown investigations similarly come up empty. FISA orders, unlike criminal wiretap warrants, are designed to gather intelligence, and not intended to lead to criminal prosecution in most cases. Even when they do, the government is typically reluctant to introduce FISA intercepts in court if they can make a case with other evidence. That means there’s no good way to evaluate the success of intelligence investigations by looking at prosecution statistics. Moreover, the public statistics on FISA orders, do not distinguish between new orders and extensions, which means there’s no good way to even approximately gauge how commonly FISA wiretaps are abandoned as dead ends.

Yet in Carter Page’s case, the FBI clearly did not believe they had hit a dead end. A FISA warrant targeting a United States person must be renewed every 90 days, as Page’s was on three separate occasions, by three different FISA Court judges. Those renewal applications would not merely have recited the evidence supporting the initial order: They would have been expected to describe the fruits of previous surveillance, and justify continued monitoring by showing that useful intelligence was being gathered—or, at the very least, that there was good reason to expect some in the future.

Though almost all of the new information added to the renewal applications remains redacted, the length of the applications increased substantially over time: The initial submission the the FISC totaled 66 pages, while the final renewal application had grown to 101 pages. While presumably not all of the additional 35 pages concerned the information gleaned from wiretapping Page, some significant portion must have. So what was the FBI telling the FISC to justify continuing surveillance? And how do we square that with Mueller’s inability to establish coordination between Trump associates and Russia? It is unfortunate, but probably inevitable, that the government will sometimes target people for surveillance and discover that their suspicions were mistaken. If, however, the government conducts nine months of intrusive electronic surveillance, persuades a court that their suspicions have been confirmed, and still proves to have been wrong, that is at least a prima facie indication of something wrong with the system.

The trouble for those wedded to the idea of an anti-Trump Deep State conspiracy is, precisely, that it suggests something wrong with the system. A vendetta against Trump does little to explain why investigators would continue spying on Page well into 2017, long after he’d left the campaign and Trump had been sworn in as president, nor why Trump appointee Rod Rosenstein would sign off on that final renewal application. If Page had never been a foreign agent after all, then the fact that Republican officials signed off on those applications, and FISC judges—all chosen by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts—approved them, would instead raise troubling questions about the larger process designed to oversee and check intelligence wiretaps. Yet relatively few of the Republican lawmakers expressing concern about potential FISA abuse have shown any interest in reforming the broader framework of intelligence surveillance—preferring to focus on the purported misconduct of a handful of supposed bad apples.

Jim in CT

09-25-2019, 12:25 PM

That is what happens when you are suspected of doing something illegal, I'd find interesting what they found in their investigation to continue it, even after Page left the campaign. That is why the request grows each time and is renewed.

If you take the time to read this perhaps you'll understand what a FISA warrant is and is not.

One of the two concrete findings from the Mueller report made public thus far, in a letter by Attorney General William Barr, is that Mueller’s “investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” Presumably that extends to Page, who briefly served as a foreign policy advisor to the Trump campaign. On face, that would seem to imply that the evidence before Mueller was insufficient to demonstrate that Page was an “agent of a foreign power,” as the FBI had asserted to the FISA court in seeking its surveillance order.

If that’s true, it wouldn’t necessarily mean the FBI acted improperly in obtaining that initial order. Sometimes intelligence agencies follow leads based on information from sources they assess to be reliable, and that information turns out to be wrong. We know, for example, that only a very tiny fraction of the “assessments” the FBI opens each year blossom into full-blown investigations, but it’s impossible to know how many of those full-blown investigations similarly come up empty. FISA orders, unlike criminal wiretap warrants, are designed to gather intelligence, and not intended to lead to criminal prosecution in most cases. Even when they do, the government is typically reluctant to introduce FISA intercepts in court if they can make a case with other evidence. That means there’s no good way to evaluate the success of intelligence investigations by looking at prosecution statistics. Moreover, the public statistics on FISA orders, do not distinguish between new orders and extensions, which means there’s no good way to even approximately gauge how commonly FISA wiretaps are abandoned as dead ends.

Yet in Carter Page’s case, the FBI clearly did not believe they had hit a dead end. A FISA warrant targeting a United States person must be renewed every 90 days, as Page’s was on three separate occasions, by three different FISA Court judges. Those renewal applications would not merely have recited the evidence supporting the initial order: They would have been expected to describe the fruits of previous surveillance, and justify continued monitoring by showing that useful intelligence was being gathered—or, at the very least, that there was good reason to expect some in the future.

Though almost all of the new information added to the renewal applications remains redacted, the length of the applications increased substantially over time: The initial submission the the FISC totaled 66 pages, while the final renewal application had grown to 101 pages. While presumably not all of the additional 35 pages concerned the information gleaned from wiretapping Page, some significant portion must have. So what was the FBI telling the FISC to justify continuing surveillance? And how do we square that with Mueller’s inability to establish coordination between Trump associates and Russia? It is unfortunate, but probably inevitable, that the government will sometimes target people for surveillance and discover that their suspicions were mistaken. If, however, the government conducts nine months of intrusive electronic surveillance, persuades a court that their suspicions have been confirmed, and still proves to have been wrong, that is at least a prima facie indication of something wrong with the system.

The trouble for those wedded to the idea of an anti-Trump Deep State conspiracy is, precisely, that it suggests something wrong with the system. A vendetta against Trump does little to explain why investigators would continue spying on Page well into 2017, long after he’d left the campaign and Trump had been sworn in as president, nor why Trump appointee Rod Rosenstein would sign off on that final renewal application. If Page had never been a foreign agent after all, then the fact that Republican officials signed off on those applications, and FISC judges—all chosen by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts—approved them, would instead raise troubling questions about the larger process designed to oversee and check intelligence wiretaps. Yet relatively few of the Republican lawmakers expressing concern about potential FISA abuse have shown any interest in reforming the broader framework of intelligence surveillance—preferring to focus on the purported misconduct of a handful of supposed bad apples.

requests to violate the privacy of citizens, should be based on accurate reasonable suspicion. not fabricated political dirt. you disagree?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device