Impeachment Investigators Got Rudy Giuliani's Phone Records

This is worth noting:

The call logs in the endnotes include a few of Giuliani’s calls with Nunes and with Solomon. Two calls from Parnas to Nunes are set forth in the log on page 157: one for 1:00, one for 0.02. There is one call from Nunes to Parnas, but the duration indicated is 0:00.

Oh the horror! One guy called Nunes and they talked for a minute. Same guy called again, and that call lasted 2 seconds. Then, oh the perfidy ... Nunes called this time for ... wait for it ... not even a minute! Who knows what deep, dark scheming took place in that not even 60 sec. span of time.

originally posted by: fringeofthefringe
Are teachers and garbage collectors civil servants? Do they have special 1st amendment rights?

I'm talking specifically about elected officials, if that wasn't clear since we're talking about Nunes than there's not much I can do to help you.

If you want somewhere to start your education you can begin with New York Times Co. v. Sullivan and work you way forward. I doubt you will and instead stick with your 'hur-dee-dur, you iz never Trump' tact.

Impeachment Investigators Got Rudy Giuliani's Phone Records

Remember people.

Schiffs so called facts don't back up any warrants.

Unless the judge was a hack like these so called legal experts testfying today( just so happen to have a long history with Schiffs party).

Giving them lots and Lots O money.

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Byrd
wow
why do you need to see the warrant?

mkay
so then spying on your political opponent is now fair game?

the days we live in

What will a warrant tell you? How familiar are you with criminal law? Could you tell on what grounds a search might be deemed illegal under law and which laws apply?

If you aren't a lawyer, asking to see a warrant is a little like asking to see the proof of the C parameter in this paper: link.springer.com... (in other words, the non-specialist reader can't tell if it's valid or not.)

In this age of noise and division, if you really want to see the warrant and if it's legal, contact a real lawyer (like the youtube channel, Legal Eagles) and ask them for an opinion.

Don't rely on an ATS member's ability to tell if it's legal or not... that was my point.

I think the point was more like, "Let's make sure they even had a properly executed warrant," and not, "Let's read the warrant over coffee."

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: fringeofthefringe


There is indication that President ''X'' has solicited a foreign nation to dig up dirt on a political rival. Should we look into that possiblity or just ask President ''X'' if it is true or not?

There is indication that a loyal congressional teammate of President ''X'' has also worked to dig up dirt on a political rival of his boss, President ''X''. Should we look into that possibility or just ask President ''X'' and his crony if it is true or not?

I do get the felling that were are being told to shut up, and that anything that someone more than likely has done wrong should not be dealt with in case it's bad for the country.

I guess the next tale will be...is that Giuliani was secretly working with the Democratic party, the FBI, the CIA, MI5, MI6 and the NCTC, to entrap Trump.

a reply to: smurfy

So they got phone records on the 2 Ukrainian guys, and they discovered a grand total of 1 min and 2 secs phone time with Devin Nunes, some are saying this implicates him as a conspirator? What do you think they could have schemed about in that time frame please.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: fringeofthefringe

No testimony indicating crime? I refer you to Sondlands testimony.

oh this old thing?
www.foxnews.com...

While not mentioning it in his opening statement, Sondland eventually said under questioning that Trump told him "I want nothing, I want no quid pro quo" -- apparently concerning whether military aid and more was tied to his requests for politically advantageous investigations from Ukraine.

or perhaps this?

“When the chairman asked you about security assistance dollars, you said there had to be a public announcement from Zelensky,” Jordan said. “So I’m asking you a simple question, when did that happen?”

“Never did,” Sondland replied.

Sondland testified about a conversation with Trump where he asked the president what he wanted from Ukraine.

“And it was a very short, abrupt conversation,” the ambassador said. “He was not in a good mood. And he just said, ‘I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.’ Something to that effect.”

what trump ACTUALLY SAID indicates absolutely no crime

so again please tell me how what sondland testified to shows any crime by trump?

I think we need to get phone records of all DNC house of reps.

originally posted by: neo96
Impeachment Investigators Got Rudy Giuliani's Phone Records

Remember people.

Schiffs so called facts don't back up any warrants.

Unless the judge was a hack like these so called legal experts testfying today( just so happen to have a long history with Schiffs party).

Giving them lots and Lots O money.

I dont think there was any judge
I think schiff gave a subpoena to att and they complied

this stinks like month old catfish chum

originally posted by: visitedbythem
I think we need to get phone records of all DNC house of reps.

Don't stop there.

Raid Perkins Coie.

Raiding lawyer offices is all legal like now.

We have the actual transcript that shows it did not happen.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

REALLY??? This is BREAKING news!!

Please, post a link to this 'actual transcript'!Several others here have mentioned this transcript, but not one can provide a link.

Hmmmm, starting to think it doesn't actually exist.

a reply to: shooterbrody

I dont think there was any judge

I don't either since Schiff declined to comment about how he got them.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif.,declined to say how the House obtained the phone records.

www.nbcnews.com...

Nothing Schiff has done has been ethical.

originally posted by: Byrd

Asking to "see the warrant" is not very useful unless you happen to be a New York lawyer currently practicing.

Don't you think his wording to "see the warrants" doesn't mean he wants to actually read the warrants but to imply he wants to see the proof to justify all this?

Politicians HAD been operating under the idea that they could do what they liked and that power and money protected them. They are beginning to see that this is no longer true.

I can agree to a point, but the left in recent times have come to weaponize different powers/movements etc. We saw it with Obama with the IRS, DOJ, FBI, partisan bureaucrats, federal judges, FISA, House committees etc. tenfold of what Trump is even believed to have done. Since Trump has taken office the goal to impeach started on day one, and I beg you to dispute that in anyway. Much of what you are getting to with your statement above are further weaponizing from the left. I feel the left has push us back into the McCarthy era, or J. Edgar Hoover's FBI.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: smurfy

So they got phone records on the 2 Ukrainian guys, and they discovered a grand total of 1 min and 2 secs phone time with Devin Nunes, some are saying this implicates him as a conspirator? What do you think they could have schemed about in that time frame please.

It's especially pathetic given how Schiff was openly coaching his "witnesses" throughout the hearings, and shielding them from politically inconvenient questions from Republicans (like Nunes). Yo, Adam: ever hear of the crime of Witness Tampering?

a reply to: ketsuko

Parnas called Nunes earlier in the day on April 12. That is the one minute call. Nunes then tried to return the call twice. These are the two second and zero second calls. Parnas then got back to Nunes that same day and they had a conversation that lasted almost nine minutes.

That same day Parnas also had conversations with Giuliani and Solomon.

a reply to: neo96

Nothing Schiff has done has been ethical.

I agree.
He is an example of why "the swamp needs draining".
Tho he is not the only one.

a reply to: shooterbrody

The # has immunity.

They ALL do.

That needs to change.

originally posted by: neo96
Impeachment Investigators Got Rudy Giuliani's Phone Records

Remember people.

Schiffs so called facts don't back up any warrants.

Unless the judge was a hack like these so called legal experts testfying today( just so happen to have a long history with Schiffs party).

Giving them lots and Lots O money.

Or, your wrong, and Schiffs facts are just plain ole facts. Occam's razor.

a reply to: ErEhWoN

Hill and Sondland.

Hill was a 'facts' witness that undercut Steele dossier.

Sondland testfied, THERE WAS NO QUID PRO QUO.

Just the assumption of an accused 'womanizer'.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Thank you for pointing out another reason for the president to review the aid package to Ukraine and the ongoing corruption there.
Seems he is being impeached for doing his job.

www.justice.gov...

U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said: “As alleged in the Indictment, the defendants broke the law to gain political influence while avoiding disclosure of who was actually making the donations and where the money was coming from. They sought political influence not only to advance their own financial interests but to advance the political interests of at least one foreign official – a Ukrainian government official who sought the dismissal of the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine. Protecting the integrity of our elections – and protecting our elections from unlawful foreign influence – are core functions of our campaign finance laws. And as this Office has made clear, we will not hesitate to investigate and prosecute those who engage in criminal conduct that draws into question the integrity of our political process.”

Why are you mad it appears trump wants to fight the on going corruption and protect election integrity?

Attempting to connect this to the president is folly.
The defendants contacting their lawyer or an elected official while attempting to peddle influence would not be uncommon?
But it still shows NO CRIME OR EVEN SUSPICION OF SUCH to warrant the violation of 4th amendment rights of American citizens clearly not involved.