Per wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 1:11 pm
If the phone call was such a nothingburger, why did the White House try to bury it, and why did they try to stop the whistleblower’s account from reaching congress? These are the questions you must ask.
This is what is normally done with meaningless secondhand accounts.
Under the law, the inspector general must decide within 14 days whether the information is credible. The inspector general must also determine whether the allegations amount to an “urgent concern,” meaning they relate to a “serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of the law or executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the director of national intelligence involving classified information.”
If the complaint meets that standard, the inspector general is supposed to forward it to the director of national intelligence. The law says that within seven days of receiving the complaint, the director in turn shall forward the material to the House and Senate intelligence oversight committees.
Is that what happened here?
No. While the inspector general for the intelligence community, Michael K. Atkinson, told Congress that he had determined that the complaint was credible and qualified as an “urgent concern,” Mr. Maguire has refused to transmit it to Congress
Per wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 1:11 pm
Right.... well, Tucker is either stupid or dishonest there.
Trump doesn’t need to mention the aid.
It should have been delivered the week before, but Trump stopped it, for no reason.
C'mon Per, sane folk don't launch an impeachment inquiry based on imagination and maybes!
Neither imagination nor maybes.
Congress had approved of aid for the Ukraine.
Trump froze it, then called the Ukrainian president and asked fot a favour.
No ifs and buts. These are objective facts. This is what happened.
You are IMAGINING that MAYBE Lord Trump was threatening to withhold aid for nefarious reasons.
He wasn’t threatening to withhold aid, he was actually withholding aid, that is a fact. Sure, only for a few weeks, but the phone call was made while he was withholding that aid. These are facts that you cannot deny, no matter how you spin it.
You are IMAGING that the "favor" asked for was MAYBE something bad.
He was quite clear he wanted them to investigate Biden & son. Just like he asked Russia to hack Hillary’s e-mails. I see a pattern.
Traditionally in the USA (as well as pretty much anywhere else), asking foreign governments to intervene in your domestic political process has been frowned upon, hell, even considered treasonous.
As for possible wrongdoing by the Bidens; they have already been investigated for their dealings in the Ukraine and nothing was found. To continue launching new investigations reek of double jeopardy and, frankly, seems a wee bit like a witch hunt.
Besides, matters like that should not rest on the president but the FBI, or a special council. To bring it up in a phone call between two heads of states has a somewhat fishy bouqet of collussion.
(note folks ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE say Maguire behaved "honorably" in this matter)
Yes, he eventually did. But he was stalling for a while, which in part is why media got so interested. Maybe it was just because he was new at the job and wasn’t quite clear about what the law demanded? But in the end he delivered, so, good on him.
For Reefer, the situation explained in a simplified manner...
Lol foxnews again
Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2019 1:30 pm
by Strangelove
Per wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:14 pm
He wasn’t threatening to withhold aid, he was actually withholding aid, that is a fact. Sure, only for a few weeks
And?
Nothing wrong with that...
Per wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:14 pm
, but the phone call was made while he was withholding that aid. These are facts that you cannot deny, no matter how you spin it.
And?
Nothing wrong with that...
Per wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:14 pm
He was quite clear he wanted them to investigate Biden & son.
And?
Nothing wrong with that...
Per wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:14 pm
Just like he asked Russia to hack Hillary’s e-mails.
Did you IMAGINE that?
Per wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:14 pm
Traditionally in the USA (as well as pretty much anywhere else), asking foreign governments to intervene in your domestic political process has been frowned upon, hell, even considered treasonous.
Sure, but no one did that... except of course in your IMAGINATION.
Per wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:14 pm
As for possible wrongdoing by the Bidens; they have already been investigated for their dealings in the Ukraine and nothing was found.
VP Biden is on record bragging about having the prosecutor in that investigation fired, putting the brakes on the investigation.
Per wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:14 pm
To continue launching new investigations reek of double jeopardy and, frankly, seems a wee bit like a witch hunt.
It wouldn't be a new investigation, so no double jeopardy and btw... Uncle Joe is a witch!
"My orange hero" merely asked that they pick up the investigation where they left off and
Nothing wrong with that...
Per wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:14 pm
Besides, matters like that should not rest on the president but the FBI, or a special council. To bring it up in a phone call between two heads of states has a somewhat fishy bouqet of collussion.
That's quite the IMAGINATION you have there!
As I explained earlier, nothing wrong with the Prez asking a foreign gov to complete their investigation on a crooked US citizen.
It happens all the time and there's no one crookeder than Dirty Uncle Joe Biden.
Anyhoo, this whole informal impeachment inquiry is nothing more than political theater
... and you know it.
Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2019 1:36 pm
by Strangelove
Reefer2 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 27, 2019 8:31 am
Lol foxnews again
Lol yeah we know you've been brainwashed into never listening to foxnews...
Solomon: These once-secret memos cast doubt on Joe Biden's Ukraine story
09/26/19 06:00 PM EDT
Former Vice President Joe Biden, now a 2020 Democratic presidential contender, has locked into a specific story about the controversy in Ukraine.
He insists that, in spring 2016, he strong-armed Ukraine to fire its chief prosecutor solely because Biden believed that official was corrupt and inept, not because the Ukrainian was investigating a natural gas company, Burisma Holdings, that hired Biden's son, Hunter, into a lucrative job.
There’s just one problem.
Hundreds of pages of never-released memos and documents — many from inside the American team helping Burisma to stave off its legal troubles — conflict with Biden’s narrative.
And they raise the troubling prospect that U.S. officials may have painted a false picture in Ukraine that helped ease Burisma’s legal troubles and stop prosecutors’ plans to interview Hunter Biden during the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
For instance, Burisma’s American legal representatives met with Ukrainian officials just days after Biden forced the firing of the country’s chief prosecutor and offered “an apology for dissemination of false information by U.S. representatives and public figures” about the Ukrainian prosecutors, according to the Ukrainian government’s official memo of the meeting. The effort to secure that meeting began the same day the prosecutor's firing was announced.
In addition, Burisma’s American team offered to introduce Ukrainian prosecutors to Obama administration officials to make amends, according to that memo and the American legal team’s internal emails.
The memos raise troubling questions:
1.) If the Ukraine prosecutor’s firing involved only his alleged corruption and ineptitude, why did Burisma's American legal team refer to those allegations as “false information?"
2.) If the firing had nothing to do with the Burisma case, as Biden has adamantly claimed, why would Burisma’s American lawyers contact the replacement prosecutor within hours of the termination and urgently seek a meeting in Ukraine to discuss the case?
Ukrainian prosecutors say they have tried to get this information to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) since the summer of 2018, fearing it might be evidence of possible violations of U.S. ethics laws. First, they hired a former federal prosecutor to bring the information to the U.S. attorney in New York, who, they say, showed no interest. Then, the Ukrainians reached out to President Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani.
Ukraine’s new president, Volodymyr Zelensky, told Trump in July that he plans to launch his own wide-ranging investigation into what happened with the Bidens and Burisma.
“I’m knowledgeable about the situation,” Zelensky told Trump, asking the American president to forward any evidence he might know about. "The issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue of making sure to restore the honesty so we will take care of that and will work on the investigation of the case.”
Biden has faced scrutiny since December 2015, when the New York Times published a story noting that Burisma hired Hunter Biden just weeks after vice president Joe Biden was asked by President Obama to oversee U.S.-Ukraine relations. That story also alerted Biden’s office that Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin had an active investigation of Burisma and its founder.
***(I left out a huge chunk of the article here)***
Today, two questions remain.
One is whether it was ethically improper or even illegal for Biden to intervene to fire the prosecutor handling Burisma’s case, given his son’s interests. That is one that requires more investigation and the expertise of lawyers.
The second is whether Biden has given the American people an honest accounting of what happened. The new documents I obtained raise serious doubts about his story’s credibility. And that’s an issue that needs to be resolved by voters.
Per, I think you meant to say it's... Joe Biden... who is "the godfather".
SIDE NOTE: The company paid Joe Biden's son $50K/month as a member of the Board of Directors
... even though he had no experience in the Ukraine, with the language, nor with the gas industry!
Something stinks like rotten fish around here!
Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16
Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2019 7:59 pm
by Strangelove
Strangelove wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 6:15 pm
Well normally the IC wouldn't determine a 2nd hand complaint to be credible but anyway
... Maguire didn't "refuse to transmit it to Congress", he asked for one more week.
Here is something seriously strange. The Disclosure of Urgent Concern Form located earlier today at DNI is only two days old according to its pdf properties.
Between May 2018 and August 2019, the intelligence community secretly eliminated a requirement that whistleblowers provide direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoings. This raises questions about the intelligence community’s behavior regarding the August submission of a whistleblower complaint against President Donald Trump. The new complaint document no longer requires potential whistleblowers who wish to have their concerns expedited to Congress to have direct, first-hand knowledge of the alleged wrongdoing that they are reporting.
The brand new version of the whistleblower complaint form, which was not made public until after the transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and the complaint addressed to Congress were made public, eliminates the first-hand knowledge requirement and allows employees to file whistleblower complaints even if they have zero direct knowledge of underlying evidence and only “heard about [wrongdoing] from others.”
Breaking – ICIG Whistleblower Form Recently Modified to Permit Complaint “Heard From Others"
Folks, this “Ukraine Whistleblower” event was a pre-planned event. As we begin to understand the general outline of how the Schiff Dossier was assembled, we are now starting to get into the specifics. First discovered by researcher Stephen McIntyre, there is now evidence surfacing showing the ICIG recently created an entirely new ‘whistleblower complaint form’ that specifically allowed for the filing of complaints “heard from others“.
