Page 56 of 61 FirstFirst ... 6465455565758 ... LastLast
Results 826 to 840 of 911
  1. #826

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    Trump isn’t going to be impeached and Fox News hasn’t turned on him.
    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Howie gets his info from fake news.

    I would say that Tucker Carlson and Shep Smith are at war. Carlson ‘on air’ accused Smith of masquerading as news instead of opinion.


  2. #827

    Default

    What does it say when you see a misspelled word is trending worldwide and you know exactly why?



  3. #828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    Howie gets his info from fake news.

    I would say that Tucker Carlson and Shep Smith are at war. Carlson ‘on air’ accused Smith of masquerading as news instead of opinion.
    Shep has been known to sensationalize stuff in the past. Love the feud, good TV

  4. #829

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tredwell View Post
    What does it say when you see a misspelled word is trending worldwide and you know exactly why?


    Like I said, Trump lets a fart slip, it’s news.

  5. #830

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    Apparently, this process has been used multiple times before to protect against leaks. If this is a cover up, complete transparency of every document within hours after it was being called for is a really unusual way of doing a cover up.

    But boy, the Dems really hammered that ďhonorable manĒ, as Stiff called him, today for his role. The guy that Pelosi accused of breaking the law. He really looked like a lawbreaker.
    That is just really unsound logic. The only reason it was "being called for" is because of the whistleblower complaint. It was put on that classified system to purposely hide it from anyone who would rightly find the content of the call troubling.

  6. #831

    Default

    JTFs, regarding the significant accusations the ďwhistleblowerĒ made about Giuliani, this The Hill article explains all of Giulianiís actions, both as the personal attorney attempting gather facts that defend his client (Trump) relating to accusations of 2016 campaign interference and later as an invited State Dept representative attempting to improve the line of communications between the State Dept and the Ukrainian government.

    It appears that the ďwhistleblowerĒ, and his/her firsthand sources, had no understanding of the role that Giuliani had with Ukraine and mischaracterized it in his/her complaint. Another inaccuracy of the ďwhistleblowerĒ.

    https://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...erture-to-rudy

    Missing piece to the Ukraine puzzle: State Department's overture to Rudy Giuliani

    When I was a young journalist decades ago, training to cover Washington, one of my mentors offered sage advice: When it comes to U.S. intelligence and diplomacy, things often arenít what they first seem.

    Those words echo in my brain today, as much as they did that first day. And following the news recently, I realize they are just as relevant today with hysteria regarding presidential lawyer Rudy Giulianiís contacts with Ukraineís government.

    The coverage suggests Giuliani reached out to new Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyís team this summer solely because he wanted to get dirt on possible Trump 2020 challenger Joe Biden and his son Hunterís business dealings in that country.

    Politics or law could have been part of Giulianiís motive, and neither would be illegal.

    But there is a missing part of the story that the American public needs in order to assess what really happened: Giulianiís contact with Zelensky adviser and attorney Andrei Yermak this summer was encouraged and facilitated by the U.S. State Department.

    Giuliani didnít initiate it. A senior U.S. diplomat contacted him in July and asked for permission to connect Yermak with him.


    Then, Giuliani met in early August with Yermak on neutral ground ó in Spain ó before reporting back to State everything that occurred at the meeting.

    That debriefing occurred Aug. 11 by phone with two senior U.S. diplomats, one with responsibility for Ukraine and the other with responsibility for the European Union, according to electronic communications records I reviewed and interviews I conducted.

    When asked on Friday, Giuliani confirmed to me that the State Department asked him to take the Yermak meeting and that he did, in fact, apprise U.S. officials every step of the way.

    ďI didnít even know who he [Yermak] really was, but they vouched for him. They actually urged me to talk to him because they said he seemed like an honest broker,Ē Giuliani told me. ďI reported back to them [the two State officials] what my conversations with Yermak were about. All of this was done at the request of the State Department.Ē

    So, rather than just a political opposition research operation, Giulianiís contacts were part of a diplomatic effort by the State Department to grow trust with the new Ukrainian president, Zelensky
    , a former television comic making his first foray into politics and diplomacy.

    Why would Ukraine want to talk to Giuliani, and why would the State Department be involved in facilitating it?

    According to interviews with more than a dozen Ukrainian and U.S. officials, Ukraineís government under recently departed President Petro Poroshenko and, now, Zelensky has been trying since summer 2018 to hand over evidence about the conduct of Americans they believe might be involved in violations of U.S. law during the Obama years.


    The Ukrainians say their efforts to get their allegations to U.S. authorities were thwarted first by the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, which failed to issue timely visas allowing them to visit America.

    Then the Ukrainians hired a former U.S. attorney ó not Giuliani ó to hand-deliver the evidence of wrongdoing to the U.S. attorney's office in New York, but the federal prosecutors never responded.

    The U.S. attorney, a respected American, confirmed the Ukrainiansí story to me. The allegations that Ukrainian officials wanted to pass on involved both efforts by the Democratic National Committee to pressure Ukraine to meddle in the 2016 U.S. election as well as Joe Bidenís sonís effort to make money in Ukraine while the former vice president managed U.S.-Ukraine relations, the retired U.S. attorney told me.


    Eventually, Giuliani in November 2018 got wind of the Ukrainian allegations and started to investigate.

    As President Trumpís highest-profile defense attorney, the former New York City mayor, often known simply as Rudy, believed the Ukrainian's evidence could assist in his defense against the Russia collusion investigation and former special counsel Robert Muellerís final report.

    So Giuliani began to check things out in late 2018 and early 2019, but he never set foot in Ukraine.
    And when Ukrainian officials leaked word that he was considering visiting Ukraine to meet with senior officials to discuss the allegations ó and it got politicized in America ó Giuliani abruptly called off his trip. He stopped talking to the Ukrainian officials.

    Since that time, my American and foreign sources tell me, Ukrainian officials worried that the slight of Giuliani might hurt their relations with his most famous client, Trump.

    And Trump himself added to the dynamic by encouraging Ukraineís leaders to work with Giuliani to surface the evidence of alleged wrongdoing that has been floating around for more than two years, my sources said.

    It is likely that the State Departmentís overture to Giuliani in July was designed to allay fears of a diplomatic slight and to assure the nascent Ukrainian administration that everything would be OK between the two allies.

    The belief was that if Zelenskyís top lawyer could talk to Trumpís top lawyer, everything could be patched up, officials explained to me.

    Ukrainian officials also are discussing privately the possibility of creating a parliamentary committee to assemble the evidence and formally send it to the U.S. Congress, after failed attempts to get the Department of Justiceís attention, my sources say.

    Such machinations are common when two countries are navigating diplomatic challenges, and, often, extracurricular activities with private citizens are part of the strategy, even if they are not apparent to the American public.

    So the media stories of Giulianiís alleged political opposition research in Ukraine, it turns out, are a bit different than first reported. Itís exactly the sort of nuanced, complex news development that my mentor nearly 30 years ago warned about.

    And itís too bad a shallow media effort has failed to capture the whole story and tell it to the American public in its entirety.

    Itís almost as though the lessons of the now debunked Russia-Trump collusion narrative didn't really sink in for some reporters. And that is a loss for the American public. The continuing folly was evidenced when much attention was given Friday to Hillary Clintonís tweet suggesting Trumpís contact with Zelensky amounted to an effort to solicit a foreign power to interfere in the next election.

    That tweet may be provocative, but itís unfair. The contacts were about resolving what happened in the last election ó and the last administration.

    And if anyone is to have high moral ground on foreign interference in elections, Clinton canít be first in line. Her campaign lawyers caused Christopher Steele, a British foreign national desperate to defeat to Trump, to be hired to solicit unverified allegations from Russians about Trump as part of an opposition research project and then went to the FBI to trump up an investigation on Trump. And her party leaders, the Democratic National Committee, asked the Ukrainian Embassy to also try to dig up dirt on Trump. Thatís not a record worthy of throwing the first punch on this story.

    The truth is, getting to the bottom of the Ukraine allegations will benefit everyone. If the Bidens and Ukraine did nothing wrong, they should be absolved. If wrongdoing happened, then it should be dealt with.

    The folly of the current coverage is preventing us from getting the answer we deserve.

  7. #832

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Radio Badger View Post
    That is just really unsound logic. The only reason it was "being called for" is because of the whistleblower complaint. It was put on that classified system to purposely hide it from anyone who would rightly find the content of the call troubling.
    And you know how? What if they have done it with other calls or as leak prevention process?

  8. #833

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    And you know how? What if they have done it with other calls or as leak prevention process?
    Why would you need to protect actual unclassified phone conversations from leaks? This is exactly my point. You have to be either willfully ignorant or intellectually dishonest to suggest that this is a normal practice.

  9. #834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    Like I said, Trump lets a fart slip, it’s news.
    One of the funnier things I've seen on twitter:

    https://twitter.com/dprk_news/status...160384?lang=en

  10. #835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Radio Badger View Post
    Why would you need to protect actual unclassified phone conversations from leaks? This is exactly my point. You have to be either willfully ignorant or intellectually dishonest to suggest that this is a normal practice.
    Why is obvious? B/c they could possibility be completely misinterpreted and mischaracterized, and since conversations between a US President and a foreign leader are NEVER released to maintain the openness of future private conversations, a president would have no way of denying the claims or defending him/herself against bogus accusations.

    Got it?

  11. #836

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    Why is obvious? B/c they could possibility be completely misinterpreted and mischaracterized, and since conversations between a US President and a foreign leader are NEVER released to maintain the openness of future private conversations, a president would have no way of denying the claims or defending him/herself against bogus accusations.

    Got it?
    The only people misinterpreting the call are those suggesting that it's all above board. This is what corruption actually looks like. Not even President Trump is actually stupid enough to clearly draw out a quid pro quo situation. But it's plainly obvious to everyone who isn't doing mental gymnastics that the call was troubling enough to require investigation, and that's why the memo was hidden on a secure system.

  12. #837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Radio Badger View Post
    The only people misinterpreting the call are those suggesting that it's all above board. This is what corruption actually looks like. Not even President Trump is actually stupid enough to clearly draw out a quid pro quo situation. But it's plainly obvious to everyone who isn't doing mental gymnastics that the call was troubling enough to require investigation, and that's why the memo was hidden on a secure system.
    This is what lefties call a ďword saladĒ.

    Nothing of logic or anything resembling a fact.

  13. #838
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    3,001
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    Why is obvious? B/c they could possibility be completely misinterpreted and mischaracterized, and since conversations between a US President and a foreign leader are NEVER released to maintain the openness of future private conversations, a president would have no way of denying the claims or defending him/herself against bogus accusations.

    Got it?
    I don't think you're actually stupid. I would never call you stupid. But if someone did call you stupid, I wouldn't chastise them.

  14. #839

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Radio Badger View Post
    The only people misinterpreting the call are those suggesting that it's all above board. This is what corruption actually looks like. Not even President Trump is actually stupid enough to clearly draw out a quid pro quo situation. But it's plainly obvious to everyone who isn't doing mental gymnastics that the call was troubling enough to require investigation, and that's why the memo was hidden on a secure system.
    Investigation into what? They've released everything. What else could there be to investigate?

    Go right ahead and impeach him because you read things into a conversation that weren't actually said. I love this new standard.

  15. #840

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    Investigation into what? They've released everything. What else could there be to investigate?

    Go right ahead and impeach him because you read things into a conversation that weren't actually said. I love this new standard.
    Again, this isn't that ****ing hard. They tried to hide the memo about the call knowing that how troublesome it was. The only reason they released anything is that they got caught. I realize that at this point you just have to blindly follow the orange pig into the fire, but try not to sound so ****ing stupid while doing it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •