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

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

Jeff,is this the code red you speak of? Any predictions?
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

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

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.

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

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

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

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?

so the rumors that there were multiple calls is good enough for you, but you question the rumor that the whistleblower didn’t hear the call. interesting.
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.

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.

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.

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

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

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

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

About time Nancy!
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.

This is great,the old Jeff is back.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

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.

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....

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

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. "