"This is a coverup"

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer

Those records were not his to sequester in such a fashion.

You have a source for that?
I would love to see such.

"White House lawyers directed White House officials to remove the electronic transcript of the Zelensky call from the computer system where such transcripts normally are stored. That transcript then was loaded into a “separate electronic system” that is otherwise used to store and handle classified information of an especially sensitive nature. “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.”

Source

To save you some time I'll go ahead and address your previous assertion that the President can classify whatever he wants, whenever he wants, for whatever reason. That being said, since its obvious nothing in the call pertained to national security, and as many have said that what was in the transcript wasn't criminal in any way: why would Trump move to lock this down and hide it so quickly before it came out?

So, based on the quote from the whistleblower’s complaint, it was White House lawyers who directed White House officials to move the Ukraine call transcripts to a separate electronic system normally reserved for classified communications of an especially sensitive nature, despite the transcript containing nothing of a remotely sensitive nature from a national security standpoint.

So it was not Trump, himself who moved the transcripts, that was done by White House officials.

It appears that the order to move the transcripts originated from White House lawyers.

This is where it gets muddy: where those lawyers acting on their own initiative, without Trump’s knowledge and consent; or where they acting in direct obedience to the orders of the POTUS?

Trump has not, as of yet, made any claim to the effect that this action was taken without his knowledge and/or consent.

We must therefore conclude that the POTUS was aware of the move, expressed his consent. Or that it was standing policy to allow those lawyers to authority, on their own and without additional presidential oversight, to classify communications as rising to the level of especially sensitive enough to warrant transfer to a system intended for national security matters.

It has yet to be determined who, exactly, put a hold on the release of the hundreds of millions of dollars authorized by Congress to aid Ukraine. Nor has any justification for that hold been released.

What is fact, is that the funds were, ultimately released, but not until after the President’s phone call to the newly elected President of Ukraine, in which Trump, per the available record of the call, requests a “favor” from the Ukraine president.

Coincidence? Perhaps. But it does “look” suspiciously like a mob-style “shakedown”, and if it was, would be an abuse of the power of the office of the President.

If Trump knew, prior to his call to the Ukrainian president, that the funds already authorized as payable to Ukraine, had been placed on hold, why did he not use his presidential authority to have them released, and Then call Ukraine?

If Trump didn’t know about the funds being held, why not?

The whistleblower has asked to testify before Congress, and that will hopefully answer a lot of questions.

But we need also to hear from the White House officials who transferred the call to that national security system to discover which White House lawyers directed the transfer, and under what authority. We need to find out why none of those officials “blew the whistle” themselves, if they felt the order was inappropriate.

We also need to hear from those lawyers to find out whether they issued the transfer orders under the expressed direction of the President, or if they acted on their own, and if on their own, by what authority.

We need to find out who authorized the hold placed on the funds Congress intended for Ukraine, and why that hold was effected. And subsequently, who authorized the release of those funds, and why that release was delayed until after the President’s call; was there a “connection”, a “quid pro quo”, or was it all just a coincidence of bungling and timing?

We, as citizens have a need to know these things, we have a right to know.

a reply to: Bhadhidar

Just have to listen to Zelensky.
Sounds like a classic shakedown alright.

a reply to: RadioRobert

Looks more like coercion.

Like right out of ”The Godfather”, Part II, I believe.

I’m not savvy enough to locate and embed a video clip in my post, so I’ll give you a synopsis.

Michael Corleone, the new Godfather and head of the crime family, has been brought before a Congressional hearing committee (the Kefauver committee, I believe) looking into organized crime.

One of his “deputies”, under arrest and facing prison, is brought to testify against Michael.

In an obvious effort to influence his deputy into “keeping his mouth shut” about Michael’s illegal activities, Michael ensures that his deputy sees Michael in the hearing room’s audience, accompanying the deputy’s innocent brother, as a hostage.

The implication is obvious: “Rat me out to Congress, and I’ll kill your brother”.

Is that so very different from eliciting a denial of a “quid pro quo” when a refusal could (and the unstated implication is that it would) result in future funds being delayed, or even denied?

If, as the president of Ukraine, you recognized those funds as being crucial to the survival of your government, perhaps even your country, wouldn’t you “perjure” yourself on the world stage?

a reply to: Bhadhidar


If I was coerced by Trump, I'd scream it as loud as possible.

All he has to do is say, "Trump strong -armed me and threatened to withhold vital military aid unless I prosecuted Biden!" Trump would be gone tomorrow, and the Democrats in the House and the Republican Senate would quickly approve so much funding for the poor Ukraine that Ukrainians would all eat using gilded utensils and use US greenbacks as napkins.


In comparison, your interpretation of this scenario makes no sense.

You know it. I know. Everyone who has two brain cells that rub together knows it.




He shrugs and says he felt no pressure. Doesn't make a lick of sense if anything you said was true.

a reply to: RadioRobert

You claim that you would scream as loud as possible.

And you may be well certain of that.

But you are speaking hypothetically (since, I assume Trump has not, yet, attempted to strong arm you?), and it is difficult to extrapolate from a hypothetical situation to a real one, especially lacking supporting evidence (like what did you do the last time President Trump strong armed you, knowing that you held the fate of millions of your countrymen in your hands).

And of course, how you might react under such circumstances is not necessarily an accurate predictor of how the current Ukrainian President would, or did react.

a reply to: shooterbrody

That's the thing.

For all too many, evidence isn't necessary. By whatever means necessary to get the job done.

The job? Remove Trump.

If that means lie...do it. If it means cheat...do it. Never mind about evidence. Only their hate is required.

a reply to: Bhadhidar


So the all hoopla boils down to: "There is no evidence because there is a coverup". And "I think President Zelensky is too mentally challenged to recognize the obvious; I know I am, and I hope you are too"

You almost have me on board the impeachment train.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: shooterbrody

That's the thing.

For all too many, evidence isn't necessary. By whatever means necessary to get the job done.

The job? Remove Trump.

If that means lie...do it. If it means cheat...do it. Never mind about evidence. Only their hate is required.

The 116th Congress

a reply to: RadioRobert

If evidence has been covered up, it does not mean there is no evidence to be uncovered, assuming that what evidence existed still exists.

And, if there is evidence of a cover-up, then the natural inclination is to determine WHY did the perpetrators of the cover-up feel the need to cover “something” up, and was that “something” itself illegal; making the effort to cover it up illegal as well.

And to your other point, you do understand that the target of a coercion attempt does not need to have acceded to the attempt, the only requirement is that the perpetrator of the coercive attempt intended for the attempt to succeed.

a reply to: Bhadhidar


So now the fantasy hinges on Trump being total rubbish at intimidation? Oooookay, boss...

originally posted by: underwerks
Obviously it does have supporting evidence. The Trump appointed IG investigated the allegations in it and found them to be credible. And Maguire agrees with his assessment.

Investigate away Congress, but I ask you...

How credible, exactly, can they be, if they are all second and third hand... hmmmmmmmmmmmm?

a reply to: tanstaafl

"Officer, I think Bill raped Nadia."

What makes you think that?

"I didn't hear or see anything, but that's what some people told me. They said he coerced her in email. I'm concerned."

Erm, okay. But Nadia herself says she wasn't raped. And there is no other evidence that suggests she was. We read the conversation and there's nothing like that in there.

"That proves he has attempted to cover it up! We need more investigations! Arrest that man!"

I'm beginning to think this is a staged event to take down Trump, a gamble on the future by the powers that be.

A staged event to advance some agenda or the other.

originally posted by: thedigirati
a reply to: shooterbrody

we had 3 safes is our "safe" room one for classified, one for confidential noforn and Top Secret ( this safe was mostly empty )

sometimes confidential noforn ( no foreign distrubution) would get upgraded to TS for a specific time (usually for "training")

it was supposed to be moved from one safe to the other with in 24 hours of classfication changes, (24 hours for upgrade, 48 hours for downgrades and 76 hours for declass.)

we usually had it done it minutes but I had to "clear the room" everytinmg I opened the TS safe, My cohorts did not have TS clerance and hated me (LOL) when I would kick them out. (even my boss the Cpl)

My platon hated me because everytine they would walk past my door I was reading a book, "we never see you working"

"Correct, if you see me doing my job, I'm not doing my job".....

Thank you for your service Devil Dog!

What years were you in-service and what was your MOS? There were more than a few intel related ones. I too am a jarhead enlisting when I graduated from college. My years of service were '83-'86 and my MOS was 0211 - cointel specialist. Semper Gumby, as it were.

My Dad was a Gunny and he never let me live it down that he worked for a living in the corps while I was given the rank of 2nd Lt. after boot camp because of my college degree. When he razzed me about it I used to tell him "shut up and get back to work, Gunny!".

My Dad was in the USMC from 1952-1956 and performed in a few very highly classified operations during the last few battles of the Korean War in 1953. I thought he was an amazing guy and is the reason I enlisted too.

He even won the Navy Cross for his actions during one of the North Korean final offensives in July 1953. He and a small platoon of men were dropped behind enemy lines in the middle of the offensive - god knows why - in a highly classified operation. He was a very young gunny at the time (23 yrs old) and had 3 men with him. They were one of the only ones that survived and make it back across friendly lines. He said they were lucky...lol.

He left the Corp in 1956, went to college and then married my Mom in 1960 after he graduated. My 3 younger sisters and I were all born pretty quickly afterwards, and all the while growing up, he rarely talked about his time in Korea and *never* gave us a straight answer regarding the operation that won him the Navy Cross.

It became a running joke in my family and it was finally agreed by all that it was a highly classified rescue operation for Spanky, Stymie & Alfalfa of The Little Rascals who had been secretly kidnapped by the North Koreans. He loved that one!!

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: shooterbrody

That's the thing.

For all too many, evidence isn't necessary. By whatever means necessary to get the job done.

The job? Remove Trump.

If that means lie...do it. If it means cheat...do it. Never mind about evidence. Only their hate is required.

"We choose truth over facts!"
-Joe Biden

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Wayfarer


Didn't recently uncovered evidence just reveal quotes from the Ukrainian prosecutor saying he WAS fired for investigating Biden's son and Burisma?

Shh! You're ruining it! /s

I interpret this as Trump trying to get Pelosi to pull the trigger on an impeachment inquiry which goes nowhere, thus ending impeachment talks and securing reelection. Good luck trying to get a second impeachment inquiry going before the election next year. A vote on the floor of the House is the endgame. Preferably a role-call vote, so that we can see exactly which reps fell for it. This talk about a "secret vote" being a counter to this is nonsense. Even in such a case, reps who have already made public statements will have telegraphed their position, ensuring their ouster. Meanwhile, once impeachment goes forward and is adjudicated in the Senate(you know, the "upper" house where the states are represented equally, as opposed to the gerrymandered districts of the House) the case is a non-starter. The burden of proof, being on the prosecution, would be insurmountable.

So I say, do it Pelosi. Pull the freaking trigger already! Do it in secret, if you must. You've already lost.

z

originally posted by: IAMTAT

"We choose truth over facts!"
-Joe Biden

Maybe he is closer to the truth than he realized.

ever heard of CROWDSTRIKE


September 27, 2019

Title:
" All Hell Is About To Break Loose: The Truth Hidden By The MSM And The Frantic Panic Behind The 'Impeachment Push' As Media Work Overtime To Protect The Deep State Lies "

Initial reports by the media claimed that President Trump asked the newly elected Ukraine president for a "favor," claiming that favor was to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, and his sons dealing with in Ukraine, but that entire narrative was blown to hell when the president released the transcript of the call itself.
President Trump did ask for a favor, but the Biden dealings were not mentioned until later in the phone call.

The favor was to look into a company called Crowdstrike, with the president stating clearly that he believed Ukraine had the "server."Crowdstrike, for those unaware, was the third party entity that investigated the DNC servers, and offered a draft report claiming that it was Russia that "hacked" the DNC servers. The information from that server was later published publicly by Wikileaks.

It was Crowdstrike's report that was used by the U.S. intelligence agencies to claim that Russia was behind the hack, with the former FBI director James Comey admitting that no American intelligence agency was given access to those DNC "hacked" servers for an independent investigation....

Trump has learned that Ukraine might have the DNC Server or a copy of it on some sort of memory stick... the Biden corruption played on Ukraine since the Obama era is of secondary importance to the Trump phone call to the newest, Ukraine President..

Do yourselves a favor & read the whole Article... & tap those YouTube videos too...
allnewspipeline.com...



the deep state is making the Congress bad-Actors to rig an Impeachment against Trump...

the Russian Collusion failed - now it is the Ukraine collusion & dossier narrative
why is crowdstrike important to the Globalist elites?

was Ukraine the real source of Russian collusion...and the DNC hacks...and ultimately the false dossier used to dupe the Court ?

theres 2 levels of crimes intermixed in this Impeachment Lust.... lowly political corruption on one level AND

treason/spying/capital punishment penalties on the other level

I think Trumps trying to keep the bad actors separated from each other

a reply to: St Udio

Thanks for posting that.

Great info and your analysis of it is top notch!

Keep those cards & letters coming! (so to speak)

BTW - how do you think this will ultimately play out?

Carry on amigo...