Anybody else notice what republicans are starting to do? Little by little, they give small criticisms of the president, but just enough to pull back if the impeachment inquiry turns another direction. However, more and more republicans are now showing cracks in that big red wall of theirs.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
The CIA’s top lawyer sent a criminal referral to the Justice Department based on the now-famous whistleblower’s complaint about President Donald Trump’s conduct toward Ukraine. And no, that lawyer isn’t some deep-state conspiracist out to thwart the president: She’s a Trump appointee.
According to NBC News on Friday, CIA general counsel Courtney Simmons Elwood and another top official called the Justice Department on August 14 to make a criminal referral — weeks before the whistleblower complaint had become public.
“On that call, Elwood and John Eisenberg, the top legal adviser to the White House National Security Council, told the top Justice Department national security lawyer, John Demers, that the allegations merited examination by the DOJ, officials said,” NBC News reports.
The DOJ, however, reportedly didn’t consider that to be an official referral because it came in a call, not in writing. (This is important, as you’ll see in just a minute.) As such, the DOJ didn’t look any further into the allegations that Elwood was so concerned about.
In other words, they dropped it.
The Justice Department would eventually look into the allegations made in the whistleblower complaint a bit later after receiving a different criminal referral, this one from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (and apparently in writing, luckily).
That referral was “based solely on the whistleblower’s official written complaint.” This is a really important point, because, as NBC News explains, “Justice Department officials have said they only investigated the president’s Ukraine call for violations of campaign finance law because it was the only statute mentioned in the whistleblower’s complaint.”
So DOJ looked into this whistleblower complaint and determined in September that there is no need for a full-blown criminal probe into Trump’s actions because that specific law — campaign finance — wasn’t broken, thus effectively closing the inquiry.
Now here’s the kicker: The CIA’s criminal referral wasn’t about campaign finance law, according to NBC News.
This means DOJ essentially ignored the CIA criminal referral — which apparently included concerns that other laws besides campaign finance law may have been broken — all because it was made over the phone.
The episode calls into serious question just how thorough the Justice Department was when determining whether to start a formal investigation into the president’s actions on Ukraine.
____________
Is AG Barr’s constant interference to defend trump his sole reason for existing? The evidence says yes.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Now trump is calling for mitt Romney’s impeachment
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Bro he woke up and started tweeting some absolutely insane nonsense.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Do you believe in the rule of law and the Constitution?
Do you that any president is above the law?
I got this....yes and no.
But when it comes to trump it’s no and yes. Then the sudden whatabout Obama reply is compulsory. Proving the whole trump presidency is a white backlash on the majority voters in the USA.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.
White House ordered to preserve evidence about Trump's dealings with foreign leaders
A federal judge has ordered the White House to preserve records of President Trump's "meetings, phone calls, and other communications with foreign leaders," a move that comes as the president faces a formal impeachment inquiry over his interactions with Ukraine.
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an appointee of former President Obama, issued the directive on Thursday.
The order — which stemmed from a lawsuit filed in May by the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, as well as the National Security Archive and the Society for the History of American Foreign Relations — also called on the Trump administration to preserve “all records of efforts by White House or other executive branch officials to return, ‘claw back,’ ’lock down’ or recall White House records."
Politico first reported the judge's decision late Saturday.
The suit was filed months before Trump's interactions with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky became the subject of a whistleblower complaint within the intelligence community.
The civil suit, filed against Trump and the Executive Office of the President, accused the White House of failing to follow the Presidential Records Act, a law that governs the official records of the president.
Politico noted that lawyers pressed Jackson to issue a temporary restraining order in light of reports that the White House placed some of Trump's phone calls with foreign leaders onto a computer system not typically meant for those conversations.
Jackson denied the request on Wednesday, after the Justice Department made assurances that it would secure records of communications between Trump and foreign leaders. Justice Department lawyer Kathryn L. Wyer said in a two-page filing that the administration would “voluntarily agree . . . to preserve the material at issue," The Washington Post reported.
Just a day later, Jackson issued the directive ordering the White House to preserve a host of communications between Trump and foreign leaders.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Hill.
Trump is facing intensifying scrutiny over revelations about his efforts to encourage Ukraine into investigating 2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden and his son. A whistleblower complaint accusing Trump of a broad effort to enlist the foreign nation's help in his 2020 reelection campaign contributed to a formal impeachment inquiry in the House.
The complaint focuses in part on allegations about the White House's actions with regards to Trump's conversation with foreign leaders. Among other things, the complaint alleges that senior White House officials intervened to “lock down” records of the July 25 phone call between Trump and Zelensky. It also claims that White House officials were told by White House lawyers to move the electronic transcript onto a separate computer system “that is otherwise used to store and handle classified information of an especially sensitive nature.”
(CNN)The lawyer for the first intelligence whistleblower who came forward with accusations concerning President Donald Trump and his interactions with Ukraine said Sunday he is representing a second whistleblower regarding the President's actions.
Attorney Mark Zaid confirmed to CNN that he and other lawyers on his team are now representing the second person. Zaid told CNN that the second whistleblower is from the intelligence community and has spoken to the intelligence community's inspector general, but has not filed their own complaint and doesn't need to as anyone who speaks to inspector watchdog is considered to have made a protected disclosure and is a whistleblower under law. Attorney Andrew Bakaj, also representing the whistleblowers, tweeted Sunday, "I can confirm that my firm and my team represent multiple whistleblowers in connection to the underlying August 12, 2019, disclosure to the Intelligence Community Inspector General. No further comment at this time." Bakaj would not provide further details about how many people he and his colleagues are representing regarding the matter. Bakaj said right now there is just one complaint filed with the inspector general and that is including information from both persons. ABC first reported Zaid's representation of the second person. Reports of a second whistleblower comes as House Democrats ratchet up their impeachment inquiry centered on Trump's July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky by issuing a subpoena to the White House and a documents request to Vice President Mike Pence. The initial whistleblower's complaint alleged the President abused his official powers "to solicit interference" from Ukraine in the upcoming 2020 election, and that the White House took steps to cover it up. Trump has denied doing anything improper. A White House-released transcript of a July call revealed Trump asked Ukraine's President to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden -- Trump's potential 2020 Democratic rival -- and his son, Hunter. There is no evidence of wrongdoing by either Biden. The New York Times reported Friday that a second intelligence official with concerns and more direct knowledge regarding Trump's dealings with Ukraine was considering filing a whistleblower complaint. Zaid told CNN he didn't know if the second whistleblower he is representing is the same person referenced in the Times report.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Second whistleblower comes forward in Trump-Ukraine scandal
The latest whistleblower "has first-hand knowledge" of the events in question, the person’s attorney said.
A second whistleblower has come forward with information about President Donald Trump’s call with the president of Ukraine, according to attorneys representing that whistleblower and the intelligence official whose earlier complaint set off a series of events culminating in an impeachment inquiry.
The second whistleblower "has first-hand knowledge" of the events, according to attorney Mark Zaid.
The first complaint, filed in August with the intelligence community's inspector general, centered on a July 25 phone call during which Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to look into why Ukraine's top prosecutor had apparently ended an investigation into a Ukrainian gas company that once employed former Vice President Joe Biden's son as a board member. House Democrats launched a formal impeachment inquiry last month as details of the conversation were made public.
Trump has publicly maintained that the call was "absolutely perfect" and "totally appropriate."
Text messages given to Congress Thursday and released by House Democrats suggest the call was part of a broader effort from Trump and his administration to pressure Ukraine.
The texts show U.S. ambassadors working to persuade Ukraine to publicly commit to investigating Trump’s political opponents and explicitly linking the inquiry to whether Ukraine’s president would be granted an official White House visit.
The messages offer the fullest picture to date of how top diplomats and Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani sought to advance Trump’s goal of getting the Ukrainians to investigate both meddling in the 2016 election and Hunter Biden.
The new details on how Trump’s pressure campaign on Ukraine unfolded came as the president publicly called for another foreign country — China — to probe one of his top political opponents.
Trump lashed out at the second whistleblower on Saturday amid a day-long effort at defending himself on Twitter.
"The first so-called second hand information 'Whistleblower' got my phone conversation almost completely wrong, so now word is they are going to the bench and another 'Whistleblower' is coming in from the Deep State, also with second hand info," Trump tweeted. "Meet with Shifty. Keep them coming!"
Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani responded to news of another whistleblower on Twitter Sunday morning, saying the "Swamp Media will corruptly fail to point out it means nothing, now that conversation is public."
And speaking with "Fox News Sunday," Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, said the latest whistleblower "does not matter."
"This person is going to come forward and say, yep the president had this phone call," Stewart, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said. "And yep, that's the transcript. Why should I care at all what his opinion and judgment of this transcript is? You and I can read it."
A White House summary of the July phone conversation, released last month, does not contradict the whistleblower complaint. The summary showed that Trump and Zelenskiy discussed military aid the U.S. provides Ukraine before Trump asked his counterpart for "a favor." The president then asked Zelesnkiy to investigate theories regarding Ukraine's involvement in the 2016 election and the Biden family.
In a formal complaint, the first whistleblower detailed how White House officials were so concerned about what the president said in that call that they intervened to "lock down" the record of the conversation. The whistleblower filed the complaint, which relied on the accounts of White House and other U.S. officials, out of a belief Trump was "using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country" in the 2020 election.
Trump has referred to the first whistleblower as "fake," adding that the complaint was "not holding up," though it was deemed credible by a Trump-appointed intelligence community inspector general, and was authored by someone who the Trump-appointed acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire told Congress last month had acted in "good faith."
The president and his top allies have zeroed in on Biden's 2016 call, backed by much of the international community, to remove Viktor Shokin, the Ukrainian prosecutor. Shokin, who had been widely accused of not doing enough to crack down on corruption, had been investigating Burisma, the scandal-plagued energy company affiliated with Biden's son Hunter. But earlier this year, Bloomberg News, citing documents and an interview with a former Ukrainian official, reported the Burisma investigation had been dormant for more than a year by the time Shokin was fired. In addition, former Ukrainian prosecutor general Yuriy Lutsenko has told news outlets he found no evidence of wrongdoing by Biden and his son.
Speaking with NBC's "Meet the Press," Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., said Republicans were going to "wild lengths" to avoid criticism from Trump.
"They shouldn’t be fearful of this president," he said. "If they vote to get rid of him, there’s nothing he can do to hurt them."
Former Reagan official rips Republicans for backing Trump: 'It's like the invasion of the body snatchers'
A former Reagan administration official railed against Republicans over the weekend for continuing to back President Trump as House Democrats pursue an impeachment inquiry.
During a segment on CNN’s "State of the Union," Linda Chavez, who previously served as the White House director of public liaison, said Republicans were “absolutely abrogating their duty” as tensions escalate over the impeachment inquiry.
"It's like the invasion of the body snatchers," Chavez said. "I don't know who these people are. I mean, they have so changed their tune. This is really serious," she said.
Chavez, who noted during the segment that she had previously identified as a Democrat before serving under former President Reagan, said she used to believe that “the Republican Party was devoted to the truth, that we believed in ideals."
"We were devoted to the Constitution," Chavez said. "And what I see happening now is people who are absolutely abrogating their duty.”
“They are putting politics first and they're scared. They're scared of Donald Trump,” she continued.
Her remarks echo similar sentiments from former CIA chief John Brennan, who said during a segment on NBC's “Meet the Press” on Sunday that Republican senators are "running scared" of Trump as talk of impeachment continues.
Brennan also called out Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) over his earlier appearance on the same program. Johnson and host Chuck Todd got into a heated back-and-forth during which Todd accused the senator of not answering his questions to "make Donald Trump feel better here that you're not criticizing him."
"Clearly Sen. Johnson is running scared of Donald Trump, as are the other Republican senators, because if they say anything against him, he comes after them with a vengeance," Brennan said later.
Brennan also said that Trump transformed into a "typical bully," adding that "it's clear that the Republicans in the Senate are just going along."
"I've had many issues with the Democrats over the years," Brennan also said. "But I have never seen anything like the Republicans right now, as far as just misrepresentations of the truth because of what Donald Trump has done."
It's what a lot of us are seeing. I mean I have my differences with some Republican policies. I also have my differences with some Democratic policies. But when it came to both parties it was far more about the issues than the person. Presidents of both parties never acted like this. None of them were so brazen and nasty. None seemed to thumb their nose at the rule of law this way. Now they back the most disgusting human being anyone has ever seen as our president like they just don't care about all of the things they have claimed to stand for, for what has been decades now.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Could all these shenanigans, and all the BS ultimately lead to a more unified America when all is said and done.
When his replacement comes into office, and the people breathe a sign of relief. Could the country be better for it in the future?
All this stuff reads like a bad TV drama, I have to think it's all part of a bigger plan, whether it is to show us how bad things could be, and that they can get better, or to build up the angst now, so that later we have our guards down.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
Trump is just bringing out the actual feelings of many people. He's the epitome of how so many people actually believe. He just brought it from under the woodwork to the forefront. I mean he's the same guy who tried to accuse Obama of being a Muslim born in Kenya. So anybody listening knew what they were getting. Yet they chose him out of a large field of qualified candidates. They preferred the one who called others names and screamed the loudest.
They sit there and blame Democrats for the Mueller investigation when it was a Republican who was appointed by Trump himself to his job that began the actual investigation by appointing Mueller as the special prosecutor and Mueller too is a Republican.
I've never seen anything like it in my lifetime.
So no, I just expect more name calling, more people spreading lies and saying things like, "the press is the enemy of the United states" and talking about anyone who stands up against him is a traitor or spy.
The animosity was bad before, but now it's at an all time high and I don't see that changing.
It's seriously time people like yourself and DC take your party back.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Giuliani associates won't comply with House impeachment inquiry, attorney says
A pair of Soviet-born South Florida businessmen with ties to President Trump’s attorney, Rudy Giuliani, will not comply with congressional requests for documents and depositions as part of the House's formal impeachment inquiry into the president.
John Dowd, a former Trump attorney representing Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, told the Miami Herald that the two would not respond to a documents request by the Monday deadline. He added that neither of the individuals would appear for depositions scheduled for later this week.
Parnas and Fruman are facing scrutiny from multiple House committees as part of their investigation into revelations from a whistleblower that Trump sought to pressure Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden.
As part of the inquiry, the chairmen of the House Intelligence, Oversight and Reform and Foreign Affairs committees subpoenaed Giuliani for documents related to the Trump administration's dealings with Ukraine. They also scheduled depositions with three of Giuliani's business associates, including Parnas and Fruman.
Giuliani has not said whether he will comply with the House's request. The committee gave him an Oct. 15 deadline to hand over documents.
The office of House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Parnas's and Fruman's failure to comply.
Parnas and Fruman reportedly helped introduce Giuliani to officials within Ukraine's political circles. Parnas told the Miami Herald that he had information about alleged impropriety from Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, and that he used Giuliani as a vehicle to disclose the details. “I got certain information and I thought it was my duty to hand it over,” he told the Herald on Sept. 26.
Parnas and Fruman are among the several individuals who have received documents and deposition requests as part of the House's impeachment inquiry.
A day before Dowd's comment, The Associated Press reported that the two were at the center of a push to persuade Ukraine to instal new management at the top of the country's state gas company.
It is as simple as the House holding a vote to make this impeachment investigation legit.
Then BOTH sides can present their evidence, witnesses, and issue subpoenas.
It is called Due Process. That is American Justice.
As it is, one side has its hands tied, trying to make their case to a Press that won't listen while the other side has it their own way, with the Press supporting them.
That is called a Lynching. Dems are good at Lynchings and have done it for a century.
It is as simple as the House holding a vote to make this impeachment investigation legit.
Then BOTH sides can present their evidence, witnesses, and issue subpoenas.
It is called Due Process. That is American Justice.
As it is, one side has its hands tied, trying to make their case to a Press that won't listen while the other side has it their own way, with the Press supporting them.
That is called a Lynching. Dems are good at Lynchings and have done it for a century.
No low 2 low. Nothing wrong with what is going on except the tears from Trumpians. A vote won't change the fact that Trump commited this crime.
It is as simple as the House holding a vote to make this impeachment investigation legit.
Then BOTH sides can present their evidence, witnesses, and issue subpoenas.
It is called Due Process. That is American Justice.
As it is, one side has its hands tied, trying to make their case to a Press that won't listen while the other side has it their own way, with the Press supporting them.
That is called a Lynching. Dems are good at Lynchings and have done it for a century.
No low 2 low. Nothing wrong with what is going on except the tears from Trumpians. A vote won't change the fact that Trump commited this crime.
You gots you a crime???
Then you should urge your congressman to vote for impeachment! Or at least vote for an official investigation.
It is as simple as the House holding a vote to make this impeachment investigation legit.
Then BOTH sides can present their evidence, witnesses, and issue subpoenas.
It is called Due Process. That is American Justice.
As it is, one side has its hands tied, trying to make their case to a Press that won't listen while the other side has it their own way, with the Press supporting them.
That is called a Lynching. Dems are good at Lynchings and have done it for a century.
No low 2 low. Nothing wrong with what is going on except the tears from Trumpians. A vote won't change the fact that Trump commited this crime.
You gots you a crime???
Then you should urge your congressman to vote for impeachment! Or at least vote for an official investigation.
We need to get to the bottom of this here!
They are still searching for a crime. 3 years in the term and still searching for a crime. It is a joke.
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples' money." Margarat Thatcher
It is as simple as the House holding a vote to make this impeachment investigation legit.
Then BOTH sides can present their evidence, witnesses, and issue subpoenas.
It is called Due Process. That is American Justice.
As it is, one side has its hands tied, trying to make their case to a Press that won't listen while the other side has it their own way, with the Press supporting them.
That is called a Lynching. Dems are good at Lynchings and have done it for a century.
No low 2 low. Nothing wrong with what is going on except the tears from Trumpians. A vote won't change the fact that Trump commited this crime.
You gots you a crime???
Then you should urge your congressman to vote for impeachment! Or at least vote for an official investigation.
We need to get to the bottom of this here!
They are still searching for a crime. 3 years in the term and still searching for a crime. It is a joke.
They're not looking for a crime, they're looking for votes.
They are trying to create a crime. It doesn't matter what it is as long as there is a perception of a crime. After that, they need a couple wimp republican house members and maybe a couple senators to vote with them on their bogus impeachment. Then they can scream to the heavens they had a bipartisan effort to remove Trump, and those horrible republicans wouldn't let them.
This is nothing more than political theater to get votes.
Support for impeachment has risen to 58% and 49% support Trumps removal via impeachment.
This poll was taken before Trump decided to pull troops out of Syria...such an unpopular decision on Trumps part that Republican Senators are joining with the Dems in criticizing Trump.
so basically trump's people were trying to make a crap ton of money and influence in ukraine, then tried to cover their tracks by making it about Biden.
you conservatives really found a way to make Bush seem like a great republican president. congrats, in all the worse ways imaginable.
AP's key findings about Ukraine gas deal Trump allies sought
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Associated Press reported Monday that a circle of businessmen and Republican donors touted their connections to President Donald Trump and his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani as they sought to install new management at the top of Ukraine's state-owned gas company last spring. The intervention was happening while Giuliani was pressuring Ukraine to investigate Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden. But in this case, the aims were profit, not politics. Their plan hit a snag after the election of Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, but then U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry took up the effort to install a friendlier management team at the company, Naftogaz. Perry has denied any wrongdoing.
Among the AP's findings:
THE FLORIDA MEN: Two Soviet-born Florida businessmen who worked with Giuliani, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, leveraged political contacts made through hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations to Republicans, including $325,000 to a Trump-allied PAC, to help pursue a business deal involving Naftogaz. With the men at a dinner In Houston was Florida GOP mega-donor and oil magnate Harry Sargeant III. According to two AP sources, their sales pitch was to force out the chief executive at the Ukrainian gas giant and replace him with a team that would carry out exclusive deals. The winners would be corporate entities controlled by Trump allies to profit from exporting U.S. liquefied natural gas into the war-torn former Soviet republic. A lawyer for Sargeant denies he was involved in any business dealings in Ukraine.
THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYER: During the same time period, Parnas and Fruman also served as fixers for Giuliani. They helped him set up meetings with key Ukrainian officials where President Trump's personal attorney pressed the country's government to open an investigation into Joe Biden. Trump himself later asked Zelenskiy in a July phone call to investigate the former Democratic vice president and his son. That request is now the focus of the impeachment inquiry by House Democrats.
THE TRUMP HOTEL MEETING: A couple weeks after the dinner in Houston, Parnas accompanied Giuliani to a meeting at the Trump International Hotel in Washington where the pursuit of energy deals in the former Soviet bloc was discussed, according to an AP source with knowledge of the conversation. Giuliani told the AP on Friday that the proposed deal involved Uzbekistan, not Ukraine.
THE AMBASSADOR: At both the Houston and Washington meetings, Parnas said Trump planned to remove U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and replace her with someone more open to aiding their business interests, according to three AP sources. She was recalled to Washington two months later. Giuliani confirmed to the AP he "did play a role" in replacing Yovanovitch.
THE PRESIDENT'S EX-LAWYER: John Dowd, a former Trump attorney who now represents Parnas and Fruman, told the AP in an interview Friday it was actually the Naftogaz executives who approached his clients about making a deal. Dowd says the group then presented the proposal to Perry to get the Energy Department on board. Perry confirms he spoke with Giuliani by phone, but a spokeswoman for the energy secretary declined to say when that call was or whether the two discussed Naftogaz.
THE KYIV MEETING: In a face-to-face meeting with Zelenskiy in May, Perry pressed the Ukrainian president to replace a key Naftogaz supervisory board that is supposed to help root out corruption, according to an AP source who was in the room. Perry then provided a list of suggested replacements that included Michael Bleyzer, a Ukrainian-American businessman who gave $20,000 to support the former Texas governor's 2010 reelection campaign.
THE ENERGY SECRETARY: Perry said Monday the Ukrainian government asked for a list of recommended advisers on energy issues, though he said he could not recall whether his political donor's name was on the list. The day before, a spokeswoman for the Energy Department confirmed Bleyzer was on the list.
THE PRESIDENT BLAMES PERRY: On Friday, Trump told a group of Republican lawmakers that it was Perry who had prompted the July phone call in which Trump asked Zelenskiy for a "favor" regarding Biden, according to an AP source familiar with the president's remarks. Trump said Perry had asked Trump to make the call to discuss "something about an LNG (liquefied natural gas) plant."
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
It is as simple as the House holding a vote to make this impeachment investigation legit.
Then BOTH sides can present their evidence, witnesses, and issue subpoenas.
It is called Due Process. That is American Justice.
As it is, one side has its hands tied, trying to make their case to a Press that won't listen while the other side has it their own way, with the Press supporting them.
That is called a Lynching. Dems are good at Lynchings and have done it for a century.
Let me explain how hypocritical this is.
When it came to Trump releasing his taxes, you all claimed, "There is no rule or law that requires this".
It was pointed out to all of you that every president for the last 50 years had released their taxes and that it was now the standard. But you didn't care because other presidents, longer than 50 years ago did not.
And now?
There have been three impeachment inquiries. Clinton, Nixon and Andrew Johnson. A vote was taken in the examples of both Clinton and Nixon. No vote was taken on Andrew Johnson.
There is no rule or law that states you must take a vote to proceed with a presidential impeachment inquiry. It's just an excuse for a cover up.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Trump acts like a dictator. he thinks everything in government is owned by him, including thinking the DoJ is suppose to be his personal lawyer and do his bidding.
the GOP needs to grow a backbone, seeing as replace all the things trump has said and done with the name obama or hillary, and the gop and conservatives wouldve already had them lynched in public.
LOL...grow a back bone? We have a solid backbone. You are the ones with a wishbone.
President Trump is exactly what this country needed.
For the longest time people on both sides have said vote all of them out. Now we have a President thumbing his nose at them and telling them to go to hell and people are up in arms.
It really funny to watch.
The President isn't going to be removed from office, he is going to roll in the next election, and many, many Dems are the one's going to be "impeached" as they don't get re-elected.
That is the fury to try to remove the President from office. They know they don't have an electable candidate.
Who cares if he talked to the Ukraine President. I don't. It's no different then when Biden talked to the Ukraine President to get his son off the hook. That's politics.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
(CNN)President Donald Trump directed Secretary of Energy Rick Perry and two top State Department officials to deal with his private attorney Rudy Giuliani when the Ukrainian President sought to meet Trump, in a clear circumvention of official channels, according to two sources familiar with the conversation.
Trump believed Ukraine was still rampantly corrupt and said that if President Volodymyr Zelensky wanted to meet with him, Giuliani would have to be convinced first, one source said. "If they can satisfy Rudy, they can satisfy the President," a person familiar with the meeting said. Trump's push to have Giuliani as gatekeeper is more direct than what was previously disclosed by one of the meeting's participants in his statement to the House last week. It also further demonstrates how significant Giuliani was in brokering access to the President regarding Ukraine policy and in passing messages to other administration officials. A key accusation in the whistleblower's complaint that has prompted the impeachment probe into the President's dealings with Ukraine is that Giuliani, a private citizen, had been presenting to Ukraine a US policy different than that from US diplomats. At the May 23 meeting, Perry, US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland and Kurt Volker, then the State Department's special representative to Ukraine, were reporting back to Trump after they returned from Zelensky's inauguration. Their goal was to tell Trump that they had a favorable impression of Zelensky and his government, and that he was a reformer who Trump should trust and engage with, according to three sources familiar with the meeting. They were hoping to set up a meeting between Trump and Zelensky, the sources said. They believed Ukraine under Zelensky was a more trusted ally than previous Ukrainian regimes, and that a visit between Trump and Zelensky could demonstrate to the Russian government that the US embraced a free Ukraine, according to two of the sources. Notably, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was in Washington on May 23 but he did not attend the meeting with Trump. Perry had led the delegation who attended Zelensky's inauguration, and was a central figure in the May meeting with Trump. It became clear to the Trump administration officials, the sources said, that they would have to deal with Giuliani. Volker hinted last week in speaking to the House how central Giuliani was in the President's foreign policy approach to Ukraine. "The President was very skeptical," Volker said to the House committees, describing what had happened when he, Sondland and Perry spoke to Trump. "In the course of that conversation, he referenced conversations with Mayor Giuliani." "He was clearly receiving other information from other sources, including Mayor Giuliani, that was more negative, causing him to retain this negative view" of a corrupt Ukraine, Volker added. The US officials then set out to correct the information feed coming into the President while realizing they would need to work with --and around -- Giuliani, according to the sources. Two months later, during an interagency meeting, the Office of Management and Budget announced it would review whether Ukraine should receive $400 million in assistance from the US that had been set aside by Congress. The question on aid that arose later eventually became a major topic of conversation among Sondland, Volker and others. Perry acknowledged speaking to Giuliani, according to an Energy Department spokesperson. The spokesperson didn't comment on the meeting itself or the substance of the conversations with Giuliani. When asked if he had ever spoken to Perry about Ukraine, Giuliani responded by dismissing the question. "Did Henry Kissinger ever call me about Ukraine," Giuliani wrote to CNN on Tuesday. "What about Colin Powell." He then said that any information about his possible discussions with Perry would be privileged. He did not explain why.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/PortlandDawg/banner.jpg)
![[Linked Image from s2.excoboard.com]](http://s2.excoboard.com/forums/25521/user/302752/484538.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)