Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Trump's Betrayal of the United States

There is at least one Hangout thread on Bill Barr and how his reputation would be ruined by the Trump administration. This news clip could certainly go into that thread, but this thread is more timely, so I am putting it here. Nancy Pelosi certainly keeps her cool and she has kept her integrity, too. For someone who has been in the public eye for as long as she has been, that is no mean feat.

 
Last edited:
Dancing Fire said:
Trump needs to take a lesson from Biden.
https://www.wsj.com/video/opinion-j...ney/C1C51BB8-3988-4070-869F-CAD3CA0E81D8.html
Click to expand...
Perhaps instead of thinking that a video clip presented in a vacuum is "the end-all and be-all", you'll also read, and reflect on, what the WSJ has published from their actual investigative reporters, e.g., Alan Cullison's Bidens in Ukraine: An Explainer:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens...rlapped-with-sons-work-in-country-11569189782
"Messrs. Trump and Giuliani have suggested that Joe Biden pushed for the firing of Ukraine’s general prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, in March 2016 to stop an investigation into Burisma. In Ukraine, government officials and anticorruption advocates say that is a misrepresentation. * * * Mr. Biden had called for the ouster of Mr. Shokin because he and others thought that the prosecutor wasn’t aggressive enough.
* * *
Shokin had dragged his feet on those investigations, Western diplomats said, and effectively squashed one in London by failing to cooperate with U.K. authorities, who had frozen $23.5 million of Mr. Zlochevsky’s assets. In a speech in 2015, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, called the Ukrainian prosecutor “an obstacle” to anti-orruption efforts, and mentioned the U.K. case, which he said led to the escape of illicit assets.
But Ukraine’s government was slow to fire Mr. Shokin, despite warnings from the International Monetary Fund and others that Western aid to the country would be cut off if it didn’t act. Mr. Biden, in one of his trips to Ukraine in 2016, pressured the government, telling them the U.S. would withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees. * * *
Anders Aslund, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council in Washington, D.C., said that Mr. Biden was making the same demands that other lenders to the Ukrainian government were making. “Everyone in the Western community wanted Shokin sacked,” he said. “The whole G-7, the IMF, the EBRD, everybody was united that Shokin must go, and the spokesman for this was Joe Biden.”​
(For those who can't ordinarily access articles behind the WSJ paywall, you should be able to access the above article after clearing your cookies/cache.)

From Dr. Aslund himself last week:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1175203002870849536.html
And from Bloomberg News reporters Stephanie Baker and Daryna Krasnolutska (who is Ukranian) in May of this year:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...e-probe-casts-doubt-on-giuliani-s-biden-claim
 
KristinTech said:
I am embarrassed for Chairman Schiff. What a joke! I am so disappointed that he used “parody” (his word, an hour into the hearing) to start things off.

Who told him that was a good idea? :doh:
Click to expand...
nuts.gif
 
KristinTech said:
I am embarrassed for Chairman Schiff. What a joke! I am so disappointed that he used “parody” (his word, an hour into the hearing) to start things off.

Who told him that was a good idea? :doh:
Click to expand...
Dancing Fire said:
nuts.gif
Click to expand...
This is a time that I'm agreeing with you, Dancing Fire, about a news topic. It was an example of gawdawful judgment. Yes, he initially said, "Shorn of its rambling character and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the President communicate[d]." But that still doesn't excuse the imprecise, and sometimes misleadingly inaccurate, paraphrases that followed -- which provided fresh fodder to, among others, Trump and his tweets. See Daniel Dale's Fact-Check for CNN (Dale was formerly the Toronto Sun's Washington, DC Bureau Chief who earned kudos for his painstaking fact-checking analyses of Trump's speeches; he recently joined CNN and is also now critiquing the Presidential candidates):
https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/27/politics/fact-check-adam-schiff-trumps-ukraine-call/index.html

Honestly, I now would like to see Rep. Schiff resign -- not give up his seat in Congress as Trump is calling for, but rather resign as Chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence so that another Democratic, Committee member, without Schiff's "baggage," can assume that leadership role.
 
Screen Shot 2019-09-28 at 11.18.38 AM.png
 
MollyMalone said:
Honestly, I now would like to see Rep. Schiff resign -- not give up his seat in Congress as Trump is calling for, but rather resign as Chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence so that another Democratic, Committee member, without Schiff's "baggage," can assume that leadership role.
Click to expand...
Intelligence he is not!. What a nutcase ...:wall:
 
MollyMalone said:
Perhaps instead of thinking that a video clip presented in a vacuum is "the end-all and be-all", you'll also read, and reflect on, what the WSJ has published from their actual investigative reporters
Click to expand...

I don't like your tone, Molly. In no way did I say a video clip was "the end all and be all" of the discussion. If you had information to add, you could simply have done so civilly. When I have time, I will certainly look into what you posted.
 
AGBF said:
I don't like your tone, Molly. In no way did I say a video clip was "the end all and be all" of the discussion. If you had information to add, you could simply have done so civilly. When I have time, I will certainly look into what you posted.
Click to expand...
Oh my. I thought it was obvious that my post #32 was in response to Dancing Fire's post -- which I quoted at the beginning of my post -- about how Trump should take a lesson from Biden, followed by his link to a video clip that the "opinion side" of the WSJ posted earlier this week.
 
Chelsea Clinton won Twitter Thursday with her response to the odious twonk's tweet about the whistleblower's document:

Screen Shot 2019-09-28 at 12.43.33 PM.png
 
Matata said:
Chelsea Clinton won Twitter Thursday with her response to the odious twonk's tweet about the whistleblower's document:

Screen Shot 2019-09-28 at 12.43.33 PM.png
Click to expand...
I think she was referring to her mom.
 
MollyMalone said:
This is a time that I'm agreeing with you, Dancing Fire, about a news topic.
Click to expand...
slap4.gif
..Don't you know by now??.It is against PS rule to agree with DF...:whistle:
 
AGBF said:
I don't like your tone, Molly. In no way did I say a video clip was "the end all and be all" of the discussion. If you had information to add, you could simply have done so civilly. When I have time, I will certainly look into what you posted.
Click to expand...

MollyMalone said:
Oh my. I thought it was obvious that my post #32 was in response to Dancing Fire's post -- which I quoted at the beginning of my post -- about how Trump should take a lesson from Biden, followed by his link to a video clip that the "opinion side" of the WSJ posted earlier this week.
Click to expand...


Sorry, Molly. I am off my game. In fact in some thread I posted information about the same former prosecutor, Viktor Shokin.

Deb :wavey:
 
That both Mike Pompeo and Wlliam Barr appear to be part of the conspiracy to extort Ukraine, makes this more than a simple act of presidential malfeasance. As Secretary of State and Attorney General they hold very high positions and are embedded in our government.

Former Republican Congressman David Jolliy suggested on television last night that both of them and the OMB Director, Mike Mulvaney, be impeached along with Trump to get the attention of the country.
 
"Trump’s Claims About Biden Aren’t ‘Unsupported.’ They’re Lies." (excerpted)

By Michelle Goldberg

"On Sept. 24, 2015, Geoffrey Pyatt, then the American ambassador to Ukraine, spoke in Odessa about the scourge of corruption. It was about a year and a half after what is sometimes called the Revolution of Dignity, when Ukrainians overthrew the kleptocratic, Russian-aligned regime of Viktor Yanukovych. The country was trying to move in a more liberal, European direction. Corruption, said Pyatt, threatened to hold the new Ukraine back.

Pyatt called out the office of Viktor Shokin, then the prosecutor general of Ukraine. 'Corrupt actors within the prosecutor general’s office are making things worse by openly and aggressively undermining reform,' he said. Pyatt specifically lambasted Shokin’s office for subverting a British case against a man named Mykola Zlochevsky, Yanukovych’s former ecology minister.

In 2014, as part of a money-laundering investigation, British authorities froze $23 million Zlochevsky had in London. They requested supporting documentation from Shokin’s office. Instead, it intervened on Zlochevsky’s behalf. 'As a result the money was freed by the U.K. court and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus,' said Pyatt.

'Shokin was seen as a single point of failure clogging up the system and blocking corruption cases,' a former official in Barack Obama’s administration told me. Vice President Joe Biden eventually took the lead in calling for Shokin’s ouster.

Agree to disagree, or disagree better? We'll help you understand the sharpest arguments on the most pressing issues of the week, from new and familiar voices.

As all this was happening, Biden’s son, Hunter, sat on the board of Burisma Holdings, a natural gas company that Zlochevsky co-founded, at some points earning $50,000 a month. Zlochevsky might have thought he could ingratiate himself with the Obama administration by buying an association with the vice president. All available evidence suggests he was wrong.

Turning this history on its head, Trump has accused Joe Biden of coercing Ukraine to jettison Shokin in order to protect Hunter. He has pressured Ukraine’s current president to open an investigation into the Bidens, which would make Trump’s charges seem more credible. As the president faces impeachment, his surrogates are parroting his attack on Biden, and his campaign is reportedly spending a staggering $10 million on an ad to amplify the smear.

Journalists, perhaps seeking to appear balanced, have sometimes described Trump’s claims about Biden as 'unsubstantiated' or 'unsupported.' That is misleading, because it suggests more muddiness in the factual record than actually exists. Trump isn’t making unproven charges against Biden. He is blatantly lying about him. He and his defenders are spreading a conspiracy theory that is the precise opposite of the truth."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/30/opinion/trump-ukraine-republican.html
 
hmr_mama said:
Corruption is corruption is corruption.


https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/09/...-ukraine-joe-biden-son-hunter-biden-ties.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-whistleblower-timeline-idUSKBN1W82HK

https://www.scribd.com/document/427618359/Shokin-Statement
Click to expand...

What you have posted here (and I have examined all three links) is quite confusing. What is your point?

By the way, I disagree that "corruption is corruption" or, if I were to stipulate that that was a true statement, so what? This thread is not about mere corruption; it is about abuse of power and extortion.

In the the first link there is an unproven allegation made (in the far past) about the Bidens.
In the second link Vice President Biden's position about the prosecutor is proven correct by the writer of the essay.
The third document appears merely to be the opinion of the disgraced prosecutor who was discharged for corruption and whom you proved to be incompetent in your second link.

AGBF
 
Link 1:
ABC News reported on the Biden "scandal" and could never get Biden to talk.

Link 2:
This 'article' gives it's reader an impression without any facts. It says a lot that your impression of the article is that is was a fact.

The second link cites a "former Ukrainian official" the probe was dormant. Who is this "former Ukrainian official". What's his/her name? Where's his/her statement. Can we trust them?

I'm wary of anything "Bloomberg" reports anyhow. But if Bloomberg reports that the new prosecutor (who took the FIRED prosecutors job) says there's no wrongdoing, I guess we should just take him at his word.

Until a journalist gives me proof from the wider US government, the EU and international institutions concerning Shokin's involvement in corruption, I'll take this statement as hearsay.

Link 3:
The third link is the statement from Viktor Shokin saying that his President told him he was being fired because of the pressure Joe Biden was putting on the Ukrainian government. Joe Biden was withholding 1 Billion dollars from Ukraine until Shokin was fired. Talk about extortion and abuse of power.

You don't find it a bit fishy that Hunter Biden was hired by the Burisma Group 3 weeks after Joe Biden met with Ukrainian officials? You see nothing wrong with the Vice President of the United States withholding $1 BILLION from Ukraine until they fired their top prosecutor. A prosecutor that created a "Specialised Anticorruption Prosecutor's Office, which enabled the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine to conduct legal work, and on creating self-governing prosecution authorities."

My point was:
The people of this country need to remember what truth is. They need to expect truth from their news sources, their elected officials and THEMSELVES.

I, for one, want to know the truth.
 
MMkay then. Your own posts have so many contradictions of what you are and are not willing to believe, depending on your own preconceptions, not sure anyone can tell you. So, the wider US government, the US and the international institutions are telling your that Shokin was dragging his feet. But that's not good enough. Now you are saying a journalist has to "prove" it. But then you also say that you are "wary" of anything that Bloomberg reports (which is a reliable news source) and also insinuate in your last sentence that new sources haven't been telling us the truth.
I think at some point you need to use the law of parsimony here. At this point Trump has told us not to trust or to disregard what the FBI, CIA, Department of Justice, our own government, the Ukrainian President, multiple news sources, the UN, and the whistleblower's statements (I'm sure I'm missing a few) but to believe Trump. Because he has you know never lied about anything like ever. Hell he's incapable of telling the truth when talking about the weather.
Please, pull my other leg.
 
I'm not sure I contradicted myself. I linked to the Reuters article for the timeline. AGBF assumed because I linked the article that I believed everything in the article. I was just simply explaining why I do not believe everything in the article. I do believe the timeline because I cross-checked on multiple media outlets. I think if there was an investigation, I would have even more faith in the timeline.

Just because someone says something doesn't make it true. I require evidence. When the author of the article stated that the prosecutor was corrupt, I need evidence. When President Trump says he didn't extort the President of Ukraine, I need evidence. I don't just believe someone because XYZ says they're a bad, bad guy. I do believe that Joe Biden extorted the Ukrainian government because he said he did. Joe says it's because Shokin was a bad guy. Shokin says it's because he was investigating Joe Biden's son for corruption. Joe Biden met with Ukrainian officials and three weeks later his son had a very lucrative position for a Ukrainian energy company. I think that's enough information for me to conclude something stinks. I would like the truth. According to transcripts from a phone call between President Trump and President Zelensky, President Trump would like to know if there was corruption too.

From the transcript, I don't see how this was an abuse of power or extortion. I don't think it's because I have any preconceptions. But then again, I don't throw up in my mouth every time President Trump's name is mentioned either.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uyWKAGgHIqDEORgjOyo0uq7JOXzhxOQf/preview
 
Yes, Trump would "like to know" if there was corruption. It's just a friendly inquiry. That's why he was holding up government appropriated monies, and making phone calls with his PERSONAL attorney, and then hiding those phone calls on a secret server so no one could find them. Think about it. The Ukrainian President was under huge pressure to get those defense monies due to Russia hostilities. And this is the President of the United States, one of the most powerful men in the world, asking you for this "favor". To give him something, anything he could use. Not just once. Apparently over multiple (I heard 8) phone calls. And dangling release of these monies on fulfilling this "favor". If this Ukraine president had anything he could give to make Trump happy, don't you think he would have done so? Why say no to the president of the US and all his powers when it costs you nothing? What's Biden going to do to him lol?
I don't know if you realize how silly you look to go through such contortions and repeat debunked conspiracies to believe in Trump's nonsense over, basically everyone else except some Fox and Friends, but, it's kind of ridiculous, defedning Trump doing the indefensible. But congratulations! You have passed the test and now qualify to be one of Trump's lawyers. I hear there is an opening now that Cohen is in prison.
 
I find your reply condescending and disrespectful. I will reply within your reply, in bold.

Yes, Trump would "like to know" if there was corruption. It's just a friendly inquiry. That's why he was holding up government appropriated monies (proof?) , and making phone calls with his PERSONAL attorney (I would take my personal attorney everywhere if I was accused of as many impeachable atrocities as President Trump has been), and then hiding those phone calls on a secret server (He's the President of the United States. I'm not sure why you said the server was "secret". Everything he does is classified. I don't think he was being as sneaky as you insinuated) so no one could find them. Think about it (I am thinking about it. I'm thinking about how grateful I am that I live in a country where you are innocent until proven guilty. Proven). The Ukrainian President was under huge pressure to get those defense monies due to Russia hostilities (Stop. The same President that colluded with Russia to influence the election is now giving money to Ukraine to protect themselves from Russia). And this is the President of the United States, one of the most powerful men in the world, asking you for this "favor" (Joe Biden actually did this. If you have proof that Trump did it, please attach). To give him something, anything he could use. Not just once. Apparently over multiple (I heard 8) phone calls. And dangling release of these monies on fulfilling this "favor" (Heard from who? Do you have a source inside the White House?). If this Ukraine president had anything he could give to make Trump happy, don't you think he would have done so? Why say no to the president of the US and all his powers when it costs you nothing? What's Biden going to do to him lol (My intellect fails me. I really don't know what you mean. Joe Biden has already admitted to strong-arming the Ukrainian government into firing the prosecutor in charge of investigating corruption)?
I don't know if you realize how silly you look (condescending) to go through such contortions and repeat debunked conspiracies (I'm not sure what "conspiracies" you speak of. If this is in regards to Joe Biden strong-arming Ukrainian officials, we'll have to agree to disagree. But I think it's disingenuous to say that anything has been debunked. President Trump believes the prosecutor is a good guy. Joe Biden says he was a bad guy. News outlets say other people think he's a bad guy. I want to know what an independent investigation says. You know, experts.) to believe in Trump's nonsense over, basically everyone (Everyone? I guess we'll see if it's indeed everyone in 2020) else except some Fox and Friends, but, it's kind of ridiculous, defedning Trump doing the indefensible (I am not defending Trump of anything. I am saying the released transcript is not damning. I am saying that Joe Biden's actions are questionable and should be investigated). But congratulations (condescending)! You have passed the test and now qualify to be one of Trump's lawyers. I hear there is an opening now that Cohen is in prison (and you might just have a shot at getting Robert Mueller's old job).

This echo chamber is obviously your safe space. I'll see myself out.
 
hmr_mama said:
This echo chamber is obviously your safe space. I'll see myself out.
Click to expand...
1237346uf0ylvkf5u.gif
.... @hmr_mama . where did you come from?. :o
FYI, it is against forum policy to disagree with the left wingers here...
slap4.gif
:lol:
 
@hmr_mama trump has himself repeatedly proved that he is a pathological liar, cheat, corrupt, and blatantly using the presidency for personal gain. To believe that he is concerned about corruption in Ukraine in not rational for those who are capable of rationality. To believe a pathological liar is impossible unless one is delusional.
 
To put in context, "the allegations were among the most serious ever made against an American president, with historians widely calling it "unprecedented" in American history.[9] https://www.businessinsider.com/tru...ine-stupid-and-unprecedented-historian-2019-9
I believe that historians have a better grasp of the seriousness of this issue than hmr_mama does.

Here is a summary of the events
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump–Ukraine_controversy

To explain further the defense well everything the President does is classified is a) not true, and b) the phone call did not contain especially sensitive information but was moved from the system controlled by the NSC, to a separate system that is not connected to the regular system of records. It did not belong there; the only reason is to hide it. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/27/us/politics/nsc-ukraine-call.html

In his complaint, the whistle-blower said that unnamed White House officials told him that they had been “‘directed’ by White House lawyers” to remove the record of the call from the National Security Council’s main computer system and load it into one managed by the agency’s intelligence directorate that is not connected to the main system and that requires special permissions and enhanced security clearances to access....“One White House official described this act as an abuse of this electronic system because the call did not contain anything remotely sensitive from a national security perspective,” the whistle-blower wrote. His complaint also alleged that other, unspecified presidential transcripts had received similar treatment."

unfortunately the Republicans with a few exceptions have been morally bankrupt in supporting Trump over Country. Reprehensible.
 
Last edited:
Did anyone see the Pelosi-Schiff press conference. Powerful stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top