"Report: Ukrainian and DNC connection in 2016 election getting larger in scope"

[L.K.Eder]

he's being impeached cause thats all the left has available in an effort to get him out of office. no other reason. you can keep pretending but in your emotional rage, just think what happens next. a D wins, the R's don't like him so off we go on a make shit up smear campaign while in the background screaming DOING IT FOR TRUMP!

One more time, your side tried to impeach a LEGITIMATELY elected president for lying about a blow job.

As far as the "impeachment is a political tool", that horse left the barn in 1974, when they got Nixon to resign. Every president since has had rumblings of "you did this bad thing, so we are going to impeach you!"

and again - the ukraine didn't even know the aid was there so how could they know it's being held up until they do as trump says? and why do you ignore / excuse actual evidence mounting daily against the DNC and Ukraine for collusion against Trump?

Okay, I don't waste time on hate radio conspiracy theories... It's been established the Ukraine knew aid was being held up, and the Crowdstrike stuff is pure bunk. (In fact, Zelensky had no idea what Trump was even talking about when he brought it up.)

oh yea - your emotional rage.

cute. bullshit anymore, but cute.

It's not emotional rage. We have a president who tried to subvert an election and use tax dollars to do it.

At some point, the GOP is going to have to decide, to they declare the President above the law, (which is going to really suck for them when a Democrat becomes president) or do they take a stand that there are standards.

so this is about Clinton then, not anything Trump did.

like i said - it IS emotional REVENGE POLITICS and - 100% bullshit while you totally ignore the crap the left is doing these days and has done. until you hold both sides accountable to these standards of your, they're not standards. they're your agenda.

lord does your agenda scream out stupid shit.

and don't give me the "above the law" crap when your side deletes requested evidence, meets in secret on tarmacs, visits pedo island 27 times and claims 3, visits his private dude ranch, colludes with the DNC and then makes up shit to attack a potential SCOTUS nominee.

fuck that shit dude. i will throw your crap back at you every damn time.

^that guy is so unemotional and objective he immediately laps up obvious bullshit as long as the obvious bullshit confirms his unemotional and objective views.

wow. the level of corruption here is amazing. remove the names and do the math, these people were corrupt as shit. but people will keep the names in play and make excuses for THEIR guys and work to diminish what THEIR guys did, or just scream FAKE NEWS or that this guy is lying.

what an amazing time we live in.

 

[iceberg]

so this is about Clinton then, not anything Trump did.

No, it's about what Trump did.. try to pay attention.

like i said - it IS emotional REVENGE POLITICS and - 100% bullshit while you totally ignore the crap the left is doing these days and has done. until you hold both sides accountable to these standards of your, they're not standards. they're your agenda.

Nothing emotional about it. Trump tried to subvert the election by pressuring the Ukraine to do sham investigations about conspiracy theories that had already been discredited. This is against the law.

ord does your agenda scream out stupid shit.

and don't give me the "above the law" crap when your side deletes requested evidence, meets in secret on tarmacs, visits pedo island 27 times and claims 3, visits his private dude ranch, colludes with the DNC and then makes up shit to attack a potential SCOTUS nominee.

Guy, you've spent the last 25 years accusing the Clintons of everything up to and including murder, and spent hundreds of millions of dollars investigating them... and the only thing you came up with was that he got a blow job from an intern and lied about it because he was embarrassed

if it was about what trump was supposed to have done there would be no need to mention clinton nor nixon now would there?

pure emo dude. that's it. as for the ukraine knowing, i can find just as many links saying they didn't know - why are YOUR links good, mine bad? hey - i'll consider they did know. sure. but i won't take what you say as fact when i can find other sources on the net saying they didn't know. when both sides are saying totally different things, it does seem funny that people get binary in WE RIGHT YOU WRONG

ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE TIME

of which is mathematically impossible. but here we are. why?

emotions.

 

[iceberg]

he's being impeached cause thats all the left has available in an effort to get him out of office. no other reason. you can keep pretending but in your emotional rage, just think what happens next. a D wins, the R's don't like him so off we go on a make shit up smear campaign while in the background screaming DOING IT FOR TRUMP!

One more time, your side tried to impeach a LEGITIMATELY elected president for lying about a blow job.

As far as the "impeachment is a political tool", that horse left the barn in 1974, when they got Nixon to resign. Every president since has had rumblings of "you did this bad thing, so we are going to impeach you!"

and again - the ukraine didn't even know the aid was there so how could they know it's being held up until they do as trump says? and why do you ignore / excuse actual evidence mounting daily against the DNC and Ukraine for collusion against Trump?

Okay, I don't waste time on hate radio conspiracy theories... It's been established the Ukraine knew aid was being held up, and the Crowdstrike stuff is pure bunk. (In fact, Zelensky had no idea what Trump was even talking about when he brought it up.)

oh yea - your emotional rage.

cute. bullshit anymore, but cute.

It's not emotional rage. We have a president who tried to subvert an election and use tax dollars to do it.

At some point, the GOP is going to have to decide, to they declare the President above the law, (which is going to really suck for them when a Democrat becomes president) or do they take a stand that there are standards.

so this is about Clinton then, not anything Trump did.

like i said - it IS emotional REVENGE POLITICS and - 100% bullshit while you totally ignore the crap the left is doing these days and has done. until you hold both sides accountable to these standards of your, they're not standards. they're your agenda.

lord does your agenda scream out stupid shit.

and don't give me the "above the law" crap when your side deletes requested evidence, meets in secret on tarmacs, visits pedo island 27 times and claims 3, visits his private dude ranch, colludes with the DNC and then makes up shit to attack a potential SCOTUS nominee.

fuck that shit dude. i will throw your crap back at you every damn time.

^that guy is so unemotional and objective he immediately laps up obvious bullshit as long as the obvious bullshit confirms his unemotional and objective views.

wow. the level of corruption here is amazing. remove the names and do the math, these people were corrupt as shit. but people will keep the names in play and make excuses for THEIR guys and work to diminish what THEIR guys did, or just scream FAKE NEWS or that this guy is lying.

what an amazing time we live in.

he's not the only one. "extremes" do that on both sides. that makes "normal" conversation with this mindset so very difficult cause they've tried to "normalize" the extreme so it's not extreme anymore. like i said, it's impossible for either side to be 100% right - every time. yet if you listen to them talk...

 

[blastoff]

I'd prefer to have the senate trial after the Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz indictments and reports are out so that the senators have all the info they need to unravel the coup for the TV cameras and the 2020 voters.

The only reason for any of the investigations you mention was to satisfy a whining POTUS. He had the power to start investigations, but he can't control the outcome. There is enough known about the Horowitz report to show that was a big nothing. After 18 months, Huber hasn't held a single hearing, and even ignores congressional requests for an update. Sounds like that is a non-starter. Of course Barr is acting more like Trump's personal attorney than the AG. so who knows what he might claim. I suspect your wet dreams of Any Day Now will disappoint you again.

I read the books "Exonerated" and "Witch Hunt" that puts a lot of meat on the bones of what happened.
1. Horowitz' IG report is coming out Monday. I wouldn't do any touchdown dances just yet. The improper FISA warrants may end up with a few indictments.
2. Huber may not have anything, he is a total unknown, but then again....who knows?
3. Durham looks like the best shot at uncovering the illegal plots against Trump.
4. Barr is a great AG, he precisely follows the law

You may be right. The investigations may turn out to be another UraniumOne or Benghazi nothingberger, I hope not. We'll see.

And Durham has the power to really make life miserable for the lying lefty pukes.

 

[JoeB131]

if it was about what trump was supposed to have done there would be no need to mention clinton nor nixon now would there?

No, there would be to give this HISTORICAL CONTEXT. Impeachment is a very extreme remedy. More extreme than recalling a governor, for instance. You have to establish level of corruption to justify it.

Watergate was clearly a case that required removal, once the tapes made Nixon's complicity clear.

By comparison, Iran-Contra did involve some illegal acts, but the decision was made to not impeach Reagan because his motivation was to save American lives, and some of the more questionable stuff was carried out by subordinates (North and Poindexter) without his knowledge.

Lewinskygate was a pretty clear overreaction and misuse of the power. But if you insisted in 1999 that lying about an affair was impeachable, than certainly what Trump did was impeachable.

One more- PlameGate. This was investigated, and it was found that Bush himself didn't know about it...

We've established that Trump held up the aid to get investigations that benefited HIM personally. That's corrupt action.

pure emo dude. that's it. as for the ukraine knowing, i can find just as many links saying they didn't know - why are YOUR links good, mine bad? hey - i'll consider they did know. sure. but i won't take what you say as fact when i can find other sources on the net saying they didn't know. when both sides are saying totally different things, it does seem funny that people get binary in WE RIGHT YOU WRONG

Whether they knew or not is besides the point. The fact that they were pressuring Ukraine for the investigation AND that aid was held up until they got it, is the problem.

Now, I'm willing to entertain the premise that there is a perfectly innocent explanation to this.

Let's get Trump, Pompeo, Guiliani, etc under oath in front of Congress to tell us their side of it.

That is what happened in those other "scandals". People testified. Clinton and Lewinsky Testified. North and Poindexter testified. Bush and Cheney Testified.

 

[iceberg]

if it was about what trump was supposed to have done there would be no need to mention clinton nor nixon now would there?

No, there would be to give this HISTORICAL CONTEXT. Impeachment is a very extreme remedy. More extreme than recalling a governor, for instance. You have to establish level of corruption to justify it.

Watergate was clearly a case that required removal, once the tapes made Nixon's complicity clear.

By comparison, Iran-Contra did involve some illegal acts, but the decision was made to not impeach Reagan because his motivation was to save American lives, and some of the more questionable stuff was carried out by subordinates (North and Poindexter) without his knowledge.

Lewinskygate was a pretty clear overreaction and misuse of the power. But if you insisted in 1999 that lying about an affair was impeachable, than certainly what Trump did was impeachable.

One more- PlameGate. This was investigated, and it was found that Bush himself didn't know about it...

We've established that Trump held up the aid to get investigations that benefited HIM personally. That's corrupt action.

pure emo dude. that's it. as for the ukraine knowing, i can find just as many links saying they didn't know - why are YOUR links good, mine bad? hey - i'll consider they did know. sure. but i won't take what you say as fact when i can find other sources on the net saying they didn't know. when both sides are saying totally different things, it does seem funny that people get binary in WE RIGHT YOU WRONG

Whether they knew or not is besides the point. The fact that they were pressuring Ukraine for the investigation AND that aid was held up until they got it, is the problem.

Now, I'm willing to entertain the premise that there is a perfectly innocent explanation to this.

Let's get Trump, Pompeo, Guiliani, etc under oath in front of Congress to tell us their side of it.

That is what happened in those other "scandals". People testified. Clinton and Lewinsky Testified. North and Poindexter testified. Bush and Cheney Testified.

we've not established that at all. your saying it doesn't make it so.

but again, you're one of the hard headed, always right cause you feelz it extremists out there and i've had enough of your 1 way bulltshit for today.

bye.

 

[JoeB131]

And Durham has the power to really make life miserable for the lying lefty pukes.

Yeah, you guys are going to be so disappointed when he comes up with nothing.

he's not the only one. "extremes" do that on both sides. that makes "normal" conversation with this mindset so very difficult cause they've tried to "normalize" the extreme so it's not extreme anymore. like i said, it's impossible for either side to be 100% right - every time. yet if you listen to them talk...

This is where you are confused, buddy. The problem isn't that we have disagreements. We are always going to have disagreements. This is actually healthy. I'd rather have disagreement and discussion than complete agreement on a bad idea.

The problem on your side is that you have gotten into the full time Trump Rationalization business, because you can't all admit that "electing" him to start with was a mistake. Every day, he reminds everyone he is completely unfit for office, while his staff works hard to keep him from doing damage.

 

[L.K.Eder]

he's being impeached cause thats all the left has available in an effort to get him out of office. no other reason. you can keep pretending but in your emotional rage, just think what happens next. a D wins, the R's don't like him so off we go on a make shit up smear campaign while in the background screaming DOING IT FOR TRUMP!

One more time, your side tried to impeach a LEGITIMATELY elected president for lying about a blow job.

As far as the "impeachment is a political tool", that horse left the barn in 1974, when they got Nixon to resign. Every president since has had rumblings of "you did this bad thing, so we are going to impeach you!"

and again - the ukraine didn't even know the aid was there so how could they know it's being held up until they do as trump says? and why do you ignore / excuse actual evidence mounting daily against the DNC and Ukraine for collusion against Trump?

Okay, I don't waste time on hate radio conspiracy theories... It's been established the Ukraine knew aid was being held up, and the Crowdstrike stuff is pure bunk. (In fact, Zelensky had no idea what Trump was even talking about when he brought it up.)

oh yea - your emotional rage.

cute. bullshit anymore, but cute.

It's not emotional rage. We have a president who tried to subvert an election and use tax dollars to do it.

At some point, the GOP is going to have to decide, to they declare the President above the law, (which is going to really suck for them when a Democrat becomes president) or do they take a stand that there are standards.

so this is about Clinton then, not anything Trump did.

like i said - it IS emotional REVENGE POLITICS and - 100% bullshit while you totally ignore the crap the left is doing these days and has done. until you hold both sides accountable to these standards of your, they're not standards. they're your agenda.

lord does your agenda scream out stupid shit.

and don't give me the "above the law" crap when your side deletes requested evidence, meets in secret on tarmacs, visits pedo island 27 times and claims 3, visits his private dude ranch, colludes with the DNC and then makes up shit to attack a potential SCOTUS nominee.

fuck that shit dude. i will throw your crap back at you every damn time.

^that guy is so unemotional and objective he immediately laps up obvious bullshit as long as the obvious bullshit confirms his unemotional and objective views.

wow. the level of corruption here is amazing. remove the names and do the math, these people were corrupt as shit. but people will keep the names in play and make excuses for THEIR guys and work to diminish what THEIR guys did, or just scream FAKE NEWS or that this guy is lying.

what an amazing time we live in.

he's not the only one. "extremes" do that on both sides. that makes "normal" conversation with this mindset so very difficult cause they've tried to "normalize" the extreme so it's not extreme anymore. like i said, it's impossible for either side to be 100% right - every time. yet if you listen to them talk...

it also helps if one does not immediately believe obvious bullshit stories, eh?

 

[JoeB131]

we've not established that at all. your saying it doesn't make it so.

but again, you're one of the hard headed, always right cause you feelz it extremists out there and i've had enough of your 1 way bulltshit for today.

bye.

OH, please... Mac1958 doesn't make that 'I'm above all this' crap fly, why do you think you do.

Trump got caught. In the next few weeks, he'll try to put all the blame on poor Rudy, but he got caught.

 

[DBA]

The Ukranians didn't know money was being withheld because they weren't doing investigations. That is a fact. You guys just don't like it because it doesn't fit the narrative you are trying to sell.

Ukraine Knew of Aid Freeze in July, Says Ex-Top Official in Kyiv

Ukraine’s government learned of the military aid freeze during the Trump administration’s pressure campaign — and tried to keep that knowledge from going public, an ex-deputy foreign minister said.

KYIV, Ukraine — As deputy foreign minister, it was Olena Zerkal’s job to read incoming diplomatic cables from embassies around the world. One from Washington caught her eye back in July, she recalled: It said the Trump administration had frozen military aid for Ukraine.

“We had this information,” Ms. Zerkal said in an interview. “It was definitely mentioned there were some issues.”

The timing of when Ukraine knew of the hold on the military aid is a critical question in the impeachment hearings in Congress. Democrats are trying to build a case that President Trump pressured President Volodymyr Zelensky by withholding the aid and a White House meeting — at the same time he was pressing for a public announcement that Ukraine would investigate his political rivals.

In the interview, Ms. Zerkal, who said she resigned from her post last week to protest her government’s back channel diplomacy with both the Trump administration last summer and Russia this fall, provided an insider’s account of when senior officials in Kyiv learned of the freeze, and how they tried to keep the information from becoming public.

Her account is backed by Laura K. Cooper, the American deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, who said in Congressional testimony during the impeachment inquiry that Ukrainian diplomats knew about the aid freeze at least by July 25, when they began to question United States officials about it.



YOu can all stop lying now. Trump held up aid, shook them down for investigations.

LOL...I guess you continue to believe hearsay and second hand information and ignore Zelinsky himself. I might also add, no investigatiions were started so they must not have been pressured too much.

You are a good little lemming.

 

[Care4all]

Thank you Putin

There's nothing like the smell of Russian propaganda in the morning

PAID FOR by a Trump donor, script written by Rudolf Giuliani.

Rudy tutti is in the Ukraine now working on the OAN documentary film......

Now we know why Trump refused to go the DOJ legal path....

Chalupa was never paid or hired for opposition research...

 

[Care4all]

These connections with Ukraine and not just any DemonRAT but the DNC itself is certainly getting more interesting, and will make excellent 2020 campaign TALKING POINTS for the Republicans!

Doubling down on the lies isn't going to help you fools. It just shows Trump's unfittness for office.

Yep, impeachment is the proper constitutional route.

 

[kyzr]

Dr. Fiona Hill looked like an idiot after she testified that the delayed military aid was essential for national security.
Then she was asked why she recommended against "lethal military aid" when the Ukes were actually fighting the Russians and taking 14,000 casualties.
The Obama admin sent them "blankets" as McCain described it. Trump sent them Javelin anti-tank weapons.
Dr. Hill said "she changed her mind" WTF? Ridiculous. Some fucking Russia expert. More of an idiot.
So who was right, Trump or Dr. Hill?

Dr. Hill. It would have been foolish to send weapons to Ukraine in 2014 when the country was still rife with corruption... Then the West cracked down and told them reform was required to get aid, and that is exactly what was done.

Again, we aren't talking about what kind of aid when. We are talking about Trump specifically withholding aid to get the Ukraine to launch investigations into his enemies... that's why he's being impeached.

1. Sending lethal US weapons like anti-tank Javelins, or not, to the Ukraine in 2014 had nothing to do with "corruption". That's when there was intense fighting in east Ukraine and they really needed the "lethal" aid. So Dr. Hill's whining that Trump withheld desperately needed aid for a few weeks and that affected US national security is total hypocritical bullshit. The US military is just fine with or without the Ukraine, thank you.
Russian military intervention in Ukraine (2014–present) - Wikipedia
Impeachment witness Fiona Hill once opposed sending lethal aid to Ukraine in fight with Russia

2. Burisma and other Ukrainian corporations are still corrupt as testified to by all of Schiff's witnesses. The point being that Trump withheld the aid while the Ukraine changed regimes from Poroshenko to Zelensky and implemented anti-corruption measures. Poroshenko went to Russia and took about $30b in stolen funds. The delay was totally justified.

3. There may have been many reasons to withhold the release of the $400m. How do you know it was ONLY for "announcing an investigation into Burisma"?
Explain to me how investigating a corrupt Burisma is an investigation into Joe Biden? I call total bullshit.

 

[blastoff]

The Ukranians didn't know money was being withheld because they weren't doing investigations. That is a fact. You guys just don't like it because it doesn't fit the narrative you are trying to sell.

Ukraine Knew of Aid Freeze in July, Says Ex-Top Official in Kyiv

Ukraine’s government learned of the military aid freeze during the Trump administration’s pressure campaign — and tried to keep that knowledge from going public, an ex-deputy foreign minister said.

KYIV, Ukraine — As deputy foreign minister, it was Olena Zerkal’s job to read incoming diplomatic cables from embassies around the world. One from Washington caught her eye back in July, she recalled: It said the Trump administration had frozen military aid for Ukraine.

“We had this information,” Ms. Zerkal said in an interview. “It was definitely mentioned there were some issues.”

The timing of when Ukraine knew of the hold on the military aid is a critical question in the impeachment hearings in Congress. Democrats are trying to build a case that President Trump pressured President Volodymyr Zelensky by withholding the aid and a White House meeting — at the same time he was pressing for a public announcement that Ukraine would investigate his political rivals.

In the interview, Ms. Zerkal, who said she resigned from her post last week to protest her government’s back channel diplomacy with both the Trump administration last summer and Russia this fall, provided an insider’s account of when senior officials in Kyiv learned of the freeze, and how they tried to keep the information from becoming public.

Her account is backed by Laura K. Cooper, the American deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, who said in Congressional testimony during the impeachment inquiry that Ukrainian diplomats knew about the aid freeze at least by July 25, when they began to question United States officials about it.



YOu can all stop lying now. Trump held up aid, shook them down for investigations.

LOL...I guess you continue to believe hearsay and second hand information and ignore Zelinsky himself. I might also add, no investigatiions were started so they must not have been pressured too much.

You are a good little lemming.

I don’t like your euphemism for ‘lying sack of shit.’

 

[Care4all]

Dr. Fiona Hill looked like an idiot after she testified that the delayed military aid was essential for national security.
Then she was asked why she recommended against "lethal military aid" when the Ukes were actually fighting the Russians and taking 14,000 casualties.
The Obama admin sent them "blankets" as McCain described it. Trump sent them Javelin anti-tank weapons.
Dr. Hill said "she changed her mind" WTF? Ridiculous. Some fucking Russia expert. More of an idiot.
So who was right, Trump or Dr. Hill?

Dr. Hill. It would have been foolish to send weapons to Ukraine in 2014 when the country was still rife with corruption... Then the West cracked down and told them reform was required to get aid, and that is exactly what was done.

Again, we aren't talking about what kind of aid when. We are talking about Trump specifically withholding aid to get the Ukraine to launch investigations into his enemies... that's why he's being impeached.

1. Sending lethal US weapons like anti-tank Javelins, or not, to the Ukraine in 2014 had nothing to do with "corruption". That's when there was intense fighting in east Ukraine and they really needed the "lethal" aid. So Dr. Hill's whining that Trump withheld desperately needed aid for a few weeks and that affected US national security is total hypocritical bullshit. The US military is just fine with or without the Ukraine, thank you.
Russian military intervention in Ukraine (2014–present) - Wikipedia
Impeachment witness Fiona Hill once opposed sending lethal aid to Ukraine in fight with Russia

2. Burisma and other Ukrainian corporations are still corrupt as testified to by all of Schiff's witnesses. The point being that Trump withheld the aid while the Ukraine changed regimes from Poroshenko to Zelensky and implemented anti-corruption measures. Poroshenko went to Russia and took about $30b in stolen funds. The delay was totally justified.

3. There may have been many reasons to withhold the release of the $400m. How do you know it was ONLY for "announcing an investigation into Burisma"?
Explain to me how investigating a corrupt Burisma is an investigation into Joe Biden? I call total bullshit.

the delay WAS NOT justified...it broke the law.

the law states that the Pentagon had to investigate the Ukraine for any corruption before they could release the military aid money...
the aid appropriation was passed by congress and signed by the president in February 2019.

The Pentagon investigated all in the Ukraine and early June 2019 they finished their investigation and gave the clear, to release the aid.

Trump illegally stopped the release of the aid, without notifying congress and giving his reason...which also broke the law.

 

[JoeB131]

LOL...I guess you continue to believe hearsay and second hand information and ignore Zelinsky himself. I might also add, no investigatiions were started so they must not have been pressured too much.

You are a good little lemming.

Yes, I believe our own diplomatic and intelligence professionals over a Comedian who got elected and doesn't want to get in the middle of our electoral squabbles.

 

[JoeB131]

1. Sending lethal US weapons like anti-tank Javelins, or not, to the Ukraine in 2014 had nothing to do with "corruption". That's when there was intense fighting in east Ukraine and they really needed the "lethal" aid. So Dr. Hill's whining that Trump withheld desperately needed aid for a few weeks and that affected US national security is total hypocritical bullshit. The US military is just fine with or without the Ukraine, thank you.

Here's the difference.... in 2014, no one thought direct intervention was appropriate. By 2018, they had.

2. Burisma and other Ukrainian corporations are still corrupt as testified to by all of Schiff's witnesses. The point being that Trump withheld the aid while the Ukraine changed regimes from Poroshenko to Zelensky and implemented anti-corruption measures. Poroshenko went to Russia and took about $30b in stolen funds. The delay was totally justified.

If was totally justified, why didn't Trump go to Congress and say, "This is what I'm delaying and this is why I'm delaying it."

The problem with, "Everything normal, nothing to see here" is belied by the fact that Trump not only went behind Congress' back, but the backs of his own Diplomatic and Military professionals using Rudy the Bagman.

3. There may have been many reasons to withhold the release of the $400m. How do you know it was ONLY for "announcing an investigation into Burisma"?
Explain to me how investigating a corrupt Burisma is an investigation into Joe Biden? I call total bullshit.

Even the heavily redacted transcript MENTIONED JOE BIDEN BY NAME. Every witness said that it was about smearing Joe Biden, not doing a legit investigation- which again, there are diplomatic and legal channels to use.

 

[Care4all]

The Ukranians didn't know money was being withheld because they weren't doing investigations. That is a fact. You guys just don't like it because it doesn't fit the narrative you are trying to sell.

Ukraine Knew of Aid Freeze in July, Says Ex-Top Official in Kyiv

Ukraine’s government learned of the military aid freeze during the Trump administration’s pressure campaign — and tried to keep that knowledge from going public, an ex-deputy foreign minister said.

KYIV, Ukraine — As deputy foreign minister, it was Olena Zerkal’s job to read incoming diplomatic cables from embassies around the world. One from Washington caught her eye back in July, she recalled: It said the Trump administration had frozen military aid for Ukraine.

“We had this information,” Ms. Zerkal said in an interview. “It was definitely mentioned there were some issues.”

The timing of when Ukraine knew of the hold on the military aid is a critical question in the impeachment hearings in Congress. Democrats are trying to build a case that President Trump pressured President Volodymyr Zelensky by withholding the aid and a White House meeting — at the same time he was pressing for a public announcement that Ukraine would investigate his political rivals.

In the interview, Ms. Zerkal, who said she resigned from her post last week to protest her government’s back channel diplomacy with both the Trump administration last summer and Russia this fall, provided an insider’s account of when senior officials in Kyiv learned of the freeze, and how they tried to keep the information from becoming public.

Her account is backed by Laura K. Cooper, the American deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, who said in Congressional testimony during the impeachment inquiry that Ukrainian diplomats knew about the aid freeze at least by July 25, when they began to question United States officials about it.


YOu can all stop lying now. Trump held up aid, shook them down for investigations.

LOL...I guess you continue to believe hearsay and second hand information and ignore Zelinsky himself. I might also add, no investigatiions were started so they must not have been pressured too much.

You are a good little lemming.

Zelensky knew about the military money being withheld in July... and he's still waiting for ALL of it... about 14% of money STILL hasn't been sent, about 30 million.

And OF COURSE Zelensky would not go against Swamp critter Trump, hIs Country desperately needs all the money....

We've got phone calls from the Ukraine diplomats calling our diplomats on the aid money asking about why it has not been released and when will it be released...in late July 2019, that's simply a fact!

AND YES the Ukraine reopened an investigation in to Burisma/Biden and MADE the announcement in public, only not on a CNN interview as initially planned before the whistleblower...

we have several Russian sympathizer trolls who post here on the site that started threads on this announcement....

Inside Ukraine’s ‘Audit’ of Hunter Biden Company Investigation

Ukrainian prosecutors are reviewing their investigation into Burisma, the energy company where Hunter Biden worked

 

[kyzr]

Dr. Fiona Hill looked like an idiot after she testified that the delayed military aid was essential for national security.
Then she was asked why she recommended against "lethal military aid" when the Ukes were actually fighting the Russians and taking 14,000 casualties.
The Obama admin sent them "blankets" as McCain described it. Trump sent them Javelin anti-tank weapons.
Dr. Hill said "she changed her mind" WTF? Ridiculous. Some fucking Russia expert. More of an idiot.
So who was right, Trump or Dr. Hill?

Dr. Hill. It would have been foolish to send weapons to Ukraine in 2014 when the country was still rife with corruption... Then the West cracked down and told them reform was required to get aid, and that is exactly what was done.

Again, we aren't talking about what kind of aid when. We are talking about Trump specifically withholding aid to get the Ukraine to launch investigations into his enemies... that's why he's being impeached.

1. Sending lethal US weapons like anti-tank Javelins, or not, to the Ukraine in 2014 had nothing to do with "corruption". That's when there was intense fighting in east Ukraine and they really needed the "lethal" aid. So Dr. Hill's whining that Trump withheld desperately needed aid for a few weeks and that affected US national security is total hypocritical bullshit. The US military is just fine with or without the Ukraine, thank you.
Russian military intervention in Ukraine (2014–present) - Wikipedia
Impeachment witness Fiona Hill once opposed sending lethal aid to Ukraine in fight with Russia

2. Burisma and other Ukrainian corporations are still corrupt as testified to by all of Schiff's witnesses. The point being that Trump withheld the aid while the Ukraine changed regimes from Poroshenko to Zelensky and implemented anti-corruption measures. Poroshenko went to Russia and took about $30b in stolen funds. The delay was totally justified.

3. There may have been many reasons to withhold the release of the $400m. How do you know it was ONLY for "announcing an investigation into Burisma"?
Explain to me how investigating a corrupt Burisma is an investigation into Joe Biden? I call total bullshit.

the delay WAS NOT justified...it broke the law.

the law states that the Pentagon had to investigate the Ukraine for any corruption before they could release the military aid money...
the aid appropriation was passed by congress and signed by the president in February 2019.

The Pentagon investigated all in the Ukraine and early June 2019 they finished their investigation and gave the clear, to release the aid.

Trump illegally stopped the release of the aid, without notifying congress and giving his reason...which also broke the law.

1. The delay did not break the law, bullshit. Funding is delayed all the time for many legitimate reasons
2. Agreed that the pentagon investigated the Ukraine and said it was ok
3. Agreed that the money was approved by congress and the president

The other pertinent "facts" that you are ignoring are:
1. The Ukraine just had elections and Poroshenko was out and Zelensky was in
2. Poroshenko went to Russia and took about $30 of Ukraiinaian funds
3. The Ukraine was changing administrations fro Poroshenko's guys to Zelensky's guys
4. Their "parliament" was revising laws to deter corruption,
5. Trump wanted the EU to kick-in more funding
6. Burisma and other corporations were still too powerful and corrupt, as testified to by Schiff's witnsses
7. Trump delayed the funding as long as he could without jeopardizing it, then released it
8. When he released it the new government was up and running.

 

[kyzr]

1. Sending lethal US weapons like anti-tank Javelins, or not, to the Ukraine in 2014 had nothing to do with "corruption". That's when there was intense fighting in east Ukraine and they really needed the "lethal" aid. So Dr. Hill's whining that Trump withheld desperately needed aid for a few weeks and that affected US national security is total hypocritical bullshit. The US military is just fine with or without the Ukraine, thank you.

Here's the difference.... in 2014, no one thought direct intervention was appropriate. By 2018, they had.

2. Burisma and other Ukrainian corporations are still corrupt as testified to by all of Schiff's witnesses. The point being that Trump withheld the aid while the Ukraine changed regimes from Poroshenko to Zelensky and implemented anti-corruption measures. Poroshenko went to Russia and took about $30b in stolen funds. The delay was totally justified.

If was totally justified, why didn't Trump go to Congress and say, "This is what I'm delaying and this is why I'm delaying it."

The problem with, "Everything normal, nothing to see here" is belied by the fact that Trump not only went behind Congress' back, but the backs of his own Diplomatic and Military professionals using Rudy the Bagman.

3. There may have been many reasons to withhold the release of the $400m. How do you know it was ONLY for "announcing an investigation into Burisma"?
Explain to me how investigating a corrupt Burisma is an investigation into Joe Biden? I call total bullshit.

Even the heavily redacted transcript MENTIONED JOE BIDEN BY NAME. Every witness said that it was about smearing Joe Biden, not doing a legit investigation- which again, there are diplomatic and legal channels to use.

1. 2014 was when the heavy fighting was happening in east Ukraine, and when the Ukraine really needed the "lethal aid". There was no excuse for sending blankets instead of Javelin anti-tank weapons. How many of the 14,000 dead Ukes could have been averted if they had proper weapons? Dr. Hill admitted she fucked it up and changed her mind.

2. Trump doesn't need to justify anything to congress. Trump had the funds, and was required by law to ensure that there was no corruption before releasing the funding.

3. I'm not a fan of the clumsy "announce the investigation and we'll release the money" ploy. Trump had every legitimate right to require an investigation of Burisma before releasing the money. Trump fucked up by saying "investigate the Bidens". That was just an unforced error. I don't believe that's an impeachable error, but its an error. Trump just proved he's not as smart as he thinks he is. Lesson learned, he is NOT the fucking CEO of the Federal government.

4. I still call bullshit on smearing Joe Biden. A Ukrainian investigation can't invent wrongdoing for Joe Biden if he's not involved with Burisma. Either Joe Biden got some of that Burisma/Soros cash via QPQ, or he didn't.