Impeachment

[elengil]

Was listening to a podcast this morning on early in the Obama administration when he gave a press conference about the black Harvard professor arrested in his own home and he made the comment that the arrest was done 'stupidly', and the absolute uproar it caused and that people cite this as being proof Obama was racist and divisive.

Then he had the two to the White House to sit down over a beer and talk it over and everyone called it "beer gate" or whatever? Remember the days that was considered a scandal? Remember when that was what there was to be upset about?






https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/23/opin ... e=Homepage

[dated yesterday]

Two years ago, we got a call from a United States government official warning us of the imminent arrest of a New York Times reporter based in Egypt named Declan Walsh. Though the news was alarming, the call was actually fairly standard. Over the years, we’ve received countless such warnings from American diplomats, military leaders and national security officials.

But this particular call took a surprising and distressing turn. We learned the official was passing along this warning without the knowledge or permission of the Trump administration. Rather than trying to stop the Egyptian government or assist the reporter, the official believed, the Trump administration intended to sit on the information and let the arrest be carried out. The official feared being punished for even alerting us to the danger.

Unable to count on our own government to prevent the arrest or help free Declan if he were imprisoned, we turned to his native country, Ireland, for help. Within an hour, Irish diplomats traveled to his house and safely escorted him to the airport before Egyptian forces could detain him.

We hate to imagine what would have happened had that brave official not risked their career to alert us to the threat.

I really miss the days when the scandal was the president called an unnecessary arrest 'stupid'.

[yovargas]

Well then.

I wish they had waited a minute to see how the whistle blower thing plays out.

I can't help but feel like this will do more harm than good to this country.

[Cerin]

Chuck Schumer just tweeted that the Senate approved his resolution calling for the whistleblower complaint to be provided to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees by unanimous consent. If that is true (and I can't imagine he would lie about such an easily provable thing), not a single GOP senator objected. That is big.

If the DNI believes the complaint doesn't fall under the statute, then he would be remiss to turn it over in spite of a Senate resolution. In addition, there are executive privilege concerns. But the frantic media coverage creates a frantic political climate, and no one is going to care about the specifics of the whistle-blower law and whether it actually applies to this complaint.

It seems that the whistle-blower's request to testify is an attempted end run around the DNI's refusal to turn over the complaint. So I wonder how the person refusing to turn over the complaint on grounds that it isn't covered by the statute will advise the whistle-blower on testifying. The point of the intelligence whistle-blower statute, if I understand correctly, is to protect the whistle-blower, to protect the intelligence involved and to protect executive privilege in releasing intelligence. It seems to me that all goes out the window if there is testimony. So this could be viewed as a dangerous precedent.

These issues are supposed to be handled with 'dynamic compromise,' but with half of the Congress convinced the Pres. is a traitor, the Pres. convinced that half of the Congress is out to get him, and the press railroading the process there is no hope of that. As far as I know, the media collectively suffered no consequence as a result of their irresponsible reporting on Trump-Russia, and will probably suffer no consequence as they do the same here.

[Cerin]

It was suggested in one of the whistle-blower articles I read last week that an inquiry into the Trump-Ukraine call would necessitate an inquiry into the substance of the Biden-related issues vis-a-vis Ukraine. Does anyone have an opinion on whether or not that is true? It seems to me that Trump would have been best off running against Biden than against any of the more mentally vigorous Dem. candidates, so one might say he was in effect working against his own election interests in pursuing the Biden issues (if, in fact, this might put Biden in some jeopardy).

[elengil]

It was suggested in one of the whistle-blower articles I read last week that an inquiry into the Trump-Ukraine call would necessitate an inquiry into the substance of the Biden-related issues vis-a-vis Ukraine. Does anyone have an opinion on whether or not that is true?

I could not begin to guess as to whether it was true. I will say if there was any substantial evidence for it, it absolutely should be investigated by US, not by a foreign government trying to make Trump happy. If Trump or the government in general had credible evidence of criminal activity and purposely did not pursue it, that is yet another strike against this administration!

I know it's almost laughably naive these days but I still fall firmly in the camp that says criminal activity by those in power needs to be addressed and prosecuted, no matter who or what party they are. No one should be able to stand above the law in this country. Sadly, many do.

[RoseMorninStar]

I know it's almost laughably naive these days but I still fall firmly in the camp that says criminal activity by those in power needs to be addressed and prosecuted, no matter who or what party they are. No one should be able to stand above the law in this country. Sadly, many do.

Agreed.
There is more than this one instance in the whistleblower complaint and I would not be surprised if they were related. This didn't come out of the middle of nowhere. Collusion with a foreign government to affect the US election is collusion whether Trump (and Giuliani) admits it 'out in the open' or no. As Lindsay Grahmn has said, Trump should come out and 'blow us away with transparency'.. (like he promised to do with his taxes.)

[Frelga]

It was suggested in one of the whistle-blower articles I read last week that an inquiry into the Trump-Ukraine call would necessitate an inquiry into the substance of the Biden-related issues vis-a-vis Ukraine. Does anyone have an opinion on whether or not that is true?

I don't see why that is relevant. Even if there were anything to find (and there's no suggestion that there is), the issue here is the president allegedly offering quid pro quo to a foreign government, the quid being millions in taxpayer-funded aid, and the quo, information (true or not) helpful to Trump's reelection.

[elengil]

As Lindsay Grahmn has said, Trump should come out and 'blow us away with transparency'.. (like he promised to do with his taxes.)

Won't hold my breath on that one (either of them), but yes. Definitely tired of the transparent criminality without accountability.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

The law does not give the DNI discretion to make that determination, as the administration is finally conceding.

White House prepares to release whistleblower complaint to Congress as Pelosi presses forward

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

[RoseMorninStar]

As Lindsay Grahmn has said, Trump should come out and 'blow us away with transparency'.. (like he promised to do with his taxes.)

Won't hold my breath on that one (either of them), but yes. Definitely tired of the transparent criminality without accountability.

That was my point, he always SAYS he would *love* to release his taxes (etc.. etc..) and has been said so many, many times since 2011 but we never see them. Sounds good, but if there is no follow through it's just empty promises/a diversion.

[Frelga]

This thread by a former WH Situation Room chief explains what records there may be of a call between two heads of state. It mentions that the National Security Advisor may listen in. This is leading some people to speculate that the whistle-blower is the recently fired John Bolton...

https://twitter.com/LarryPfeifferDC/sta ... 42400?s=19

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I would be beyond shocked if the whistleblower turned out to be Bolton. For one thing, as right-wing media has been harping on, the whistleblower's attorney was once an intern for both Hillary Clinton and Sen. Schumer. It seems unlikely that Bolton would hire such a lawyer. But we'll see (maybe).

Meanwhile Fox News is reporting WH to release document showing intel community watchdog found whistleblower had 'political bias,' official says. Of course, that would seem to contradict the reports that the IC IG found the complaint to be credible, but we'll see. Maybe.

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

[Cerin]

It was suggested in one of the whistle-blower articles I read last week that an inquiry into the Trump-Ukraine call would necessitate an inquiry into the substance of the Biden-related issues vis-a-vis Ukraine. Does anyone have an opinion on whether or not that is true?

I don't see why that is relevant. Even if there were anything to find (and there's no suggestion that there is), the issue here is the president allegedly offering quid pro quo to a foreign government, the quid being millions in taxpayer-funded aid, and the quo, information (true or not) helpful to Trump's reelection.

As I understand it, Trump was urging Ukraine to investigate Biden's involvement in certain dealings in Ukraine. That would be the 'information' you refer to?

[RoseMorninStar]

Maybe Dan Coats?

Further complicating this issue (well, complicating just about every issue regarding this White House) is that it is incredibly understaffed and many that Trump has hired are not qualified for the job or they are in an 'acting' capacity (something Trump seems to prefer so the customary vetting process can be bypassed). While it certainly is the president's prerogative to have staff that he feels comfortable with, they shouldn't be required to be sycophants/require personal loyalty to Trump. These are high level jobs that are tasked with keeping us safe. The turnover is 'off the charts' and wouldn't be necessary if quality, experienced people were being properly vetted and hired in the first place. Given Trump's supposed business acumen, this is even weirder as good CEO's/companies know how to attract and retain quality personnel. Just another example of the chaos and lack of professionalism.

Because the DNI is new (as of Aug. 16) and in an 'acting' capacity, perhaps he was unsure of the proper procedures for a whistleblower complaint, but it is a complaint he deemed to be credible and urgent to National Security. It should have immediately gone to Congress under 'duty to inform'. Everything can't be 'privileged' because then what we'd have is no rule of law and we'd have a dictator. Congress is supposed to be an equal branch of government, are they all 'privileged' too? (no).

What in the heck is Rudy Giuliani is doing acting as a Trump's personal ...??? I don't know what to call it. The president is supposed to be acting on behalf of the country, not sending his personal thug to extort another country.

[Frelga]

V, to be clear, I don't think it's Bolton, either, but who knows in this weird timeline.

[Cerin]

The law does not give the DNI discretion to make that determination, as the administration is finally conceding.

White House prepares to release whistleblower complaint to Congress as Pelosi presses forward

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

Voronwë, I have read the article linked to and did not see where it said the administration conceded that the law does not give the DNI discretion to make the determination that the complaint doesn't fall under the statute. As I understand it, the DNI requested guidance from DOJ and they told him he could not release the complaint because it did not fall under the whistleblower statute. The complaint was said to concern a series of incidents -- perhaps some involve intelligence activities, which would fall under the statute and some involve the Pres., which would not fall under the statute. I'm not clear if it is lawful to release the complaint if it doesn't fall under the statute. It would certainly be ironic if the White House released the complaint due to press pressure and was then found to have acted improperly in doing so. I don't like the idea of decisions being made as a response to press hysteria, but that seems to be our reality.

In any case, I am comforted by the article below, as it reports that efforts are being made to ensure that the delicate balance of needs is met in releasing the complaint and allowing for the whistle-blower testimony. I fear that in the eagerness to get Trump there is a willingness to set unhealthy precedent, but we will need our laws and institutions intact after Trump is gone, which he beyond any doubt will be, sooner or later.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... ar-AAHNb29

That would be pretty funny if it's Bolton -- taking sour grapes to a whole new level.

[Túrin Turambar]

I'm still unclear on how asking the President of Ukraine to investigate someone is a crime or misdemeanor - if I did it tomorrow I can't imagine what I'd be prosecuted for. I understand there's the question of promising military aid in exchange for investigation, but I'm not sure quite how that fits with the U.S. criminal code.

[RoseMorninStar]

I believe the issue is using the power of office for personal gain AND asking/coercing 'colluding' with a foreign government to interfere in our election process by damaging a political opponent, the offer/threat/exchange of something of value. Many local and state politicians are prosecuted for similar crimes. Voronwë might be able to explain it better.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

By agreeing to provide the complaint (if they really do), they have conceded that they don't have discretion to withhold it.

[Griffon64]

The transcript does seem to suggest that allegations are true.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... li=BBnb7Kz

I guess now the partisan fighting can start over whether this is actually a crime or not.

For every Republican saying it isn't, I'd just like them to ask themselves, what would I have felt if Obama did this?