So Who Did Trump Sell Us Out To? The Intelligence Agency Whistle-blower Scandal.

[Machismo]

They do, but if they're being asked to lie for Trump, there's no way they're going to go along with it to any large degree - they're better off hedging their bets with the Dems.



Yes - everyone knows the way to Trump's heart is through his ass, but that's because he was on a private call, engaging in "diplomacy". If it came down to being forced to pick sides, publicly, there's no way they'd throw their weight behind the Republicans. Supporting Dems is simply more beneficial to Ukraine.

They have 400 million reason s to lie or downplay it.

[Grapemask]

I wonder what else was in the transcript that they cut out. There's at least 20 minutes of talking not present in this 35 minute transcript, and Trump has a lot of ellipses for cut info.

Or maybe getting us to stare intently at this one document is half the point, because the whistleblower said it was multiple actions that sparked his complaint.

Smells like when Nixon agreed to release a small piece of info because he knew the rest of what he had was a shitstorm.

[Breccia]

it's illegal for politicians to receive aid/favors/etc from foreign powers and entities

Once again, we see hypocrisy in action.

Trump was asking for exactly this.

I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you're surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible.

Trump asked for something you specifically said was against the law. I also posted an entire debunking of your claim about abuse of power, unless you somehow magically make the EU and the IMF all part of it.

- - - Updated - - -

I love how his excuse for witholding money is waiting for other European states to provide more.

Again, Trump gave three excuses in public:

1) The first, at the time, was the OMB letter saying the foreign aid cost too much.

2) The second was corruption.

3) The third, and the one actually on the transcript, was "the EU isn't doing enough". I've already cited evidence that's also a lie: the EU gave billions. So did the IMF. Trump is lying.

As soon as you give more than one version of events, your entire defense is suspect. When you give three, you've ruined your credibility. Trump probably said "oh it was Germany!" last, because that was the excuse he gave on the transcript, but never an excuse he gave the American people. He stopped withholding the aid Sept 11. He didn't bring up the EU for over a week.

[Blur4stuff]

Looks like we're going to have to keep repeating to Trump supporters that this "transcript" isn't the real transcript and has been edited to put Trump in the best possible light. It's also not the whistleblower complaint.

Even with this edited version Trump is guilty.

[Breccia]

Guys...the White House just accidentally sent their talking points out to Congressional Democrats. And then tried to recall the email.

The instructions are also lies.

1) 2016 was never mentioned in the transcript. The US election was never mentioned in the transcript. Other than Trump asking Ukraine to do it personally, election interference was never mentioned in the transcript. The email is pushing objective lies.

2) This exchange:

President Zelenskyy: ...I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost. ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.

The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike...

That happened literally back to back. Ukrainian President asks for defense and missiles, Trump immediately goes into "I would you like to do us a favor though".

3) The emails say that the Ukrainian President mentioned Giuliani first. In the context of this phone call, that's true. But he brings it up
a) after Trump mentions investigating Biden, and
b) that one of his people (his personal lawyer) had already made contact.
So it's cherry picking to intentionally mislead.

4) The emails say Trump asked the Ukrainian President to talk to Giuliani, after the Ukrainian President brought up Giuliani first. Problem is, Trump asked the Ukrainian President to investigate Biden first, which immediately prompted the Ukrainian President to mention Giuliani. Almost as if, like the missiles -> Biden transition, the two were heavily related.

5) They bring up the "eight times" thing. First of all, as has been pointed out, no way was this a 30 minute phone call. Second of all, this is Trump's pinky swear Sharpie-covered account of what happened. This is basically "Trump said it was one time, therefore the person who said it was eight times is lying".

6) And there's no indication the "eight times" was all in this one phone call anyhow. We don't have the whistleblower's report. The WH is sitting on it.

It is not possible to defend Trump, without blatantly lying. It's all they have left.

- - - Updated - - -

Just a reminder: Ukraine already investigated Biden. They did so months ago. No evidence of wrongdoing was found.

Therefore, Trump was asking the Ukrainian President to investigate again.

[Ashnazg]

Looks like we're going to have to keep repeating to Trump supporters that this "transcript" isn't the real transcript and has been edited to put Trump in the best possible light. It's also not the whistleblower complaint.

Even with this edited version Trump is guilty.

Any proof of the bolded part?

[Breccia]

So I don't know how it works but I assume these calls are listened in on by multiple people and then there's the transcript which someone must have seen as well, if this is the case, how many people knew about it and said nothing?
If it turns out to be true, does that mean that there are multiple people that could be potentially investigated?

This is an honest question, I am not so much interested on whether people think he did it, but more curious about how many people were potentially involved because it seems unlikely to me that only Trump and the whistle blower know the contents of the call.

Well, we know Barr knew. The ICIG went to the DoJ and said that this was a campaign finance law violation. Barr said it was not within a week. Also he didn't recuse himself, despite being named in the call.

- - - Updated - - -

This Reuters article pre-dates the release of the transcript.

Which isn't a transcript.

Details from a phone call made by Donald Trump that has led the U.S. House of Representatives to launch a formal impeachment inquiry against the president isn’t likely to come from a recording or be verbatim, former White House and national security officials say.

Instead, because of standard White House protocol for handling phone calls between the president and other world leaders, a transcript is likely to be put together from written notes by U.S. officials who listen in.

Trump said on Tuesday a “complete, fully declassified and unredacted transcript” of the July 25 call would be released on Wednesday. In it, the Republican president is alleged to have pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate Joe Biden, the U.S. Democratic presidential front-runner.

The transcript would show the call was “totally appropriate,” Trump said on Twitter.

However, standard practice when a president is talking to a foreign leader is not to make a recording but to have at least two and sometimes more note-takers from the National Security Council (NSC) on the call, a former senior NSC official told Reuters.

Those note-takers are themselves usually Central Intelligence Agency officers on assignment to the NSC, he said.

Their notes serve as the principal record of such calls, the former official said. He was not aware of any electronic recordings made by the U.S. government on calls between Trump and other world leaders.

Evelyn Farkas, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense during the Obama presidency, said not only would any so-called transcript be based on notes, but it would also likely be incomplete because the note-takers usually do not include issues that could be controversial if they became public.

“Typically a note-taker will write notes about what the principal says in a fashion that does not embarrass their principal,” said Farkas.

A former White House senior official concurred there was unlikely to be a recording.

“There’s no physical recording but there are a lot of people listening and taking contemporaneous notes of these calls,” the official said. “When you read it, it looks almost like a transcript.”

This could be a clue to the whistleblower's job.

[Bodakane]

Just like with the findings of the Mueller Report, this is literally conspiracy committed by Trump. They marketed the name of conspiracy as collusion. They did that because collusion isn't illegal and conspiracy is.

Guys, do not fall into that trap again. Every time you talk about this in every public forum, call it what it is, conspiracy.

Any other American citizen would be looking for a plea deal on conspiracy charges right now.

Make no mistake, Trump's team is going to bring out the word "collusion" again. They are going to try to do it again. Don't let them.

[Machismo]

Any proof of the bolded part?

Well, considering Trump put it out, that's the logical conclusion.

[Felya]

Any proof of the bolded part?

This transcript is a 3rd party account of the conversation. It’s not a dictation of the call...

- - - Updated - - -

Well, considering Trump put it out, that's the logical conclusion.

It’s also listed on every page I read it on.

I don’t think folks even read it. I’d expect more comments about Trump asking Ukraine for Hillary’s mail server, because he ‘heard’ they had it.

[Machismo]

This transcript is a 3rd party account of the conversation. It’s not a dictation of the call...

- - - Updated - - -



It’s also listed on every page I read it on.

I don’t think folks even read it. I’d expect more comments about Trump asking Ukraine for Hillary’s mail server, because he ‘heard’ they had it.

Yeah, the pushing of the conspiracy theory shows just how brainwashed he is.

[kaelleria]

Trump is in a press conference trying to push the Hunter Biden angle again...

With the president of Ukraine.

And now he's trying to redirect to Hillary's emails.

"I hope you and President Putin can get together and solve your problems"

[Somewhatconcerned]

Where's the "what he meant was..." crowd? So far all I've seen are a couple of weak deflections to Biden.

C'mon guys...you're slippin.

[Belize]

Where's the "what he meant was..." crowd? So far all I've seen are a couple of weak deflections to Biden.

C'mon guys...you're slippin.

They didn't get their talking points because those were sent to the Dems by accident

[Shadowferal]

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said, “Biden is the one who threatened Ukraine’s aid, not Trump, and that has to be investigated.”

Rand Paul seems to have forgotten who the hell is the president.

[Felya]

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said, “Biden is the one who threatened Ukraine’s aid, not Trump, and that has to be investigated.”

Rand Paul seems to have forgotten who the hell is the president.

To be fair... he isn’t the only one. A lot of people seem to forget Trump is the president and can launch any investigation he wants.

[Slybak]

He wants the Democratic nomination for President. I don't think pointing out that he's not a Democrat is "bizarre".

There is nothing in the qualification criteria that requires a candidate be a registered Democrat for any period of time prior to their registration as a candidate. To say nothing of the fact that half the states have open primaries, allowing non-Democrats to select the Democratic Party nominee.

It's bizarre because "you have to be a Democrat for X years to participate in our process" isn't even a qualifier that the party itself agrees with, and it would be much easier for the party to change that than for someone to create a credible alternative party.

[kaelleria]

Acting director of national intelligence threatened to resign if he couldn’t speak freely before Congress on whistleblower complaint

The acting Director of National Intelligence threatened to resign over concerns that the White House might attempt to force him to stonewall Congress when he testifies Thursday about an explosive whistleblower complaint about the president, according to current and former U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

The revelation reflects the extraordinary tensions between the White House and the nation’s highest-ranking intelligence official over a matter that has triggered impeachment proceedings against President Trump.

The officials said that Joseph Maguire, who was thrust into the top intelligence post last month, warned the White House that he was not willing to withhold information from Congress, where he is scheduled to testify in open and closed hearings on Thursday.

The move was in part designed to force the White House to make an explicit legal decision on whether it was going to assert executive privilege over the whistleblower complaint, which centers on a call that Trump made with the leader of Ukraine in late July.


[Some Senate Republicans stunned,question White House’s judgement after release]

In essence, Maguire was serving notice that he intended to cooperate with lawmakers unless the White House moved forward with a legal case to prevent him from doing so, the officials said.

The White House disputed the account. “This is actually not true,” White House spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham said in a tweet. A spokeswoman for the director said that to her knowledge Maguire had not threatened to quit.”

Maguire has been caught in the middle of a fight between Congress and the executive branch over the contents of the whistleblower report since it reached his office late last month.

He has at times expressed his displeasure to White House counsel Pat Cipollone and others that the White House had put him in the untenable position of denying the material to Congress over a claim that it did not fall within his jurisdiction as leader of the intelligence community.

The contents of Trump’s call were released by the White House on Wednesday, showing that Trump repeatedly pressured Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to pursue investigations that might yield political dirt against Trump’s adversaries including former Vice President Joe Biden.

Maguire became DNI last month after the resignations of previous director Daniel Coats and Trump’s refusal to allow the deputy director, Sue Gordon, to step into the senior job.

Since the whistleblower controversy erupted earlier this month, Maguire has been the target of harsh criticism from Democratic lawmakers who accuse him of blocking the complaint from being transmitted to Congress.

It was unclear whether Maguire’s threat had forced the White House to acquiesce and allow him to testify without constraint. But officials said Maguire has pursued the opportunity to meet with lawmakers to defend his actions and integrity.

In his only public statement on the matter, issued Tuesday evening, Maguire said, “In light of recent reporting on the whistleblower complaint, I want to make clear that I have upheld my responsibility to follow the law every step of the way.”

“ I am committed to protecting whistleblowers and ensuring every complaint is handled appropriately,” Maguire added. “I look forward to continuing to work with the Administration and Congress to find a resolution regarding this important matter.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...e90_story.html

I have no words.

[Shadowferal]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...e90_story.html

I have no words.

If it means what I hope...yeah...

[Breccia]

I have no words.

I do.

First of all, thanks for bringing this to my attention.

Second of all, multiple people have told me on these very forums "Maguire is in a tough spot" and my response was "No he fucking isn't, this is his doing and he can stop whenever he wants."

Well...let's call it 50/50.

Yes, he should do the right thing. And being asked to disobey the law or be fired is not a hard choice for me, I'd take my recordings and flip them off on the way to the DA's office.

But...he's clearly trying. And I didn't know that before. So...yeah, he's not off the hook, but he's not flopping around on the dock, either.

EDIT: It's possible his testimony will be fifty versions of "Look, I want to but I can't, okay?" If so, Barr is next. And he's mentioned on the phone call, and claims he wasn't involved. If Maguire says he is, things are going to get really ugly.