Again....Whistleblower Lawyer Worked For Schumer and Clintons

[mudwhistle]

I smell another hoax:

Meet the Attorneys Representing the Whistleblower Who Helped Launch the Impeachment Inquiry

"Lawyer Andrew Bakaj is "one of the best people suited for this representation," says his co-counsel Mark Zaid.

We don’t know the identity of the whistleblower who reportedly raised the alarm about Donald Trump‘s phone call with the Ukrainian president (you know, the one that finally kickstarted an impeachment inquiry). But we at least know the identity of their lawyers.


Bakaj also served at the State Department, and worked for Democratic senators Daniel Moynihan, Charles Schumer, and Hillary Clinton earlier in his career."

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

"You will know them by the fruits of their labor". This whole scam stinks to high heaven.

 

[mudwhistle]

"You will know them by the fruits of their labor". This whole scam stinks to high heaven.

Lying, changing the rules, typical coup attempt similar to the Russian Collusion hoax.

 

[Oddball]

 

[Pogo]

I smell another hoax:

Meet the Attorneys Representing the Whistleblower Who Helped Launch the Impeachment Inquiry

"Lawyer Andrew Bakaj is "one of the best people suited for this representation," says his co-counsel Mark Zaid.

We don’t know the identity of the whistleblower who reportedly raised the alarm about Donald Trump‘s phone call with the Ukrainian president (you know, the one that finally kickstarted an impeachment inquiry). But we at least know the identity of their lawyers.


Bakaj also served at the State Department, and worked for Democratic senators Daniel Moynihan, Charles Schumer, and Hillary Clinton earlier in his career."

............................................................................................................................................. And?

 

[Billy_Bob]

why do so many gutless trump stooges resort to lies when they cannot defend trump from the phone call he admits he made to bribe the Ukrainian president!! even trump admits what he said to the Ukrainian president was true, and they still try to defend his corrupt, lying ass.

Please post up this "bribe" as I have read the transcript and no such event ever occurred..

 

[Silent Warrior]

why do so many gutless trump stooges resort to lies when they cannot defend trump from the phone call he admits he made to bribe the Ukrainian president!! even trump admits what he said to the Ukrainian president was true, and they still try to defend his corrupt, lying ass.

Read the transcript and maybe you won't spout such foolishness.

 

[2aguy]

I smell another hoax:

Meet the Attorneys Representing the Whistleblower Who Helped Launch the Impeachment Inquiry

"Lawyer Andrew Bakaj is "one of the best people suited for this representation," says his co-counsel Mark Zaid.

We don’t know the identity of the whistleblower who reportedly raised the alarm about Donald Trump‘s phone call with the Ukrainian president (you know, the one that finally kickstarted an impeachment inquiry). But we at least know the identity of their lawyers.


Bakaj also served at the State Department, and worked for Democratic senators Daniel Moynihan, Charles Schumer, and Hillary Clinton earlier in his career."

It isn't hard to tell it's a hoax....the democrats made it up...therefore, it is a hoax.

 

[2aguy]

why do so many gutless trump stooges resort to lies when they cannot defend trump from the phone call he admits he made to bribe the Ukrainian president!! even trump admits what he said to the Ukrainian president was true, and they still try to defend his corrupt, lying ass.

Oh....I get it...... you didn't read the transcript, you don't understand the Constitution....and you are just stupid...

Got it....

 

[2aguy]

don't believe me, believe the very conservative legal analyst of Fox News, State TV Itself, in his own words. How can even a dumbass trump stooge believe a conservative Fox legal expert would say Trump's phone call shows how corrupt and impeachable if he did not really believe it? Are these stooges even capable of READING? read the partial transcript that TRUMP ADMITS IS ACCURATE....how can they keep defending the indefensible?

Judge Andrew Napolitano: In Ukraine call, Trump apparently personally and directly committed a crime..

"After special counsel Robert Mueller delivered his report of the relationship between the Trump campaign and Russian agents to the Department of Justice, and then testified about what he discovered, Trump claimed exoneration. Mueller's report found some evidence of a conspiracy -- 127 telephone calls and numerous meetings -- between Trump's campaign and Russian agents, but not enough to charge the crime of conspiracy to solicit foreign assistance in a domestic political campaign.

Mueller also found 10 instances in which Trump had committed the criminal offense of obstruction of justice by his personal efforts to derail the Mueller investigation. Mueller did not seek an indictment of Trump for behavior that would have gotten any other person in America indicted because Mueller knew that his boss, Attorney General William Barr, who needed to sign off on such an indictment, would not do so.

Trump felt exonerated and emboldened. At the same time that the country was debating publicly what the Mueller report revealed about his behavior, the president instructed the Treasury Department to hold off on the licenses it had provisionally granted to American arms manufacturers to sell a quarter of a billion dollars in arms to Ukraine. He also instructed the State Department to hold off on the delivery of $140 million in direct aid to Ukraine that Congress told him to deliver.

Also at the same time, he began his conversations with his Ukrainian counterpart, during which he urged a criminal investigation of the younger Biden, even though Biden's commercial activities in Ukraine while his father was vice president have produced no credible evidence of criminal behavior.

Yet, as if to flaunt the Mueller findings, Trump apparently personally and directly committed the crime for which he claimed Mueller exonerated him.

What was that crime? It was the attempt to solicit foreign assistance for his campaign. It was the manipulation of American foreign and military policy for a corrupt purpose. A corrupt purpose puts the president personally above the needs of the nation.

In short, the whistleblower alleges that Trump offered a bribe to his Ukrainian counterpart: Go after my likely opponent's son and you will get the $390 million in goods and cash that we are holding up.
The complaint related that Trump held up the sale of $250 million worth of military equipment and the delivery of $140 million in congressionally mandated foreign aid until the government of Ukraine opened a criminal investigation against the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, the leading Democratic contender to oppose Trump in the 2020 presidential election.

Can the president of the United States legally ask a foreign government to provide assistance to his reelection? In a word: No.

There is no such wiggle room for bribery. The Constitution is quite clear that "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" shall constitute a basis for impeachment.

Was Trump offering to bribe the Ukrainian president? The circumstantial evidence is: Yes. The transcript of Trump's critical conversation with the Ukrainian president shows he asked his counterpart to coordinate with American authorities to prosecute the son of his likely political opponent in 2020. That is the solicitation of something of value from a foreign government -- a felony.

Within a week of that conversation, Trump put his hold on the $390 million in aid. That's when the Ukrainian president got the message.

Where does this leave us? We are at the precipice of a constitutional crisis. We have a president whose apparent corruption is palpable. We have a Constitution that prescribes a remedy. We have an attorney general who acts as if he were the president's personal lawyer. We have Republicans in Congress who see and hear no evil from this president."

And Joe Degenova, a Former Federal Prosecutor, and Mark Levin, both say he is wrong.....you twit. It is rumored that the Judge wanted a position from Trump and didn't get it...now he is doing payback...

 

[task0778]

don't believe me, believe the very conservative legal analyst of Fox News, State TV Itself, in his own words. How can even a dumbass trump stooge believe a conservative Fox legal expert would say Trump's phone call shows how corrupt and impeachable if he did not really believe it? Are these stooges even capable of READING? read the partial transcript that TRUMP ADMITS IS ACCURATE....how can they keep defending the indefensible?

Judge Andrew Napolitano: In Ukraine call, Trump apparently personally and directly committed a crime..

"After special counsel Robert Mueller delivered his report of the relationship between the Trump campaign and Russian agents to the Department of Justice, and then testified about what he discovered, Trump claimed exoneration. Mueller's report found some evidence of a conspiracy -- 127 telephone calls and numerous meetings -- between Trump's campaign and Russian agents, but not enough to charge the crime of conspiracy to solicit foreign assistance in a domestic political campaign.

Mueller also found 10 instances in which Trump had committed the criminal offense of obstruction of justice by his personal efforts to derail the Mueller investigation. Mueller did not seek an indictment of Trump for behavior that would have gotten any other person in America indicted because Mueller knew that his boss, Attorney General William Barr, who needed to sign off on such an indictment, would not do so.

Trump felt exonerated and emboldened. At the same time that the country was debating publicly what the Mueller report revealed about his behavior, the president instructed the Treasury Department to hold off on the licenses it had provisionally granted to American arms manufacturers to sell a quarter of a billion dollars in arms to Ukraine. He also instructed the State Department to hold off on the delivery of $140 million in direct aid to Ukraine that Congress told him to deliver.

Also at the same time, he began his conversations with his Ukrainian counterpart, during which he urged a criminal investigation of the younger Biden, even though Biden's commercial activities in Ukraine while his father was vice president have produced no credible evidence of criminal behavior.

Yet, as if to flaunt the Mueller findings, Trump apparently personally and directly committed the crime for which he claimed Mueller exonerated him.

What was that crime? It was the attempt to solicit foreign assistance for his campaign. It was the manipulation of American foreign and military policy for a corrupt purpose. A corrupt purpose puts the president personally above the needs of the nation.

In short, the whistleblower alleges that Trump offered a bribe to his Ukrainian counterpart: Go after my likely opponent's son and you will get the $390 million in goods and cash that we are holding up.
The complaint related that Trump held up the sale of $250 million worth of military equipment and the delivery of $140 million in congressionally mandated foreign aid until the government of Ukraine opened a criminal investigation against the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, the leading Democratic contender to oppose Trump in the 2020 presidential election.

Can the president of the United States legally ask a foreign government to provide assistance to his reelection? In a word: No.

There is no such wiggle room for bribery. The Constitution is quite clear that "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" shall constitute a basis for impeachment.

Was Trump offering to bribe the Ukrainian president? The circumstantial evidence is: Yes. The transcript of Trump's critical conversation with the Ukrainian president shows he asked his counterpart to coordinate with American authorities to prosecute the son of his likely political opponent in 2020. That is the solicitation of something of value from a foreign government -- a felony.

Within a week of that conversation, Trump put his hold on the $390 million in aid. That's when the Ukrainian president got the message.

Where does this leave us? We are at the precipice of a constitutional crisis. We have a president whose apparent corruption is palpable. We have a Constitution that prescribes a remedy. We have an attorney general who acts as if he were the president's personal lawyer. We have Republicans in Congress who see and hear no evil from this president."

Napolitano is an anti-Trumper, always has been. He's entitled to his opinion, but he's assuming an awful lot here that has no actual basis in facts. As are you.

Congrats, one day in and already I've got you on Ignore.

 

[Coyote]

I smell another hoax:

Meet the Attorneys Representing the Whistleblower Who Helped Launch the Impeachment Inquiry

"Lawyer Andrew Bakaj is "one of the best people suited for this representation," says his co-counsel Mark Zaid.

We don’t know the identity of the whistleblower who reportedly raised the alarm about Donald Trump‘s phone call with the Ukrainian president (you know, the one that finally kickstarted an impeachment inquiry). But we at least know the identity of their lawyers.


Bakaj also served at the State Department, and worked for Democratic senators Daniel Moynihan, Charles Schumer, and Hillary Clinton earlier in his career."

I smell another conspiracy theory.

 

[2aguy]

don't believe me, believe the very conservative legal analyst of Fox News, State TV Itself, in his own words. How can even a dumbass trump stooge believe a conservative Fox legal expert would say Trump's phone call shows how corrupt and impeachable if he did not really believe it? Are these stooges even capable of READING? read the partial transcript that TRUMP ADMITS IS ACCURATE....how can they keep defending the indefensible?

Judge Andrew Napolitano: In Ukraine call, Trump apparently personally and directly committed a crime..

"After special counsel Robert Mueller delivered his report of the relationship between the Trump campaign and Russian agents to the Department of Justice, and then testified about what he discovered, Trump claimed exoneration. Mueller's report found some evidence of a conspiracy -- 127 telephone calls and numerous meetings -- between Trump's campaign and Russian agents, but not enough to charge the crime of conspiracy to solicit foreign assistance in a domestic political campaign.

Mueller also found 10 instances in which Trump had committed the criminal offense of obstruction of justice by his personal efforts to derail the Mueller investigation. Mueller did not seek an indictment of Trump for behavior that would have gotten any other person in America indicted because Mueller knew that his boss, Attorney General William Barr, who needed to sign off on such an indictment, would not do so.

Trump felt exonerated and emboldened. At the same time that the country was debating publicly what the Mueller report revealed about his behavior, the president instructed the Treasury Department to hold off on the licenses it had provisionally granted to American arms manufacturers to sell a quarter of a billion dollars in arms to Ukraine. He also instructed the State Department to hold off on the delivery of $140 million in direct aid to Ukraine that Congress told him to deliver.

Also at the same time, he began his conversations with his Ukrainian counterpart, during which he urged a criminal investigation of the younger Biden, even though Biden's commercial activities in Ukraine while his father was vice president have produced no credible evidence of criminal behavior.

Yet, as if to flaunt the Mueller findings, Trump apparently personally and directly committed the crime for which he claimed Mueller exonerated him.

What was that crime? It was the attempt to solicit foreign assistance for his campaign. It was the manipulation of American foreign and military policy for a corrupt purpose. A corrupt purpose puts the president personally above the needs of the nation.

In short, the whistleblower alleges that Trump offered a bribe to his Ukrainian counterpart: Go after my likely opponent's son and you will get the $390 million in goods and cash that we are holding up.
The complaint related that Trump held up the sale of $250 million worth of military equipment and the delivery of $140 million in congressionally mandated foreign aid until the government of Ukraine opened a criminal investigation against the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, the leading Democratic contender to oppose Trump in the 2020 presidential election.

Can the president of the United States legally ask a foreign government to provide assistance to his reelection? In a word: No.

There is no such wiggle room for bribery. The Constitution is quite clear that "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" shall constitute a basis for impeachment.

Was Trump offering to bribe the Ukrainian president? The circumstantial evidence is: Yes. The transcript of Trump's critical conversation with the Ukrainian president shows he asked his counterpart to coordinate with American authorities to prosecute the son of his likely political opponent in 2020. That is the solicitation of something of value from a foreign government -- a felony.

Within a week of that conversation, Trump put his hold on the $390 million in aid. That's when the Ukrainian president got the message.

Where does this leave us? We are at the precipice of a constitutional crisis. We have a president whose apparent corruption is palpable. We have a Constitution that prescribes a remedy. We have an attorney general who acts as if he were the president's personal lawyer. We have Republicans in Congress who see and hear no evil from this president."

Napolitano is an anti-Trumper, always has been. He's entitled to his opinion, but he's assuming an awful lot here that has no actual basis in facts. As are you.

Congrats, one day in and already I've got you on Ignore.

Considering nothing in the transcripts support what the judge says happened.....

 

[mudwhistle]

why do so many gutless trump stooges resort to lies when they cannot defend trump from the phone call he admits he made to bribe the Ukrainian president!! even trump admits what he said to the Ukrainian president was true, and they still try to defend his corrupt, lying ass.

He didn't admit it.
Try again ......

 

[mudwhistle]

I smell another hoax:

Meet the Attorneys Representing the Whistleblower Who Helped Launch the Impeachment Inquiry

"Lawyer Andrew Bakaj is "one of the best people suited for this representation," says his co-counsel Mark Zaid.

We don’t know the identity of the whistleblower who reportedly raised the alarm about Donald Trump‘s phone call with the Ukrainian president (you know, the one that finally kickstarted an impeachment inquiry). But we at least know the identity of their lawyers.


Bakaj also served at the State Department, and worked for Democratic senators Daniel Moynihan, Charles Schumer, and Hillary Clinton earlier in his career."

I smell another conspiracy theory.

Like the Ukrainian hoax.....the Russian Collusion hoax?

 

[Witchit]

why do so many gutless trump stooges resort to lies when they cannot defend trump from the phone call he admits he made to bribe the Ukrainian president!! even trump admits what he said to the Ukrainian president was true, and they still try to defend his corrupt, lying ass.

Habit.

 

[task0778]

I smell another hoax:

Meet the Attorneys Representing the Whistleblower Who Helped Launch the Impeachment Inquiry

"Lawyer Andrew Bakaj is "one of the best people suited for this representation," says his co-counsel Mark Zaid.

We don’t know the identity of the whistleblower who reportedly raised the alarm about Donald Trump‘s phone call with the Ukrainian president (you know, the one that finally kickstarted an impeachment inquiry). But we at least know the identity of their lawyers.


Bakaj also served at the State Department, and worked for Democratic senators Daniel Moynihan, Charles Schumer, and Hillary Clinton earlier in his career."

I smell another conspiracy theory.

I smell left-wing bullshit. Again.

I mean, look at it. Everything the Dems are saying is based on innuendo, supposition, hearsay, and opinions not based on any real facts. It ain't like in Joe Biden's case where he bragged about it on TV, where's the Dem outrage about that? "6 hours or you don't get the $1 bill in aid", now THAT's gotta be a criminal offense, no?

 

[boedicca]

Yet another maneuver from the Clinton-Dem-DNC playbook. Instead of the Steele Dossier, we have the Schiff Whistleblower complaint. It's all fake.

 

[Zorro!]

"You will know them by the fruits of their labor". This whole scam stinks to high heaven.

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NO GUARANTEE OF FUTURE RESULTS: Hypocritical Schumer Fought Against More Evidence And Trial For Clinton Impeachment.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Yet another maneuver from the Clinton-Dem-DNC playbook. Instead of the Steele Dossier, we have the Schiff Whistleblower complaint. It's all fake.

And BOTH are fake to a ridiculous point of fantasy.

WHO has actually SEEN this rumorblower?

I think he could vvery well be a fiction simply made up by Shiff4brains. The guy has been lying on a daily basis, why cant he be lying about this too?

The Senate should call him as a witness and see if he is indeed a flesh and blood person.