About the Storage of Transcripts of Trump’s Calls with Foreign Leaders
The White House concealed some reconstructed transcripts of delicate calls between President Trump and foreign officials, including President Vladimir V. Putin and the Saudi royal family, in a highly classified computer system after embarrassing leaks of his conversations, according to current and former officials.
The handling of Mr. Trump’s calls with world leaders has come under scrutiny after questions over whether a transcript of a July 25 call with the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, was improperly placed into this computer system.
The latest revelations show the focus that White House officials put on safeguarding not only classified information but also delicate calls with Mr. Trump, the details of which the administration did not want leaked.
A whistle-blower complaint accuses officials of trying to “lock down” access to information about the conversation with Mr. Zelensky by improperly storing the reconstructed transcript of the July 25 call in the highly classified system after the call took place.
Some are treating this as a staggering scandal:
Just to clarify what is going on here, the White House appears to be engaged in massive, systemic abuse of the classification system and underlying presidential authorities in order to cover up egregious wrongdoing including impeachable conduct.
This is a historic scandal.
— Susan Hennessey (@Susan_Hennessey) September 28, 2019
Meh. I’m not so sure.
You know me to be as Trump skeptical as they come. And probably no President’s calls have deserved sunlight as much as this one, due to his flagrant and shameless contempt for the rule of law, and his conflation of the interests of this country with his own personal interests.
That said, generally a President’s conversations with foreign leaders have historically been considered confidential. And while I have no problem with this particular President’s calls being revealed, the historically confidential nature of the calls is relevant here — because it suggests an innocent motive on the part of those who ordered this lockdown. (I continue to believe that the lockdown was not Trump’s idea, since he seems to think he did nothing wrong — and if he ordered it, it was probably at the behest of a more cautious subordinate. It’s also notable that although the treatment of the Ukraine transcript was initially suggested to be different from that of similar transcripts, its lockdown is part of a pattern that started after the leaks started.) The fact that Trump’s calls have been leaked in the past provides a totally legitimate reason to lock the calls down.
And guess what? Obama did this on occasion as well:
.@AmbassadorRice: “Normally there is a full, verbatim transcript” of calls like Trump’s w/ the Ukraine president.
Says he tried to “bury” it on a more secure server, but acknowledges the Obama Admin. sometimes did the same. pic.twitter.com/B6zZNbZsTG
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) September 27, 2019
Susan “Liar” Rice complains about the treatment of the transcripts and says Trump was trying to “bury” the transcripts, but note that she admits Obama placed such transcripts on a similar lockdown at times. She claims it was done only when the discussion itself was classified. Well, maybe the discussions with Putin and MBS did involve classified information. (Of course, the discussions with Putin involving classified information may have been in the nature of “Hey, Vladimir, let me share some classified information with you” — you know, like Trump did with the Russian ambassador in the Oval Office. Which, again, is why I would personally like to see these transcripts leaked or disclosed — because although it sets a bad precedent, this guy is dangerous and we need to have maximum information about the damage he is causing every day.)
This is a distraction from the main event: Trump treating his interactions with a foreign leader as a chance to advance his own personal interests. That is in keeping with everything he does (and, by the way, yapping about “hearsay” and the allegedly changing rules regarding its use to initiate an investigation are wholly irrelevant since we have independent evidence here), and it is an impeachable offense.
Don’t count on Dems to keep their eye on the ball. Instead, they will yammer on (as Warren has) about how Kavanaugh should have been impeached also; or claim (as Paul Krugman has) that journalists are going to end up in camps.
Idiots.
[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]
“meh” doesn’t seem enough to describe how overwrought this lady got.
“massive, systemic abuse of the classification system and underlying presidential authorities in order to cover up egregious wrongdoing including impeachable conduct.
steveg (354706) — 9/28/2019 @ 11:06 amThis is a historic scandal.”
My neighbor is so paranoid about somebody breaking into his house that he recently installed a new lock that takes me nearly 20 minutes to pick. Have you ever heard of such a crazy thing?
Jerryskids (702a61) — 9/28/2019 @ 11:07 amDo you hate the guy so much you’d condone illegal behavior? For the greater good, of course.
“I would personally like to see these transcripts leaked or disclosed — because although it sets a bad precedent, this guy is dangerous and we need to have maximum information about the damage he is causing every day.”
I’d change “bad precedent” to “dangerous and often illegal precedent”. Who gets to decide on a President by President basis what is OK to leak? Adam Schiff?
Don’t you think that this would only further encourage hyper partisan lawfare and throttle the Executive branches authority to conduct foreign policy?
This would eventually result in an escalation of extreme measures to protect secrecy and extreme countermeasures to penetrate that secrecy.
steveg (354706) — 9/28/2019 @ 11:21 amKrugman may believe it, he said similat things in 2005 to spiegel (snorfle) but it creates the echo chamber effect,that justifies anythinh
Narciso (beeb9a) — 9/28/2019 @ 11:23 amThe whistleblower stated that Trump people stashed “politically sensitive rather than national security sensitive information,” and that was certainly the case for the Trump-Zelensky call, so there’s reason to believe that this was not the first time. A formal impeachment inquiry should be able to determine if WH personnel stashed similar stuff onto their code-level server. They do have the right of Constitutional oversight.
Paul Montagu (f2c051) — 9/28/2019 @ 11:24 amEven if Susan Rice did the same thing (and I don’t trust her as far as I can throw her fat ass), do we really want to deploy the “two wrongs make a right” argument?
Oh, and Krugman may be a first-rate economist, but he’s a third-rate pundit. Always has been.
Ahem.
Dave (1bb933) — 9/28/2019 @ 11:30 amPutin’s little green men in Ukraine couldn’t have expressed it better.
Paul Montagu (f2c051) — 9/28/2019 @ 11:32 amThe standard for impeachment is pretty low.
Abuse of Power is sufficient to impeach. You could make a case I guess that asking the favor re: Hunter Biden is an abuse of power.
The standard for removal requires a crime.
Here is Dershowitz on that:
Dershowitz: “Well I would have wished he [Trump] didn’t say it. On the other hand I don’t think there’s anything criminal. I think, to find a crime, you have to first find the statute that was violated and it was a conversation about general corruption in the Ukraine which is plentiful. I know I had cases in the Ukraine. I represented the former president of the Ukraine. And then [Trump] asked for a personal favor. Is it the right thing to do? That’s a very different question from criminal.
And so I don’t see any possible criminal conduct. [There are] those who say that being given dirt by a political opponent is a violation of the election laws. That can’t be the case. The First Amendment trumps the election laws. And under the First Amendment anybody is entitled to use and obtain information from whatever source.. the election laws relate obviously to financial contributions not contributions of knowledge or information. So I don’t think there’s anything there.
And unless there was some kind of an extortion and I don’t think that the president of Ukraine would ever say he was extorted, he was not critical of what happened. I just don’t see a criminal violation here.”
steveg (354706) — 9/28/2019 @ 11:41 amFair article, as usual.
It is not that some of any President’s conversations are confidential that concerns me. It is what THIS President does when he contacts foreign leaders. He already has spilled secrets to Russian officials in the Oval Office and tried to coerce Ukrainian officials into investigating a political opponent while withholding funds needed to protect them from the Russians. And, as we all know, he invited Russia to spy on his last opponent. God knows what else.
Yea. I wanna know what he said on those other calls.
noel (f22371) — 9/28/2019 @ 11:46 amI should say that I think Dershowitz rarely sees criminal violations here, there or anywhere
steveg (354706) — 9/28/2019 @ 11:47 amDershowitz is implying that it would be no big deal if Trump’s GOTV effort were run out of an FSB facility in St. Petersburg.
Dave (1bb933) — 9/28/2019 @ 12:03 pmHow do you know Obama never spilled the beans on anything? Oh. Wait. He destroyed records.
From Real Clear Politics
“the accumulation of recent congressional testimony has made it clear that the Obama administration itself engaged in the wholesale destruction and “loss” of tens of thousands of government records covered under the act as well as the intentional evasion of the government records recording system by engaging in private email exchanges. So far, former President Obama, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Attorney General Lynch and several EPA officials have been named as offenders. The IRS suffered record “losses” as well. Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy called it “an unauthorized private communications system for official business for the patent purpose of defeating federal record-keeping and disclosure laws.”
Obama has also been accused of moving documents and transcripts into his “library” and having them pigeon holed while they are slowly scanned for “personal” information.
While looking at Presidential libraries I found something about FDR I never heard before.
From the daily beast:
“At a public ceremony on July 24, 1939, Franklin Roosevelt pretended to deed a portion of his estate in Hyde Park, New York, to the United States government. FDR had to pretend because his mother, Sara Roosevelt, who held the land, didn’t agree with her son’s plan to build his presidential library there, and slipped off to Europe without signing the deed. FDR hurried a copy to her in France, which her son finally convinced her to sign, although with misgivings.”
That sounds illegal.
steveg (354706) — 9/28/2019 @ 12:07 pmAnd obviously, like every other right, the courts recognize limitations when there is a compelling interest.
It is not even remotely true that “anybody is entitled to use and obtain information from whatever source”; classified information exists, intellectual property exists, insider trading laws exist, and other protected information exists, all of which are regulated by law.
It seems hard to argue that Trump or anyone else has a legitimate interest in allowing foreign governments to interfere in our elections on their behalf.
Dave (1bb933) — 9/28/2019 @ 12:09 pmWhy shouldn’t we fear journalists in camps? The msm has already told us that The Handmaid’s Tale’ is a literal reflection of Trump’s America.
harkin (58d012) — 9/28/2019 @ 12:16 pmHe’s saying he believes the First Amendment entitles the use of information from whatever source. If you look at the swirl around the Pentagon papers, I think he is right.
I think he is right about election law as well.
He isn’t saying it isn’t a big deal, he’s saying it isn’t criminal. If you think about it, he is also giving cover to Hillary (who likes to still call it Leningrad due to the nostalgia)
steveg (354706) — 9/28/2019 @ 12:18 pmBecause of our Captain’s personality- his ingrained, transactional, sales pitchy manner and ‘loose-lips-sink-ships’ chatter, saner staff parking conversations – recordings and/or transcripts- in a “special file” does seem reasonably prudent and benign on the part of day-to-day WH operations. For instance, we know the guy often explodes into rants about nuking places around the world. Yes, staff, file that away.
Recall Nixon’s persona and his rants -in several raging moments- directing his ‘Berlin Wall’ and associated staff to do some over-the-top-stuff which were dutifully noted, [and usually quilled by Haldeman in his own hand on yellow legal pads in his ‘transcription’ notes] nodded affirmatively to in a meeting– then ‘filed’ away to be buried and forgotten, never to be acted upon nor for public review. Eventually some of the ‘directives’ got loose to more zealous operatives and it caught up with him, revealed in his own ‘special file’ – aka “the tapes” – which were never meant for public review, either. But many of his crazier conversational comments were absorbed as mere venting, and filed by staff for ‘safe keeping’ to rest in peace. That doesn’t excuse either dude- but it does explain some of it.
History rhymes.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 9/28/2019 @ 12:30 pmConsidering that Trump openly, routinely frames questions of good/bad, true/false in terms of his own ego and advantage, and habitually blurs good-for-America with good-for-Trump in his pronouncements, it’s mystifying how one could believe that he keeps self-interest out of the equation when he’s making decisions and taking actions away from public view.
Confidence in Trump as a leader requires believing that he is a much better person — more selfless, more honest, more rational and emotionally stable — than the persona he presents to the public. Can Trump defenders really say that about anyone they know personally?
Can anyone seriously look at Trump’s rage-tweet about “Lddle” – excuse me, Liddle’ — Adam Shiff and the disgraceful omission of the “hyphen” in “discribing” him — or any number of similarly bizarre public statements — and say, “I trust that guy to make smart decisions for America”?
Trumsters always have their defense at the ready: “He’s just trolling, and you fall for it every time! Ha Ha!” Apparently no statement from Trump can be too unhinged to be covered by that excuse.
They also cling to the strange notion that no matter how specific and well-founded the criticism of Trump may be, it’s always merely a pretext to justify a completely baseless or superficial “hatred.”
It’s a close parallel to what some of those people complained about during the Obama years: no matter how specific the criticism of Obama’s words or actions or policies, Democrats retorted with “You just don’t like him because he’s black!” Now, the tired and silly “orange man bad” meme serves a similar function.
Radegunda (be5f68) — 9/28/2019 @ 1:00 pmWhat if Trump told Putin (or his rep) that “after the next election he would have more flexibility”?
jim2 (a5dc71) — 9/28/2019 @ 1:12 pmI’m pretty much a Trump supporter these days, and I think all this Ukrainian bruhaha is being over stated…
But, I’d remind everyone that you don’t need a penal violation to impeach the president.
If Congress thinks a POTUS’ behavior is beyond the pale, even if he doesn’t explicitly break the law, they can and should remove him from office via the impeachment method.
Simply stated, the Impeachment process is a political endeavor, rather than an exercise in the court of law.
whembly (4605df) — 9/28/2019 @ 1:27 pm“the allegedly changing rules regarding its use to initiate an investigation are wholly irrelevant since we have independent evidence here”
Without the rule change there would be no independent evidence publicly available, and there would be no complaint and no so-called whistleblower. So, sorry, it is wholly relevant.
Munroe (53beca) — 9/28/2019 @ 1:37 pm1998 Lindsey Graham Disagrees that a crime is a prerequisite for removal of a President from Office:
“You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if this body determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role. Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”
JRH (52aed3) — 9/28/2019 @ 1:44 pmDear Timmy/Ukraine Pain/Main Ukrain/Jeff Lebowski/Seinfeld Train Game/Inigo Montoya/Co-prosperity Spheroid/Compassionate BDSism/SDNY Prison Warden/Doxx Castro/Extreme Moderate/Charles Lindbergh’s Baby/Tsar Nicky/Tinfoil Surprise/White Hat Russian/Moderate Whignat/Illerminaty/Pious Agnostic|Michael Keohane/Margerita Surprise/Gammel Dore/Somali Enterprise Zone/Gordon Pasha/…
A) What court are you talking about? B) Like Trump and Ruditooti talking on the TeeVee and tweeter in public. C) The whistleblower identified first hands witnesses…
Translation: You have nothing on the substance, so blind them with a blizzard of snit.
Since the evidence in regard to Biden 100% exculpates him, and you have Trump and Rudytooti admitting it, I’d say that would count as infinitely more damning.
I’m sure you’ll mention how Biden and Biden’s son have actual, concrete, and in-the-public domain evidence for this “impeachable offense” (so unimpeachably impeachable that no one has actually been impeached for it despite committing it over and over again,) and not neglect to mention that all of the evidence you have for it on the Trump side is Adam Schiff-level parody, projection, imagination, and overstretched reasoning that no prosecutor in the world would attempt to test in court. Why would Biden or his son have any evidence of anything Trump did? They have nothing to do with it, shouldn’t have any evidence, they are literally unrelated to impeachment in any way. That is Trump level moronic gaslighting.
If you’re going to try to put forth some narrative, please, rise above 3rd grade level, maybe get into junior high.
Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 9/28/2019 @ 1:48 pmQuotations
Why would Biden or his son have any evidence of anything Trump did? They have nothing to do with it, shouldn’t have any evidence, they are literally unrelated to impeachment in any way. That is Trump level moronic gaslighting.
Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 9/28/2019 @ 1:49 pmSo then the bad thing wouldn’t have happened? Or we just not know about it?
Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 9/28/2019 @ 1:50 pmIs there anyone more “Conservative” and “Smart” and “Unbiased” then paul krugman. How many times has Paul attacked the Democrats for their lack of ethics and principles? Truly I man to listen to.
rcocean (1a839e) — 9/28/2019 @ 1:50 pmOff-topic. Not directed at anyone, just a generalization. I’m always amazed how writing for the NYT somehow makes you “smart” and “a man to be listened to”. My experience is that the NYT’s has the dullest, dumbest writers in the MSM. Yet, people hand on every word that comes out of the Krugman, or Friedman, or David Brooks columns. Even Michelle Goldberg, a complete idiot, is now some sort of “woman of substance” that we’re all supposed to care about when she blathers and rambles in the NYT.
Why isn’t patterico or Althouse in the New York TImes? They’re smarter than anyone who writes on the Op-ed page.
rcocean (1a839e) — 9/28/2019 @ 1:55 pmIn the full video of Trump at the UN pep talk, he also talked about how he brought up Biden, and his son, with the Chinese trade rep, and that he should get the Chines to “look into” whether they were doing anything in China, “because lots of people are saying Hunter Biden took $1.5B from the Chinese”.
Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 9/28/2019 @ 1:57 pmI’m so old that I remember Reid talking a lot about “hearing someone say that Romney never paid federal income taxes” or something. Did the MSM react in outrage to such [made-up] “hear-say”?
jim2 (a5dc71) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:11 pm“Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”
JRH (52aed3) — 9/28/2019 @ 1:44 pm
Take that, Kavanaugh!
Munroe (53beca) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:17 pmYeah, if you spend 2 seconds to google it, the NYT, WaPo, Time, Newsweek, CNN, MSNBC…all called it a lie immediately. And you know what it wasn’t, Harry Reid asking the Australians to investigate Romney to get make sure they get some aid.
You know, the actual point in this.
Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:20 pmThat’s not quite how it happened. Reid admitted in (literally) the next sentence (and was quoted as saying) that he didn’t know whether the charge was true or not:
Dave (1bb933) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:26 pmImpeachment proceedings shoud have been initiated after Helsinki.
They weren’t.
The rest since has been mere theatre. And what’s ahead is simply more of it. This guy is not going to be removed from office over this. Meanwhile, national problems continue to fester.
Censure him and press on.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:39 pmhttps://saraacarter.com/cnns-cuomo-bidens-quid-pro-quo-in-ukraine-wast-for-personal-advantage/
narciso (d1f714) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:43 pmSusan Hennessy, “Brookings Senior Fellow,” presumed Smart Person, and one of the neutral “Experts” Hillary’s “What Happened” insisted we must trust, is outraged. Trump “appears” to have done what Obama did, and for the same reasons: too many marginally useful officials think its their obligation to leak what they don’t like.
But baying media hounds predictably chase this silly assertion, and docile regional media with no reporters over age 27 echo it. Gullible and emotionally charged liberals will be talking about this “cover up” all weekend. What a joke.
Harcourt Fenton Mudd (0c349e) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:47 pmshe used to work at the puzzle palace, does that inspire confidence at who is our national security establishment, well we’ve hunted that dangerous criminal, carter page, oh wait after three years he hasn’t been indicted,
narciso (d1f714) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:49 pmThat’s because it wasn’t an attempt to describe it. It was my reaction to it.
Patterico (d3d5c1) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:51 pmThis makes sense, but I’d like to know if there’s a pattern to the way it’s done. If the only ones that go into top secret storage are the ones that look like Trump is committing a crime it paints a different picture.
Time123 (c9382b) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:52 pmYou are surely a sock-puppet for someone I have banned before. In any event, I’m banning your IP for being a jackass.
Patterico (d3d5c1) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:53 pm“So then the bad thing wouldn’t have happened? Or we just not know about it?”
Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 9/28/2019 @ 1:50 pm
How do those questions pertain to the relevance of the form change?
Munroe (53beca) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:55 pmIf the rule change was improper in some way that should be addressed. But it doesn’t impact what Trump appears to be doing.
Time123 (c9382b) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:55 pmIt does not. Relying on the hapless Alan Dershowitz is not the smartest move. Just sayin’.
Patterico (d3d5c1) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:55 pm@39, was there some comment/twitter war that I missed or is this just typical online hyperbole?
Time123 (c9382b) — 9/28/2019 @ 2:56 pm@43
There is one, or a handful of, banned commenters who use VPNs to evade the block and continue trolling.
Dave (1bb933) — 9/28/2019 @ 3:06 pmIf anyone wants to remake Escape From Alcatraz, here’s the warden:
https://media.townhall.com/townhall/reu/ha/2019/142/b8fe6c22-ef85-4a7c-ab88-fa9282726626.png
harkin (58d012) — 9/28/2019 @ 3:13 pm_
In other words, the stuff we know would still be true but we wouldn’t know it.
Munroe, this is the reason you severely criticized the hacking of the DNC and Hillary’s emails, right? I’m sure if I reviewed your archive I would find all kinds of criticism of that stuff. Because you’re not an intellectually dishonest partisan hack, right? You’re not the living essence of hypocrisy. Therefore your concern about the relevance of the hacking to a discussion of what was in her emails is no doubt in evidence in your previous commentary. You being the honest guy we all totally believe you to be.
Patterico (d3d5c1) — 9/28/2019 @ 3:20 pmhe could double for the warden in Shawshank, as well,
so any reasons why they would have chosen to revise the form, now one could simply have the times print it as an op ed, like they did with anonymous, or the late joe Wilson, the facts about the matter are immaterial,
narciso (d1f714) — 9/28/2019 @ 3:22 pmthey operated an insecure network that trafficked in classified info, that was susceptible to foreign exfiltration, then all devices were destroyed before an investigation could proceed, but comey said ‘no prosecutor would pursue, see the difference,
narciso (d1f714) — 9/28/2019 @ 3:26 pmI am also old enough to remember how much “impact” those MSM statements had in preventing Reid’s words from having results or getting echo-chambered.
After all, when challenged later about if he regretted it, Reid smugly replied, “He did not get elected, did he?”
++++++++++++++++++
I’m so old that I remember Reid talking a lot about “hearing someone say that Romney never paid federal income taxes” or something. Did the MSM react in outrage to such [made-up] “hear-say”?
Yeah, if you spend 2 seconds to google it, the NYT, WaPo, Time, Newsweek, CNN, MSNBC…all called it a lie immediately. And you know what it wasn’t, Harry Reid asking the Australians to investigate Romney to get make sure they get some aid.
You know, the actual point in this.
Colonel Klink
jim2 (a5dc71) — 9/28/2019 @ 3:35 pm“Therefore your concern about the relevance of the hacking to a discussion of what was in her emails is no doubt in evidence in your previous commentary. You being the honest guy we all totally believe you to be.”
Patterico (d3d5c1) — 9/28/2019 @ 3:20 pm
Challenge accepted.
If someone here ever asserted that the hacking was irrelevant, like anyone now asserting the change of form is irrelevant, then I would certainly take issue. Go ahead and search the archives, Mr. P. Except, I don’t think anyone made such an assertion regarding the hacking — so there’s that.
Actually, I recall a ton of hand-wringing about them, and a finger kinda sorta pointed at the Orange Man by several here. Relevance never seemed in doubt.
Plus, good folks like Mifsud, Halper and Turk always thought them relevant—going waaaay back, right? But, let’s not go down that rabbit hole. Best not to broach that subject, amirite?
Munroe (53beca) — 9/28/2019 @ 3:36 pmof course, Schiff secretly met with glenn simpson, last year in aspen, but he’s an impartial witness, even though contracted by the oligarchs,
when I was younger I had great hopes about what would happen in a post soviet Russia, but ultimately we saw what gaidar chubais, and co, turned the place into, one can blame yeltsin, but he was only hald aware at best. a similar thing happened in Ukraine, the bio of zylovesky, is rather blank between his graduation from the Kherson institute, and becoming a minister in the azarov cabinet, setting up burisma in 2002, (is that where he first encountered cofer black, as at large ambassador,)
narciso (d1f714) — 9/28/2019 @ 3:38 pmit’s been fascinating to see the coverage of the case from 2015 (when supposedly the case against burisma was shut down) to 2017, when it was by special court, then he returned the following year, then onychenko revealed incriminating tapes between him and poroshenko, then they reopened the case in june of this year,
narciso (d1f714) — 9/28/2019 @ 3:41 pm42. Let me explain a few things to everyone here, Trump lickers and Trump haters alike.
Firstly, impeachment is an official “impeachment” of the president’s character. The constitution spells out the fact that although Congress’ only remedy is the removal of the president from office, such removal does not preclude a criminal trial.
Secondly (and thusly), impeachment is ipso facto a political act — NOT a legal one. The burden of proof for such is whatever the House of Representatives decides it to be.
Thirdly, Nancy Pelosi can not unilaterally declare an impeachment inquiry to have started. Like any other matter before congress, she can schedule committee meetings and votes. Beyond that, she has no plenary power as regards impeachment that she does not have on other day-to-day matters in the House.
And lastly, the Senate requires a 2/3 vote to remove. Not gonna happen. This is all Demo-weasel political theater.
Gryph (08c844) — 9/28/2019 @ 3:43 pmas for zelensky, some of his associates like kolomoisky are indeed suspicious, (the privat bank matter is of concern) along with the proposed transfer of certain technology to the Chinese, as john Bolton warned against, might have raised some reservations,
narciso (d1f714) — 9/28/2019 @ 3:45 pmplease you think the law matters, if that were so, mueller would not have been appointed comey would have faced charges for the memos he leaked, the national security division of the doj would have been severely reprimanded (bearded spock universe I know) It will be made an statement of the nature of one’s soul to convict, those that do will be rewarded. those who don’t will be branded unpersons, they won’t allow that mistake to happen again,
narciso (d1f714) — 9/28/2019 @ 3:51 pmNo, that is wholly irrelevant, how does a change in the form change the reality of the event? Or are the rest of us supposed to stick are head in the sand and say “I cannot see it, so it didn’t happen”? You are not a toddler, object permanence is a real thing.
Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:02 pmWhat, in the name of all that is holy, is any of that supposed to mean, be referencing, something? Maybe you shouldn’t let the cat run on the keyboard.
Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:09 pmif law was followed, well delay, McDonnell and stevens would have never lost their office, but it was necessary for Pelosi to crawl in, same with McAuliffe, and the high school drop out in Alaska because they needed their 58th vote, to get Obamacare passed,
narciso (d1f714) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:15 pmThe accusations against Joe and Hunter Biden find their origin in the book Clinton Cash. They have long been debunked and thoroughly discredited, but there isn’t a right wing conspiracy theory Trump doesn’t embrace. This one though is most likely being pushed by Giuliani, as we know Trump doesn’t read. If there’s anyone is this sordid mess that could find himself in serious trouble, it’s Giuliani. Because he is not a government official, nor a member of the administration, his repeated attempts to influence policy with foreign officials could be construed as violations of the Logan Act.
Gawain's Ghost (b25cd1) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:16 pmUntamed on Main, ah, a new handle.
You say, things in error. Trump also confirmed it using his mouth tweeter and his finger tweeter, as did Rudytooti. You keep glossing over it in your Steppe Nomad’y way. Trump has admitted it because he thinks its OK, you want to do the hand wavy thing about learning of it, because you know it’s not.
You’re Biden hand waving hides that Trump is holding half a billion dollars in aid and greatly needed arms, in the middle of an invasion, hostage to force a foreign government to manufacture evidence against a domestic political opponent. This is a Trump story, Biden is a footnote, barely.
Sure, people who think specifically ordering foreign governments to interfere with our internal politics, by our president being a bad thing are the hacks.
Hand waving about them over there, or something, it’s not clear, you should check the talking points. That you don’t understand a president actively encouraging a foreign actor to interfere with internal US political policy, or face the consequence of not receiving military aid, is kind of telling.
Well, you told him, and you think there’s going to be a Civil War over Trump? If Chick-Fil-Et started selling burgers, maybe a civil war, Trump, I think not.
Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:22 pmThen Democrats who said nothing about Obama would pretend to be furious, and Trumpers who pretended to be furious about Obama saying that would rationalize it or be silent.
Any other questions?
Patterico (d3d5c1) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:34 pmwell it led to the invasion of Ukraine, yet one can barely hear it mentioned it’s like a whole 30 minutes of the film left out,
narciso (d1f714) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:36 pmSteppe Nomad. I deleted the comment and will delete further comments from the same banned person, under whatever handle. I am going to go back and delete at least one comment from his previous comments every time it happens, too, meaning I am also deleting the “Main Ukrain” comment as well.
Patterico (d3d5c1) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:38 pmYou’re off on some of those, like Jeff Lebowski and Michael Keohane.
Patterico (d3d5c1) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:39 pmthey left something out again, what are the odds,
https://dailycaller.com/2019/09/28/new-york-times-quid-pro-quo-trump-nra/
narciso (d1f714) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:44 pm#36
steveg (354706) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:48 pmmeh
I apologize to the Dude and Mike.
Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:48 pmI am an equal opportunity critic. I complained when Obama promised “flexibility”. That was easy. I am a Republican.
Now I am really disturbed with Trump’s schemes. Man, do I wish Rubio would have won.
Just trying my best to be objective.
noel (f22371) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:55 pmLow energy Jeb, please. Boring but good, like a Volvo.
Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 9/28/2019 @ 4:57 pmOver the last couple days, I see Republicans complaining that the whistleblower has bias. Yea, of course, everyone does. Should we just allow Republicans to be whistleblowers? Maybe, just maybe, it’d be better if we just try to verify the claims no matter who submits them. Maybe that would work best?
Imagine. You are a Democrat employed by the CIA and you find out that our President is holding funding over the head of a foreign leader and pressuring him into finding dirt on the Democrat front-runner for President. Imagine that. Or are some of you just not capable of that?
noel (f22371) — 9/28/2019 @ 5:01 pm#41
Granted the Senate will do their political kangaroo hackery regardless to the actual “crime”.
I think Dershowitz is right that the standard for removal by the Senate should be for a criminal action, but a lot of people have already become persuaded that Trump is a criminal regardless of how the evidence plays out.
From wikepedia My snark in bold: The standard of proof required for impeachment and conviction is also left to the discretion of individual Representatives and Senators, respectively. Ugly Defendants have argued that impeachment trials are in the nature of criminal proceedings, with convictions carrying grave consequences for the accused, and that therefore proof beyond a reasonable doubt should be the applicable standard. House Managers have argued that a lower standard (down to their level of ability?) would be appropriate to better serve the purpose of defending the community against abuse of power (as in daring to beat our candidate), since the defendant does not risk forfeiture of life, liberty, or property, for which the reasonable doubt standard was set. (no wonder the house and senate didn’t care about due process with Kavanaugh)
steveg (354706) — 9/28/2019 @ 5:04 pmIf Trump didn’t mention holding the funding and the Ukrainians didn’t know the funding was held up until a month after the call…. the the CIA guy got … as they said early on…. “ahead of his skis”
Plus Trump may have been lying, but he gave a plausible explanation for withholding the money… an explanation that the transcript seems to somewhat verify
steveg (354706) — 9/28/2019 @ 5:09 pmFrom my research prompted by the host I am glad to have learned that a person under the threat of removal from office by the house and senate is NOT entitled to due process because due process under the Constitution guarantees that the government cannot take away a person’s basic rights to life, liberty or property, without due process of law.
steveg (354706) — 9/28/2019 @ 5:17 pmSo Kavanaugh would not be facing loss of life, loss of liberty, loss of property. So F*** him.
Same goes for Trump.
Hey, by whatever means necessary to achieve the greater good. Right?
JEB. Boring, underpowered, POS, like a Trabant
steveg (354706) — 9/28/2019 @ 5:21 pmThats a fine East German auto there Col K
steveg (354706) — 9/28/2019 @ 5:22 pmLike valerie plame who donated monies from her company propietary same note different song.
There was glen carle who wrote a book length screed which illustrated his category error.
Narciso (beeb9a) — 9/28/2019 @ 5:37 pmOK lets forget Dershowitz for now
steveg (354706) — 9/28/2019 @ 5:48 pmhttps://jonathanturley.org/2019/09/27/you-want-impeachment-find-a-quip-to-go-with-the-pro-quo/
Dershowitz however reminds of the blue star group that defended the oligarch. Burretta was head of the criminal division and secured the transocean and takata settlements
Narciso (beeb9a) — 9/28/2019 @ 5:57 pmImpeachment IS due process. It is spelled out explicitly in the constitution, the supreme law of the land.
If you don’t like it, the constitution can be amended.
Dave (1bb933) — 9/28/2019 @ 6:05 pmI had one in Germany for 2 years, 92-93. It had 200k kilometers, at least, and drove it for every bit of a year without oil. Bought it for 200 Swiss francs, gave it to the bartender at Gaffel am Dom after drinking about 300 Stange of Kolsch, I forgot my wallet, lost my coaster, and gave her the car after she took me home and poured me out of it. It was rust colored, not painted, just colored, and had 2 mopeds worth of horsepower. 40, maybe 50mph top speed, down hill. I traded up to an 89 CRXsi and thought I had the fastest car on earth.
Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c) — 9/28/2019 @ 6:13 pm@ Dave, #78, responding to steveg:
I am depressed that this needs spelling out to (I presume) an American citizen. Depressed, but not surprised.
Demosthenes (7fae81) — 9/28/2019 @ 6:30 pmHere we are, 3 years down the rabbit hole, and I find I’ve lost my moral compass. I used to ahve it right there in my front pocket, but I reached for it the other day and I I had was a glob of plastic.
I mean, the President says all these things, and some of them must be right. Some must be true. But I don’t know if those are the same things, nor do I remember what he said the other day. I look at the media and the newspapers for some reference, and I find that they, too, are just as irregular. All I can get from the Washington Post is that the President is Bad. Then I turn on Fox News and their opinion depends ENTIRELY on the time of day.
It’s so confusing.
Now we have NANCY PELOSI lecturing us on what is moral and ethical. What happened to the world? There used to be Principles, dag nubbit. But even those really principled people are hedging their words depending on what the Orange Man (or that Green Eel Woman) says.
So, I’ve decided I will roll some dice every morning and proceed as indicated. Every day a new position. It seems the way things work now.
Kevin M (19357e) — 9/28/2019 @ 6:49 pmWSJ has a take that’s similar the OP, but with some additional https://www.wsj.com/articles/embarrassing-leaks-led-to-clampdown-on-trumps-phone-records-11569710889
Time123 (d54166) — 9/28/2019 @ 6:59 pmYep,
https://apelbaum.wordpress.com/2019/09/29/how-to-finance-your-congressional-campaign-with-arms-sales/
Narciso (beeb9a) — 9/28/2019 @ 7:01 pmOh and tulsi has decided its right and proper to impeach, maybe she’ll go full moloch next.
Narciso (beeb9a) — 9/28/2019 @ 7:02 pmNancy deciding she doesnt need a vote to start impeachment proceeding just a weirding module.
Narciso (beeb9a) — 9/28/2019 @ 7:20 pm1st of 3 cock crowings…Barr is validating mg’s “concerns”:
urbanleftbehind (dc2748) — 9/28/2019 @ 10:04 pmhttp://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/barr-surprised-and-angry-over-trump-phone-call-with-ukraine
Um, Turley makes zero mention of 52 U.S.C. § 30121(a)(2). I wonder why.
It’s not required to prove quid pro quo for Trump to have committed a felony and impeachable offense.
Paul Montagu (f2c051) — 9/29/2019 @ 7:45 amOh, and I learned a new word today from Julian Sanchez: Renfields.
Oh, and I learned a new word today from Julian Sanchez: Renfields.
You never read Dracula? (To tell the truth, I think the book is better than most of the film versions.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5eqkWRWZ7c
kishnevi (496414) — 9/29/2019 @ 8:05 amI haven’t read Dracula since high school, and I’m going to my 40th reunion next weekend.
Paul Montagu (f2c051) — 9/29/2019 @ 8:25 amOne of the reasons I come here now is to watch never trumpers jump on “news” that reinforces their biases.
We should all be more patient.
I used to think 72 hours, but now the media seems wise to that and are waiting longer.
I guess that I should try, try, try to wait a week.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/27/us/politics/trump-lapierre-nra-impeachment.html
steveg (354706) — 9/29/2019 @ 9:26 amPaul.
By my poor math, that means you are around 57-58 (you are smart so maybe even 56 unlike some of us here who seem to have repeated several grades to no avail) I’m 62 and probably graduated a few years ahead of you.
My question is why subject yourself to that?
One year my class decided to have the kids favorite teachers do short little classes on their subject of expertise. One of my friends was in charge of the reunion and asked if I’d be going to one of the 15 minute “classes”. I responded: Why would I want another “D”? They should just give a seminar on colon cancer.
steveg (354706) — 9/29/2019 @ 9:40 amThe hot girls almost all looked horrible, the athletes had gone to seed and everyone had grown jowls.
Darn it. Comment in moderation for an innocuous comment. Can’t tell if the trigger word was “gals” or “fat” or “goateed” or “bellies”.
Paul Montagu (f2c051) — 9/29/2019 @ 10:29 amGiuliani said the whistleblower’s complaint is wrong on maybe five things ones of which ws that his meeting with an aide to Zelensky was set up as a result. It was set up three days before he call, he said.
Giuliani was on both Face the Nation and ABC’s This Week. He constantly complains that the media are ignoring the story and they are not letting him out the story on thdes interviews (and he’s right it’s complicated and he can’t explain thinngs too briefly) and he says he has affidavts – sworn statements – alleging things and they’ve been posted online for five or six months.
He said he first got on to this story or stories when Ukrainians came to him in November, 2018 (I think one time Giuliani misspoke and said 2016)
He also said he never said certain things that other people attribute to him – he did not suggest that Ukraine hacked the DNC server. What he says is that people in Ukraine made things available to the Clinton campaign. I think he’s mainly talking about the black notebook recording payments to Paul Manafort.
(there does indeed seems to be a difference bwtween what Giuliani said and what Trump said. Giuliani, for instance never said Biden admitted to fiiring teh prosecutor to stop an investigation)
Trump was using an intermediary to communicate with Giuliani and that could explain some of that)
Giuliani said he didn’t go to the FBI (maybe this only applies to the Justice Department after BArr became Attorney General) because he knew that Adam Schiff would accuse him of using political influence to get something investigated if he did, so he went a different way. (I think he means post it on;ine and hope it gets press attention.)
He aays Adam Schiff should be removed as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee and an impartial Democrat put in charge instead. He not saying but he clearly indicated he doesn’t want to co-operate with the commmittee as it stands now but would if Trump asked him to.
Sammy Finkelman (4fd7a7) — 9/29/2019 @ 11:01 am