The Impeachment Inquiry

Archive From The 'Tank
Locked
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

The Impeachment Inquiry

Post by Skyweir »

As the public hearings commence, it seems opportune to take a look at the facts.

So first it all started with the Whistleblower Complaint.

The complaint is here in full
https://www.npr.org/2019/11/09/77617349 ... -heres-how
In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President's main domestic political rivals. The President's personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well.

Over the past four months, more than half a dozen U.S. officials have informed me of various facts related to this effort.
1. Abuse of power of the Office of President
2. Seeking foreign interference in US 2020 Election (again)
3. There are witnesses to the abuse of power that can corroborate abuse witnessed.

So much has been made of the whistleblower and the fact that he did not witness the alleged abuse.
Over the past four months, more than half a dozen U.S. officials have informed me of various facts related to this effort. The information provided herein was relayed to me in the course of official interagency business.

It is routine for U.S. officials with responsibility for a particular regional or functional portfolio to share such information with one another in order to inform policymaking and analysis.
Its always challenging when established protocols are circumnavigated. They originate to prevent mixed messaging and facilitate transnational communication. Having official channels delivering approved messaging and another messaging that counters the approved narrative, leads to confusion and lack of clarity between states.
Starting in mid-May, I heard from multiple U.S. officials that they were deeply concerned by what they viewed as Mr. Giuliani's circumvention of national security decision making processes to engage with Ukrainian officials and relay messages back and forth between Kyiv and the President. These officials also told me:

that State Department officials, including Ambassadors Volker and Sondland, had spoken with Mr. Giuliani in an attempt to "contain the damage" to U.S. national security; and

that Ambassadors Volker and Sondland during this time period met with members of the new Ukrainian administration and, in addition to discussing policy matters, sought to help Ukrainian leaders understand and respond to the differing messages they were receiving from official U.S. channels on the one hand, and Mr. Giuliani on the other.

During this same timeframe, multiple U.S. officials told me that the Ukrainian leadership was led to believe that a meeting or phone call between the President and President Zelenskyy would depend on whether Zelenskyy showed willingness to "play ball" on the issues that had been publicly aired by Mr. Lutsenko and Mr. Giuliani.
Trump and a number of Republicans have attempted to undermine the whistleblower, require his identity, raise claims of witch-hunt etc his usual tantrum-like displays, and despite I forget the number now .. of Republican Party members present in the closed door inquiry ... a group of pubs stormed the Inquiry demanding public access ... HOWEVER, now that public hearings are now in progress, these same storming pubs call it a *public spectacle* ____

Pretty much damned if you do and damned if you dont... ____

As soon as Ive had the opportunity to get up to speed am interested to see how they are progressing.

Bare in mind this is the first day .. I believe Taylor and one other appeared today ... but cant be sure till I look it up.
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
Obi-Wan Nihilo
Still Not Buying It
Posts: 5904
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:37 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by Obi-Wan Nihilo »

Nothing of substance. The easily led are going to argue that, but there's no malfeasance that's been perpetrated by the Trump administration.

Pathetic, really.
Image
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

You are entitled to your opinion, position and your beliefs but I must admit to surprise.
US diplomat in Ukraine told Congress Wednesday of a previously unknown conversation President Donald Trump had the day after his phone call with the Ukrainian President, in which Trump asked the US ambassador to the European Union about Ukraine opening investigations that would help him politically.

The testimony from diplomat Bill Taylor provides new details about the President's personal involvement in the push for Ukraine to open investigations into his political rivals as House Democrats began public impeachment hearings that could lead to the House voting to impeach a president for just the third time in US history.

Taylor testified that Gordon Sondland, the EU ambassador, told an aide that Trump's interest in Ukraine was the "investigations of Biden," and that he cared more about an investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden than he did about Ukraine.

Taylor testified that his aide told him of a phone conversation Trump had with Sondland on July 26, one day after Trump's phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Taylor's aide, who was accompanying Sondland to meetings in Kiev with Ukrainian officials, could hear Trump asking Sondland about the investigations, Taylor testified. Sondland "told President Trump that the Ukrainians were ready to move forward," Taylor said.

Taylor testified that his aide later asked Sondland what Trump thought of Ukraine.

"Ambassador Sondland responded that President Trump cares more about the investigations of Biden, which (Trump personal attorney Rudy) Giuliani was pressing for," Taylor said.
Not exactly NOTHING and is at the end of the day corroboration of Trump indeed imposing pressure on Ukraine to investigate the Bidens.
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

The quid pro quo is the malfeasance Nihilo, right?
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

"Quid pro quo" is how all diplomatic discussions are undertaken--that is not "malfesance" but "business as usual".

The whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, was not part of the phone call with Ukraine. No one else who was actually in the room found anything to be so far outside the realm of "normal" that they were "concerned" or "upset" or whatever way in which Ciaramella got his feelings hurt. The whistleblower is a Democrat operative whose lawyer was bragging on Twitter back in 2017 how people were going to take down Trump.

The inquiry, although being a relevant news story, is actually irrelevant to the broader question at hand. If the House thinks Trump is worthy of impeachment they don't need "proof"; instead, all they need to do is hold a vote. Why are the only talking about it instead of doing it? They don't need to sell it to voters because private citizens are not a part of the impeachment process whatsoever.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

Dont be too quick to jump to conclusions.

It matters not that a complaint is not eye witnessed ... particularly a complaint that is as rigorous in its detail as the whistleblowers.

It is the complaint itself that identifies corroborating witnesses .. which the Impeachment Committee SRD following dont forget.

As long as you have corroboration you do not need to rely on hearsay at all. And lets be fair its a well crafted and considered complaint, which adheres to the standards of a whistleblower complaint.
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

Eh.

Was he out of line? Probably, although almost certainly no more than any other politician who have done the same thing.

Hell, IIRC, receiving US aid at is contingent on certain policies etc. This is barely different, and almost certainly not unique.

Also, who is surprised? Business as usual for the Pres or not, it is certainly business as usual for Donald Trump. Exactly the kind of thing he is famous for doing in business deals.

Finally, once again, odious as it might be, I will be hugely surprised if anything concrete actually comes out of this, let alone impeachment. Not because he doesn't deserve it, but because...politics... :D

--A
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

Yes, tis alas sadly true... it might well be as you say.

But this was not BAU this was pressuring a foreign state to produce dirt on Trumps political opponent. That is not BAU .. the office of POTUS is irrefutably a powerful one ... but its a position of State and abuse of office powers apply ... and this was for HIS personal benefit ... not the benefit of the American Nation.

This was to interfere with another election, a thing one would think Trump would be wary of even the very appearance of such.

There remain lines that even a POTUS cannot cross. Some do ... and some get away with it. But tis not something to be sooo easily dismissed or god forbid accept.

Now if Trump were the leader of a rogue, corrupt or developing nation ... one would expect this form of quid pro quo or extortionist tactics ... but he is not.
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

You're speaking to somebody whose last president merrily spent a decade looting billions from the fiscus for himself and his cronies. :D

--A
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

I know πŸ˜”

Not really the ideal huh? 😬
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
Obi-Wan Nihilo
Still Not Buying It
Posts: 5904
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:37 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by Obi-Wan Nihilo »

Skyweir wrote:The quid pro quo is the malfeasance Nihilo, right?
No, that's how governments work.

Both "witnesses" yesterday had no firsthand "evidence" of anything, just more hearsay.

This is simply a pathetic attempt to re-litigate 2016, and will result in a bloodletting in the next Congressional election, as well as a decisive Trump victory.
Image
User avatar
TheFallen
Master of Innominate Surquedry
Posts: 3153
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 3:16 pm
Location: Guildford, UK
Has thanked: 1 time

Post by TheFallen »

You know what surprises and frankly, slightly depresses me here? It's the unwitting - and no doubt party politically inspired - suspension of people's ability for critical thinking.

Look, I have absolutely no problem if Trump gets impeached and if appropriate removed from office on sufficiently evidenced grounds. That'd be fine by me. No issues.

But all I am seeing - so far at least - is people latching on mere allegation or 2nd hand "evidence"... and brandishing it around as if it were the cast-iron gospel truth.

And this is only happening because the target is Trump. Those same people setting such store by mere allegations would NEVER take the same approach if say their brother was the target of investigation.

First off, look at the whistleblower Ukraine call stuff. That is categorically all hearsay - because the guy wasn't on the call. But that's old news.

And then just look at the major "shock revelations" of yesterday that are the latest thing to be trumpeted around as "proof".
BBC News wrote:During a detailed opening statement, Mr Taylor said a member of his staff had overheard a telephone call in which the president inquired about "the investigations" into Mr Biden.

The call was with Gordon Sondland, the US ambassador to the European Union, who reportedly told the president over the phone from a restaurant in Kyiv that "the Ukrainians were ready to move forward".

After the call, the staff member "asked ambassador Sondland what President Trump thought about Ukraine", Mr Taylor said.

Mr Taylor said: "Ambassador Sondland responded that President Trump cares more about the investigations of Biden."

Here's your link.
Huh? FFS can we please start engaging our dispassionate critical faculties here?

The first part of Taylor's statement above is pure second-hand hearsay - and would be thrown out as such in any court of law. He merely reports what one of his staff told him he'd overheard. Why does that hold any water? Why nor call the staffer to the stand?

The second part is if anything more flaky. This time, Taylor reports what the same member of his staff told him that Sondland said about Trump - so this time we have second-hand hearsay relating to a further third party's mere opinion on what Trump's feelings might be on an issue...

That's like me announcing that I had a conversation with Zee who told me that he believed Sky was in favour of selling heroin. Are we going to lock Sky up on that basis?

How can ANYONE in the cold light of day set ANY value at all by such things? They are literally nowhere near evidence.

Now I am not saying that reasonable and proper evidence won't be revealed as time goes by - but for the love of God, can we wait to actually see something that meets the most basic of evidentiary standards?
Last edited by TheFallen on Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Newsflash: the word "irony" doesn't mean "a bit like iron" :roll:

Shockingly, some people have claimed that I'm egocentric... but hey, enough about them

"If you strike me down, I shall become far stronger than you can possibly imagine."
_______________________________________________
I occasionally post things here because I am invariably correct on all matters, a thing which is educational for others less fortunate.
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

This isnt a trial. Not even close at this point.

The hearsay aspect can be and is addressed by corroborating statements. And its day one ... lets see what day 2 holds in store.
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
TheFallen
Master of Innominate Surquedry
Posts: 3153
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 3:16 pm
Location: Guildford, UK
Has thanked: 1 time

Post by TheFallen »

I know it's not a trial. Which is why hearsay, smoke, spin and unsubstantiated allegation are being allowed and not being thrown out.

What I'd want is this:-

1. Someone actually listening in on the Ukraine call to give evidence.

2. Taylor's staffer to give direct evidence on what he is alleged to have overheard Trump say to Sondland during their call.

3. Sondland to give direct evidence saying that yes, Trump specifically and directly told him that he didn't give a toss about Ukraine and was only interested in getting Biden investigated.

Those three things would carry some evidentiary weight. Nothing else has, so far.
Newsflash: the word "irony" doesn't mean "a bit like iron" :roll:

Shockingly, some people have claimed that I'm egocentric... but hey, enough about them

"If you strike me down, I shall become far stronger than you can possibly imagine."
_______________________________________________
I occasionally post things here because I am invariably correct on all matters, a thing which is educational for others less fortunate.
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

Nice wants. That would be good. Id like that and I think we will get it.

We know from the whistleblower complaint that πŸ€” was it 6 individuals cited that can produce first hand testimonies.

If the II has received that in closed door hearings, you can be sure we will hear of it in the public hearings.


It is still early days .. but if we do not have eye witness reports, your right it will revert to the storm in a teacup that pubs are asserting. In which case the Republicans can celebrate.
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

Just in case there are others who dont know why the Impeachment Investigation, including closed door meetings and public hearings are being held.

I couldnt be assed typing it out again. From the other thread.
......
The impeachment offence resides in the realm of bribery and extortion.

Trump is accused of manipulating a foreign state to dig up dirt on a electoral opponent ... for his personal benefit.

And seeking a foreign state to investigate an American citizen ... and given what Trump is using as bribery ... right congressionally approved foreign aid to that state Trump is seeking a PERSONAL favour from ... which Trump has made clear they wont get without delivering dirt on the Bidens.

What IS BAU if you will is applying non personal conditions with foreign aid. Such conditions may be related to improvements in human rights record, applying ANTI corruption measures, a cessation of hostilities, an arrangements re trade agreements etc.

It is not BAU to seek personal favours or personally benefit from a particular arrangement. That is a significant conflict of interest and accepting gratuities can facilitate further acts of corruption.

That is NOT BAU

I worked for government most of my working life ... such behaviours are sackable offences are best and indictable at worst.

Thats what the impeachment is about.

I have linked the whistleblowers complaint upthread .. and pretty sure you can get up to speed by googling its framework and purpose.
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

Image
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
Gaius Octavius
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 3331
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:32 pm

Post by Gaius Octavius »

Dems: let us be a beacon of integrity and expose unethical stuff no matter the price!

Also Dems: let us protect pedophiles and feminize our men so the birthrate will drop precipitously and sexually frustrated men blow shit up
User avatar
Savor Dam
Will Be Herd!
Posts: 6140
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:02 am
Location: Pacific NorthWet
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by Savor Dam »

For those who may have lost track of the meaning of BAU, this is an acronym for "business as usual", a term reference upthread (and in the broader real-life and online discussion of such issues) as a defense of the transactional nature of the infamous phone call memorandum.

As someone who spent over a decade working with a US government agency and who understands the applicable ethics standards, Sky is pretty much on-point. We used to call it "conflict of interest." Anything that could be interpreted as serving one's own interest (really, anything that had a more-than-tangential affect on anything except the organizational objective) was cause for scrutiny.

As I have said in multiple threads, this has had an off odor from the outset. The "perfect" transcript (memorandum,whatever) differs little from what the whistleblower alleged and what the various deponents have testified to. The counter-questioning (not to call it cross-examination) by GOP has been less substantive so far.

There may yet emerge a more robust defense that mitigates all this, but somehow I do not think Trump (et al) are playing rope-a-dope only to rally at the eleventh hour. The weak questioning by the staff lawyer and the scattershot (and factually challenged) questions from the GOP ranking member, imported member from Oversight, and various others suggests that there is no defense behind the current barricades of denial, deflection, and projection.
Love prevails.
~ Tracie Mckinney-Hammon

Change is not a process for the impatient.
~ Barbara Reinhold

A government which robs Peter to pay Paul, can always count on the support of Paul.
~ George Bernard Shaw
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

Interesting.

So bribery and extortion crimes too pricey to safeguard against?

Wow them Dems sure got a lot to answer for πŸ€” I was unaware of the surreptitious endeavours of Party Dems to feminise men πŸ€”

And are you sure a drop in reproduction equates to sexual frustration? You can enjoy sex just for sex, right?

Ergo addressing that nasty sexual frustration that leaves men with ZERO other outlets ... other than extreme violence and blowing shit up πŸ€·β€β™€οΈ

πŸ€”πŸ€”πŸ€”πŸ€” right?

Sometimes I do wonder about the lack of logic and reason that pervades humans today πŸ€”
Last edited by Skyweir on Fri Nov 15, 2019 4:22 am, edited 2 times in total.
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
Locked

Return to β€œCoercri”