Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, October 07, 2019

The 1991 Intelligence Authorization Act prohibits the U.S. government from using covert actions - which include propaganda - to "influence United States political processes, public opinion, policies, or media."

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

The Pres is obviously not bound by silly things like laws.

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2019-10-07 04:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Apparently Trump's biggest supporters for the 2020 election are failed USSR oligarchs, despots from around the world, and the abysmally stupid in cow country America.

MAGA! Right?

#2 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-10-07 04:44 PM | Reply

#2 Dont forget the incels.

#3 | Posted by bored at 2019-10-07 04:51 PM | Reply

"The 1991 Intelligence Authorization Act prohibits the U.S. government from using covert actions - which include propaganda - to "influence United States political processes, public opinion, policies, or media."
POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY"

Probably what Barr will cite when he finishes his investigation - US government illegal actions against Papadopolous is what will start the waterfall of rats trying to same themselves.

#4 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-07 08:39 PM | Reply

Bill Barr Risks becoming George Papadopoulos' Coffee Boy

I think, because Papadopoulos has so little credibility outside of the frothy right, traditional journalists largely ignored the role of Papadoulos and his Congressional testimony until it had already taken hold of the entire frothy right. That's changing. Vox has a good post on Papadopoulos' centrality in Bill Barr's treasure hunt, and NYT tried to debunk the Italian part of it pertaining to Mifsud.

www.emptywheel.net

#5 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-10-07 09:13 PM | Reply

Here's a link to the Vox piece Wheeler mentions:

William Barr's 4-country effort to discredit the Trump-Russia inquiry, explained

The conspiracy theories linking Italy, Australia, the UK, and Ukraine.

www.vox.com

#6 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-10-07 09:17 PM | Reply

The Bidens are crooks and deserve to be investigated.

The charge is laughable.

#7 | Posted by Ray at 2019-10-07 09:30 PM | Reply

#5 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

You need to try harder as your story is falling apart. Let's expand on it:

1.) Papadopolous was out of his depth - everyone knew this and that is exactly why he was targeted. He was going to be the backdoor into the campaign but they need to generate cause for this
2.) Papadopolous - a guy everyone knew was out of his depth - as lured to the UK under the guise of a consulting contract with Stefan Halper - a confirmed FBI informant at a minimum (we will see how deep his ties go). They did this as they could not target him on US soil and could escape oversight by leveraging British and Italian intelligence agencies
3.) Papadopolous meets with Prof Mifsud - who the US intelligence agencies now claim is a Russian agent - only problem is that he was in the US at US State department functions 1 year prior AND was employed by Link University in Italy - a well known intelligence agency backed campus. Thus, there is no way that Mifsud could be a Russian spy without admitting our intelligence community is the dumbest bunch of people on the planet.
4.) Mifsud apparently tells Papadopolous that the Russians have Hillary's emails - now, I think this is an import distinction to make here as Libs like to conflate 2 separate events - Hillary's private server with 30K+ bleach bit emails and the 'hack' on the DNC. To date, there is ZERO proof that the US government has been presented that the Russians ever hacked Hillary's emails. So, what Papadopolous heard is at best, a guess without proof.
5.) Halpern conspires to put Papadopolous in a position to repeat the claims from Mifsud that he was told that the Russians have Hillary's emails - first with a beautiful women FBI/CIA spy using a honeypot technique (George is not a looker) and then using Alexander Downer - the Aussie diplomat that is tied to a $36M Clinton Foundation scam.
6.) Downer relates back to the US intelligence community that he heard Papadopolous claimed the GOP were working with the Russians that hacked Hillary's emails - the US intelligence community used this information to obtain FISA warrants

Now, this is where it gets spicy:
Also on his trip Papadopolous is invited to Israel to talk about a potential political consulting gig. While there, Papadopolous is given $10,000. George, thinking something is fishy, gives the money to his lawyer in Athens prior to flying back to the US. Upon arriving in the US, the FBI arrests Papadopolous and go through his luggage looking for the $10,000 - that they should have had no knowledge of - of course they do not find it.

So, this is where Barr will bury them - that money likely came from the DOJ, FBI, or CIA. The bills were likely recorded for serial numbers - and those bills are still sitting with Papadopolous' lawyer in Athens. If those bills track back to the intelligence community, it is game over - per the exact statute cited at the beginning of this thread.

#8 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-07 09:44 PM | Reply

"Let's expand on it"

Let's boil it down:
"You had no right to discover my wrongs!"

#9 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-07 09:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"You had no right to discover my wrongs!"

Signed, Joe Biden and the Left

#10 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-07 10:01 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Now you're stealing Trump's words and assigning them to his opponents?

You're not even phoning it in.

#11 | Posted by YAV at 2019-10-07 10:05 PM | Reply

""Let's expand on it"
Let's boil it down:
"You had no right to discover my wrongs!"

#9 | POSTED BY DANFORTH "

Boiling things down means to make them more succinct, not wordier. But snoofy would be proud of you replacing every word in someone else's sentence with your own, and implying it means the same thing. He loves that game, too.

#12 | Posted by goatman at 2019-10-07 10:10 PM | Reply

"Now you're stealing Trump's words and assigning them to his opponents?
#11 | POSTED BY YAV "

Please explain to me why you are outraged over the Ukraine phone call again. Did Trump ask them to make up dirt or simply to investigate? Once you answer that question for yourself, I think you might finally have a moment of clarity and stop your continuous stream of stupidity.

#13 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-07 10:10 PM | Reply

#8 | POSTED BY IRAGOLDBERG

You forgot the pedophilia ring run out of the basement of the pizza parlor. That is where the CIA laundered the money to give to Papadapaoctapus.

#14 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-10-07 10:13 PM | Reply

"Signed, Joe Biden and the Left"

What a smokescreen. If Hunter was a Republican, he'd be celebrated.

And if his last name was Manafort, Republicans would be looking at their next Presidential Campaign Manager.

#15 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-07 10:14 PM | Reply

"Boiling things down means to make them more succinct, not wordier."

Agreed. Ira's post was wordier; mine was more succinct.

#16 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-07 10:16 PM | Reply

"You forgot the pedophilia ring run out of the basement of the pizza parlor. That is where the CIA laundered the money to give to Papadapaoctapus.
#14 | POSTED BY GTBRITISHSKULL"

Can you stick to one deflection at a time? Also, you sure you want to bring up pedophiles when Clinton's best bud was just 'suicided'?

#17 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-07 10:17 PM | Reply

Please explain to me why you are outraged over the Ukraine phone call again

You are brain damaged. Seriously. That doesn't even make sense.

#18 | Posted by YAV at 2019-10-07 10:20 PM | Reply

#17 - Yay! Our LiarIra conspiracy insanity is turned up to 11! Awesome!

#19 | Posted by YAV at 2019-10-07 10:21 PM | Reply

"You are brain damaged. Seriously. That doesn't even make sense.
#18 | POSTED BY YAV "

You seem outraged over it - you want to impeach over it. So, please tell me why you are outraged. You can't answer that question because you realize how stupid it makes your look in light of your "You have no right to discover my wrongdoings" deflect the Dems love to employ.

#20 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-07 10:26 PM | Reply

You really can't help yourself, can you? Compulsive? You are as unhinged as your idol, Trump.

#21 | Posted by YAV at 2019-10-07 11:05 PM | Reply

"Trump again worked with foreigners on propaganda Ops against the American people."

Traitorous POS.

#22 | Posted by YAV at 2019-10-07 11:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#21 | POSTED BY YAV

Now take a deep breath and tell us why you are outraged about the Ukraine phone call.

#23 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-07 11:20 PM | Reply

Barr's Requests for Foreign Help Prompt Backlash in Australia, Italy, U.K.

Opposition lawmakers, intelligence officials question why the attorney general is working outside usual channels in review of Russia-probe origins

www.wsj.com

#24 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-10-07 11:45 PM | Reply

"Now take a deep breath and tell us why you are outraged about the Ukraine phone call."

Today a reporter asked if Trump had ever asked a foreign leader for investigations on someone who WASN'T a political rival of his. He couldn't think of one.

Take a deep breath and tell us why you aren't outraged. And pretending Trump cares about corruption is too laughable to count.

#25 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-07 11:48 PM | Reply

"Opposition lawmakers, intelligence officials question why the attorney general is working outside usual channels in review of Russia-probe origins
#24 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY"

Because the 'usual' channels are the exact people being accused of wrongdoing. You are suggesting that Corey Lewandowski should have headed up the Trump investigation.

"Today a reporter asked if Trump had ever asked a foreign leader for investigations on someone who WASN'T a political rival of his. He couldn't think of one.
#25 | POSTED BY DANFORTH A"

Hunter Biden is not a political rival of him - neither James Comey, Brennan, or McCabe. They are all caught up in the investigation as it relates to 2016.

You are trying to twist this into being about 2020 when the wrongdoing is all tied to 2016.

And you best response (with no hint of irony): You have no right to uncover our wrongdoing!

Yeah Dems...take that message to the voters...

#26 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-08 12:48 AM | Reply

"Hunter Biden is not a political rival of him"

Riiiight. And Jared isn't Trump's Son-in-Law. Get real.

"They are all caught up in the investigation as it relates to 2016."

Sure...and they'll be frog-marched exactly when...the twelfth of never?!?

Meanwhile, tell us why Trump is only concerned about investigations when they involve political rivals. And remind us of all the other corruption around the world he's been standing up to in the past.

#27 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 01:45 AM | Reply

"And (your) best response (with no hint of irony): You have no right to uncover our wrongdoing!

What a riot: that TOTALLY sums up the Rs defense. Waaaaa! The PROCESS was all wrong!!!

You had no right to discover my wrongs is actually a perfect summation.

But investigate whomever you want. We both know Republicans are going to lie about the results, regardless.

#28 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 01:47 AM | Reply

"What a riot: that TOTALLY sums up the Biden's defense. Waaaaa! The PROCESS was all wrong!!!
You had no right to discover my wrongs is actually a perfect summation.
#28 | POSTED BY DOUCHEFORTH "

yeah, I agree

#29 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-08 01:54 AM | Reply

"yeah, I agree"

After purposely misquoting. Lame, at best.

But go after Biden; what does is matter? Republicans have already begun lying about him; why stop now?

For example, remember when Trump claimed he sent investigators to Hawai'i??? "I have people that actually have been studying it and they cannot believe what they're finding."

ALL LIES. Why would you expect anything different now?

#30 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 02:16 AM | Reply

Meanwhile, tell us why Trump is only concerned about investigations when they involve political rivals. And remind us of all the other corruption around the world he's been standing up to in the past.

Posted by Danforth

Trump and his kids make any money Hunter Biden earned - for sitting on the board of a company from 2014-2018 that was investigated by the Ukraine over 2010-2012 dealings, and found without fault - look like chump change.

Trump's D.C. hotel, which is the new place for lobbyists and foreign governments to earn Trump's goodwill by spending money there, has profited $100,000,000. Mar A Lago and his other properties tell the same story. Grifting off the presidency. Hundreds of millions of dollars worth.

Trump's blatantly giving the middle finger to the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, and his kids use his presidency to wildly enrich themselves too. Now THERE'S something to investigate!

#31 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-10-08 02:43 AM | Reply

"But go after Biden; what does is matter?
#30 | POSTED BY DOUCHEFORTH "

Good, then shut your mouth about the Ukraine phone call because that is what it was.

#32 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-08 03:29 AM | Reply

"...then shut your mouth about the Ukraine phone call because that is what it was."

You're an idiot. Have you ever negotiated a contract? When I say I'd love to work with a company, and the next thing out of their mouths is "I want you to do something, though"...that's a quid pro quo; that's part of the negotiation. But you have to pretend not to know that, have to pretend to be a moron, because...Trump.

The fact Trump only is worried about corruption when the last name is Clinton or Biden should speak volumes...once you get your head out of the sand.

Meanwhile, you're polishing a turd. An orange one, at that.

#33 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 03:37 AM | Reply

"You're an idiot. Have you ever negotiated a contract? When I say I'd love to work with a company, and the next thing out of their mouths is "I want you to do something, though"
#33 | POSTED BY DANFORTH"

Back to hanging impeachment on the word 'though'? Sad and pathetic. However, you just said investigating Biden was fine - why the change of heart? Now that his campaign has slipped and stated the WHITE HOUSE approved Hunter taking the board seat, it opens a whole new can of worms...especially Joe 'see no evil' Biden saying he never discussed his corrupt kid's business. Biden will be out of the race shortly after the debate - and here is another prediction - Hunter Biden will NEVER be given another board seat making $50K/month after his dad drops out of the race.

#34 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-08 03:49 AM | Reply

"Back to hanging impeachment on the word 'though'?"

No.

Simply knowing when we're talking terms, and someone says "I want you to do something, though"...that's part of a negotiation. You have to pretend to be ignorant of that simple fact of life. Meanwhile, Trump is using the power of the state to help him politically. If you're fine with that, just say it; no need to keep polishing turds.

"Now that his campaign has slipped and stated the WHITE HOUSE approved Hunter taking the board seat, it opens a whole new can of worms"

What a laugh: If this guy were a Republican getting $50K a month, you'd either be celebrating him, or dissing him for not getting Manafort-level cabbage.

#35 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 04:00 AM | Reply

"Meanwhile, Trump is using the power of the state to help him politically."

There is truth to this. Exposing the origins of the 2016 Russian Hoax will aid Trump politically. Why are Dems afraid of the truth?

"Now that his campaign has slipped and stated the WHITE HOUSE approved Hunter taking the board seat, it opens a whole new can of worms"
What a laugh: If this guy were a Republican getting $50K a month, you'd either be celebrating him, or dissing him for not getting Manafort-level cabbage.

Manafort is in jail where he belongs for corruption. The only question is how many Democrat cell mates he will have when Barr is through investigating.

#36 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-08 04:06 AM | Reply

"Exposing the origins of the 2016 Russian Hoax will aid Trump politically."

If it was the Dems all along, what made Team Trump lie about Russian contacts over 100 times?

"Manafort is in jail where he belongs for corruption"

Trump knew he was corrupt when he hired Manafort.

"The only question is how many Democrat cell mates he will have when Barr is through investigating."

Well, whatever your over/under is, I'll take the under.

#37 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 04:15 AM | Reply

""Exposing the origins of the 2016 Russian Hoax will aid Trump politically.
If it was the Dems all along, what made Team Trump lie about Russian contacts over 100 times?"

How many were charged and jailed for collusion...I think that number still stands at ZERO.

And that is what is being debated here - a completely false Russian collision narrative.

#38 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-08 04:20 AM | Reply

"How many were charged and jailed for collusion."

Now you're moving the goalposts just to collusion? Plenty went to jail, some for lying about Russia.

Tell me; serious question: Why is it okay with you that Trump lies to the public all the time? Team Trump lied over 100 times about contacts with Russians. If there was nothing to hide, why where they so damned concerned about hiding it? In addition, if you read the Mueller Report carefully, you'll see the reason they didn't indict for the Trump Tower meeting is Mueller didn't believe he could prove they knew they were breaking the law...IOW, they escaped prosecution, in part, because Mueller concluded they were too stupid to know they were breaking the law.

"And that is what is being debated here - a completely false Russian collision narrative."

Eff that; I'm more interested in why you allow yourself to be treated like a battered spouse. What say you?

#39 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 04:31 AM | Reply

And rather than move the goalposts again, just answer the question directly:

"If it was the Dems all along, what made Team Trump lie about Russian contacts over 100 times?"

#40 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 04:32 AM | Reply

"Now you're moving the goalposts just to collusion? Plenty went to jail, some for lying about Russia."

How many went to jail for collusion with Russia? - yeah, ZERO. That is why we need to investigate the origins of the Hoax. After 2 years, we proved no collusion existed, now we need to know why someone started that hoax.

#41 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-08 04:37 AM | Reply

One word: Deliverance.

#42 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2019-10-08 04:41 AM | Reply

"How many went to jail for collusion with Russia? - yeah, ZERO"

Well, if Team Trump hadn't been meeting with the Russians, and hadn't lied about it scores and scores of times, no one would've felt an investigation was warranted.

As it was, wouldn't you've wanted the FBI to investigate if HRC was meeting with the Russians, and Huma was recorded talking with Kyslyak? Even if ZERO went to jail?

"origins of the Hoax."

The only "hoax" is the bullshirt you're trying to pull now. You keep avoiding all my salient, direct questions. Is it because you have no real answer?

#43 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 04:46 AM | Reply

"As it was, wouldn't you've wanted the FBI to investigate if HRC was meeting with the Russians, and Huma was recorded talking with Kyslyak? Even if ZERO went to jail?"

That is not a bad idea and I think Barr will end up doing exactly that ... although it seems more like Russian born people living in the Ukraine rather than still in Russia. But why would Huma be talking to Kyslyak? That would be equivalent to Melania talking to him.

"The only "hoax" is the bullshirt you're trying to pull now.
#43 | POSTED BY DANFORTH"

2 yeas and ZERO jailed for collusion - IT WAS A HOAX. Now, we will find out who started it and why.

#44 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-08 04:56 AM | Reply

"2 yeas and ZERO jailed for collusion - IT WAS A HOAX. "

Nonsense. It was the result of Republicans lying to the FBI, after the FBI had warned them about foreign intervention.

If Dems had done this, your head would be exploding right now. As it is, you have to pretend Team Trump telling 100+ lies were all somehow the fault of the Dems.

"But why would Huma be talking to Kyslyak?"

You'd want to know why?!?

Thanks for proving my point.

#45 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 05:22 AM | Reply

"Nonsense. It was the result of Republicans lying to the FBI, after the FBI had warned them about foreign intervention."

Well, except for the fact that they were under surveillance prior to any FBI knowledge of Russian contacts. And once the FBI illegally spied on all of these Russian contacts, they still had ZERO evidence of collusion. They had a completely illegal investigation and STILL FOUND NOTHING. I think that explains the Papadopolous story - they quickly realized the Russia story was BS so they had to try to invent one to justify their illegal actions.

"If Dems had done this, your head would be exploding right now. As it is, you have to pretend Team Trump telling 100+ lies were all somehow the fault of the Dems."

THEY DID!!! What don't you understand about the Steele Dossier? The Dems knowingly pushed this completely false narrative - and now it is coming back to bite them in the ass and you are scared -------- because you know Trump 2020 is a lock. You have only yourself to blame for helping to propagate the Russian hoax for 2+ years. If would have just forced Hillary to accept defeat and move on, Trump wouldn't have had a need to put Barr on the case to investigate the origins of the hoax. But, you had to poke the bear.

#46 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-08 05:39 AM | Reply

Simply knowing when we're talking terms, and someone says "I want you to do something, though"...that's part of a negotiation. You have to pretend to be ignorant of that simple fact of life. Meanwhile, Trump is using the power of the state to help him politically. - Danforth

A few things. Trump had initially asked about Crowd Strike and a compromised Dem server. If memory serves (and assuming the transcript is accurate) it was Zelensky who brought up Biden.

The biggest thing here is for the Ukrainians there was no Quid. The Ukrainians are adamant that in no way was their military aid funding contingent upon anything related to Trump's request. For me that is the biggest takeaway.

Second, asking for a specific act committed by a political opponent to be looked into - a true case of quid pro quo, BTW - is a far cry from "go dig up dirt on this guy."

No quid, a legitimate inquiry into Crowd Strike and an unsavory but not criminal request to look into the Biden quid pro quo arrangement.

As for all of the actions by the Obama administration and Clinton campaign against a political opponent and ALL of the political benefits via foreign intermediaries - a la the Steele Dossier...another discussion for a different day but is certainly applicable to this discussion here.

#47 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-10-08 06:54 AM | Reply

Show of hands, people. How many here believe the US Government has been running "covert propaganda against US citizens" every single day since sometime in the 1950's?

What did Obama call it....a nudge? I'm not singling him out, it's just a recent example.

#48 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-10-08 08:25 AM | Reply

WhataboutObama!

#49 | Posted by YAV at 2019-10-08 10:11 AM | Reply

If memory serves (and assuming the transcript is accurate) it was Zelensky who brought up Biden.

#47 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Well... it doesn't look like your memory "serves". Maybe you should go back and read the transcript before posting BS like that just to confuse the issue?

www.nytimes.com

Zelenskyy never even says the word "Biden" (though Trump does 3 times) and his only real reference to him is "the company that you mentioned". How do you see that as Zelenskyy having "brought it up"?

I have seen you post many times arguing vociferously that there is nothing untoward in the transcript, but it seems like you do not even know what is in it.

Either you never bothered to read it carefully, or you just saw what you WANTED to see (or heard what you WANTED to hear) when you read it.

#50 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-10-08 10:15 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#50 - True and validated. The "Zelensky brought Biden up first" is a easily disproven lie that I've heard repeated by several Republicans on various TV shows. Disappointing that they aren't slapped down (or corrected) immediately for that.

#51 | Posted by YAV at 2019-10-08 10:21 AM | Reply

Either you never bothered to read it carefully, or you just saw what you WANTED to see (or heard what you WANTED to hear) when you read it.

#50 | POSTED BY GTBRITISHSKULL

FFS, what do you want, blood?

I read it twice when it was released a couple of weeks ago. That's why I said, "if memory serves..."

I made a mistake, sheesh.

#52 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-10-08 10:47 AM | Reply

The biggest thing here is for the Ukrainians there was no Quid. The Ukrainians are adamant that in no way was their military aid funding contingent upon anything related to Trump's request. For me that is the biggest takeaway.

#47 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Your assertion is then, that if Trump tried to pressure Ukraine with aid, then Ukraine would say "yes, we were pressured"? You don't think that Zelenskyy ADMITTING he was pushed around by Trump would make him look weak (so therefore he has an incentive not to admit it happened)? And, you don't think that Trump would react poorly to Ukraine saying "he was trying to do a quid pro quo", possibly holding it against them in the future if he survived this scandal (as he has survived scandals in the past)?

When did you become so naive?

And, I am assuming that we can all agree that Trump DID delay the aid to Ukraine. I have seen nothing to contradict the claim that the reason it was held up was that Trump personally requested it to be.

So, if you think the aid being held up was "in no way" contingent upon Trump's request, what is your explanation as for why it was held up?

Conservatives claim that it CAN'T be a quid pro quo because Trump never said "If you don't investigate Biden, then I will not give you the military aid". But only an idiot would lay out a quid pro quo like that, especially in a call that is being recorded/transcribed/witnessed/etc. Though, from their arguments, that is apparently how conservatives would approach an illicit quid pro quo (not that I'm saying conservatives are idiots, but if the glove fits?).

If I were to have the ethical flexibility of a conservative and an opportunity to abuse my position of political gain, I would approach the "quid pro quo" as follows... I would hold up the aid, but not tell them why. Before the call I would probably try to make sure they knew that the aid was delayed, but would do it through a back channel so it is more "they have heard the aid might be delayed" as opposed to being directly told "it is delayed". But, if the back channel did not get through before the call, it would not be a big deal (they would find out eventually even without the back channel). Then, during the call I would just "innocently" request my "quo" without any reference to the "quid". If they later ask why the aid is delayed, there would be some bureaucratic excuse for it. But, once they started delivering on the "quo" the aid would "magically" start appearing in their bank account. It might take a couple of months for them to figure it out, but they would figure it out eventually.

Now let me remind you of the timeline. Trump supposedly requested that the aid be held up before the call. Zelenskyy has said that no one told him why the aid was held up, and that he was not pressured, but I cannot find anywhere where he says that he did not KNOW it was delayed when he had the call with Trump. The call was on July 24th. The whistleblower report was filed on August 12th. The IG of the intelligence community notifies the House intelligence committee of the whistleblower on September 9th. Trump finally releases he aid to Ukraine on September 11th.

So, in my scenario, Zelenskyy would have had a MONTH AND A HALF to "stew" about all the potentially reasons why the aid was "delayed" before I would potentially be "forced" to release it due to the whistleblower report coming out (gotta take the "quid" off the table before the whole thing blows up).

But, then again, I am a liberal so have the intelligence to do something like that. You can always argue that a conservative like Trump is not intelligent enough to pull a "quid pro quo" without directly saying "if you do this, I will give you that."

#53 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-10-08 10:55 AM | Reply

FFS, what do you want, blood?
I read it twice when it was released a couple of weeks ago. That's why I said, "if memory serves..."
I made a mistake, sheesh.

#52 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Lol... I might have been a little harsh in my reply. :)

But, that is how FUD like that gets spread. And I would probably have been a little more forgiving if you hadn't been so adamant before that there is nothing there. It kinda bugs me that you would be so sure there is nothing there, yet don't even seem to have a grasp of important aspects of the actual transcript. A lot of other people on here that would be par for the course, but I have come to expect more from you based upon the quality of your posts in the past.

So, maybe I can give you a half-hearted "sorry"?

#54 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-10-08 11:06 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Well, except for the fact that they were under surveillance prior to any FBI knowledge of Russian contacts."

Yeah...the Russians were. It's not the FBI's fault members of Team Trump kept showing up.

The current Republican pretense is the FBI should've stopped recording Kislyack because Sessions walked into the room. That's not how it works.

#55 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 11:10 AM | Reply

"I read it twice when it was released a couple of weeks ago. That's why I said, "if memory serves..." I made a mistake, sheesh."

The mistake was of central importance.

That, and the fact your "memory" seems to reshape facts into what you wish they were: Trump didn't bring up Biden, Dubya's plan addressed the central problem of SS, and many people were adversely affected by The Cadillac Tax. All "facts" in your memory,

#56 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 11:17 AM | Reply

#54 Cool, thanks.

:-)

#57 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-10-08 11:42 AM | Reply

Dubya's plan addressed the central problem of SS

I NEVER said that. At the time W was pimping his partial privatization plan I said it was a good idea that was at least 2 decades too late. The Boomers needed to have had the opportunity to benefit from partial privatization. That would have been the case in the '80's. In the 2000's no and since funding is set up as a pyramid in the sense that current payees are funding current recipients, partial privatization would have exacerbated the funding problem.

Now it's you who has the faulty memory.

As for Cadillac Tax, it was part of the original piece of legislation but was never implemented (because it was inconvenient for Obama constituents) so it kept getting kicked down the road.

#58 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-10-08 11:46 AM | Reply

This person wrote an entire article about something that has already been tried in court and lost every single time. Biden is a candidate for an elected position. The term "public" no longer applies to him. This is the law. He is fair game for any dirt anyone wants to bring up regardless of how they got it. The issue is that an elected official tried to use his influence with American funds...THAT is the issue. I mean, it's no surprise that the party not in power will do everything they can to make the party in power look bad but this is just silly and stupid considering the entire premise of the article already has been debunked by many lawsuits.

#59 | Posted by humtake at 2019-10-08 11:53 AM | Reply

But investigate whomever you want. We both know Republicans are going to lie about the results, regardless.

#28 | Posted by Danforth

This is the sad truth.

There is no honesty or integrity left in the modern GOP.

#60 | Posted by jpw at 2019-10-08 12:41 PM | Reply

Simply knowing when we're talking terms, and someone says "I want you to do something, though"...that's part of a negotiation. You have to pretend to be ignorant of that simple fact of life.

It's funny how righties are capable of dreaming up all sorts of stuff involving the Clintons, Obamas, pizza parlors without basements and a POTUS "invading" the southeast US...buuuuuuuuutttttt...

They suddenly become hyper literal and insist one can't read between the lines when a Repub is clearly engaging in illegal or illicit activities.

#61 | Posted by jpw at 2019-10-08 12:46 PM | Reply

Biden is a candidate for an elected position. The term "public" no longer applies to him. This is the law. He is fair game for any dirt anyone wants to bring up regardless of how they got it.

#59 | POSTED BY HUMTAKE

Sure, Joe Biden is.

BUT Hunter Biden is NOT a public official. If you can use him to get at Joe Biden, then there is no reason we should not be allowed to use these people to "get at" Trump.

For another, YOU can dig up all the dirt you want on Biden. You can publicize it all you want. But, OUR GOVERNMENT CANNOT do that. People in elected positions CANNOT USE THAT POSITION for digging up dirt on their opponent for political gain. If they want to do it on their own, that is fine. But they cannot use the instruments of government to do it. And because this was an official call between the President of the United States and the President of Ukraine, this was an abuse of power because Trump was using his office for political gain (to go after his opponents).

#62 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-10-08 12:51 PM | Reply

IRAGOLDBERG you are ignorant and delusional the only one in trouble here is trump and barr if he obstructed you rightie tighties constantly engage in bullcrap thinking no one wants to deal with your crap you think cause you say it its true its bullcrap there will be accountability you mfers constantly cried when you thought obama was breaking laws but if he has a R next to there name all of a sudden you think trump should be able to act with impunity not going to happen there will be accountability

#63 | Posted by jake3533 at 2019-10-08 02:13 PM | Reply

"As for Cadillac Tax, it was part of the original piece of legislation but was never implemented (because it was inconvenient for Obama constituents) so it kept getting kicked down the road."

Yet somehow, you knew folks negatively affected by it.

#64 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 02:48 PM | Reply

Yet somehow, you knew folks negatively affected by it.

#64 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Um, no. I might have said it will have a negative effect on folks, but I didn't say I personally knew folks who were negatively affected by it.

It's amazing to me how often you bring this up, especially since I've repeatedly admitted error (I didn't follow closely enough to catch that whilst it was in the legislation, implementation repeatedly got kicked down the road). Are you always this petty?

#65 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-10-08 02:57 PM | Reply

"It's amazing to me how often you bring this up"

While I was taking a long break, the multiple times I almost signed in were regarding your erroneous posts about the Cadillac Tax.

"I didn't follow closely enough to catch that..."

That seems to be a repeated occurrence. You conveniently seem to miss all the inconvenient facts, like who brought up Biden. That's a fairly salient fact, right? Does that change any of your original conclusions, which were all based on the assumption Zelensky broached Biden?

#66 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-08 03:12 PM | Reply

The Bidens are crooks and deserve to be investigated.

The charge is laughable.

#7 | POSTED BY RAY
The charges are valid. And show a continued pattern of criminality and corruption.

The Trumps are all crooks and deserve to be impeached.

Pointing out the flaws in the other is not a defense. Pretending to be investigating corruption does not absolve YOU of corruption.

Trump is more corrupt than anyone he wants investigated. Putin took advantage of our elections and ran a propaganda PROGOMME against us and it was successful beyond their wildest imagination.

And you Trumptilians still deny that happened.

We cannot prove he " colluded" it is easy to prove he has cooperated

If he was not president he would be in court under multiple indictments.

The President is not above the law.

So Humpy will be impeached.

#67 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-10-08 06:42 PM | Reply

"I read it twice when it was released a couple of weeks ago. That's why I said, "if memory serves..."
I made a mistake, sheesh.
#52 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"

From the party arguing that 'though' is clearly the sign of quid pro quo, them holding you to the first literal mention of Biden's name laughable. Immediately prior to Trump mentioning Biden, this was stated by the Ukrainian leader:

"I will personally tell you that one of my assistants spoke with Mr. Giuliani just recently and we are hoping very much that Mr. Giuliani will be able to travel to Ukraine and we will meet once he comes to Ukraine."

Now, although Biden is not specifically mentioned, it is very clear why Rudy was speaking with the Ukrainian government and the Dems, and the Ukraine leader, clearly knew why. That is why Trump transitioned the conversation to Biden.

Now, what the Dems also don't tell you is that in the paragraph in which Trump uses the infamous 'though', the entire content of the paragraph relates to the Russia Hoax and 2016 election.

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

So, if you want to sit on 'though' as being critical, then it is clear what Trump is asking for is for the Ukraine to look into the Russia Hoax and 2016 election interference. Nowhere is Biden mentioned at all. We then have further dialogue as I mentioned above before Biden is mentioned. So, if your argument is really about quid pro quo, it relates to the 2016 election.

#68 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-08 10:07 PM | Reply

"So, if you want to sit on 'though' as being critical, then it is clear what Trump is asking for is for the Ukraine to look into the Russia Hoax and 2016 election interference. Nowhere is Biden mentioned at all. We then have further dialogue as I mentioned above before Biden is mentioned. So, if your argument is really about quid pro quo, it relates to the 2016 election."

We only have a partial "transcript" of the call. There has been reporting that Trump mentioned Biden 8 times during the conversation. If true, that could prove what you've just said to be false. Release the full, complete transcript, the one Trump has said exists.

#69 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-10-08 11:21 PM | Reply

Sounds like maybe Barr is running a covert op himself:

American Oversight @weareoversight

What is US attorney John Durham actually investigating? We still don't know. DOJ just told us it has no records of any formal order from the AG to Durham outlining his inquiry. We're still asking for any informal guidance or directives given to Durham.

No Records Response from DOJ Regarding Orders Directing Attorney Durham to Review the Origins of the Russia Investigation

The Department of Justice's Office of Information Policy stated that it had no records relating to American Oversight's request for the Attorney General's order directing U.S. Attorney John Durham to investigate sensitive issues related to investigations of the president and the 2016 Trump campaign.

www.americanoversight.org

#70 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-10-08 11:32 PM | Reply

"the entire content of the paragraph relates to the Russia Hoax and 2016 election."

Could I have mustard with that pretzel?

#71 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-09 01:14 AM | Reply

Could I have mustard with that pretzel?
#71 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

You are still hungry after Lying Liz' Clevelandsteamer over getting fired for being pregnant?

#72 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-09 03:04 AM | Reply

Trump brought up Crowdstrike. Zelensky brought up Giuliani. If Trump said "Burisma" instead of "Bidens" that would have slid by. Why was Biden shooting his mouth off about his shady dealings in the Ukraine on his son's behalf? Well, son of a B, because he's a gaffe laden moron that worked for a corrupt administration who used his position and influence for financial gain for his coked-out spawn. Looking forward to the Durham report to bear this out more.

#73 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2019-10-09 05:18 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#73 | POSTED BY NUKE_GENTLY

Finally, a voice of sanity.

#74 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-09 06:08 AM | Reply

Since when does an investigation in secret require acknowledgment it exists?

Isn't that the whole point?

#75 | Posted by Petrous at 2019-10-09 07:20 AM | Reply

"Isn't that the whole point?
#75 | POSTED BY PETROUS A"

No need to acknowledge anything officially. We know they are investigating - we know they already were in Italy for the Mifsud nonsense. Funny enough, immediately after, the former Italian prime minister (at the time of 2016) just went off on Papadopolous - the rats are running scared now. I thought if Trump could fix the economy (trade deals), he would be one of the most influential presidents of all time - then he pulled us out of war...then he appointed actual conservative justices, now he is draining the swamp for real. After a 2020 landslide, the Dems won't be able to block immigration reform and Trump's legacy as the greatest president of the modern era will be assured.

#76 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-10-09 07:54 AM | Reply

"You are still hungry after Lying Liz'..."

Bwahahahahaha!

Are you actually pretending you care about lies?!? You, who acts like a battered spouse every time Trump opens his mouth?

#77 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-09 11:11 AM | Reply

"After a 2020 landslide, the Dems won't be able to block immigration reform and Trump's legacy as the greatest president of the modern era will be assured."

Steven Miller is an absolute idiot.

#78 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-10-09 11:11 AM | Reply

If Trump said "Burisma" instead of "Bidens" that would have slid by.

But he did bring up the Bidens specifically, which exposed his true motives:

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

#79 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-10-09 11:17 AM | Reply

Maybe the truth will set the Bidens free. One person's "digging up dirt on a potential future rival " is another person's "investigation of actionable past abuse of office". If it was all above board, despite any appearance of impropriety, this too shall pass. But don't we just want to know the truth?

#80 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2019-10-09 12:15 PM | Reply

I hope someone gets to the bottom of why former Ukrainian prosecutor Yuri Lutsenko refused to cooperate with the Mueller investigation:

Prosecutor in Trump-Ukraine Scandal Refused to Cooperate With US Congress

He wouldn't answer questions about possible Trump-Ukraine collusion.

In May 2018, the New York Times broke a significant story about Ukraine that did not receive great attention at the time: The nation's chief prosecutor had halted cooperation with special counsel Robert Mueller's Trump-Russia investigation and had essentially shut down four Ukrainian criminal inquiries related to Mueller's work. Ukrainian lawmakers said their government took these steps out of fear of upsetting Trump and jeopardizing a deal that would supply Ukraine Javelin anti-tank missiles for its ongoing conflict with Russia, which occupied portions of the country. In response to that story, several US senators, wondering if the investigations had been sidelined as an act of Trump-Ukraine collusion, requested information from the Ukrainian prosecutor. He did not cooperate and blew off their request. This is the same prosecutor who now happens to be in the middle of the latest scandal.

The Times article naturally raised suspicions. The four Ukrainian investigations that were frozen concerned Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign chair, who had made millions in Ukraine as a consultant for the corrupt and ousted President Viktor Yanukovych and his political party. (Manafort is now in federal prison, convicted of tax fraud, money laundering, and other charges related to his endeavors in Ukraine.) And Ukrainian officials also let a key potential witness for Mueller"a Russian Ukrainian business partner of Manafort named Konstantin Kilimnik, who the FBI concluded was associated with Russian intelligence"leave Ukraine before Mueller's investigators could question him. The reason for all this was obvious: "In every possible way, we will avoid irritating the top American officials," a member of Ukraine's parliament told the Times. "We shouldn't spoil relations with the administration."


www.motherjones.com

#81 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-10-09 12:24 PM | Reply

It's possible the quid pro quo with Ukraine goes back farther and is more involved than is currently known:

Three Democratic senators"Patrick Leahy, Dick Durbin, and Robert Menendez"quickly fired off a letter to Yuri Lutsenko, then Ukraine's general prosecutor, expressing their "great concern about reports that your office has taken steps to impede cooperation" with Muller's investigation. The letter asked Lutsenko to explain these moves. It also raised the issue of whether Trump and his crew had pushed the Ukrainians to quash these probes. "Did any individual from the Trump Administration, or anyone acting on its behalf, encourage Ukrainian government or law enforcement officials not to cooperate with the investigation of Special Counsel Robert Mueller?" the lawmakers inquired. They also asked if there had been any discussion of the Mueller probe between Ukrainian and US officials when Trump met then-President Petro Poroshenko the previous year.

This was a serious matter. The senators were asking if there had been some underhanded collusion, a quid pro quo: missiles for blocking Mueller. Lutsenko did not answer their questions, according to a Menendez spokesperson.


Stopping investigations into Manafort and letting Konstantin Kilimnik leave the country raises some very big red flags. Won't it be ironic if Trump & Team is once again projecting, i.e., accusing Biden of doing what they in fact did do with regard to Manafort, Kilimnik and the Mueller investigation?

#82 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-10-09 12:29 PM | Reply

That would be ironically hysterical! Hopefully The Ukrainians help us get to the bottom of this.

#83 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2019-10-09 01:03 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort