RadioFreeLiberal.com

Smart Voices, Be Heard
It is currently Sat Oct 19, 2019 4:07 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 89 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 1:16 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:20 pm
Posts: 6869

Yes, that's correct. One thing at a time.

Back up what you say about Libby, that's been the only request. At first you got overdefensive because I brought up white conservative history in responding to what they perceive as "confrontation". But that was just an obvious effort to avoid backing up what you said. You still can't do it because it doesn't exist.



You can simply ask him yourself. But your inability to come clean about your claims about Libby when challenged to provide even one quote is par for the course.



You know, it's really rare that I post about white conservative hypocrisy or indifference for truth, though I could. Instead I post about white conservative history and the continuity of the white conservative past with what is happening right now in current events. I also post about a lot more than just the "conservative white" element of the problems with American conservatism, but some of you only notice one thing for some reason.

Read it, or don't. I don't care whether or not you read what I write.

But Libby is right about the need to protect ourselves and kids from conservative laws, social norms, and public policies.

When we take it to the streets it's conservative politicians that make laws to exonerate people who would run us over.

And from ProfX's Huffpo post:



Donald Trump (R), Rudy Giuliani (R).

The R. party is supposed to be the party of law and order and support of law enforcement, but your party is lawless with Donald Trump as the party leader. You continue to vote for this?

Okay. One thing at a time. The only request I made was for you to apply the same standard to Libby that you apply to me. Let me know when you get that done. You don’t get to dictate the rules. This is a conversation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 1:29 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 22720
Okay. One thing at a time. The only request I made was for you to apply the same standard to Libby that you apply to me. Let me know when you get that done.


I'm not your staff.

You OTOH are pointing at someone else to cover for your own inability to verify your own statement.

Quote:
You don’t get to dictate the rules. This is a conversation.


Asking you to 1- back up what you say by 2- pointing out where Libby said what you claim isn't dictating any rules, though that's an interesting choice of words. I notice you've used it twice.

He's never said what you claim. If he says it all the time like you say he does, it should be very easy for you to find and a post or posts where he's done so. There's also other options like acknowledging that you don't know of any such posts, or that you're simply misremembering and perhaps embellishing what he's actually said.

Are you familiar with the #NotAll... hashtags? or whattabouttery?

_________________
WHAT DON'T YOU GIT?? THEY WOKE!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 3:35 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 22720
https://twitter.com/cjcmichel/status/11 ... 6114764800

Casey Michel
@cjcmichel
‘A whistleblower complaint about President Trump made by an intelligence official centers on Ukraine, according to two people familiar with the matter’
Whistleblower complaint about President Trump involves Ukraine, according to two people familiar...

Democratic lawmakers are demanding to see the complaint made by an intelligence official who formerly worked in the White House.
washingtonpost.com


The Rudy footage literally yelling about "Ukrainian collusion with Hillary Clinton 1.5 million..." in this Twitter thread would be hilarious if it wasn't so serious. Other valuable links to articles in it, too.

_________________
WHAT DON'T YOU GIT?? THEY WOKE!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 7:31 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 15586
Location: Sunny South Florida
So what is it Ghouliani thought he would find? Charlie Krist on a pogo stick, they can't even lie very well.

Giuliani says 'of course' he asked Ukraine to look into Biden seconds after denying it
https://thehill.com/policy/national-sec ... en-seconds

President Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani gave conflicting answers in an interview on CNN on Thursday night as to whether he asked Ukraine to look into former Vice President Joe Biden, saying at one point "of course I did."

After CNN host Chris Cuomo questioned whether Giuliani had asked Ukraine to investigate Biden, Giuliani said, "No, actually I didn't. I asked the Ukraine to investigate the allegations that there was interference in the election of 2016 by the Ukrainians for the benefit of Hillary Clinton."

"You never asked anything about Hunter Biden? You never asked anything about Joe Biden?" Cuomo followed up.

"The only thing I asked about Joe Biden is to get to the bottom of how it was that Lutsenko ... dismissed the case against AntAC," Giuliani said, referring to former Ukrainian prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko and the Ukrainian-based Anti-Corruption Action Centre (AntAC).

"So you did ask Ukraine to look into Joe Biden," Cuomo said.

"Of course I did," Giuliani replied.

"You just said you didn't," Cuomo responded.


"I didn't ask them to look into Joe Biden," Giuliani shot back. "I asked them to look into the allegations that related to my client which tangentially involved Joe Biden." :roll:

In 2016, Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees unless Ukraine removed a top prosecutor, who was later voted out amid corruption allegations, according to The New York Times.

Biden’s younger son, Hunter Biden, was a board member of an energy company that the prosecutor had also been looking into, according to the newspaper.

Giuliani previously said last month that he had spoken to a Ukrainian official about Biden, who is the Democratic presidential front-runner, saying his conversation focused on Biden's possible role in the prosecutor's dismissal of the gas company investigation.

[snip][end]

OK ... so let me try and disentangle this all.

I suppose it could be true Joe Biden tried to pressure the Ukrainian government into getting this prosecutor to drop the case because he was looking into a gas company where Hunter Biden was involved. Of course, I see allegations but no evidence.

.... that has what to do with, supposedly, 'the Ukrainian government interfering to get Hillary elected'?

Like so much coming out of the maladmin, this barely makes sense.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 7:43 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 15586
Location: Sunny South Florida
Joe Biden's 2020 Ukrainian nightmare: A closed probe is revived
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house ... is-revived

In his own words, with video cameras rolling, Biden described how he threatened Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March 2016 that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending the former Soviet republic toward insolvency, if it didn’t immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

“I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion.’ I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’” Biden recalled telling Poroshenko.

“Well, son of a bitch, he got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time,” Biden told the Council on Foreign Relations event, insisting that President Obama was in on the threat.

Interviews with a half-dozen senior Ukrainian officials confirm Biden’s account, though they claim the pressure was applied over several months in late 2015 and early 2016, not just six hours of one dramatic day. Whatever the case, Poroshenko and Ukraine’s parliament obliged by ending Shokin’s tenure as prosecutor. Shokin was facing steep criticism in Ukraine, and among some U.S. officials, for not bringing enough corruption prosecutions when he was fired.

But Ukrainian officials tell me there was one crucial piece of information that Biden must have known but didn’t mention to his audience: The prosecutor he got fired was leading a wide-ranging corruption probe into the natural gas firm Burisma Holdings that employed Biden’s younger son, Hunter, as a board member.

U.S. banking records show Hunter Biden’s American-based firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, received regular transfers into one of its accounts — usually more than $166,000 a month — from Burisma from spring 2014 through fall 2015, during a period when Vice President Biden was the main U.S. official dealing with Ukraine and its tense relations with Russia.

[snip][end]

So: was Shokin fired just because of Biden's grandstanding? Or were there other reasons? Once again, the rest of the Obama administration, including the POTUS, supported this, I don't think solely to protect Biden's son.

I get the allegation here ... it looks like it could be something hinky ... but as with claims Hillary Clinton "helped the Russians get our uranium," the stories fall apart once you look for the actual evidence.

Even if the worst is true, that does not give the current POTUS, Trump, the right to "blackmail" the Ukrainian government now into giving "dirt," real or imagined, on Biden. The strangest irony is that would be the current maladmin essentially doing the same thing they're accusing Biden of doing in 2016.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 7:55 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 15586
Location: Sunny South Florida
OK. I would not expect the Intercept to be in Joe Biden's corner, but these days I often get surprised.

They say this is all nonsense.

A Republican Conspiracy Theory About a Biden-in-Ukraine Scandal Has Gone Mainstream. But It Is Not True.
https://theintercept.com/2019/05/10/rum ... rmer-says/

VIRAL RUMORS THAT Joe Biden abused his power as vice president to protect his son’s business interests in Ukraine in 2016, which spread last week from the pro-Trump media ecosystem to the New York Times, are “absolute nonsense,” according to Ukraine’s leading anti-corruption activist. That evaluation is backed by foreign correspondents in Kiev and a former official with knowledge of Biden’s outreach to Ukraine after President Viktor Yanukovych was deposed in a popular uprising in 2014.

In an interview with The Intercept, Daria Kaleniuk, an American-educated lawyer who founded Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Action Center, expressed frustration that two recent front-page stories in the New York Times, on how the conspiracy theory is being used to attack Biden, failed to properly debunk the false accusation. According to Kaleniuk, and a former anti-corruption prosecutor, there is simply no truth to the rumor now spreading like wildfire across the internet.

The accusation is that Biden blackmailed Ukraine’s new leaders into firing the country’s chief prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, to derail an investigation he was leading into a Ukrainian gas company that the vice president’s son, Hunter, was paid to advise.

The truth, Kaleniuk said, is that Shokin was forced from office at Biden’s urging because he had failed to conduct thorough investigations of corruption, and had stifled efforts to investigate embezzlement and misconduct by public officials following the 2014 uprising.

There is no question that Biden did, during a visit to Kiev in late 2015, threaten to withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees unless Shokin was dismissed. But the vice president, who was leading the Obama administration’s effort to fight corruption in Ukraine, did the country a favor by hastening Shokin’s departure, Kaleniuk said, since he had failed to properly investigate corrupt officials.

“Shokin was fired because he attacked the reformers within the prosecutor general’s office,” Kaleniuk said, “reformers who tried to investigate corrupt prosecutors.”

As Andrew Kramer explained in the New York Times when Shokin was finally dismissed in 2016, Biden had acted as the point man for a coordinated international effort:

The United States and other Western nations had for months called for the ousting of Mr. Shokin, who was widely criticized for turning a blind eye to corrupt practices and for defending the interests of a venal and entrenched elite. He was one of several political figures in Kiev whom reformers and Western diplomats saw as a worrying indicator of a return to past corrupt practices, two years after a revolution that was supposed to put a stop to self-dealing by those in power.

[snip]

“Shokin was fired,” Kaleniuk observed, “because he failed to do investigations of corruption and economic crimes of President Yanukovych and his close associates, including Zlochevsky, and basically it was the big demand within society in Ukraine, including our organization and many other organizations, to get rid of this guy.”

By getting Shokin removed, Biden in fact made it more rather than less likely that the oligarch who employed his son would be subject to prosecution for corruption.

[snip][end]

OK. It IS like the stories of "Hillary helping the Russians get our uranium" :roll: ... it falls apart once you examine it. Yes, Biden pressured them to fire Shokin. But it was because a lot of other Americans, Ukrainians, and people in the international community thought he was doing a piss-poor job and might have been corrupt himself. Not to protect his son Hunter Biden. Because, in fact, replacing Shokin would have actually meant someone might MORE aggressively go after Burisma and other companies.

Ghouliani as always was grasping at straws, and Trump was squeezing Ukraine to get ... fake juice.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:02 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:20 pm
Posts: 6869

Yes, that's correct. One thing at a time.

Back up what you say about Libby, that's been the only request. At first you got overdefensive because I brought up white conservative history in responding to what they perceive as "confrontation". But that was just an obvious effort to avoid backing up what you said. You still can't do it because it doesn't exist.



You can simply ask him yourself. But your inability to come clean about your claims about Libby when challenged to provide even one quote is par for the course.



You know, it's really rare that I post about white conservative hypocrisy or indifference for truth, though I could. Instead I post about white conservative history and the continuity of the white conservative past with what is happening right now in current events. I also post about a lot more than just the "conservative white" element of the problems with American conservatism, but some of you only notice one thing for some reason.

Read it, or don't. I don't care whether or not you read what I write.

But Libby is right about the need to protect ourselves and kids from conservative laws, social norms, and public policies.

When we take it to the streets it's conservative politicians that make laws to exonerate people who would run us over.

And from ProfX's Huffpo post:



Donald Trump (R), Rudy Giuliani (R).

The R. party is supposed to be the party of law and order and support of law enforcement, but your party is lawless with Donald Trump as the party leader. You continue to vote for this?


Regarding your remarks about not being on my staff. That is wonderful news.

As to the rest, you are harping on a point to avoid dealing with the hypocrisy and double standard in your own behaviour. Libby himself admits to being confrontational. Anyone reading his continuous rants is well aware of it. I on the other hand have never advocated for confrontation in the street violent or otherwise. He has on more than one occasion said that I have. You overlook his empty assertions. Why is that? If you want to be the net nanny around here you need to work on your consistency. Otherwise you are simply a hypocrite.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 1:02 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 22720
I on the other hand have never advocated for confrontation in the street violent or otherwise. He has on more than one occasion said that I have. You overlook his empty assertions.


Pointing at Libby because you can't produce posts where he says what you claim is whattabouttery.

Are you familiar with the #Notall... hashtags?

_________________
WHAT DON'T YOU GIT?? THEY WOKE!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 3:46 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 19648
Location: The blue parts of the map
The biggest political scandal since Watergate, and we're talking about hypothetical street confrontations.

The confrontation that I'm looking for is in the House Judiciary Committee. There is no longer any doubt that the president and his cabal have gone rogue, and the only valid debate is over how to stop them.

Not just the Ukraine plot to smear an opponent. How about the assertion that the president cannot be criminally investigated AT ALL? In other words, that he really could walk out into 5th Avenue and shoot somebody in cold blood, and not be guilty of a wrongdoing? This means, basically, that the president is a dictator.

It's the constitutional crisis of a lifetime. What are you going to do about it?

_________________
Human extinction is bad for business.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 3:49 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 22720
Well. Alrighty, then.


Yamiche Alcindor
@Yamiche
Wow.

President Trump in a July phone call repeatedly pressured the president of Ukraine to investigate Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden ’s son, urging Volodymyr Zelensky about eight times to work with Rudy Giuliani.
WSJ News Exclusive | Trump Repeatedly Pressed Ukraine President to Investigate Biden’s Son

President Trump in a July phone call repeatedly pressured the president of Ukraine to investigate Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden’s son, urging Volodymyr Zelensky about eight times to...
wsj.com
12:40 PM · Sep 20, 2019


wsj.com link goes to this paywalled article, https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-defe ... 1568993176

_________________
WHAT DON'T YOU GIT?? THEY WOKE!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 4:25 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 19648
Location: The blue parts of the map
Right, Maddow has been banging on the edges of this for a week now. Everything fell into place today. A sitting president tried to blackmail the sovereign head of a foreign country to help rig the election.

Hope everyone's seen the videos of Rudy completely losing it on Cuomo's show last night. Total meltdown. He said he didn't do it and then he said he did, and later he tweeted that the president was in on it.

Notice it's always Ukraine. They all had their dirty little hands in the poop over there.

_________________
Human extinction is bad for business.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 4:38 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:20 pm
Posts: 6869
The biggest political scandal since Watergate, and we're talking about hypothetical street confrontations.

The confrontation that I'm looking for is in the House Judiciary Committee. There is no longer any doubt that the president and his cabal have gone rogue, and the only valid debate is over how to stop them.

Not just the Ukraine plot to smear an opponent. How about the assertion that the president cannot be criminally investigated AT ALL? In other words, that he really could walk out into 5th Avenue and shoot somebody in cold blood, and not be guilty of a wrongdoing? This means, basically, that the president is a dictator.

It's the constitutional crisis of a lifetime. What are you going to do about it?


Point taken

There are facts flying all around on this story. Is it pressure or is it blackmail? I don’t know and don’t care what it is called at this point. No sitting President (or any other cabinet officer or elected official) should be using the powers of his/her office to target a political opponent. That is abuse of power. It’s corrupt. It’s dishonest. It’s a breach of the public trust. It’s below the dignity of the office. It’s impeachable in my view.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 4:39 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 19648
Location: The blue parts of the map
Blackmail might be too strong a word.

We're on the same page regarding everything else.

_________________
Human extinction is bad for business.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 5:12 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 15586
Location: Sunny South Florida
Looks like the main thing Congress is putting its energy into is finally getting the whistleblower to come forward and testify. BTW, speculation is rife as to who the whistleblower could be, as bear in mind there would be few people allowed to listen in on a phone call to a foreign leader.

Dan Coates' name has been dropped. Please note, I am not psychic, and I'm merely repeating a widespread guess. But ... wouldn't it be a pisser if it was him?

The whistleblower is, apparently, claiming there could be more to this than just the Ukrainian pressure story ... there were "multiple acts" according to several outlets ... perhaps there ALSO was some hinky promises made on the July 31st phone call to Russia. We may not even know the full dimensions of it all.

Soooooo .... I say get the whistleblower to testify, get it in the Congressional Record, let all bombs fly, and yes, THEN, IMPEACH THE MOTHERFUCKER.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2019 8:38 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 15586
Location: Sunny South Florida
I guess it's good to be king. Except you aren't, Don. :roll:

TRUMP: MY CRIMES CAN’T BE INVESTIGATED WHILE I’M PRESIDENT
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/09 ... ns-lawsuit

As you may or may not have heard, Donald Trump refused to release his tax returns while running for president, claiming, falsely, that an audit prevented him from doing so but that the public would see them just as soon as he got the green light. Two years and 242 days after moving into the White House that, of course, has not happened. Instead, Trump has sicced his Treasury secretary, attorney general, and various personal lawyers on anyone attempting to get their hands on the information, in a manner suggesting the details within could make a person look quite bad. Typically, Trump’s attorneys have argued that such requests, like the ones from various House committees, constitute “PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT” or supposedly lack “a legitimate legislative purpose.” On Thursday, though, they came up with a novel new argument: It’s illegal to investigate a sitting president for any crimes he may have committed.

In a lawsuit filed today against Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., who recently subpoenaed eight years of Trump’s tax returns to determine if the Trump Organization falsified business records relating to Stormy Daniels payments, the president’s lawyers claim such a request is unconstitutional because the founding fathers believed sitting presidents should not be subject to the criminal process. “The framers of our Constitution understood that state and local prosecutors would be tempted to criminally investigate the president to advance their own careers and to advance their political agendas,” the suit reads. “And they likewise understood that having to defend against these actions would distract the president from his constitutional duties.”

Strangely, actual legal experts aren’t entirely convinced of this argument. “Even assuming that the president cannot be indicted while in office, it does not follow that his business and associates are likewise immune from investigation,” Harry Sandick, a former federal prosecutor, told Bloomberg. “The complaint makes light of the idea that ruling in their favor would elevate the president above the law, but it certainly seems as if the president views himself as above the law.”

[snip][end]

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2019 9:08 am 
Online
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:01 pm
Posts: 19753
Frank Figliuzzi was on with Brian Williams last night. Figliuzzi (former Assistant Director for Counterintelligence at the Federal Bureau of Investigation) is probably the person I most respect of all the people that CNN and MSNBC have on for their panel discussions every night. Anyway Figliuzzi confirmed the problems with this behavior in his typical thorough set-up, and then he said (I parapharase), "If this was anybody else in this country, including any other President in the history of this country, he would already be under criminal investigation by the DOJ. And when complete, the results of the investigation would be handed over to the US House for their impeachment process."

Figliuzzi pulled no punches in his description of this as "criminal behavior" and he agrees with the Inspector General's assessment of the incident being "serious" and requiring "urgent" attention. Trump and his toadies in the Congress can bleat about it being "highly partisan" all day long. But it was reported to the Inspector General and identified as "serious" and requiring "urgent" attention. Is the Inspector General "highly partisan"?

_________________
I never said you were a racist Ike.

BUT YOU'RE NOT RACIST....EXCEPT WHEN YOU ARE.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2019 4:26 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 19648
Location: The blue parts of the map
I guess it's good to be king. Except you aren't, Don. :roll:

TRUMP: MY CRIMES CAN’T BE INVESTIGATED WHILE I’M PRESIDENT
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/09 ... ns-lawsuit

As you may or may not have heard, Donald Trump refused to release his tax returns while running for president, claiming, falsely, that an audit prevented him from doing so but that the public would see them just as soon as he got the green light. Two years and 242 days after moving into the White House that, of course, has not happened. Instead, Trump has sicced his Treasury secretary, attorney general, and various personal lawyers on anyone attempting to get their hands on the information, in a manner suggesting the details within could make a person look quite bad. Typically, Trump’s attorneys have argued that such requests, like the ones from various House committees, constitute “PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT” or supposedly lack “a legitimate legislative purpose.” On Thursday, though, they came up with a novel new argument: It’s illegal to investigate a sitting president for any crimes he may have committed.

In a lawsuit filed today against Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., who recently subpoenaed eight years of Trump’s tax returns to determine if the Trump Organization falsified business records relating to Stormy Daniels payments, the president’s lawyers claim such a request is unconstitutional because the founding fathers believed sitting presidents should not be subject to the criminal process. “The framers of our Constitution understood that state and local prosecutors would be tempted to criminally investigate the president to advance their own careers and to advance their political agendas,” the suit reads. “And they likewise understood that having to defend against these actions would distract the president from his constitutional duties.”

Strangely, actual legal experts aren’t entirely convinced of this argument. “Even assuming that the president cannot be indicted while in office, it does not follow that his business and associates are likewise immune from investigation,” Harry Sandick, a former federal prosecutor, told Bloomberg. “The complaint makes light of the idea that ruling in their favor would elevate the president above the law, but it certainly seems as if the president views himself as above the law.”

[snip][end]


POTUS takes an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the US Constitution. The Constitution, and all its succeeding interpretations, are clear that that the president is NOT above the law, and the United States by definition is not a dictatorship. The legal scholars are all over this one, and they can't find anything that would justify drumpf's assertion. Having a dingbat attorney who used to run NYC as something of an oligarch does not excuse any of this.

NiXon had the same idea, though he didn't talk about it as much. He resigned right when we were getting ready to impeach the motherfucker.

_________________
Human extinction is bad for business.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 8:44 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 15586
Location: Sunny South Florida
[from twitter]
Venture Capital @kelly2277
BREAKING NEWS@RudyGiuliani and @realDonaldTrump want REVENGE on @JoeBiden for removing their Judicial FIXER, Ukrainian Prosecutor Shokin. He wasn’t prosecuting RU mafia corruption- which includes Rudy’s clients #Whistleblower cc @MingGao26
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1022 ... 08450.html

Thread by @kelly2277: "Igor Fruman and Lev Parnas are part of the Sunny Isles, FL - Russian Mar A Lago Trump crowd that launders money thrug.com/news/articles/… Here’s some LLCs w Lev Parnas or his...
threadreaderapp.com
[snip][end]

This was from back in July:
Meet the Florida Duo Helping Giuliani Investigate for Trump in Ukraine
https://www.occrp.org/en/investigations ... in-ukraine

Two Soviet-born Florida businessmen — one linked to a Ukrainian tycoon with reputed mafia ties — are key hidden actors behind a plan by U.S. President Donald J. Trump’s personal attorney to investigate the president’s rivals.

[snip]

At the center of Giuliani’s back-channel diplomacy are the two businessmen, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, who Giuliani has publicly identified as his clients.

[snip]

Since early last year, the men have emerged from obscurity to become major donors to Republican campaigns in the United States. They have collectively contributed over half a million dollars to candidates and outside campaign groups, the lion’s share in a single transaction that an independent watchdog has flagged as a potential violation of electoral funding law.

The men appear to enjoy a measure of access to influential figures. They’ve dined with Trump, had a “power breakfast” with his son Donald Jr., met with U.S. congressmen, and mixed with Republican elites.

[snip]

While setting up meetings for Giuliani with Ukrainian officials, the men also promoted a business plan of their own: Selling American liquefied natural gas to Ukraine to replace Russian imports disrupted by war.

[snip]

The men make for unlikely back-channel diplomats. Parnas, 47, is a former stockbroker with a history of unpaid debts, including half a million dollars owed to a Hollywood movie investor. Fruman, 53, has spent much of his career in Ukraine, and has ties to a powerful local businessman reputed to be in the inner circle of one of the country’s most infamous mafia groups.

[snip]

Kenneth McCallion, an ex-federal prosecutor who has represented former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yuliya Tymoshenko in U.S. court, said that Parnas and Fruman were “playing with fire” by lobbying in the United States and Ukraine without registering as foreign agents.

[snip]

However, Biden was not alone in his disdain for Shokin. The former top prosecutor was dismissed by parliament after a chorus of criticism by European diplomats and international organizations, and even street protests calling for his resignation.

Local anti-corruption activists had become convinced Shokin was quashing investigations into Burisma’s owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, and other oligarchs, said Daria Kaleniuk, the director of the Anti-Corruption Action Center, a Ukrainian transparency group.

“Shokin was not dismissed because he wanted to investigate Burisma,” Kaleniuk said. “Quite the contrary. He was dismissed because of a lack of willingness to investigate this particular case as well as other important cases involving high-level associates of [ousted former President Viktor] Yanukovych.”

[snip]

A resident of upscale Boca Raton, Parnas once ran an electronics business that was successfully sued for its role in a fraudulent penny stock promotion scheme. He has also worked for three brokerages that later lost their licenses for fraud and other violations. He has never been personally charged.

Court records also show that judges have awarded a series of default judgements against Parnas for multiple unpaid debts. These include over $500,000 he owes to an investor in a Hollywood movie that he had promoted but was never made. He has also been sued a dozen times over the last decade for failing to pay rent on various Palm Beach County properties and has been evicted from two homes.

Fruman’s backstory is even more colorful.

His network of businesses extends from the United States to the city of Odesa, a Ukrainian Black Sea port notorious for corruption and organized crime.

Reporters found that Fruman has personal ties to a powerful local: Volodymyr “The Lightbulb” Galanternik, a shadowy businessman commonly referred to as the “Grey Cardinal” of Odesa.

Galanternik is described by local media and activists as a close associate of Gennadiy Trukhanov, the mayor of Odesa who was shown in the late 1990s to be a senior member of a feared organized criminal group involved in fuel smuggling and weapons trading.

[snip]

The lion’s share of these donations, however, was just one $325,000 payment, made on May 17, 2018, to America First Action. The group is one of the largest pro-Trump Super Political Action Committees (commonly known as Super PACs), a kind of outside campaign organization that is allowed to raise unlimited funds in support of a candidate, but is barred from working directly with their campaign.

That payment was declared as coming from a Delaware company, Global Energy Producers LLC, set up by Fruman and Parnas just weeks before as part of their plan to sell gas to Ukraine.

The donation is subject to an ongoing complaint to the FEC by the Campaign Legal Center, a watchdog group, alleging the company is likely a shell intended to hide other donors.

[snip]

Given Parnas and Fruman’s relationships with senior Ukrainian officials and their business interests in the country, their lobbying against a U.S. ambassador raises questions about their compliance with the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

The act requires Americans operating on behalf of a foreign entity in the United States to declare their work to the Department of Justice. Parnas and Fruman did not do so.

[snip][end]

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 8:54 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 19648
Location: The blue parts of the map
See, this is what I'm saying. Everyone in our current ruling oligarchy has side action going in Ukraine. One of them is currently doing time for this.

I can't think of a time since the end of the Cold War and the creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States out of the former USSR when this hasn't been the case.

_________________
Human extinction is bad for business.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 6:29 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 15586
Location: Sunny South Florida
If you thought "lock her up" was tame ... Donald just said Joe Biden should have gotten the electric chair. At the UN, of all places.

Trump claims that if Biden were a Republican he'd get the 'electric chair' – live
The president repeated his debunked claims that the former vice-president and his son are corrupt
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/liv ... st-updates

Electric chair ... for what? Even if he were guilty of what they've accused him of ... doing something illegal to protect his son Hunter ... which there's no evidence for ... the death penalty?

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 6:39 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 15586
Location: Sunny South Florida
Trump's Republican challenger William Weld has said Trump has committed treason and should resign immediately. I agree on both points.

President Trump has committed treason and ought to consider resigning now, says Republican challenger Bill Weld
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/presi ... 2019-09-23

I may not be participating in the primaries you will be in, Msr. Weld, but I hope you get a fair chance to be heard.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2019 5:28 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 15586
Location: Sunny South Florida
Schiff on Twitter:

AdamSchiff@RepAdamSchiff
We have been informed by the whistleblower’s counsel that their client would like to speak to our committee and has requested guidance from the Acting DNI as to how to do so.

We‘re in touch with counsel and look forward to the whistleblower’s testimony as soon as this week.


Also:

Steven Dennis✔@StevenTDennis
The Senate has *unanimously* agreed to Schumer's resolution calling for the whistleblower complaint to be turned over the intelligence committees immediately.

It's all going down.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2019 5:51 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am
Posts: 17002
Schiff on Twitter:

AdamSchiff@RepAdamSchiff
We have been informed by the whistleblower’s counsel that their client would like to speak to our committee and has requested guidance from the Acting DNI as to how to do so.

We‘re in touch with counsel and look forward to the whistleblower’s testimony as soon as this week.


Also:

Steven Dennis✔@StevenTDennis
The Senate has *unanimously* agreed to Schumer's resolution calling for the whistleblower complaint to be turned over the intelligence committees immediately.

It's all going down.



Now that Nancy has launched impeachment investigation, we can expect the DNI and all of the traitors to refuse to obey the law. They know they have putin on their side.

They will all refuse to do anything of course, and I hear that Moscow Mitch allowed a vote on releasing this material, so I am wondering if he knows they are sending a doctored document OR as Moscow Mitch knows he is himself guilty of betraying the country with the Russians, maybe he is scared.

Either Moscow Mitch is going to obstruct to protect himself or he is going to allow the truth to come out. I just said all of them will violate the law on this but maybe for once Moscow Mitch will do something that isnt a direct violation and betrayal

what do you all think?
?

_________________
"Corporate Democrat" phrase created at the same place "Angry Mob" was...People keep falling for rightwing talking points. How sad.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2019 6:08 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 15586
Location: Sunny South Florida
I think:

a) we are getting the substance of the whistleblower complaint by hook or crook, by the end of this week.
b) there's more in there than we know of so far. Remember, the whistleblower alleged "several acts" by the POTUS of which the phone call to Ukraine everybody has been discussing has only been one. It may be more than Ukraine that the whistleblower wants to talk about ... in fact, I agree with you some other material might deal with communications with Russia.
c) My Spidey Sense tells me once we have everything, this will be a "smoking gun" for impeachment kinda like the discovery of the Nixon tapes during Watergate.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2019 6:12 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:06 pm
Posts: 14032
Trump just took a big dump when Moscow Mitch allowed the Senate to vote on the non-binding resolution to have the whistleblower's complaint be made available to the House and the Senate. Looks like maybe Moscow Mitch is trying to protect his own ass as well as his fellow republicans who are up for reelection next year. This way, they can try and say they didn't something.

_________________
When you vote Left you vote right.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 89 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ike Bana and 20 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group