Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Devin Nunes Met with Ex-Ukrainian Official to get dirt on Biden

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by pamak View Post


    Just to show to what level void of facts your comments are

    First, regarding Kissinger:


    As i said, Kissinger was a member of the administration as National Security Council senior adviser and not Nixon's personal lawyer

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Kissinger
    .
    .
    8th United States National Security Advisor

    In office
    January 20, 1969 – November 3, 1975
    Richard Nixon
    .
    As for the policy with respect to China...

    https://china.usc.edu/getting-beijin...cret-1971-trip

    You can see the different original documents which refute your claims, including'

    February 5, 1969

    Henry Kissinger notified the State and Defense departments and the Central Intelligence Agency that the National Security Council has been directed to prepare a study on U.S. relations with China, to include alternative approaches and risks. (State Department, Office of the Historian)


    December 2, 1969
    Secretary of State William Rogers wrote to President Nixon to advocate for continued relaxation of measures against China. He thought this might be helpful as a wedge between the Soviet Union and China.Rogers reported that "there have been signs of moderation in Peking's foreign policy stance including—in private encounters—toward the U.S." Rogers listed a number of measures that could be taken to send positive signals to China's leaders. These included loosening economic restrictions, including the purchase of American farm products.Nixon accepted the recommendations and changes were announced on December 19. (State Department, Office of the Historian)





    February 20, 1970
    National Security Council staffer Alexander Haig wrote on behalf of Henry Kissinger to President Nixon that Chinese representatives at the Warsaw talks said "that if we wished to send a representative of “ministerial rank or a special Presidential envoy to Peking for the further exploration of fundamental principles of relations” between the US and China, they would be prepared to receive him." (State Department, Office of the Historian)

    July 1, 1971
    President Nixon met with Henry Kissinger and Alexander Haig to go over plans for Kissinger's meetings with Chinese leaders.




    .
    In conclusion from the above, any attempt to compare Kissinger to Giuliani is nonsense. In addition, unlike Giuliani, Kissinger was pursuing an objective which was common understanding within the Nixon administration regarding the need to improve relations with China. Kissinger did not act in a way that contradicted this understanding nor did he advocated the removal of diplomats who believed in such policy by finding BS excuses based on a smear campaign. Giuliani's conduct is certainly unprecedented and with no reasonable explanation to justify his presence when there WERE ALREADY AT LEAST TWO special envoys (Sondland and Volker) working on the same issue.





    As for Hopkins, his first trip as an envoy was not secret. In fact FDR announced it

    https://www.historynet.com/harry-hop...-president.htm

    Recent events, however, had left a serious void in communication between the two nations. Ambassador Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr., had resigned, and the British ambassador to the United States, Lord Lothian, had died just days after Roosevelt received Churchill’s pivotal letter. Unable to meet with his British counterpart himself, Roosevelt told the press he was sending Hopkins to London so that he can “talk to Churchill like an Iowa farmer.”

    and his first trip to London WAS about the Lend Lease.

    The bond of trust between Hopkins and Churchill began in January 1941, when Hopkins first visited London, and deepened into what might be called the “other Special Relationship.”

    ...

    Roosevelt’s challenge was twofold: to help Britain materially, he needed to convince Americans that their scarce munitions would not be wasted. Simultaneously he had to convince Churchill that Americans were indeed supportive of British efforts to resist what many in the world saw as an inevitable capitulation to the Germans.2 Hopkins was the right man to send to England on Roosevelt’s behalf. Or at least this is what Hopkins thought.

    The content obviously had to be secret since the US as technically neutral, but again this does not mean that it was kept secret from the rest of the administration.

    Just a few months later we had the pass of the Lend Lease Act

    https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=71

    Passed on March 11, 1941, this act set up a system that would allow the United States to lend or lease war supplies to any nation deemed "vital to the defense of the United States."

    And Hopkins was actually the one who administered the Lend Lease program

    https://www.fdrlibrary.org/lend-lease

    . The program’s three administrators—Harry Hopkins...

    And again, in this case, Hopkins did not pursue an objective that contradicted the common understanding within the FDR administration about the need to help England. The Lend Lease deal was a natural continuation of the destroyer deal a year before

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destroyers-for-bases_deal
    Hopkins was used for more than LL, he was used for things that in an other political system would be treated by State . But the US president is not obliged to use State for diplomatic problems,or the AG for judiciary problems .
    As long as you fail to understand this, you prove to have no notion of the US political system .NO ONE in the Executive Branch has the right to know things or to be used for a problem situated in his sector .
    And you are wrong also about LL : it was NOT the natural continuation of the destroyer deal . LL happened because Britain had no longer the foreign currency to pay for Cash and Carry . LL was the natural continuation of Cash and Carry .If Britain had still $ , there would be no need for LL .

    Comment


    • About Kissinger : Nixon had already in 1969 secret contacts of which Kissinger nor Rogers knew anything .

      Comment


      • Originally posted by ljadw View Post

        Hopkins was used for more than LL, he was used for things that in an other political system would be treated by State . But the US president is not obliged to use State for diplomatic problems,or the AG for judiciary problems .
        As long as you fail to understand this, you prove to have no notion of the US political system .NO ONE in the Executive Branch has the right to know things or to be used for a problem situated in his sector .
        And you are wrong also about LL : it was NOT the natural continuation of the destroyer deal . LL happened because Britain had no longer the foreign currency to pay for Cash and Carry . LL was the natural continuation of Cash and Carry .If Britain had still $ , there would be no need for LL .
        Nonsense!

        We are talking about Hopkins in his role as an envoy and I presented links . And again, you repeat points that I have already addressed. Just because someone does something legal, it does not mean that his behavior is not suspicious. As I said, you tried to blame Hunter for something that he could do legally and then you change the tone by saying that Trump could legally do certain things. I responded by reminding you that it is not the illegality of a behavior which raises suspicions. It is the circumstances surrounding it and how unusual that behavior is. Hunter did what is standard practice is the current capitalist system Giuliani working in secrecy while he opposed the official policy as it was understood by TRUMP"S APPOINTED envoys is unprecedented and very suspicious. And the transcripts reveal the only reasonable explanation for such behavior.
        My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

        Comment


        • Originally posted by ljadw View Post

          You know who is Hagel ? An anti-Israelian RINO who worked with Obama ,who endorsed 2 Democrats for Senate in his state and who is an enemy of Trump .
          Kempe also is hostile to Trump .
          An institution that is packed with former Pentagon,State Department and CIA veterans ( people who can not be trusted ) can not be trusted ,
          I know that he has been a long term republican senator. I also know that Volker by your own words was appointed in his position during the Trump administration. As I said, you do to trust anybody except the Russian propagandists who spread the talking points that you swallow uncritically and who also oppose the Atlantic Council as I showed
          My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ljadw View Post

            While Hopkins was still a private person, he was used as special agent by FDR,who bypassed State .And, it was not about LL,but BEFORE LL.
            Again, his FIRST trip to England was before the Lend Lease and as I showed the trip was linked linked to the LL. I am not interested if Hopkins was used on domestic errands. I countered your point that his conduct as an envoy abroad can be compared to Giuliani's conduct.
            My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

            Comment


            • Originally posted by ljadw View Post
              About Kissinger : Nixon had already in 1969 secret contacts of which Kissinger nor Rogers knew anything .
              Again, you pull things out of your ass. Before, yo made the claim that Kissinger knew but Rogers did not!

              Originally posted by ljadw View Post
              ....The only who knew were FDR/Nixon/Hopkins and Kissinger . Hull and Rogers were in the dark .

              Now, you suddenly changed the position (without again bringing evidence) and claimed that at some point Kissinger also did not know.

              . As I clearly showed with evidence, there was a common understanding within the Nixon administration that they could perhaps drive a wedge between Soviet Union and China. Kissinger or whoever you fantasize was a secret envoy worked towards that common objective and did not establish a secret channel to undermine this commonly understood policy as Giuliani did!
              My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

              Comment


              • Originally posted by pamak View Post

                I know that he has been a long term republican senator. I also know that Volker by your own words was appointed in his position during the Trump administration. As I said, you do to trust anybody except the Russian propagandists who spread the talking points that you swallow uncritically and who also oppose the Atlantic Council as I showed
                And why did the Atlantic Council accept the money from the Russians ?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by pamak View Post

                  Again, his FIRST trip to England was before the Lend Lease and as I showed the trip was linked linked to the LL. I am not interested if Hopkins was used on domestic errands. I countered your point that his conduct as an envoy abroad can be compared to Giuliani's conduct.
                  A trip to Britain before LL can not be linked to LL : as LL did not exist when Hopkins, a private citizen,visited Britain .

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by ljadw View Post
                    Saying that there was no reason to bypass State, is proving to have no notion of the fundamentals of the US political system: the potus uses whom he wants for what he wants .There was no reason to use ,inform, involve State ,because the more persons know something, the less it can remain secret, especially if one informs un reliable persons working at State .
                    JFK used his brother, the AG, for secret contacts with Dobrynin during the Cuba crisis and kept State in dark . Thus why should Trump use state for an investigation about illegal activities in Ukraine by a US VP ?If he did it, the day after the enemy would know it and CNN would talk about it .Knowing the role of the Few but Infamous in the attempt by the WH to prevent his nomination as candidate and his election as potus in 2016, Trump would be very foolish to use the Democratic secret police in an investigation of illegal activities of one of their leaders .
                    George Schutlz was not informed about the selling of weapons to Iraq and Iran by the Reagan WH . Why ? Because following Reagan,it was not his business .For the selling of weapons to Iraq,Reagan used Rumsfeld who was a private person,as is Giuliani .
                    The potus decides what is whose business .
                    That is the only way to prevent the Executive Branch to be subordinated to the two others . And the Executive Branch is the potus .


                    You keep repeating a point that the president can use whoever he wants without addressing my counterpoint which is that legal actions can still raise suspicions based on the circumstances. It proves what a hypocrite you are when you suspect Biden for doing something that he could legally too and become a member of the board of directors for Burisma.

                    Again, if the surrounding circumstances showed some form of confrontation between Pompeo and Trump then one could understand why a POTUS could want to bypass Pompeo. But that was not the case. On top of that, bypassing a person does not mean that the attempts for establishing a new policy need to be secret. There have been many cases where presidents set new policies in contrast to previous administrations but this, by itself, does not explain a need to keep people in the administration in the dark. The new policies articulated and whoever disagrees, resigns or is getting fired. Trump is no shy about these things. Mattis left when he disagreed with Trump's new policy in Syria and Korea. FDR got a lot of criticism from critics who wanted the US policy to be strictly neutral, ad so on. AS for JFK, an AG is also a member of the administration, and you do not know what things were kept secret from other members of the administration.

                    And it is preposterous to claim that Rumsfeld acted in secrecy. We have even photos of the meeting with his=m shaking Saddam's hand

                    handshake300.jpg



                    Here is a link with a state department telegraph informing different ambassadors about Rumsfeld's meeting in Iraq

                    https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq36.pdf

                    My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ljadw View Post

                      And why did the Atlantic Council accept the money from the Russians ?
                      That is your assumption. You assumed that Burisma is controlled by the Russians.

                      Meanwhile, you have no problem with Trump having deals in Russia or with the money he got from indicted indicted oligarchs.
                      My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by ljadw View Post

                        A trip to Britain before LL can not be linked to LL : as LL did not exist when Hopkins, a private citizen,visited Britain .
                        I gave you the LINK which shows the connection! the LL Act did not come spontaneously. It came as a result of the UK needs that were conveyed by Hopkins who also had discussions with the British military command .
                        My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by pamak View Post

                          Again, you pull things out of your ass. Before, yo made the claim that Kissinger knew but Rogers did not!

                          Originally posted by ljadw View Post
                          ....The only who knew were FDR/Nixon/Hopkins and Kissinger . Hull and Rogers were in the dark .

                          Now, you suddenly changed the position (without again bringing evidence) and claimed that at some point Kissinger also did not know.

                          . As I clearly showed with evidence, there was a common understanding within the Nixon administration that they could perhaps drive a wedge between Soviet Union and China. Kissinger or whoever you fantasize was a secret envoy worked towards that common objective and did not establish a secret channel to undermine this commonly understood policy as Giuliani did!
                          Giuliani did NOT undermine a commonly understood policy : an investigation of the claims that Biden was acting illegally is not undermining a commonly understood policy ,unless you are saying that it was a commonly understood policy not to investigate Biden .
                          About Kissinger : in 1969 Nixon has a secret channell with Pakistan of whom nobody knew .And what Nixon wanted was not driving a wedge between the SU and China, because China was never an ally of the US, but to have diplomatic relations with China and for this he would sacrifice Formosa .
                          It is also a fact that FDR ignored totally State and Hull,what finally resulted in the resignation of Hull .

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by pamak View Post

                            That is your assumption. You assumed that Burisma is controlled by the Russians.

                            Meanwhile, you have no problem with Trump having deals in Russia or with the money he got from indicted indicted oligarchs.
                            The boss of Burisma fled to Russia after Euromaidan. Thus ...
                            Clinton also received money from Putin to to some blahblah in Moscow : $ 500000 .And Trump did business with Russia before he became potus,something which is very natural .

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by pamak View Post



                              You keep repeating a point that the president can use whoever he wants without addressing my counterpoint which is that legal actions can still raise suspicions based on the circumstances. It proves what a hypocrite you are when you suspect Biden for doing something that he could legally too and become a member of the board of directors for Burisma.

                              Again, if the surrounding circumstances showed some form of confrontation between Pompeo and Trump then one could understand why a POTUS could want to bypass Pompeo. But that was not the case. On top of that, bypassing a person does not mean that the attempts for establishing a new policy need to be secret. There have been many cases where presidents set new policies in contrast to previous administrations but this, by itself, does not explain a need to keep people in the administration in the dark. The new policies articulated and whoever disagrees, resigns or is getting fired. Trump is no shy about these things. Mattis left when he disagreed with Trump's new policy in Syria and Korea. FDR got a lot of criticism from critics who wanted the US policy to be strictly neutral, ad so on. AS for JFK, an AG is also a member of the administration, and you do not know what things were kept secret from other members of the administration.

                              And it is preposterous to claim that Rumsfeld acted in secrecy. We have even photos of the meeting with his=m shaking Saddam's hand

                              handshake300.jpg



                              Here is a link with a state department telegraph informing different ambassadors about Rumsfeld's meeting in Iraq

                              https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq36.pdf
                              Rumsfeld acted secretly : the picture was not available in 1983 .
                              About JFK : he sent his BROTHER, not his AG, to negotiate with Dobrinin .
                              If JFK could send his brother on a secret mission, Trump can send Giuliani ( an old friend and one of his lawyers ) ,there is no law forbidding the potus to use a brother/one of his lawyers for a secret mission .

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ljadw View Post

                                Giuliani did NOT undermine a commonly understood policy : an investigation of the claims that Biden was acting illegally is not undermining a commonly understood policy ,unless you are saying that it was a commonly understood policy not to investigate Biden .
                                About Kissinger : in 1969 Nixon has a secret channell with Pakistan of whom nobody knew .And what Nixon wanted was not driving a wedge between the SU and China, because China was never an ally of the US, but to have diplomatic relations with China and for this he would sacrifice Formosa .
                                It is also a fact that FDR ignored totally State and Hull,what finally resulted in the resignation of Hull .
                                Your claims mean nothing. The diplomats who testified, including those who were selected by Trump to act as special envoys presented the opposite picture. And all of them mentioned that their understanding was that Biden would not be investigated.

                                I do not care about you unsupported theories. I gave you the links with official documents which SHOW that there was a wide spread understanding within the Nixon administration to improve the US relationship with China as a way to drive a wedge to the communist block. It does not mean that this was the only reason, but it was clearly articulated within the administration.

                                And no Formosa was not sacrificed and in fact, if you actually open your eyes and read the links I posted , there is a document related to this issue in which the US officials talk about the need to assure Taiwan that the new policy would not mean that they were abandoned.

                                Again, ignoring or firing somebody does not mean that a POTUS is shy and secretive about his policy. Again, see Mattis and Trump or other officials who were fired when their views classed with that of Trump.

                                By repeating your original points you do not refute my counterpoints!
                                Last edited by pamak; 02 Dec 19, 14:28.
                                My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                • BorderRuffian
                                  Polls that oversample Democrats
                                  by BorderRuffian
                                  Economist/YouGov poll of July 26-28, 2020, has Biden leading Trump by 49-40

                                  Sample size-1500

                                  Party ID
                                  Democrat-521 (35%)...
                                  Today, 08:44
                                • casanova
                                  Robi P.
                                  by casanova
                                  The Austrian soldier Toni P. of the Radetzky barack in Horn Nether Austria was forced by his commander to make an march with his comrades in 3th August...
                                  Today, 02:27
                                • casanova
                                  Beirut
                                  by casanova
                                  Gigantic explosion in the city of Beirut. 70 people were killed and 2750 men were heavy hurted. The explosion was like atomic bomb. The cause of that...
                                  Today, 00:47
                                Working...
                                X