That's not really about nepotism. That's about corruption.
Ambassador Sondland Throws Trump Under the Bus
The U.S. ambassador to the EU will tell Congress that
he was effectively forced to work with Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine by the President.
will tell Congress that he was told by President Trump that he had to help his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani with his plan on Ukraine.
“I did not understand, until much later,
that Mr. Giuliani’s agenda might have also included
an effort to prompt the Ukrainians to investigate Vice President Biden or his son or
to involve Ukrainians, directly or indirectly, in the President’s 2020 reelection campaign.”
He and Giuliani encouraged President Zelensky to publicly announce an investigation into the Bidens.
“Please know that I would not have recommended that Mr. Giuliani or any private citizen be involved in these foreign policy matters.
However, given the President’s explicit direction,
as well as the importance we attached to arranging a White House meeting between Presidents Trump and Zelensky,
we agreed to do as President Trump directed,”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/sondland-throws-trump-under-the-bus
That's not really about nepotism. That's about corruption.
Kushner with a security clearance ordered by Trash over security professionals' objections and making $10Ms, obtaining $100Ms in loans from sovereign funds, while advisor to so-called President Trash, are both nepotism and corruption.
I'm pretty sure this is about Donald Trump jr. And Hunter Biden. Why you dragged Kushner into this I have no idea.
Here’s the connection between Trump’s Ukraine scandal and convict Paul Manafort’s mul ude of crimes
the current Ukraine scandal engulfing the Trump White House actually started last decade,
when former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort started working as a lobbyist in the former Soviet republic.
“Let’s start with Trump’s former campaign manager,” he began.
“Right now Paul Manafort is in federal prison,
but more than a decade ago, he riding high in Ukraine as a political Svengali for a pro-Putin Ukrainian president —
somehow managing to pull in $60 million in a country where the average salary is just 200 bucks!”
Avlon then explained how the corrupt pro-Putin government created a chaotic situation for Ukraine,
which is what pushed multiple Western governments to urge the country to fire former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin,
who was seen as unwilling to prosecute corruption cases that might expose the nation’s political elites.
It was shortly after Shokin’s dismissal, Avlon said, that Trump brought Manafort onto his campaign.
And it appears that Manafort’s subsequent arrest and conviction on multiple counts of tax and bank fraud over his work in Ukraine was what
helped convince Trump to buy into the bogus conspiracy theory
that it was really Ukraine that hacked the Democratic National Committee in 2016.
“But at the end of the day,
there’s only one winner in this twisted tale, and
his name is Vladimir Putin. Same as it ever was.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/heres-the-connection-between-trumps-ukraine-scandal-and-convict-paul-manaforts-mul ude-of-crimes-cnns-avlon/
Yeah because Trump's scion's are just so qualified to hold those WH and NSC positions.
The Hunter Biden issue is about corruption not about nepotism. Unless you think Joe Biden runs that Energy company in the Ukraine how can it be about nepotism? It could be about corruption because the Ukraine could be trying to gain favor of the United States by hiring the son of the vice president but it's not like Joe Biden hired him.
Trump Suspects a Spiteful John Bolton Is Behind Some of the Ukraine Leaks
Trump fears the leaks are now coming from the people he chose to serve him—and
that only increases the paranoia currently infecting the West Wing.
Donald Trump is feeling besieged by snitches.
President Trump has privately raised su ions that a spiteful John Bolton, his notoriously hawkish former national security adviser, could be one of the sources behind the flood of leaks against him, three people familiar with the comments said.
Trump guessed that Bolton was behind one of the anonymous accounts that listed the former national security adviser as one of the top officials most disturbed by the Ukraine-related efforts of Trump and Rudy Giuliani,
Bolton, for his part, told The Daily Beast last month that allegations that he was a leaker in Trump’s midst are “flatly incorrect”
near the end of the Mueller probe, the president became so distrustful and resentful toward Don McGahn, his own White House counsel at the time, he started asking those close to him, “Is [Don] wearing a wire?”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-suspects-a-spiteful-john-bolton-is-behind-ukraine-leaks?ref=home
Here’s why Sondland’s testimony is devastating to Trump — whether he wants it to be or not
“While wrapped in diplomatic-speak and hemming-and-hawing,
the statement of Gordon Sondland, U.S. ambassador to European Union,
is devastating to Trump and Giuliani,”
“Given the surrounding evidence, either
Giuliani has to say he lied to Sondland, or
Trump has to be impeached
it is important to dig through it,
because, while quite clear on most dates,
it takes jumping a bit around in the statement to figure out the date of the key event.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/heres-why-sondlands-testimony-is-devastating-to-trump-whether-he-wants-it-to-be-or-not/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1751
From a NY Times email
Why Mick Mulvaney admitted the quid pro quo
I talked to my colleague Maggie Haberman about why he said something so stunning.
Maggie, whoa. That happened in front of reporters at the White House.
The briefing was jaw-dropping by any metric. He admitted to a quid pro quo.
But it showed once again something you and I talked about two weeks ago:
Mr. Trump tries to shift the window on conduct by revealing stuff publicly to take the sting out of its discovery.
Mr. Mulvaney insisted the terminology doesn’t matter, but
he bluntly acknowledged that aid was withheld from Ukraine to get a desired outcome on an investigation.
That is at the heart of what Democrats have been trying to ascertain.
Was it actually the plan for him to do this?
I do think it was, yes — at least in part. Remember, this happened as Mr. Sondland was on the Hill giving a closed-door deposition.
So I think Mr. Mulvaney was trying to rob House Democrats of a headline and frame the events on his own,
to take the air out of the sails by saying it out loud.
But it’s not clear that he was actually supposed to say there was a quid pro quo.
It’s breathtaking that he’s the first person they’ve sent out to expressly discuss these issues and that he said so much.
How might this affect the impeachment investigation?
He came out and
admitted to a lot of what House Democrats were hoping to get from him in a deposition!
I can’t imagine the White House counsel and others were thrilled. Mr. Mulvaney and the counsel’s office have been at odds lately.
I’m sensing some irony in the outcome, then.
Mr. Mulvaney’s job has been perceived as being in jeopardy.
There isn’t a clear replacement for him right now, but he may not have helped himself today. We don’t yet know how Mr. Trump feels about what Mr. Mulvaney said. But if past is prelude, if it proves problematic, the president will blame Mr. Mulvaney.
Here’s how my colleague Katie Rogers, who was in the room, described the scene:
Reporters knew this was big news right away,
and I think you saw the incredulity in the questions that were asked of him.
We kept asking the same question in different ways, which was essentially:
“How is what you’re telling us not an acknowledgment of something the president has outright denied?”
The first time he said it, I emailed our White House team saying,
“Did he actually just link Ukraine conspiracy theories to withholding aid?”
All of us in the room were trying to figure out if what we were watching was actually happening.
you know what nepotism is right? it's not getting a job on a board of an energy company your father isn't an employee of. dumbass!
Hunter needs more TV appearances
Diplomat tells investigators he raised alarms in 2015 about Hunter Biden’s Ukraine work but was rebuffed
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...b63_story.html
Yes, optics bad. What crimes did he and Joe commit?
So you agree it appears bad. Should we investigate?
Investigate what?
What crimes are you alleging?
I didn't allege crimes. You believe it appears as though something bad took place. Should we investigate?
No, I didn't say that. Don't make up.
What are you saying should be investigated?
You believe it appears as though something bad took place. Should we investigate?
Investigations start with specific criminal allegations. If you're not alleging a crime, then the answer to "should we investigate?" is no.
What does Optics bad mean? If that doesn't suggest that it has a bad appearance what does it mean?
It doesn't mean it appears a crime was committed.
He made a faulty inference.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)