The Trump Whistleblower Extravaganza Thread

[Ibanez]

What?

What rule did Lawfare miss and why does it matter?

There have been 3 witnesses from the Republican witness list that have testified already.

Conservative Treehouse wrote about all this last year when the Dems hired three Lawfare attorneys to help them change the House rules to get ready for their impeachment hearings.

Except, they apparently missed a rule that will essentially allow the Reps to run the hearings for a day as the minority. Of course we know Schiff won't allow that.

Interesting. I read the most recent changes were done while Boehner was still SoH.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ibanez]

The same people that pay themselves $174k/yr for part-time work?

Let me guess, the lazy fucks (both parties) will probably take 4 weeks for Christmas/New Years.

I’m Taking 2 weeks for Christmas. And 4 days for Thanksgiving.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDKJMU]

Just pulled up their calendar. Didn't know they worked so little. 260 weekdays during the year:
Days in session (rough count):
House 126
Senate: 163
https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/ ... l-calendar

[SeattleGriz]

Conservative Treehouse wrote about all this last year when the Dems hired three Lawfare attorneys to help them change the House rules to get ready for their impeachment hearings.

Except, they apparently missed a rule that will essentially allow the Reps to run the hearings for a day as the minority. Of course we know Schiff won't allow that.

Interesting. I read the most recent changes were done while Boehner was still SoH.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ahh, shit! Not the House, but new rules for 116th Congress.

https://t.co/mM1QqXEHF1

[UNI88]

Thanksgiving?

Who in the hell takes 12 days off for Thanksgiving?

I could understand it if they spent the time in their district talking to constituents, business owners and local leaders but they'll probably spend the time asking for donations and feeding at the trough.

[SeattleGriz]

Who in the hell takes 12 days off for Thanksgiving?

I could understand it if they spent the time in their district talking to constituents, business owners and local leaders but they'll probably spend the time asking for donations and feeding at the trough.

https://youtu.be/DQTqB5jZ4Lc

[Ibanez]

Interesting. I read the most recent changes were done while Boehner was still SoH.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ahh, shit! Not the House, but new rules for 116th Congress.

https://t.co/mM1QqXEHF1

I wonder how much they change from Congress to Congress.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AZGrizFan]

Not resuming the hearings until Dec 3.. Why the 12 day break?

Because there’s no sense of urgency because they know it’s a nothing burger. If he REALLY was a lying, conniving crooked traitor wouldn’t they want him out of office as soon as possible?

[AZGrizFan]

Unless you ignore the obvious.

I never said it was wise for Hunter to take that position. It was stupid and the optics aren't good. But there isn't any evidence of wrong doing.

Now if I can just find that article where it was reported that Ukraine re-opened the investigation into Burisma in 2018.

Tell me any....just one....legitimate reason why a company would hire a complete amateur for $50,000 a month?

There’s only one logical reason. He’s the VP’s son. It’s the Occam’s Razor principle in a nutshell.

[Skjellyfetti]

Giuliani associate willing to tell Congress Nunes met with ex-Ukrainian official to get dirt on Biden

A lawyer for an indicted associate of Rudy Giuliani tells CNN that his client is willing to tell Congress about meetings the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee had in Vienna last year with a former Ukrainian prosecutor to discuss digging up dirt on Joe Biden.

The attorney, Joseph A. Bondy, represents Lev Parnas, the recently indicted Soviet-born American who worked with Giuliani to push claims of Democratic corruption in Ukraine. Bondy said that Parnas was told directly by the former Ukrainian official that he met last year in Vienna with Rep. Devin Nunes.

"Mr. Parnas learned from former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Victor Shokin that Nunes had met with Shokin in Vienna last December," said Bondy.

Shokin was ousted from his position in 2016 after pressure from Western leaders, including then-vice president Biden, over concerns that Shokin was not pursuing corruption cases.

Nunes is one of President Donald Trump's key allies in Congress and has emerged as a staunch defender of the President during the impeachment inquiry, which he has frequently labeled as a "circus." Nunes declined repeated requests for comment.

Bondy tells CNN that his client and Nunes began communicating around the time of the Vienna trip. Parnas says he worked to put Nunes in touch with Ukrainians who could help Nunes dig up dirt on Biden and Democrats in Ukraine, according to Bondy.

That information would likely be of great interest to House Democrats given its overlap with the current impeachment inquiry into President Trump, and could put Nunes in a difficult spot.

Bondy tells CNN his client is willing to comply with a Congressional subpoena for documents and testimony as part of the impeachment inquiry in a manner that would allow him to protect his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

Bondy suggested in a tweet on Friday that he was already speaking to House Intel though the committee declined to comment.

Giuliani has told CNN previously about his conversations with Shokin and  Parnas, saying that this was part of his legal work for his client, President Trump. Parnas' claims about Nunes' alleged involvement offers a new wrinkle and for the first time suggests the efforts to dig up dirt on the Bidens involved a member of Congress.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/22/poli ... ssion=true

[SDHornet]

From a few days ago:

phpBB [video]

phpBB [video]

Nailed it.

[houndawg]

Not resuming the hearings until Dec 3.. Why the 12 day break?

Because there’s no sense of urgency because they know it’s a nothing burger. If he REALLY was a lying, conniving crooked traitor wouldn’t they want him out of office as soon as possible?

If he really wasn't a crook wouldn't he say so under oath?

[SeattleGriz]

Giuliani associate willing to tell Congress Nunes met with ex-Ukrainian official to get dirt on Biden

A lawyer for an indicted associate of Rudy Giuliani tells CNN that his client is willing to tell Congress about meetings the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee had in Vienna last year with a former Ukrainian prosecutor to discuss digging up dirt on Joe Biden.

The attorney, Joseph A. Bondy, represents Lev Parnas, the recently indicted Soviet-born American who worked with Giuliani to push claims of Democratic corruption in Ukraine. Bondy said that Parnas was told directly by the former Ukrainian official that he met last year in Vienna with Rep. Devin Nunes.

"Mr. Parnas learned from former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Victor Shokin that Nunes had met with Shokin in Vienna last December," said Bondy.

Shokin was ousted from his position in 2016 after pressure from Western leaders, including then-vice president Biden, over concerns that Shokin was not pursuing corruption cases.

Nunes is one of President Donald Trump's key allies in Congress and has emerged as a staunch defender of the President during the impeachment inquiry, which he has frequently labeled as a "circus." Nunes declined repeated requests for comment.

Bondy tells CNN that his client and Nunes began communicating around the time of the Vienna trip. Parnas says he worked to put Nunes in touch with Ukrainians who could help Nunes dig up dirt on Biden and Democrats in Ukraine, according to Bondy.

That information would likely be of great interest to House Democrats given its overlap with the current impeachment inquiry into President Trump, and could put Nunes in a difficult spot.

Bondy tells CNN his client is willing to comply with a Congressional subpoena for documents and testimony as part of the impeachment inquiry in a manner that would allow him to protect his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

Bondy suggested in a tweet on Friday that he was already speaking to House Intel though the committee declined to comment.

Giuliani has told CNN previously about his conversations with Shokin and  Parnas, saying that this was part of his legal work for his client, President Trump. Parnas' claims about Nunes' alleged involvement offers a new wrinkle and for the first time suggests the efforts to dig up dirt on the Bidens involved a member of Congress.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/22/poli ... ssion=true

Guess we'll see who is right. CNN or Nunes.

In an exclusive statement provided to Breitbart News, Nunes said: “These demonstrably false and scandalous stories published by the Daily Beast and CNN are the perfect example of defamation and reckless disregard for the truth. Some political operative offered these fake stories to at least five different media outlets before finding someone irresponsible enough to publish them.

[kalm]

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/22/poli ... ssion=true

Guess we'll see who is right. CNN or Nunes.

In an exclusive statement provided to Breitbart News, Nunes said: “These demonstrably false and scandalous stories published by the Daily Beast and CNN are the perfect example of defamation and reckless disregard for the truth. Some political operative offered these fake stories to at least five different media outlets before finding someone irresponsible enough to publish them.

So the “political operative is Parnas’s lawyer?

[Ibanez]

I never said it was wise for Hunter to take that position. It was stupid and the optics aren't good. But there isn't any evidence of wrong doing.

Now if I can just find that article where it was reported that Ukraine re-opened the investigation into Burisma in 2018.

Tell me any....just one....legitimate reason why a company would hire a complete amateur for $50,000 a month?

There’s only one logical reason. He’s the VP’s son. It’s the Occam’s Razor principle in a nutshell.

I don’t deny that. Hell, if you’ve read the posts between CId and I, you’ll see that we have both said it’s was shady. Unethical even. But what does that have to do with the national security or best interests of America in 2019?

How is that question so fucking difficult for conservatives to answer? I’ve asked it multiple times and each time someone deflects or asks a question about something else.

You won’t answer it. BDK and SG won’t. What gives? Is it that you can’t? You dont understand how it’s to our benefit? You just won’t?

But you’re right...Occam’s Razor. They can’t defend it. Hunter wasn’t an elected official. His father yes, but his father didn’t work for Burisma and there’s no evidence of any wrongdoing. Even if there is - again...how does knowing that and having Ukraine investigate in exchange for aid to our benefit?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CAA Flagship]

Hunter wasn’t an elected official. His father yes, but his father didn’t work for Burisma and there’s no evidence of any wrongdoing. Even if there is - again...how does knowing that and having Ukraine investigate in exchange for aid to our benefit?

Take the aid part out of the equation for a second, since when is "knowing of any wrongdoing" not a benefit to the US?

[kalm]

Hunter wasn’t an elected official. His father yes, but his father didn’t work for Burisma and there’s no evidence of any wrongdoing. Even if there is - again...how does knowing that and having Ukraine investigate in exchange for aid to our benefit?

Take the aid part out of the equation for a second, since when is "knowing of any wrongdoing" not a benefit to the US?

Ah yes...we are SO in to snuffing out corruption around the world even when it doesn’t benefit us.

I miss Cluck U.

[CAA Flagship]

Take the aid part out of the equation for a second, since when is "knowing of any wrongdoing" not a benefit to the US?

Ah yes...we are SO in to snuffing out corruption around the world even when it doesn’t benefit us.

I miss Cluck U.

Stay focused, kalm. And stay on your meds.

[Ibanez]

Hunter wasn’t an elected official. His father yes, but his father didn’t work for Burisma and there’s no evidence of any wrongdoing. Even if there is - again...how does knowing that and having Ukraine investigate in exchange for aid to our benefit?

Take the aid part out of the equation for a second, since when is "knowing of any wrongdoing" not a benefit to the US?

Add CAA to the list of people who refuse to answer the question. I'm beginning to see a pattern here. Where is the link between finding out if Burisma/Biden did something bad years ago and the USA giving money and weapons to Ukraine in order to fight Russia? I'm begging for someone that leans towards Team Trump to logically explain it. What does one have to do with the other?


Don't take the aid part out b/c that is the situation we're dealing with. Answer the question. Let's try to compare apples to apples.

Btw, you read my post about nobody answering a question or they respond with a question. What do you do? exactly that? Why are Republicans afraid to answer basic questions? My sense is that they know something fucked up occurred and instead of saying, " there's no defense to what Trump attempted to do" they just muddy the waters with debunked conspiracy theories, conjecture, straw man arguments, saying b/c Trump didn't say the magic words to one person he didn't have the intent at all, saying attempted crimes are ok b/c they weren't acted upon and more absurd, partisan BS.

[AZGrizFan]

Tell me any....just one....legitimate reason why a company would hire a complete amateur for $50,000 a month?

There’s only one logical reason. He’s the VP’s son. It’s the Occam’s Razor principle in a nutshell.

I don’t deny that. Hell, if you’ve read the posts between CId and I, you’ll see that we have both said it’s was shady. Unethical even. But what does that have to do with the national security or best interests of America in 2019?

How is that question so fucking difficult for conservatives to answer? I’ve asked it multiple times and each time someone deflects or asks a question about something else.

You won’t answer it. BDK and SG won’t. What gives? Is it that you can’t? You dont understand how it’s to our benefit? You just won’t?

But you’re right...Occam’s Razor. They can’t defend it. Hunter wasn’t an elected official. His father yes, but his father didn’t work for Burisma and there’s no evidence of any wrongdoing. Even if there is - again...how does knowing that and having Ukraine investigate in exchange for aid to our benefit?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’ll answer it. Because if Biden is willing to do THAT (not to mention the $130 million contract given to Hunter’s new company during Obama/Biden’s last term), I don’t want that motherfucker anywhere near the White House. We’re worried about the optics of Trump holding a G-7 at his resort, but Biden doing THAT shit doens’t even cause a ripple in the media?

[CID1990]

Take the aid part out of the equation for a second, since when is "knowing of any wrongdoing" not a benefit to the US?

Add CAA to the list of people who refuse to answer the question. I'm beginning to see a pattern here. Where is the link between finding out if Burisma/Biden did something bad years ago and the USA giving money and weapons to Ukraine in order to fight Russia? I'm begging for someone that leans towards Team Trump to logically explain it. What does one have to do with the other?


Don't take the aid part out b/c that is the situation we're dealing with. Answer the question. Let's try to compare apples to apples.

Btw, you read my post about nobody answering a question or they respond with a question. What do you do? exactly that? Why are Republicans afraid to answer basic questions? My sense is that they know something fucked up occurred and instead of saying, " there's no defense to what Trump attempted to do" they just muddy the waters with debunked conspiracy theories, conjecture, straw man arguments, saying b/c Trump didn't say the magic words to one person he didn't have the intent at all, saying attempted crimes are ok b/c they weren't acted upon and more absurd, partisan BS.

They don’t have anything to do with one another.

Let’s take away the Biden angle as a hypothetical though-

And add in that the Trump admin was asking for a broad front attack on corruption in Ukraine.

In that situation, the whole thing would not only be appropriate, but also commonplace. We do it all the time - we are a huge supplier of all kinds of financial and other aid and we never give it away... it is almost always predicated on the recipient doing something for us.

So far there is no real proof that Trump directed anyone to ask Ukraine to specifically look into Burisma with the intent of getting dirt on the Bidens. That’s why some people are characterize this whole exchange as being above-board.... because without that one element, it really is a “we do it all the time” situation. And that’s why the whole exercise is going to wind up being a waste of time. Because without Trump telling Bolton or others “tell Ukraine they need to investigate Burisma so I can get dirt on Biden” then there will be political cover for Republicans to go against impeachment. There might even be a Dem or two in the Senate who won’t vote to convict, either.

[Skjellyfetti]

I will agree that if you remove the Biden angle and add in a broad front attack on corruption in Ukraine... this story goes away.

[Ibanez]

I don’t deny that. Hell, if you’ve read the posts between CId and I, you’ll see that we have both said it’s was shady. Unethical even. But what does that have to do with the national security or best interests of America in 2019?

How is that question so fucking difficult for conservatives to answer? I’ve asked it multiple times and each time someone deflects or asks a question about something else.

You won’t answer it. BDK and SG won’t. What gives? Is it that you can’t? You dont understand how it’s to our benefit? You just won’t?

But you’re right...Occam’s Razor. They can’t defend it. Hunter wasn’t an elected official. His father yes, but his father didn’t work for Burisma and there’s no evidence of any wrongdoing. Even if there is - again...how does knowing that and having Ukraine investigate in exchange for aid to our benefit?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’ll answer it. Because if Biden is willing to do THAT (not to mention the $130 million contract given to Hunter’s new company during Obama/Biden’s last term), I don’t want that motherfucker anywhere near the White House. We’re worried about the optics of Trump holding a G-7 at his resort, but Biden doing THAT shit doens’t even cause a ripple in the media?

So your answer is that inviting foreign interference into our elections and withholding money from them is ok because you don’t want Biden to be president.

That’s comical. It’s ok to abuse power as long as my chosen political party is doing it so they can’t remain in power. Oy!!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ibanez]

Add CAA to the list of people who refuse to answer the question. I'm beginning to see a pattern here. Where is the link between finding out if Burisma/Biden did something bad years ago and the USA giving money and weapons to Ukraine in order to fight Russia? I'm begging for someone that leans towards Team Trump to logically explain it. What does one have to do with the other?


Don't take the aid part out b/c that is the situation we're dealing with. Answer the question. Let's try to compare apples to apples.

Btw, you read my post about nobody answering a question or they respond with a question. What do you do? exactly that? Why are Republicans afraid to answer basic questions? My sense is that they know something fucked up occurred and instead of saying, " there's no defense to what Trump attempted to do" they just muddy the waters with debunked conspiracy theories, conjecture, straw man arguments, saying b/c Trump didn't say the magic words to one person he didn't have the intent at all, saying attempted crimes are ok b/c they weren't acted upon and more absurd, partisan BS.

They don’t have anything to do with one another.

Let’s take away the Biden angle as a hypothetical though-

And add in that the Trump admin was asking for a broad front attack on corruption in Ukraine.

In that situation, the whole thing would not only be appropriate, but also commonplace. We do it all the time - we are a huge supplier of all kinds of financial and other aid and we never give it away... it is almost always predicated on the recipient doing something for us.

So far there is no real proof that Trump directed anyone to ask Ukraine to specifically look into Burisma with the intent of getting dirt on the Bidens. That’s why some people are characterize this whole exchange as being above-board.... because without that one element, it really is a “we do it all the time” situation. And that’s why the whole exercise is going to wind up being a waste of time. Because without Trump telling Bolton or others “tell Ukraine they need to investigate Burisma so I can get dirt on Biden” then there will be political cover for Republicans to go against impeachment. There might even be a Dem or two in the Senate who won’t vote to convict, either.

I agree IF that is what happened. But it’s not that black and white.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CID1990]

They don’t have anything to do with one another.

Let’s take away the Biden angle as a hypothetical though-

And add in that the Trump admin was asking for a broad front attack on corruption in Ukraine.

In that situation, the whole thing would not only be appropriate, but also commonplace. We do it all the time - we are a huge supplier of all kinds of financial and other aid and we never give it away... it is almost always predicated on the recipient doing something for us.

So far there is no real proof that Trump directed anyone to ask Ukraine to specifically look into Burisma with the intent of getting dirt on the Bidens. That’s why some people are characterize this whole exchange as being above-board.... because without that one element, it really is a “we do it all the time” situation. And that’s why the whole exercise is going to wind up being a waste of time. Because without Trump telling Bolton or others “tell Ukraine they need to investigate Burisma so I can get dirt on Biden” then there will be political cover for Republicans to go against impeachment. There might even be a Dem or two in the Senate who won’t vote to convict, either.

I agree IF that is what happened. But it’s not that black and white.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well obviously - that’s why I said my scenario was a hypothetical. We may never get evidence of Trump actually ordering his people to have Ukraine target Biden in an investigation

BTW did I call it on Bolton, or what? Dude is chomping at the bit