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 ljadw View Post

    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 .
    See the ****ing LINKS I posted with the transcripts of state department telegrams informing ambassadors in the Middle East about Rumsfeld's visits! These telegrapms were circulated among State Department officials in 1983. AGAIN, here is one of them which you want to ignore because it does not fit your narrative!

    https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu//NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq31.pdf



    And something else, at the time of the visit the US had no embassy in Iraq.

    And again, nothing in your claim shows that JFK's brother hid or promoted a policy that was at odds with the one that was understood by the rest of the administration. And again, Trump did not just use Giuiani. He used him in parallel to official envoys who TRUMP selected to supposedly contact the Ukrainians.

    As I said from the beginning, it is not the presence of an unofficial channel (Giuliani) which is unprecedented. It is Giuliani's conduct of working independently towards objectives that contradicted the official channels. which were already established in Ukraine and which included people selected by Trump himself.
    Last edited by pamak; 02 Dec 19, 18:20.
    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

      See the ****ing LINKS I posted with the transcripts of state department telegrams informing ambassadors in the Middle East about Rumsfeld's visits! These telegrapms were circulated among State Department officials in 1983. AGAIN, here is one of them which you want to ignore because it does not fit your narrative!

      https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu//NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq31.pdf



      And something else, at the time of the visit the US had no embassy in Iraq.

      And again, nothing in your claim shows that JFK's brother hid or promoted a policy that was at odds with the one that was understood by the rest of the administration. And again, Trump did not just use Giuiani. He used him in parallel to official envoys who TRUMP selected to supposedly contact the Ukrainians.

      As I said from the beginning, it is not the presence of an unofficial channel (Giuliani) which is unprecedented. It is Giuliani's conduct of working independently towards objectives that contradicted the official channels. which were already established in Ukraine and which included people selected by Trump himself.
      There is no such thing as a policy that contradict the official policy ,as it is Trump who determines the official policy . You make the usual mistake by assuming that what is saying State is the official policy . Official channels are not more important than unofficial channels .
      In 1981 US officialy said that it was neutral, but secretly was selling arms to both parties .
      There was nothing wrong with Trump using an unofficial channel that was contradicting the official channels . Every one knows that what the official channels are saying is not reliable . Diplomacy can only have results if it is done secretly .
      That the objectives of Giuliani were contradicting the official channels is not unprecedented,it is diplomacy .
      The US official channels claimed that US were not involved in the coup in Iran in 1953, in the coup in Chili in 1973 ,in Euromaidan in 2014 . We know that what the official channels said was not correct .
      And that JFK used his brother, and not State, for secret negotiations in 1962 to prevent a nuclear war ,while the official channels were doing nothing else than flexing their muscles,was because he did not trust State .
      All governments have two or more policies: the official one and the secret one .
      An unofficial channel is always working independently towards objectives that contradicted the official channels .It is the old policy that the left hand should not know what the right hand is doing .

      Comment


      • Originally posted by pamak View Post

        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!
        Thus if the US officials were talking about the need to assure Taiwan that the new policy would not mean that they were abandoned, this means that the US would not abandon Taiwan ?
        Are you that naive ?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by pamak View Post

          See the ****ing LINKS I posted with the transcripts of state department telegrams informing ambassadors in the Middle East about Rumsfeld's visits! These telegrapms were circulated among State Department officials in 1983. AGAIN, here is one of them which you want to ignore because it does not fit your narrative!

          https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu//NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq31.pdf



          And something else, at the time of the visit the US had no embassy in Iraq.

          And again, nothing in your claim shows that JFK's brother hid or promoted a policy that was at odds with the one that was understood by the rest of the administration. And again, Trump did not just use Giuiani. He used him in parallel to official envoys who TRUMP selected to supposedly contact the Ukrainians.

          As I said from the beginning, it is not the presence of an unofficial channel (Giuliani) which is unprecedented. It is Giuliani's conduct of working independently towards objectives that contradicted the official channels. which were already established in Ukraine and which included people selected by Trump himself.
          Give me ONE reason why the diplomats in Ukraine would need to know about the reason of the mission of Giuliani .
          ONE reason .

          Comment


          • Your continued obfuscation of facts of various issues is noteworthy.
            We are not now that strength which in old days
            Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
            Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
            To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by ljadw View Post

              Give me ONE reason why the diplomats in Ukraine would need to know about the reason of the mission of Giuliani .
              ONE reason .
              oh that easy. Because the diplomat were told to get there orders from him.

              Comment


              • Usual whataboutism tactics being used here. Neither Hopkins nor Kissinger were personal lawyers to the President charged with digging up dirt on political opponents nor did they seek to breath life into a stupid conspiracy theory meant to advance Russian interests. Just the usual Russian talking points being advanced.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by ljadw View Post

                  Give me ONE reason why the diplomats in Ukraine would need to know about the reason of the mission of Giuliani .
                  ONE reason .
                  Because when TRUMP uses them to communicate with Ukraine (and some of them were not even members of the Ukraine embassy there but were added as special envoys, like Sondland and Volker), he needs unity of effort and a clear message towards the Ukrainians. The testimonies show that the US messages were contradicting.


                  As an example, Volker and Taylor (who both took their position during the Trump administration) testified under oath that he was advising the new Ukrainian leader not to prosecute Poroshenko because such action would not bring the unity and political stability that Ukraine needed. And the Ukrainians pointed at the contradiction telling them (paraphrasing) "so, you do not want us to investigate our politicians but you want us to investigate yours"
                  Neither Taylor nor Volker pressured them to investigate Clinton and Biden in order to get the military aid or the WH meeting. That pressure came from the unofficial channel...
                  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

                    Thus if the US officials were talking about the need to assure Taiwan that the new policy would not mean that they were abandoned, this means that the US would not abandon Taiwan ?
                    Are you that naive ?
                    I do not make assumptions based on a theory. I am guided by the historical facts which show that Taiwan was not absorbed by China.
                    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

                      There is no such thing as a policy that contradict the official policy ,as it is Trump who determines the official policy . You make the usual mistake by assuming that what is saying State is the official policy . Official channels are not more important than unofficial channels .
                      In 1981 US officialy said that it was neutral, but secretly was selling arms to both parties .
                      There was nothing wrong with Trump using an unofficial channel that was contradicting the official channels . Every one knows that what the official channels are saying is not reliable . Diplomacy can only have results if it is done secretly .
                      That the objectives of Giuliani were contradicting the official channels is not unprecedented,it is diplomacy .
                      The US official channels claimed that US were not involved in the coup in Iran in 1953, in the coup in Chili in 1973 ,in Euromaidan in 2014 . We know that what the official channels said was not correct .
                      And that JFK used his brother, and not State, for secret negotiations in 1962 to prevent a nuclear war ,while the official channels were doing nothing else than flexing their muscles,was because he did not trust State .
                      All governments have two or more policies: the official one and the secret one .
                      An unofficial channel is always working independently towards objectives that contradicted the official channels .It is the old policy that the left hand should not know what the right hand is doing .
                      As it has been explained, the official channels were contradicted by the unofficial channels. And both of them took directions fro Trump. THIS behavior is unprecedented and suspect. And the ONLY reasonable explanation for it is that Trump used Giuliani as an unofficial channel to pressure Ukraine to provide dirt for Biden.

                      Again, you confuse the concept of what an administration says to the lat public with the idea of what the administration holds within its ranks. A neutral country can see weapons to both sides. The issue with the US at the time was that there was a US law which prohibited such sales.

                      Yes, there is a lot of dog with Trumps and Giuliani's behavior because such contradiction can only be explained by a need to use office powers to get dirt on a political opponent. And again, you confuse the idea of secrecy that shield even official diplomacy from the public eyes with the idea of using an unofficial channel which secretly works at odds with the rest of the National Security Council, Pentagon and State Department.

                      This is unprecedented and with no reasonable explanation that does not involve an attempt to get dirt for Trump's 2020 election.
                      Again, this is NOT about what the US claims in public and what you and me know. This is about the INTERNAL dissemination of information within the ranks of the US government.


                      And again, this is not about who the president uses but about the failure of updating the rest of the team about the developments of the negotiations. That was not a case with JFK and it was NOT the case that the official channels of his government were in agreement about flexing the muscles for war. LeMay and his airfare was certainly ready to start a nuclear war but that was not the mainstream position of the crisis group that was handling the situation. We have actually the transcripts of those meeting, so we have a good picture of what was happening there.

                      And you make things up. An unofficial channel is NOT a channel which is established to contradict the official one. As I said from the beginning, an unofficial channel is used in many situations when it is not advisable to have an official channel. This includes negotiations with leaders that are controversial or when there is an attempt to establish a diplomatic relation with a former hostile country.

                      In such situations, a president would want to save face if things do not work out. Nobody wants to be seen as the guy who was rejected after initiating an attempt to create or mend relationships. Of course, Trump was not facing such problem swift Ukraine.
                      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 craven View Post

                        oh that easy. Because the diplomat were told to get there orders from him.
                        That's not a reason to know why Giuliani was in Ukraine : only the potus can give someone clearance.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by pamak View Post

                          I do not make assumptions based on a theory. I am guided by the historical facts which show that Taiwan was not absorbed by China.
                          That Taiwan is not absorbed by China does not mean that it was not abandoned by the USA .
                          If China wanted to absorp Taiwan, there is nothing US could do unless to start a suicidal nuclear war with China .China has absorbed HongKong and we see the results : the Politbureau is repenting that China has absorbed Hongkong ,thus the Anschluss of Taiwan would be a disaster for China ,

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by ljadw View Post

                            That Taiwan is not absorbed by China does not mean that it was not abandoned by the USA .
                            If China wanted to absorp Taiwan, there is nothing US could do unless to start a suicidal nuclear war with China .China has absorbed HongKong and we see the results : the Politbureau is repenting that China has absorbed Hongkong ,thus the Anschluss of Taiwan would be a disaster for China ,


                            That Taiwan was not absorbed by China is evidence of my claim. Meanwhile, you just make claims with ZERO evidence. And sorry, but if your claim is that China does not really want to absorb HK you contradict your previous claim that Taiwan was abandoned by the USA. How can you claim the latter when there is no need to support Taiwan against Chinese aggression in the first place? On top of that as you ADMIT China DID get HK. So, history contradicts your claim that China did not want tp get new territories. The same was true with Tibet.

                            And it is IRRELEVANT what the Chinese may think NOW about absorbing or not HK. We discuss their attitude in the PAST!
                            Even if the Chinese officials have second thoughts today (and that claim of yours is also unsupported) history PROVES that this was NOT the case in the past.In other words, you make another irrational argument and you commit the fallacy of anachronism in which you plant modern ideas to past historical situations!
                            Last edited by pamak; 03 Dec 19, 16:11.
                            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

                              As it has been explained, the official channels were contradicted by the unofficial channels. And both of them took directions fro Trump. THIS behavior is unprecedented and suspect. And the ONLY reasonable explanation for it is that Trump used Giuliani as an unofficial channel to pressure Ukraine to provide dirt for Biden.

                              Again, you confuse the concept of what an administration says to the lat public with the idea of what the administration holds within its ranks. A neutral country can see weapons to both sides. The issue with the US at the time was that there was a US law which prohibited such sales.

                              Yes, there is a lot of dog with Trumps and Giuliani's behavior because such contradiction can only be explained by a need to use office powers to get dirt on a political opponent. And again, you confuse the idea of secrecy that shield even official diplomacy from the public eyes with the idea of using an unofficial channel which secretly works at odds with the rest of the National Security Council, Pentagon and State Department.

                              This is unprecedented and with no reasonable explanation that does not involve an attempt to get dirt for Trump's 2020 election.
                              Again, this is NOT about what the US claims in public and what you and me know. This is about the INTERNAL dissemination of information within the ranks of the US government.


                              And again, this is not about who the president uses but about the failure of updating the rest of the team about the developments of the negotiations. That was not a case with JFK and it was NOT the case that the official channels of his government were in agreement about flexing the muscles for war. LeMay and his airfare was certainly ready to start a nuclear war but that was not the mainstream position of the crisis group that was handling the situation. We have actually the transcripts of those meeting, so we have a good picture of what was happening there.

                              And you make things up. An unofficial channel is NOT a channel which is established to contradict the official one. As I said from the beginning, an unofficial channel is used in many situations when it is not advisable to have an official channel. This includes negotiations with leaders that are controversial or when there is an attempt to establish a diplomatic relation with a former hostile country.

                              In such situations, a president would want to save face if things do not work out. Nobody wants to be seen as the guy who was rejected after initiating an attempt to create or mend relationships. Of course, Trump was not facing such problem swift Ukraine.
                              There is only ONE person who decides about the dissemination of information within the ranks of the US government ,and that is the potus . And you presenting the whole thing as if dissemination of information would be a good thing ,while dissemination of information results only in leaks .
                              Not updating the rest of the team about the developments of the negotiations is NOT a bad thing . There is no reason why every member of a team would need to know about the developments of the negotiations .
                              When the Few But Infamous investigate a spy case, the rule is that every member of the investigating team needs to know only that what he needs to know to do his part of the investigation .
                              There are only 2 possibilities :
                              compartmentalization,especially if there are a lot of people involved who can not be trusted
                              or to tell the public everything,which will be the result of dissimenation of information .
                              And that the team was swarming with people who could not be trusted ( anti Trump officials ) is PROVED by the fact that the whole investigation was leaked , NOT by Trump, NOT by Giuliani .But by members of State .
                              An unofficial channel is needed when you can not trust the official channel .

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by pamak View Post

                                Because when TRUMP uses them to communicate with Ukraine (and some of them were not even members of the Ukraine embassy there but were added as special envoys, like Sondland and Volker), he needs unity of effort and a clear message towards the Ukrainians. The testimonies show that the US messages were contradicting.


                                As an example, Volker and Taylor (who both took their position during the Trump administration) testified under oath that he was advising the new Ukrainian leader not to prosecute Poroshenko because such action would not bring the unity and political stability that Ukraine needed. And the Ukrainians pointed at the contradiction telling them (paraphrasing) "so, you do not want us to investigate our politicians but you want us to investigate yours"
                                Neither Taylor nor Volker pressured them to investigate Clinton and Biden in order to get the military aid or the WH meeting. That pressure came from the unofficial channel...
                                Wrong : the official channel and the unofficial channel had both different tasks .Thus the official channel did not need to know what were the orders of the unofficial channel .

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X