Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Sept 28, 2019 19:43:54 GMT -8
Clearly, you haven't read the transcript of Trump's call with Ukrainian President Zelensky, or Zelensky's own words just the other day. The facts about both Hunter and Joe Biden's actions in Ukraine are a matter of public record. Yes, Trump asked Zelensky to look into corruption in Ukraine. That's exactly what he asked. Incorrect on all counts. I have read the summary of the call, the transcript has yet to be released. Yes the facts about the Biden's are a matter of public record...perhaps you should tell trump to look at that record because he's got some pretty bizarre ideas about what the Biden's did. What trump asked Zelensky was, according to the whistle-blower: Multiple White House officials with direct knowledge of the call informed me that, after an initial exchange of pleasantries, the President used the remainder of the call to advance his personal interests. Namely, he sought to pressure the Ukrainian leader to take actions to help the President’s 2020 reelection bid. According to the White House officials who had direct knowledge of the call, the President pressured Mr. Zelenskyy to, inter alia:
initiate or continue an investigation into the activities of former Vice President Joseph Biden and his son, Hunter Biden;
assist in purportedly uncovering that allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election originated in Ukraine, with a specific request that the Ukrainian leader locate and turn over servers used by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and examined by the U.S. cyber security firm Crowdstrike, which initially reported that Russian hackers had penetrated the DNC’s networks in 2016; and
meet or speak with two people the President named explicitly as his personal envoys on these matters, Mr. Giuliani and Attorney General Barr, to whom the President referred multiple times in tandem.That's exactly what he asked. I understand why you don't want trump to be investigated, but he will be nevertheless. . And here you are on SATURDAY morning, nearly 72 hours after it's release, claiming "the transcript has yet to be released." Dude, get your facts straight. Unlike you, I actually read the transcript--and not merely hearsay from someone with a demonstrable political bias against the President (according to the ICIG), who had this information illegally leaked to him. You can read the transcript here: www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdfThere is absolutely nothing inappropriate about this phone call. The Justice Department previously declined to investigate the phone call, saying no campaign finance violation occurred and “no further action was warranted.” Namely, he sought to pressure the Ukrainian leader to take actions to help the President’s 2020 reelection bid.
The 2020 election is never mentioned in the phone call. Read the transcript. According to the White House officials who had direct knowledge of the call, the President pressured Mr. Zelenskyy to, inter alia:
initiate or continue an investigation into the activities of former Vice President Joseph Biden and his son, Hunter Biden;
This matter is of vital interest to the United States of America--both for the government and for its people. There is plenty of credible evidence (mostly his own admission on tape) that the former V.P. used American taxpayer money as leverage to quash an investigation into corruption in Ukraine involving his son. This is a completely legitimate inquiry by the POTUS. Again, the fact that Biden is running for President doesn't immunize him from investigation. Nor does the same apply to Trump. assist in purportedly uncovering that allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election originated in Ukraine, with a specific request that the Ukrainian leader locate and turn over servers used by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and examined by the U.S. cyber security firm Crowdstrike, which initially reported that Russian hackers had penetrated the DNC’s networks in 2016Lot's of conjecture here by the "whistlebower." Crowdstrike is mentioned briefly by Trump. No, he did not make any "specific request that the Ukrainian leader locate and turn over" the DNC servers. Everyone should have an interest in getting to the bottom of how this whole "Russia Collusion" narrative originated--most of all President Trump--but I'm afraid it won't turn out to look so good for the Democrats. The "whistleblower" accurately reports that repeats the assertion (never proven) that the Russians hacked the servers of the DNC comes from Crowdstrike alone. Despite the Russian ‘hacking’ claim the DOJ and FBI previously admitted the DNC would not let FBI investigators review the DNC server or cloud-based network. Instead their claim was that the DNC provided the FBI with analysis of a technical review done through a cyber-security contract with Crowdstrike. However, during court filings in the case against Roger Stone, the DOJ/FBI later admitted they never even saw the Crowstrike final report. It will be interesting to see what--if anything--A.G. Bill Barr ultimately discovers here. I'm not surprised at the concern shown by anti-Trump interests in his desire to get to the origin of the Russia Collusion narrative. You previously stated that the Hillary email case was worth investigating, yet nothing was found (many would dispute this, but let's set that aside); you also stated that the Trump-Russia Collusion allegations were worthy of being investigated and you conceded (quite rightly) that the Mueller investigation found that there was no such collusion or coordination. QUESTION: are the allegations involving Joe Biden (in what appears to be a quid pro quo to protect his son) similarly worthy of investigation? I assume you think there is nothing there (as we believed about Trump-Russia), which is your prerogative. But the only way to find out is to fully investigate. Correct me if I am mistaken: it sounds like your objection (and shared by those who don't like Trump) is not so much that Biden be investigated, but that it is Trump who may be the impetus behind such an investigation. If that is the case, how is this anything more than "X is not wrong, except when X is done by Trump"? A final point: we allow you to come over here and put forth your opinions--without restriction or suppression. Yet your site (you and JQP are effectively 1 and 1a) does not do the same. It bans people in violation of its own rules (including a few members here) and restricts others so that dissenting opinions on "national news" items are not allowed to see the light of day on its website. Here you are, 2nd in command at TOB, spending your time posting on a site that you cannot even link to on your own site without be re-directed to porn. So which site is actually the more open-minded and magnanimous, confident in its members and willing to engage in honest debate? The question answers itself. |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Sept 29, 2019 3:12:24 GMT -8
Again, not to make too fine a point of this but the distinction here is that Hillary Clinton did engage in her attributed behavior, whereas Donald Trump did not. I see...perhaps you could tell me through what process you arrived at these separate conclusions...I'm thinking it was the result of two investigations, but you're telling me that at least one of the investigations was unnecessary. Not to belabor the point but I'm wondering how you know trump was 'innocent"...as you put it. |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Sept 29, 2019 3:24:18 GMT -8
Dude, what you read was NOT a transcript. It was not a verbatim rendering of what was said but rather a summary made by people who listened in on the call. It said so right in the document. If you had read the thing you'd know that. Get back to me when you have.
|
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,278
|
Post by RSM789 on Sept 29, 2019 10:01:23 GMT -8
Dude, what you read was NOT a transcript. It was not a verbatim rendering of what was said but rather a summary made by people who listened in on the call. It said so right in the document. If you had read the thing you'd know that. Get back to me when you have. I get brownie points for calling this response earlier in the thread. The left talking point is to try to invalidate the "transcript" because the people who wrote it called it a "summary". A transcript is technically the summary of a recorded or dictated dialog and since this summary is of a phone call, it is not technically a transcript. However, for the sake of conversation & communication, 2 skills that VilePagan lacks, it is in effect a transcript. More importantly, the left making an argument over whether or not the paper released is a transcript or a summary reveals their lack of genuineness. They aren't interested in getting to the truth of the matter, they are just interested in arguing, about everything. They act as if life is an event being held in a courtroom. Which leads us back to why Vile Pagan is so lonely... |
|
Luca
Master Statesman
Posts: 1,300
|
Post by Luca on Sept 29, 2019 16:27:02 GMT -8
Again, not to make too fine a point of this but the distinction here is that Hillary Clinton did engage in her attributed behavior, whereas Donald Trump did not. I see...perhaps you could tell me through what process you arrived at these separate conclusions...I'm thinking it was the result of two investigations, but you're telling me that at least one of the investigations was unnecessary. Not to belabor the point but I'm wondering how you know trump was 'innocent"...as you put it. I did not use the word "innocent" and you should not quote me as having done so when I did not. I said that Donald Trump - unlike Hillary Clinton - did not engage in the behavior attributed to him. He was falsely accused. I don't know how to put it any clearer than that, I don't understand. Are you asking me how I concluded that Hilary Clinton actually did use a private server in her own home to conduct government business? And how I concluded that Donald Trump did not collude with the Russian government to affect the outcome of the 2016 election? You don't understand where this information comes from?.......................................Luca |
|
Luca
Master Statesman
Posts: 1,300
|
Post by Luca on Sept 29, 2019 16:29:21 GMT -8
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Sept 29, 2019 20:20:17 GMT -8
Dude, what you read was NOT a transcript. It was not a verbatim rendering of what was said but rather a summary made by people who listened in on the call. It said so right in the document. If you had read the thing you'd know that. Get back to me when you have. Yet, in your indictment of Trump, you quote complaint registered by the "whistleblower", who did not hear the phone call and is working off nothing but hearsay, rather than quote the actual summary of the call (whether you want to call that a "transcript" or not). If you want to make an accusation, quote the facts--not rumor. Nor did you ever address my question about investigating Joe Biden. Is that legitimate or not? |
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Sept 29, 2019 22:16:36 GMT -8
Rudy Giuliani laying some truth bombs on former Bill Clinton WH staffer George Stephanopoulos, who is masquerading as a journalist. The media's reaction to credible and public allegations of corruption by Joe Biden: ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Sept 29, 2019 22:24:42 GMT -8
The corrupt plot continues apace.
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Sept 29, 2019 22:36:25 GMT -8
Where are the headlines, "Biden Attacks the Free Press!" Previously Joe Biden demanded the Ukraine government shut down the investigation of his son and fire the Ukrainian prosecutor. Today Joe Biden duplicates this behavior by demanding American media shut down any discussion about his corrupt Ukrainian influence campaign.
 |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Sept 30, 2019 2:57:34 GMT -8
ROFL. Don't you ever tire of being completely wrong?
Nothing "invalid" about the so-called transcript at all. Read it. Just understand that it's not a verbatim rendering of what was said during trump's phone call. The actual word-for-word transcript has yet to be released...we'd be talking about that right now but someone in the WH decided to put that in a top-secret computer server where it can't easily be accessed...I wonder why? Perhaps you have an explanation?
|
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Sept 30, 2019 3:05:08 GMT -8
Two blatant lies in as many sentences. You've outdone yourself Credo. Interesting that a professed Christian would so gleefully bear false witness.
1. Biden never demanded that an investigation of his son be shut down.
2. Joe Biden did not demand that all discussion of his dealings with Ukraine be "shut down". He demanded that networks stop booking Giuliani because of his habit of lying about Biden. Lucky for you this place has no similar restrictions, you can lie about him all you want here. Carry on.
|
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Sept 30, 2019 3:15:03 GMT -8
Of course I know where the information comes from.
You claimed that the investigation of trump for "collusion" was unnecessary because trump was falsely accused...correct?
How would we have known he was falsely accused without the investigation?
|
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Sept 30, 2019 3:20:15 GMT -8
So in your mind the whistleblowers report is "rumor", but the "summary" of trump's phone call is fact? Seems rather arbitrary to me. No, the question was not legitimate. Also, there seem to be some people who think the question has already been answered: Joe and Hunter Biden's Ukraine dealings didn't warrant investigation, ex-law enforcement official saysUkraine’s former top law enforcement official told the Los Angeles Times he saw no reason to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden or his son Hunter, in a story published Sunday.
Yuri Lutsenko, the Ukraine ex-prosecutor general, said he told President Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani they had not broken any Ukrainian laws to his knowledge. He said he would start a probe only after U.S. officials launched an investigation.
“I said, ‘Let’s put this through prosecutors, not through presidents,’” Lutsenko told The Times. “I told him I could not start an investigation just for the interests of an American official.”www.foxnews.com/politics/ukraine-biden-joe-hunter-law-enforcement-officialTrump's own staff repeatedly warned him that his theory about Democrats and Ukraine had been debunkedSeveral former White House officials said they told President Donald Trump that a conspiracy theory that Ukraine was secretly responsible for hacking the 2016 US presidential election was false, The New York Times reported on Sunday.
According to the paper, their warnings had little effect on the president, who pursued the theory anyway.
The report backs up a claim by the former homeland security adviser Tom Bossert, who earlier Sunday attacked Trump's lawyer Rudy Giuliani for keeping the flawed theory alive and said he'd warned Trump that it was groundless.www.businessinsider.com/trump-staff-warned-ukraine-conspiracy-was-false-ignored-2019-9I'm wondering how much longer you're going to spout this nonsense. |
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,347
|
Post by SK80 on Sept 30, 2019 6:32:10 GMT -8
Did you set your alarm at 4:00 AM to write your numerous diatribes? Seriously what motivates you in the morning? Looking at TOB for sometime and now this here..... it must be anoymous message boards because the juice me to exist.
|
|
