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 Sparlingo View Post
    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.
    There is no proof that the task of Giuliani was to dig up dirt : the task of Giuliani was to investigate the claims that VP Biden was guilty of illegal activities .

    Comment


    • Originally posted by ljadw View Post

      That's not a reason to know why Giuliani was in Ukraine : only the potus can give someone clearance.
      Sorry, but historians and political analysts understand that there is always a reason behind political decisions. It seems that you ant to have people stop thinking and being rational so that you can give Trump and Giuliani a pass for their decisions and actions.
      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

        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 .
        Of course they had different tasks! Did not I say that they were contradicting each other? The answer you cannot give is WHY they had different and contradicting tasks when both were communicating with the same Ukrainians? If anything, if someone is REALLY serious in sending a message of fighting corruption in Ukraine it makes NO sense to give contradicting signals from an official and an unofficial channel!
        Last edited by pamak; 03 Dec 19, 15:43.
        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 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 .
          Sorry, but if one is serious in passing a messsage of combating corruption, he needs to have the whole team consistent wth that message and not having half of them saying one thing to Ukrainians while others pursuing in secrecy different objectives which contradicted the understanding of the official channels!

          So, yes, updates were necessary. And updates WERE used in the past even when unoffiicial envoys were engaged in diplomacy as I SHOWED you with the links that I posted. And sorry but it is preposterous to claim that a personal lawyer who has NOT even taken an oath in assuming official duties and has not even passed from a vetting process should have a higher "need to know" regarding diplomatic affairs that the official channels!

          The claim that Trump did not trust ANY official channel is contradicted by Trump's DECISION to APPOINT people like Volker and Sondland to handle the case through official channels. Trump did not JUST use Giuliani to handle the whole range of contacts with the Ukrainians regarding the supposedly investigation of Ukrainian corruption.


          The leak by the way came when TRUMP TALKED to Zelensky which was heard by various people who eventually got in contact with the whistleblower. The leak did not come from Sondland or Volker who were not present during the phone-call since they were already in Ukraine WORKING FOR TRUMP.

          So, the question is why did Trump trust Sondland and Volker to press Ukraine for investigating Burisma and Ukrainian corruption but did NOT trust them enough to handle the case without Giuliani? The only answer is that Trump wanted Giuliani for something else other than pressing the Ukrainians to investigate Burisma and corruption . He wanted to get dirt for Biden and for THIS he could NOT trust the official channels Trump himself established!
          Last edited by pamak; 04 Dec 19, 02:17.
          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

            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 .
            I never said that the official channels had the same tasks with the unofficial tasks. I said that they had different and contradicting tasks and that is exactly the problem and what makes Trump's and Giuliani's behavior suspicious Then you combine the above suspicion with the transcripts in which Trump personally mentioned Biden and whose reference was not mentioned to Volker and Sondland, even though both got a summary of the transcript's content (which omitted the Biden reference) and it becomes clear why the official channel did not need to know the orders that were carried out by the unofficial channel! The unofficial channel was going after Biden to get dirt for the 2020 Trump campaign.
            Last edited by pamak; 03 Dec 19, 16:23.
            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 proof that the task of Giuliani was to dig up dirt : the task of Giuliani was to investigate the claims that VP Biden was guilty of illegal activities .
              There is proof that Trump wanted Zelensky to dig up dirt for Biden and in the same phonecall Trump directed him to talk to Giuliani.

              And by the way, there is no requirement to have proof to satisfy the standard of " beyond reasonable doubt" to remove a president. Convincing 2/3 of the jury in the senate is enough. If that standard applied to criminal trials, we would talk about a much lower standard of proof.
              Last edited by pamak; 04 Dec 19, 02:20.
              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

                There is proof that Trump wanted Zelensky to dig up dirt for Biden and in the same phonecall Trump directed him to talk to Giuliani.

                And by the way, there is no requirement to have proof to satisfy the standard of " beyond reasonable doubt" to remove a president. Convincing 2/3 of the jury in the senate is enough. If that standard applied to criminal trials, we would talk about a much lower standard of proof.


                Nunes has sued CNN for $435,000,000 for fake news about the meeting that this thread is all about.

                ‘Tis said his form is tiny, yet
                All human ills he can subdue,
                Or with a bauble or medal
                Can win mans heart for you;
                And many a blessing know to stew
                To make a megloamaniac bright;
                Give honour to the dainty Corse,
                The Pixie is a little shite.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by inevtiab1e View Post
                  Trump is glued to Fox and RW media all day long. Trump believed John Solomon's reporting and then used the power of his office to get to the bottom of it.

                  It's best to understand what propaganda is, how to recognize it and not be fooled into believing it emotionally. RW media had this president out looking for dirt on a political opponent. Trump's basis are conspiracy theories he wanted to investigate. Not very bright.
                  Not very bright indeed..... Your response had nothing to do with my post that you quoted.

                  Try again.
                  "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Dibble201Bty View Post



                    Nunes has sued CNN for $435,000,000 for fake news about the meeting that this thread is all about.
                    Yeah.....the meeting happened in Vienna.....Nunes didn't go to Vienna during the time of the 'meeting'......

                    Going to be hard for CNN to back out of this fake news.

                    "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by pamak View Post
                      And by the way, there is no requirement to have proof to satisfy the standard of " beyond reasonable doubt" to remove a president. Convincing 2/3 of the jury in the senate is enough. If that standard applied to criminal trials, we would talk about a much lower standard of proof.
                      Right now, there's about a 0.0000001% chance of that happening. You have better odds of winning the lottery.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                        Right now, there's about a 0.0000001% chance of that happening. You have better odds of winning the lottery.
                        Indeed! am talking about the theoretical concept and not about the political reality.
                        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 Dibble201Bty View Post



                          Nunes has sued CNN for $435,000,000 for fake news about the meeting that this thread is all about.
                          Nunes will not get a dime as long as CNN reported accurately Parna's lawyer's revelation that his client (Parnas) was ready to testify that Nunes was involved. And even if this is not the case, Nunes will have to prove deliberate intention from CNN's part to harm him. This lawsuit is just theatrics which Nunes employs to make himself appear as a fighter who goes after the "deep state" and its liberal press. It may work with his constituent but it will not work in courts.
                          Last edited by pamak; 04 Dec 19, 02:11.
                          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

                            Of course they had different tasks! Did not I say that they were contradicting each other? The answer you cannot give is WHY they had different and contradicting tasks when both were communicating with the same Ukrainians? If anything, if someone is REALLY serious in sending a message of fighting corruption in Ukraine it makes NO sense to give contradicting signals from an official and an unofficial channel!
                            Why should Trump fight corruption in Ukraine ? Afaics,he is not the president of Ukraine .
                            Biden also was not fighting corruption in Ukraine.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by pamak View Post

                              I never said that the official channels had the same tasks with the unofficial tasks. I said that they had different and contradicting tasks and that is exactly the problem and what makes Trump's and Giuliani's behavior suspicious Then you combine the above suspicion with the transcripts in which Trump personally mentioned Biden and whose reference was not mentioned to Volker and Sondland, even though both got a summary of the transcript's content (which omitted the Biden reference) and it becomes clear why the official channel did not need to know the orders that were carried out by the unofficial channel! The unofficial channel was going after Biden to get dirt for the 2020 Trump campaign.
                              That the unofficial channel was going after Biden was totally legal . Unless your opinion is that crimes of Biden should remain hidden .

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by pamak View Post

                                There is proof that Trump wanted Zelensky to dig up dirt for Biden and in the same phonecall Trump directed him to talk to Giuliani.

                                And by the way, there is no requirement to have proof to satisfy the standard of " beyond reasonable doubt" to remove a president. Convincing 2/3 of the jury in the senate is enough. If that standard applied to criminal trials, we would talk about a much lower standard of proof.
                                There is no proof that Trump wanted Zelensky to dig up dirt for Biden .

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X