Impeachment witness Kent helped bury investigation into Ukrainian election interference

originally posted by: Caractacus

originally posted by: Grambler

www.politico.com...

Here is an interesting article about the source for that politico article:

www.buzzfeednews.com...

This article is just Buzzfeed saying one of the sources for the Politoc article has committed the grievous sin of...... talking to conservative outlets.

No where in this entire article does it even remotely claim leschenko, who i have provided quotes saying he interfered with the NABU, and sytnyk , the head of the NABU, didnt interfere and release the black ledger to help Hillary.

All it says is Chalupa and Yovanavitch deny Chulapa sought Ukrainian interference, offering no proof, and then it through around a bunch of names of conseravtive and russian outlets as if this is proof of something. Just another msm outlet upset that people would dare to speak to any outlet that isnt as virulently anti trump as themselves.

Lest assume that they are totally right about Chalupa.

In the russia interference situation, we had to have a 3 year long investigation into whether or not people on trumps team colluded illegally with their interference. That investigation found no one had.

Yet despite this, we are constantly reminded, by witnesses that testified yesterday, the democrats, and media like buzzfeed that its still an enormous deal that russia interfered.

Yet Buzzfeeds position here is well if Chulupa and the DNC didnt request the help from the Ukrainiians, then who cares if the Ukrainians interfered.

None of this remotely addresses anything at all in my op.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Caractacus

originally posted by: Grambler

www.politico.com...

Here is an interesting article about the source for that politico article:

www.buzzfeednews.com...

This article is just Buzzfeed saying one of the sources for the Politoc article has committed the grievous sin of...... talking to conservative outlets.

I haven't dug into it, but thought you might since you have an interest in the angle.

Stuff like this and his working with Giuliani makes me skeptical.

After leaving the embassy, Telizhenko opened a political consulting firm called Golden Lion Strategies, incorporated in Canada. He’s since been hired by Pavel Fuks, the Ukrainian oligarch who sought a deal to build a Trump Tower Moscow in 2006 and who brought Giuliani to Ukraine in 2017

Same link as above in my post.

a reply to: Caractacus

I dont see how him working with rudy, or talking to Sputnik news or Hannuty is relevant in any way whatsoever.

I could just as easily say Buzzfeed is a known anti trump rag that has worked with otyher msm people and hillary connected people, and infamously first released the Kremlin sourced dossier with no verification to smear trump, therefore this article is garbage.

But thats just becomes a race to the bottom, so I actually read the article and didnt ignore it despite their shadiness. Yet that is exactly what they are suggesting we do with this guy.

Again, lets assume Buzzfeed is right, and Telizhenko is not to be trusted at all. Heck lets assume Chulapa never even talked with anyone in the Ukraine (despite their being evidence to the contrary)

Does that make it ok for Ukrainian officals, including the head of their head investigative agency, to interfere in the 2016 election? Does it make it right for Obamas state department to pressure prosecutors in the Ukraine to drop investigations into those people, or else they would jeopardize the US cooperation?

I say it doesnt. And this buzzfeed article doesnt remotely dispute or even address any of the above.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Caractacus

I dont see how him working with rudy, or talking to Sputnik news or Hannuty is relevant in any way whatsoever.

I could just as easily say Buzzfeed is a known anti trump rag that has worked with otyher msm people and hillary connected people, and infamously first released the Kremlin sourced dossier with no verification to smear trump, therefore this article is garbage.

But thats just becomes a race to the bottom, so I actually read the article and didnt ignore it despite their shadiness. Yet that is exactly what they are suggesting we do with this guy.

Again, lets assume Buzzfeed is right, and Telizhenko is not to be trusted at all. Heck lets assume Chulapa never even talked with anyone in the Ukraine (despite their being evidence to the contrary)

Does that make it ok for Ukrainian officals, including the head of their head investigative agency, to interfere in the 2016 election? Does it make it right for Obamas state department to pressure prosecutors in the Ukraine to drop investigations into those people, or else they would jeopardize the US cooperation?

I say it doesnt. And this buzzfeed article doesnt remotely dispute or even address any of the above.

Ukraine can do what it wants to do. If you can show that the Clinton's bribed them to come up with the dirt or anyone else connected, yes there is a problem, but this does not say this at all. All it says that the Ukranians didn't want Trump to win and took steps to try to prevent that from happening.

a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

No that’s not what it says

It says Ukrainian officials admitted to interfering into an election, and Ukrainian prosecutors were investigating them, and state department official threatened that they wanted the investigation stopped or it would jeopardize cooperation, a more blatant quid pro quo than trump is accused of



Have t we all been told over and over that Russians did interfere in our election, and that’s a huge deal even though no one in trumps team colluded with them in doing so?

Haven’t the media and the Dems touted mueller charging 12 Russian trolls for memes and Facebook posts because it was designed to interfere

I don’t remember the Dems saying “these trolls could do anything they wanted”

No when we have Ukrainian officials admitting to interfering to help Hillary, and state dept officials from the US forcing investigations into them to be dropped, the standard has changed to “well foreign government officials can do anything they want to our elections and it’s no problem”

And that’s all without proving a dnc operative worked with them, which we have credibile reporting is the case

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

I don’t remember the Dems saying “these trolls could do anything they wanted”

Now when we have Ukrainian officials admitting to interfering to help Hillary, and state dept officials from the US forcing investigations into them to be dropped, the standard has changed to “well foreign government officials can do anything they want to our elections and it’s no problem”

Here we are again with the old."If it weren't for double standards.."
I really don't know how they can keep track of all the duplicity, except by believing anything that benefits them is ok while the same would be bad/illegal for others. What a joke.

It seems like Trump's die hard supporters need to don their tinfoil hats to keep coming up and believing the conspiracy theories that exonerate Trump.

It is blatantly obvious to a reasonable person that Trump used his power as president to get dirt on Biden and threaten to without military aide if his demands were not met. This is an abuse of power, it is why are having this impeachment inquiry.

Unfortunately most of our Republican lawmakers do not care about upholding the law or keeping checks and balances in place. They only care about what they perceive is the popular role by their constituents. If support for Trump takes a nosedive by his base as a result of this, expect them to turn on Trump.

Think about it, Trump supporters have resorted to insane conspiracy theories to justify supporting the man.

a reply to: jrod



Insane, right? LOL

a reply to: jrod

I know I am used to this tactic

You have nothing at all in way of a specific response to anything, so you say it’s all a conspiracy theory and move on

By all means tell me what specifically is wrong with the op

a reply to: Grambler

I am curious.

Do you believe that President Trump's intent was to ensure the government of Ukraine was not corrupt for the security of the United States of America?

Or do you believe he tried to use Military Aid to force them to make public statements that he could use to discredit an opponent in his bid to be re-elected in 2020.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Gryphon66

so the politico article was a lie?

The politico article was obviously fake news.


/s

a reply to: EndtheMadnessNow
You are correct. It is to cover up their own misdeeds. But I believe something much more sinister is afoot. This is what has been planned by Bill Ayers and Saul Alinsky all along. Socialism/Marxism has perfused into primary, secondary and college level educations. They have gotten into the media. They have inserted their politicians within the Democratic Party. Finally they have rigged the voting systems by direct tampering with voting machines and flooding our country with illegals. Now finally with this constant barrage of BS by the Marxist party it is wearing on the American public.

A good percentage of the American public will be fooled by these Marxists.They will play on their emotion. Use the pulpit of public opinion to condemn those of us who support the Constitution and our Nation as it stands. It is all in play right now. The Marxists are on the loose and winning. If it goes any further with this insanity it seems to me civil war is surely at hand. I see no other alternative to save this nation from the looney house.

a reply to: Caractacus
You make your statement as if Biden did nothing. Trump is the President. Crimes of the Obama administration were committed. The President has the authority to make sure that our government runs correctly without bribes and overt favors. The whole mess against Trump is made up. Why are you so concerned with Trump when higher crimes have been committed by a past administration against Trump? My last post states that many of the American people will be fooled by this S@%T show. I hope you are not one of them.

a reply to: Caractacus

I don’t know

Neither do you

It is very possible he wanted an investigation into corruption. That’s why he mentioned crowdstrike, which has nothing to do with Biden

If there was a reason to investigate Biden, trump is correct to pursue it because it is investigating corruption

Was the democrats and Obama’s investigation into trump to help them politically?

Is the dem impeachment investigation just to help them politically?

So why is it only a problem with trump?

Meanwhile, Kent admits the state dept pressured Ukraine to drop an investigation about foreign election interference, because it would have looked bad for the democrats

Yet he is the witness complaining about trump doing things for political reasons?

a reply to: Grambler

Tactic?

I just get drunk and write what comes to mind. You are greatly over estimating my intent on here if you think I'm using tactics on a forum.

Your OP is a leading post. It puts the assumption that Ukraine interfered with an election...which is a guano crazy assumption.

a reply to: jrod

I posted quotes from the Ukrainian who interfered, and article showing a Ukraine court found them guilty of interfering

I believe you ignoring that makes you the one making crazy comments

a reply to: Ansuzrune

You didn't answer my question...at all.

Grambler did. Hat tip to him.

originally posted by: tanstaafl
a reply to: Grambler

So... why did Jordan, Nunes or anyone else not pursue this line of questioning? This would have destroyed his credibility in front of everyone in America.

the cold hard truth is there is still a segment of the republican party (establishment leaders ) that HATE trump .

Let me set the wayback machine to the republican primary.
the republican leaders at first mocked trump .
then it became apparent to the level of a blind man in a fur coat that he could win the primary they tried almost as much as the main stream media to destroy trump.

when that failed and the convention came up they tried to split votes, tell the delegates to "vote their conscious" and even openly tried to change the rules. Hell even a small amount actually walked out like children throwing a temper tantrum.

but the VOTERS decided and he handily won the nomination.

but then the "resistance" didnt stop there
remember alot of fellow candidates and "leaders" REFUSED to give support?
remember how the party as a whole was "luke warm" at best and gave minimal / as little as they could support (financial, political, ect) .

but the topper was alot of the supposed promises (ex outright end obamacare, reform / tougher immigration policy, budget cuts/ balanced budget, ect) they said they do if you first gave them the house (we did), the senate (we did) and now the presidency.

trump said bluntly "send XX legislation to my desk and ill sign it"

what happened? NOTHING DONE.

remember all the votes that the republicans BY CLEAR MAJORITY voted for outright repeal of obamacare
but now majority in house, senate (with the nuclear option the DEMOCRATS PUT IN) suddenly they didnt have the votes.


so those same establishment republicans and RINOs who failed to stop trump have a chance to maybe not outright action but quiet inaction are trying to get rid of trump.

so why (even though the supreme court mess where those that didnt support kavanaugh got the boot) openly fight for him now?

scrounger

originally posted by: jrod
It seems like Trump's die hard supporters need to don their tinfoil hats to keep coming up and believing the conspiracy theories that exonerate Trump.

when one starts out with this clearly childish emotional rant that your basically saying you cant counter with facts much less like an adult . so your telegraphing that your going to attempt to bully your opposition , shame, or troll your oppostion into submission or at least silence

It is blatantly obvious to a reasonable person that Trump used his power as president to get dirt on Biden and threaten to without military aide if his demands were not met. This is an abuse of power, it is why are having this impeachment inquiry.


So you now repeat the standard and well used talking points that others have stated OVER AND OVER. but in each retelling you STILL HAVE NOT PROVIDED FACTS to counter the facts already available. Those being THE ACTUAL TRANSCRIPTS of the phone call, the testamony of the president of ukraine (done in multiple outlets), that the aid was given in full, AND NOTHING WAS GIVEN TO TRUMP.
Unfortunately most of our Republican lawmakers do not care about upholding the law or keeping checks and balances in place. They only care about what they perceive is the popular role by their constituents. If support for Trump takes a nosedive by his base as a result of this, expect them to turn on Trump.

Think about it, Trump supporters have resorted to insane conspiracy theories to justify supporting the man.

We have FACTS to "justify" the man

TRANSCRIPT (btw the democrats have been using so save "its not real/complete" )
the testimony of the president of Ukraine . note one source is foreign news outlet (japan I believe) so save the "faux news" canned response.
and the biggest....

ALL AID WAS RECEIVED AND NOTHING PRESENTED THAT YOU CLAIM TRUMP DEMANDED.


again WHERE IS YOUR PROOF TO COUNTER THIS?

just because you tell the same story over and over does not make it the truth no matter what your propaganda minister / aid says.

scrounger