Top diplomat in Ukraine gave "damning" testimony

originally posted by: Extorris
FOR EFFS SAKE When John Bolton, Trump's hand picked National Security Advisory, stops a meeting and tells someone to notify the lawyers, something might be just a little off.

Bolton - the well known warmonger who has never seen a country he didn't want to invade and engage in regime change?

The enemy Trump decided to keep close, but was always over-riding?

That Bolton?

originally posted by: Extorris
Call me old fashioned, but I am more concerned with a full showing of evidence complete with attorneys for the President present and able to question and cross-examine etc.

Excellent!! Glad to hear you are 100% against the sham proceedings currently going on in the House.

The Senate convicting and removing him from office is not the goal. Evidence being presented to the public and scrutinized is the goal. Too much obstruction, lies and cover ups. Air it all out and let the Senate vote as they will.

I agree... get it all out into the open, and it will evaporate like dew in the summer morning sun.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Extorris

Yes it is illegal. Snapchat and other private messaging systems used to conduct foreign policy violate the Federal Records Keeping Act and a dozen other laws.

you will of course demonstrate where such was used for foreign policy?

According to the individual and two congressional aides, Sondland, Taylor and former U.S. envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker also used the encrypted messaging app WhatsApp, in addition to regular text messages, to communicate about the administration's Ukraine efforts. The use of WhatsApp has raised questions about the potential problems it could pose for complying with federal record-keeping requirements.

www.nbcnews.com...

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas
a reply to: Extorris

they didnt try to impeach him for an a affair they tried to impeach him for lying about it

It all seems so, so ridiculous compared to a President using US Military Aid to extort a foreign nation for help with his campaign.

Really? help his campainge, he mentions 2016 election

your leap is "YUGE"

1. Biden is NOT the Democrat niminee is he??

can you prove he is??

2 don't YOU like law? there may have been lawbreaking in 2016 involving the ukraine.

do you have Proof there was not??

3 Crowdstrike was owned by a ukrainian, and may have more information

would it not be nice to be able to finally Prove Russia hacked it??

again why do you want to obstuct justice??

a reply to: tanstaafl

You still seem very confused about impeachment proceedings vs. trial.

Willfully so?

a reply to: Extorris
so between volker and sondland and taylor
no foreigners
thanks

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Extorris

Yes it is illegal. Snapchat and other private messaging systems used to conduct foreign policy violate the Federal Records Keeping Act and a dozen other laws.

you will of course demonstrate where such was used for foreign policy?

According to the individual and two congressional aides, Sondland, Taylor and former U.S. envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker also used the encrypted messaging app WhatsApp, in addition to regular text messages, to communicate about the administration's Ukraine efforts. The use of WhatsApp has raised questions about the potential problems it could pose for complying with federal record-keeping requirements.

www.nbcnews.com...

LOL....Federal Record Keeping Act complaint got chucked out the window when they didn't prosecute Hillary for having a server with 10s of thousand of emails on it. She got out of it by simply saying she didnt really understand and there was no intent.....guessing that same excuse could be used here if the accusation is even true.

If the accusation is true then I would find it funny they would have used both forms of communication and really funny none appeared to have taken a screen shot of these horrid allegation of quid pro quo....

Do you understand how laughable this all is. Or are we to believe none of them thought of a screenshot kind of like hillary didnt intend to hide anything....

originally posted by: thedigirati

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas
a reply to: Extorris

they didnt try to impeach him for an a affair they tried to impeach him for lying about it

It all seems so, so ridiculous compared to a President using US Military Aid to extort a foreign nation for help with his campaign.

Really? help his campainge, he mentions 2016 election

your leap is "YUGE"

The demand was specifically for an announcement that they were opening an investigation into Burisma.

Crowdstrike was owned by a ukrainian,

Simply put, that is debunked FAKE NEWS

a reply to: Extorris

I'm sorry I missed it being debunked

I did not see your link

originally posted by: Extorris


Apparently the testimony was enough to make one of Trump's biggest defenders go silent.

I'd say that rather than him going silent, he just didn't think there was anything in there worth talking about and simply couldn't be bothered ..lol

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Extorris
so between volker and sondland and taylor
no foreigners
thanks

The Records Keeping Act applies to conducting Government Business.
Whether they are communicating with foreigners is irrelevant.

You might be confused about foreign surveillance laws.

a reply to: thedigirati

I am still under the impression that Crowdstrike is just the tip of the server issue. The fact they are a cybersecurity firm with heavy ties to Clinton makes me more inclined to believe this traces back to PROMIS and Inslaw and how that software was sold to multiple other countries.

My guess would be that Crowdstrike happened upon some sort of unique identifier for PROMIS and was able to track it worldwide. They rose VERY quickly in the cyber security ranks and somehow became the sole investigator of the DNC server and able to exclude the FBI. That is some serious power in a VERY short time span of company startup.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
a reply to: thedigirati

I am still under the impression that Crowdstrike is just the tip of the server issue.

What server issue?

The fact they are a cybersecurity firm with heavy ties to Clinton

Republicans hired the same cybersecurity firm as the hacked DNC
www.washingtonexaminer.com... dea

When the National Republican Congressional Committee realized its emails were hacked, it called in a familiar firm: CrowdStrike, the same company the Democratic National Committee used in 2016 when suspected Russian hackers stole emails to sow electoral chaos.

The decision to employ CrowdStrike raised eyebrows amid remaining questions about the company's performance in 2016, but several cybersecurity experts are pushing back on suggestions that the firm botched the DNC response, allowing more emails to be taken.

“Their reputation is warranted and they are very good. They have worked for both parties for years now,” said Nicholas Weaver, a computer security expert at the University of California, Berkeley.

Republicans Hired DNC’s Cyber-Firm CrowdStrike, Got Hacked in 2018
dailycaller.com...

a reply to: Extorris

My thought has to do with PROMIS. I added more to my post about it.

Doesnt matter if the GOP hired them as well. Has nothing to do with what I posted.

a reply to: Extorris

can you show where crowstrike used bleachbit on the RNC server??

Link to that for us, come on do it do it do it


where is that link??

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Maybe you can help thedigiarti out and link me to the proof that they are owned by a Ukranian?

Or the proof that a DNC server is in Ukraine, or even that a Physical server existed?

originally posted by: thedigirati
a reply to: Extorris

can you show where crowstrike used bleachbit on the RNC server??

Can you show me where Crowdstrike used bleachbit on the DNC Server?

You seem so deeply confused on the issue.

Once you wrestle through that question please show me evidence that A Physical DNC Server existed...or even an RNC one.

a reply to: Extorris
no problem
just convince me that the entire conversation was government business and not something else

as only the opening statement has been released as far as I know, any other releases you can provide will be appreciated

i dont disagree if it is official business they need to conduct it properly, i just do not interpret the statement released to show evidence of such

how would I be confused about fisa laws?
i am pretty sure I am not


none of which has to do with potus and impeachment

originally posted by: Extorris
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Maybe you can help thedigiarti out and link me to the proof that they are owned by a Ukranian?

Or the proof that a DNC server is in Ukraine, or even that a Physical server existed?

You don't believe the DNC server ever existed?

As far as "owned" by a Ukrainian I can't but I can say that their founder is a senior fellow for the Atlantic Council which is heavily funded by Pinchuk.

As for the server(s)....Trump mentioned that on a call that he had no idea would eventually be made public. We have a VAST intelligence community that updates Trump daily. I have no first hand knowledge of a server being in the Ukraine and that was the first I had heard of it. Suddenly folks are saying it is a conspiracy theory.

So as a world leader speaking to another, do you think Trump would mention things he was fully aware of the answers to? Are you one of the never trumpers that actually believes he is stupid? If you are one of those then I can't really take anything you say seriously.

I am wondering if these hearings are being closed off for a sneaky reason.....one small thing that would make it all really funny.

Do we know if any of these folks are being sworn in? As in, can they be held accountable for their testimony?