Timeline re Ukraine military aid:
Funds pre-approved per Congressional 2019 budget.
2/28/19 -- Trump Administration informs Congress they are releasing funds to Ukraine
5/23/19 -- When asked by Congress why funds have still not been released, Trump Administration gives bureaucratic runaround, ... promises to release funds soon.
7/25/19 -- TC with President Zelinsky. Transcript speaks for itself. Trump: "..... The United States has been good to Ukraine ..."
9/9/19 -- Inspector General sends letter to Representatives Schiff and Nunes, informing them of inbound WB complaint that is of "urgent concern." [Guess who Nunes then told???]
9/11/19 -- Funds to Ukraine released.
Replies to: Timeline re Ukraine military aid:
Conor, should trump tell Putie he'll have more flexibility after the election and sell Russia
uranium?
WhataboutObama?! As if there is anything wrong with saying that, too.
(no message)
Assuming Putin gives Trump permission to speak while Trump is tossing Putin’s salad?
(no message)
Ad hominem.
(no message)
In Michael Atkinson’s 16 months on the job, this was the 1st WB complaint that was “urgent.”
That is, the only one where Mr. Atkinson said “Oh shit!”
Why Cole?
Why would Trump block it, if Trump was acting with honorable intentions?
By the way, if you believe that the July phone call is the whole story, you really are a rube.
Link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Atkinson_(Inspector_General)
They found that the complainant has a political bias against Trump and he made the complaint
without reading the transcript but based on news articles. Senators have now read the complaint and found it to be a big nothing.
Good luck! Trump has already fundraised off of this to the tune of millions. So, keep going I say! Impeach him!
Tell us about Trump appointee IG Michael Atkinson's political bias.
(no message)
Who cares. Whistleblower letter: "I was not a witness to most of the events described."
(no message)
Exactly. But he lays out who was. You talk to them under oath. His political views are of no moment.
(no message)
Now that’s doggone funny coming from you.
(no message)
So, your beef with Trump is that he didn't use the US IC to interfere w/elections like you guys did?
Granted, the Dems used Ukraine to get Trump's campaign chair, but I can see why you wouldn't want Trump to be able to do the same thing.
You guys get to use Ukraine. You guys get to use the US Intelligence Community. But you want Trump to fight with one hand behind his back. Politics. (I'm granting that he did what you say he did for the sake of argument only.)
NedoftheHill: When Whataboutism goes wrong
(no message)
Don't understand why you are so willing to dismiss his horrible behavior.
If there was a transcript of Obama asking Ukraine in 2016 to investigate Trump Tower Kiev bribes you'd have been apoplectic. Admit it.
Trump is a total scrub. Every character flaw imaginable assembled in a single human unit...no redeeming qualities other than a willingness to nominate conservative judges.
Last 8 words covers it.
(no message)
You're a Phillie fan who says he's a Republican who voted for Hillary.
(no message)
Which certainly places me well above a fan of the Madoff Mess who not only voted for, but worships
the Orange Stain.
“use the US IC.” Clearly you understand how these things work.
(no message)
You also should rep Trump at his impeachment trial and run w/ the "everybody does it" defense.
Always plays well in a courtroom.
You want the simple test, conor? Isn’t it true that Marine officers eat after their men in the field
It’s called leadership.
You think that Orange would eat first or after the grunts?
You think the Bush’s, McCain and even Barry and Biden do that?
I'm good with prosecuting everyone who commits a crime. You guys aren't, though.
(no message)
How do you feel about a US President asking Ukraine to fook w/ a political rival?
And leveraging military aid as part of the personal favor? To a vulnerable and newly elected Ukraine President whose nation relies upon US support?
And offering his personal lawyer to assist with manufacturing a case against Biden?
Please don't disgrace yourself by asserting that Trump was acting honorably because Biden deserves to be investigated in Ukraine.
A political rival? Hunter is a family member, and I thought you guys were cool with that.
(no message)
I would be angry at DT if there was no crime to investigate. But that is hardly the situation.
(no message)
Wasn't Trump just asking them to investigate a potential crime? "Rule of Law," you know...
(no message)
Of course. Trump is very interested in battling corruption, wherever it exists.
During the call, Trump spoke highly of ousted prosecutor -- Viktor Shokin.
I am sure you are well aware that when Shokin first took office in 2015 as Ukraine's Prosecutor General (their version of Attorney General), he was praised by all for his pledge to wage an unflinching battle against corruption. However, as it soon came to light, Viktor was slowplaying investigations against former Yanukovych officials (the ones loyal to Putin), and in some cases, was outright hindering the investigations.
Pressure grew among the entire Western world for Ukraine to oust Viktor, who at that point had proven to be untrustworthy.
So no, President Zelensky did not need a heads up from Trump to ferret out bad guys in Ukraine. Trump wanted Zelensky to start an investigation (a commonplace Putin tactic) to give the appearance of impropriety per Biden.
A rambling non sequitur. Fantastic.
(no message)
And why is his personal attorney and fixer involved at all?
Aren’t there normal channels for DOJ to request assistance if there is an official investigation.
You forgot this one.
Lock him up.
The new cheer for Democrats.
He can share a cell with Hillary is Republicans want.
That would be an okay deal. Both of them in prison and out of public life. They have been a pox on
our nation.
Wow. As you know, timelines in a case can crush the accused.
(no message)
If this story proves up it is a pretty strong circumstantial case. Orange is a mob boss and the
Govt doesn’t normally have recorded quid pro quo’s on them. The pressure is applied like freezing the aid and then having a nice reasonable conversation telling the victim what you want. Both messages are delivered loud and clear. Leaving aside the criminality or impeachability of the whole thing, I see it as a gut check moment for the nation. Is this what and who we want as the Chief Magistrate? Is our standard so low that only criminal conduct disqualifies someone from that office? Does character matter at all? Past generations have passed those tests. Not sure about this one.
I'm just glad innocent people are never convicted with evidence like that.
(no message)