Obama spying scandal and the failed attempted coup against Trump

[Don Giovanni]

Pat Buchanan asks, "Where are the 'high crimes?'"

http://www.unz.com/pbuchanan/where-are-the-high-crimes/

Did Zelensky hold the press conference Trump demanded? No.

Did Zelensky announce Ukraine was investigating the Bidens? No.

Did Zelensky get the Oval Office meeting? Yes.

Did Zelensky get the U.S. weapons? Yes, $400 million in arms and Javelin missiles.

Where then is the crime? When was it consummated?

Zelensky denied there was any effort to pressure him.

Strangely, the transcript released by the White House is not in question. There is nothing in the transcript that explicitly reads any pressure was actually applied. So how did anyone gather otherwise from the call given the transcript doesn't clearly demonstrate otherwise?

Or was this a thought crime, a bluff to get Zelensky to look into how Hunter Biden got a $50,000-a-month seat on the board of the most corrupt company in Ukraine, days after Joe Biden was in Kyiv threatening to block a $1 billion loan guarantee to the regime.

So we are talking about something that at best can only be described a thought crime. Trump may have been thinking of doing this, we are led to believe, yet there is no evidence he actually did. Does it matter? Not to the house with it's Democrat majority, but in the Senate, it's a different story. The Senate needs a super majority to convict. So long as the presidents remains popular in states that voted Republican senators, then they can't convict and he will remain in office.

Trump will probably not get impeached, but he can lose the presidency if he doesn't get tough with Big Tech and doesn't continue withdrawing US presence in the Middle East. It's his presidency to lose.

[Reaper]

Wow, not even evidence that he thought of doing anything wrong - just the democratic hope that he did..

[Don Giovanni]

None of that matters. For them, it's just a matter of forcing him out if they have the votes and making look guilty enough of a crime without any evidence.

[Don Giovanni]

Now the ambassador to the EU has changed his testimony and claims he did delivered a quid pro quo:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...quo/ar-AAJTPJr

In his updated testimony, Mr. Sondland recounted how he had discussed the linkage with Andriy Yermak, a top adviser to President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, on the sidelines of a Sept. 1 meeting between Vice President Mike Pence and Mr. Zelensky in Warsaw. Mr. Zelensky had discussed the suspension of aid with Mr. Pence, Mr. Sondland said.

“I said that resumption of the U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anticorruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks,” Mr. Sondland said in the document, which was released by the House committees leading the inquiry, along with the transcript of his original testimony from last month.

The new information surfaced as the House committees also released a transcript of their interview last month with Kurt D. Volker, the former special envoy to Ukraine. Rushing to complete their final round of requests for key witnesses before they commence public impeachment hearings, the panels also scheduled testimony on Friday by Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff. And two more administration witnesses who had been scheduled to testify on Tuesday — Michael Duffey, a top official on the White House budget office, and Wells Griffith, a senior aide to Energy Secretary Rick Perry — failed to appear.

In his new testimony, Mr. Sondland said he believed that withholding the aid — a package of $391 million in security assistance that had been approved by Congress — was “ill-advised,” although he did not know “when, why or by whom the aid was suspended.” But he said he came to believe that the aid was tied to the investigations.

“I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anticorruption statement,” Mr. Sondland said.

Sondland was a wealthy Trump backer and was given the ambassadorship as a reward.

The reason for the change in testimony is due to a conflicting claim by a NSC official.

Mr. Morrison, the National Security Council official, testified last week that it was Mr. Sondland who first indicated in a conversation with him and Mr. Taylor on Sept. 1 that the release of the military aid for Ukraine might be contingent on the announcement of the investigations, and that he hoped “that Ambassador Sondland’s strategy was exclusively his own.”

Sondland was careful to suggest the aid was possibly contingent on a quid pro quo, not necessarily contingent, while at the same time trying to insulate himself as merely a messenger. I think the president will still deny there was any quid pro quo in place and that at best this was thought of or discussed, but never followed through on a meaningful level, which would make the most sense given nothing transpired. The aid went to Ukraine and no such investigation as supposedly demanded by Trump was ever announced.

But there is something to be said of how Biden's cokehead son landed a job in Ukraine for a company that was under investigation.

[Don Giovanni]

Don Jr acknowledged his name:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/don-trump-jr-defiant-after-naming-whistleblower-as-eric-ciaramella

Donald Trump Jr. named CIA officer Eric Ciaramella as the whistleblower who filed a complaint about President Trump's phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

It's a group of them and this guy is a nobody. What a big joke. They made him out to be this great patriot, long serving agent of the intelligence community... all BS. It's a lackey. A nobody who willing serves as agent for others. A total minion to protect higher ups.

[Don Giovanni]

McConnell says Senate would acquit if vote held today.

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/1...t-trump-066103

Hillary Clinton is looking to take over the Democrat party during the convention, but is waiting for Dems to impeach Trump first and take him out of the running. She is pure cancer.

[Soprano76]

Why are so eager to protect Trump? What qualities does he possess that you defend him so earnestly? He's terribly ignorant, mean-spirited, a liar and corrupt. Not sure why you would want someone like that in the white house.

[Reaper]

Why are so eager to protect Trump? What qualities does he possess that you defend him so earnestly? He's terribly ignorant, mean-spirited, a liar and corrupt. Not sure why you would want someone like that in the white house.

Do you think Americans care more about his personality traits or what he actually achieves for American citizens? I mean, if I imagine myself as an American, when I pick a political leader, I can imagine myself caring more about what he/she does for the economy than if he/she is arrogant. I imagine most Americans believe whoever is in power is corrupt to some degree. Same with if he/she is cynical towards the failed state of Mexico for example. America can help Mexico more by building the wall and helping Mexico establish basic law and order against the cartels (as Trump offered this week) than just keeping the vague, semi illegal but emotional relationship between the US and Mexico that Obama, Clinton had. Alcoholics can only be helped once they admit they have they problem. The US left constantly apologising for Mexico's problems and being outraged on Mexico's behalf every time Trump opens his mouth of the subject does not help Mexicans in Mexico. It just prolongs the suffering.

I understand Trump is the wrong age, wrong colour, wrong sex, wrong background, wrong political orientation for most of the ultra liberal mainstream media - but outside that bubble - surely it is the votes of US citizens that counts above woke media outrage? What has Trump done for the economy, are taxes higher or lower, is petrol higher or lower, are there more or less jobs available? Not - he was rude to Greta and Mexicans, he was arrogant in the way he negotiated this with the Chinese or EU, he was wrong to suspect a Biden of corruption etc etc.

[Don Giovanni]

Like Jair Bolsonaro, who but him stood up and won in the face of the degenerates driving off us into the abyss? Just look at what Lula did to Brazil or Chavez did in Venezuela, then you'll understand why people support candidates like Trump for president.

[Reaper]

Bolsonaro is another example. Most Brazilians wanted a reduction in crime, an end to socialism and a better life - that is why they voted Bolsonaro - not because he was rude to a fat old socialist in parliament or in generally perceived to be right wing.

People care about the money in their pocket and safety and there are more of them than care about a president being rude/ arrogant etc

[Soprano76]

Lmao trump is an east coast elite who has an MSM propaganda arm of Fox News helping him. He's a legitimate fucking moron and it's hilarious how one can legitimately defend him at this point.

He is ripping off of the government for millions of dollars by having events at and staying at his own properties. If that isn't corruption then idk what is.

He failed on healthcare. He failed on his wall. He failed on infrastructure. He failed with his Chinese trade war and let down his farmer constituents.

He's a failed president who needed daddy to prop him up in order to be successful in the first place.

The man barely has the wherewithal to manage a mcdonalds restaurant. Give me a break.

[Reaper]

Lmao trump is an east coast elite who has an MSM propaganda arm of Fox News helping him. He's a legitimate fucking moron and it's hilarious how one can legitimately defend him at this point.

The vast majority of the msm, not only in the US, but abroad is actively against him. This wasn't the case with Obama.

He is ripping off of the government for millions of dollars by having events at and staying at his own properties. If that isn't corruption then idk what is.

I think corruption comes with the job. I mean Obama is still taking money from taxpayers:

Giving Back

So, here's a modest proposal for Barack Obama.

Since he's clearly "made enough money," why not give back the $207,800 that taxpayers fork over for his presidential pension each year?

And how about covering the cost of the many perks former presidents also get? Such as the $536,000 in office space that taxpayers are providing him. Or the cost of his lifetime Secret Service protection. Or his gold-plated health benefits. Or his staff, travel funds, and free postage.

The total cost to taxpayers of these benefits: More than $1 million a year.

But who cares? He is a lefty so free pass..

He failed on healthcare. He failed on his wall. He failed on infrastructure. He failed with his Chinese trade war and let down his farmer constituents.

Healthcare - is it cheaper or more expensive than under Obama? I don't know the answer but that is how I would judge it.
The wall was blocked by 'democrats' at each stage. Regardless, he built a lot of it. Obama did too..
Has infrastructure got worse since Obama?
Chinese trade war is ongoing, any victor?
As for farmers, you mean these farmers? Maybe the rich ones made more, but he is trying to support the country.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...re-study-says/

He's a failed president who needed daddy to prop him up in order to be successful in the first place.

Agree on that.

The man barely has the wherewithal to manage a mcdonalds restaurant. Give me a break.

Maybe the case, but look at Hillary, she can barely manage her own hygiene.. and that was the choice last election.

[Don Giovanni]

The majority of daytime Fox News coverage of Trump is negative. Murdoch's sons are leftists and are moving the network towards the left. This is why Trump keeps tweeting negative things about Fox News lately.

Over 90% of Trump's media coverage is negative. Is everything he does really that bad? At what point do you question their coverage of him? The media claims Trump is a racist and a Russian agent. You believe that?

They consistently misrepresent things he says and does. For example, we were told Trump made fun of a disabled person. It was in fact a gesture Trump used to mimic someone acting hysterical. Here's Trump acting out that gesture in other instances:

Here's how CNN portrayed that gesture:

Time and time again they do this to make the president appear unstable and mean spirited. They completely take his remarks out of context and fabricate new outrages. This is why over 90% of Trump's media coverage is negative, why everything he does is an outrage.

You want to talk about propaganda. Here's CNN faking a gas attack during the 1991 Gulf War (the first Iraq War):

That's propaganda. That was real on-air footage they shot on top of their own building in Atlanta, pretending that they were live in Kuwait. It was all fake.

This should look and sound familiar. The mainstream media, Fox included, repeated the trick with Assad, claiming he gassed his own people. It was all lies designed to drag the US into a war with Syria. There was one exception in the mainstream media, Tucker Carlson, who rightly asked whether it was actually real and questioned why Assad would do something seemingly against his own interests:

Was that Tucker Carlson segment propaganda? Do you really believe Assad gassed his own people knowing fully well to do so meant to incite an international response against him? It's absurd.

As a matter of fact Trump has all but ended the war, he has overseen the defeat of ISIS (including the death of it's leader), and Assad has regained control of most of his territory. Syria is now stable. That's more than I can of Libya:

[Don Giovanni]

The Democrats look pretty desperate with this impeachment inquiry. They might be able to force Trump out by hook or by crook.

At this point I don't care that much. Trump is too easily wooed by people he should no better than to deal with, like John Bolton who should never have been his national security adviser, and who now wants to testify against him. Then there's Erdogan. That snake is going to create untold problems in the future in the Middle East, like he has already, and beyond. Whatever deal Trump worked with him, whatever optics he thinks it will have on China, North Korea, and Iran, is simply naive. Erdogan backs the Muslim Brotherhood, the same group which spawned al-Qaeda and who were throwing homosexuals and Christians off of roof tops in Egypt. He believes in the rebirth of the Caliphate with Turkey at the head. By contrast, ISIS (Daesh as Erdogan called them) would indeed be a JV team like Obama had said. Trump is surrounded by treacherous people and he keeps inviting the same mistake to happen over and over. To this end, he's a fool and he needs to stop surrounding himself with these people.

With Bloomberg filing his papers (without announcing a run) and Hillary looking to enter the fray at the last possible moment via a contested convention, they're creating enough issues for Trump to distract from their own. One of them will win the Democratic nomination. They're avoiding the primary fray for now because it's too messy and many Democrat voters are leaning heavily left-wing. We can thank communist "sociology" professors and theirs bands antifa scum bag students. It looks like the Democrats found a new KKK-like group to scare Republicans and "uppity" types who think for themselves.

The Democrats have a field of very weak candidates for president. Biden is everyone's favorite punching bag, Bernie Sanders suffered a cardiac arrest, and Elizabeth Warren is vying with AOC to prove who's more deluded on the issue of diversity (she recently said, "trans and gender non-conforming people are the backbone of our democracy"). These are the three favorites right now to lead come the DNC and I'd say Warren has the biggest edge, but I think she's unelectable given she's too left-wing and she won't get enough votes outright win the nomination. Beto was the one candidate they had who seemed Obama-esque and could carry a red state like Texas, but he was polling at zero and dropped out. Buttigieg appears to be another Michael Dukakis, no chance of winning the election, but he could spoil the party in Iowa and earn himself enough votes to bargain at the convention. The Democrats will have a contested convention. That's when Hillary will likely enter the race. Biden is tainted by scandal with his son's appointment in Ukraine and I expect that to be used against him if he tries to hold out for the nomination. I suspect Warren or Buttigieg will become the VP in order for Hillary to strike a deal at the convention. Hillary doesn't want to run in the primaries because in order to appeal to voters, she has to make too many crazy left-wing promises and she's too old to campaign. I think Bloomberg is hesitating because he knows Hillary is lurking and he doesn't want to mess with her. She owns the Democratic party. He's too old as well, but at least he's electable and even Republicans would vote him in.

[Don Giovanni]

I neglected to mention that Sanders will never become president. After the DNC emails were released, he rolled over and didn't stand up to Hillary. He's happy to have a legacy as the grandfather of new, modern Democratic party. He doesn't want to be president. How can he be president when a pair of protesters could force him off his own stage?

He only knows how to roll over. And his heart attack and age puts his health in question.