SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the the-enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend dept.
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
The view among the national security officials was unanimous: Military aid to Ukraine should not be stopped. But the White House's acting chief of staff thought otherwise.
That was the testimony of Laura Cooper, a Defense Department official, whose deposition was released Monday in the House impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump.
"My sense is that all of the senior leaders of the US national security departments and agencies were all unified in their - in their view that this assistance was essential," she said. "And they were trying to find ways to engage the president on this."
Cooper's testimony was among several hundred pages of transcripts released Monday, along with those of State Department officials Catherine Croft and Christopher Anderson.
Cooper told investigators that, in a series of July meetings at the White House, she came to understand that Trump's acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, was holding up the military aid for the US ally.
[...] When she and others tried to get an explanation, they found none.
[...] She said it was "unusual" to have congressional funds suddenly halted that way, and aides raised concerns about the legality of it. The Pentagon was "concerned" about the hold-up of funds and "any signal that we would send to Ukraine about a wavering in our commitment", she said.
Cooper told investigators that she was visited in August by Kurt Volker, the US special envoy to Ukraine, who explained there was a "statement" that the Ukraine government could make to get the security money flowing.
[...] "Somehow, an effort that he was engaged in to see if there was a statement that the government of Ukraine would make," said Cooper, an assistant defence secretary, "that would somehow disavow any interference in US elections and would commit to the prosecution of any individuals involved in election interference."
For a handy reference to the documents that have been released concerning this, npr has posted Trump Impeachment Inquiry: A Guide To Key People, Facts And Documents:
Written words are central to the Ukraine affair. The significance of the whistleblower's original complaint and the White House's record of its call with Ukraine are debated, but the text is public. Here are the documents to refer to as the inquiry proceeds:
Texts and memos
- Call:The White House memorandum (Sept. 25)
- Aid:The Pentagon letter on military aid to Ukraine (Sept. 25)
- Complaint:The whistleblower complaint (Sept. 26)
- Texts:Batch of texts between diplomats released by House Democrats (Oct. 4)
The whistleblower's complaint has largely been corroborated by witness testimony, public statements and media reports. See how the document checks out — with a detailed annotation of the text.
Testimony released by Congress following closed depositions
- Christopher Anderson, former special adviser for Ukraine negotiations
- Laura Cooper,deputy defense secretary
- Catherine Croft, former Ukraine adviser on the National Security Council
- Fiona Hill, former White House adviser on Russia
- George Kent, deputy assistant secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs
- Michael McKinley, former State Department adviser
- Gordon Sondland,U.S. ambassador to EU
- William Taylor, acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine
- Alexander Vindman, top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council
- Kurt Volker, former Ukraine envoy
- Marie Yovanovitch, ex-U.S. ambassador to Ukraine
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 12 2019, @11:12PM (27 children)
Link to transcript?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @12:28AM (23 children)
It's right there in TFS
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/25/764052120/read-transcript-of-president-trumps-call-with-ukraine-s-leader [npr.org]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @12:39AM (22 children)
Thanks. What is supposed to be wrong about that discussion? It looks fine to me.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @01:08AM (21 children)
I'm going to assume you're not trolling (although I'm almost certainly wrong) and respond.
That discussion was the culmination of a variety of efforts to extort the Ukranian government into announcing that long debunked false narratives were worthy of investigation.
My understanding is that (and this has/will come out in the published depositions/hearings to come) various members of the Administration, as well as private citizens, at the direction of Trump attempted to extort the Ukrainian government to announce investigations into long debunked rumors by refusing attendance at Ukrainian events (inauguration), political mechanisms (meetings with the US President) and denial of desperately needed military aid (almost $400 million worth) in contravention of Congress' appropriations in order to smear domestic political opponents.
Using government resources and power to extort help from foreign governments in an attempt to enhance one's domestic political standing (by smearing your competitors) is, and always has been illegal, unethical and generally a scumbag thing to do.
The investigation is looking into who knew what and when, who did what and when and how this all fits together.
The amazing thing about it is that the current administration has *admitted* pretty much all of this.
So. You're either trolling or you're really uninformed. If it's the former, I hope they're paying you well. If it's the latter, inform yourself.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @01:49AM (13 children)
Can you quote the part of this transcript where there was extortion?
Also, my understanding is the Ukranian president said he did not feel pressured or even know this "aid" was delayed, there never was an investigation of Biden's corrupt activities, and Ukraine got the "aid" in question anyway (the US shouldn't be meddling overseas or acting as the world's arms dealer to begin with, but whatever...).
So your narrative sounds made up to me. Are any of my facts wrong?
Why don't you ask for an investigation of Trump for something real like manipulating the stock and bond markets? Oh, I forgot. Because it is legal for congress to insider trade so they are all doing it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @03:16AM
FTFY.
To answer to the now correct question: no, you didn't post any facts, just words.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @03:45AM (8 children)
The facts are already coming out and more will be forthcoming, not least with the public hearing tomorrow.
Your trollish feigned ignorance is so transparent. It would be humorous if it wasn't so tragic.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @03:52AM (7 children)
Yes, the facts are out. Only idiots or the ignorant still think there is something here. Listen to the propaganda and you will be wrong about everything. Fine by me, it is like free money.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @04:16AM (5 children)
You mean this propaganda?
That Ukraine hacked the DNC and colluded with Clinton to harm Trump. [wikipedia.org]
Or that the "deep [wikipedia.org] state" [rationalwiki.org] is fomenting a coup against Trump?
Yeah. If you listen to that propaganda, you probably will be incredibly misinformed. Good call!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @04:36AM (4 children)
No, that is not what I meant. And like I said, I am not arguing or trying to convince you, it is good for me when people are kept thinking the world is different than it is.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @06:46AM (3 children)
"...it is good for me when people are kept thinking the world is different than it is."
???? Are you actually admitting here that you are an operative posting propaganda?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @12:02PM (2 children)
Nope, I posted the facts. Someone responded "words are not facts"... Ok, I can almost assure you people like that are why I can double my money like every single year by trading.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @06:38PM (1 child)
The discussion was not about how you can double your money "like every single year by trading". It was about some facts very damaging to the President coming out in congressional hearings. In view of that, I'm going to stick with my original guess that you are a trolling Russian operative. How well are they paying you for this service, comrade?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @07:59PM
I listed the facts for you. They are totally contrary to the narrative in the post I responded to. Also I am watching these hearing and even the "star witness" is laughing his ass off about how farcical this is.
So once again, I am right and the people reading fake news are wrong.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @04:16AM
You mean this propaganda?
That Ukraine hacked the DNC and colluded with Clinton to harm Trump. [wikipedia.org]
Or that the "deep [wikipedia.org] state" [rationalwiki.org] is fomenting a coup against Trump?
Yeah. If you listen to that propaganda, you probably will be incredibly misinformed. Good call!
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Wednesday November 13 2019, @03:52PM (2 children)
Just about everything you said was wrong, yes.
Reread the parts of the call memo immediately before and after, "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."
Before, President Zelensky is speaking about purchasing more military equipment they need. That's a quid. (As is the reduced military aid, and it doesn't matter if Zelensky knew it or not, but that isn't even necessary. President Zelensky asking for military weaponry is more than sufficient).
The line I quoted above is your pro. The word, "though." As in, "I have additional conditions before you'll get those weapons [or a WH visit]." As in there is more that President Trump wants besides just selling Zelensky the arms he needs to defend himself from Russia.
The quo? Investigation of a political rival and the rival party. This is not a corruption investigation by a neutral and beneficent President. If it were the President could easily point to other investigations he's acted like Nancy Drew about with other world leaders that do not directly touch upon his political rivals and the potential outcome of the next election. If it were the President could meaningfully discourse about other places where freedom is threatened and how he's fought back against it (unlike giving Russia complete influence over northern Syria, allowing the Kurds to be slaughtered and then meeting today with the Slaughterer in Chief while holding Gen. Mazloum Abdi at arms length at Turkey's request...) If it were it wouldn't be so transparent that he's trying to bring up irrelevancies to whether Ukraine can fight Russia.
By the way, anything President Zelensky says at this time cannot be assumed to be not under duress. Donald J. Trump still has the power to interfere in the United States' support to Ukraine, and he has proven that is more than willing to cozy up with Russia. Donald Trump has the ability to hand Ukraine to Russia just as he handed Syria to them. This is entirely aside from your isolationist belief which is again, completely and utterly wrong on so many levels that I'm not going to address it further. Just noting you are completely wrong in that paragraph in every statement.
Look at it for what it is. The President is trying to use the tools of statecraft to have political rivals investigated in direct contravention of federal elections law. Why does that sound like America to you?
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @08:06PM (1 child)
Nothing you said refutes my facts that:
1) The president of Ukraine did not know about the delayed aid and said he did not feel pressured
2) Ukraine never investigated Biden
3) Ukrainian received the aid
So nothing even happened, the supposed victim says nothing happened, but partisan morons want to make it illegal to investigate republicrat crimes (yes, the plundering includes at least Romney in addition to Biden and Kerry). The level of derp you need to have to support this stuff is off the scale.
It is like the people who quote Trump saying Epstein was a "good guy" without understanding he says that about everyone, especially right before he screws them over. The type of people who are wrong about everything, all the time. Like that DeathMonkey account here.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 15 2019, @08:17PM
Hi, I am a rich foreign woman in need of a manly man to marry me and save me from religious persecution. I am a hot arab woman but I'm christian :( Will you marry me and share my wads of cash while giving me the hot business???
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @05:05AM (3 children)
They're "debunked rumors" in much the same way that DNC acted unfairly during the 2016 election (with regards to Bernie) are "debunked rumors."
Biden's son was getting upwards of $50k/month to "advise" on a board in Ukraine in a field he had absolutely no knowledge or experience in. His son is a complete and absolute loser. My favorite is him getting a military commission. Biden's son is too old to receive a commission, has a drug record, and also lacks any military education or experience. Any alone is sufficient to preclude military commissioning, all three though...? Biden managed to get him a special exception to receive a rare 'direct military commissioning' which had a special ceremony at the whitehouse spearheaded by, of course, Biden. His son was kicked out of the navy a month later after testing positive for cocaine. He's the purest embodiment of a corrupt politician's silver spooner kid. Even better is his "consulting agency." Guess when it was started? Pretty much on day one of daddy winning the vice presidency. If you think this was even remotely on the up-and-up, then I have a bridge to sell you. The reason Biden has started slipping fast in the polls is specifically because people know the allegations against him are true. The reason for dissonance in actions and words is because of partisanship.
---
In my opinion what happened is that the DNC already long since knew about Biden's games for his son, which I imagine are probably an open secret along the same lines as Weinstein's sex games Hollywood. Then they learned that Trump was actively investigating such in a way that would likely produce evidence, and so they had to make a decision. They had two main options. The first would be to prepare a compelling defense/spin against the allegations which were likely going to be Trump's 'October surprise', but this comes with two problems. The first is that it might not work since the allegations are pretty damning, and also quite real. The second is that if sufficient evidence were gathered, it might not just be an October surprise but the starting of a real criminal trial. So I think they went for option two - disable the October surprise by making the issue public knowledge ASAP. And in choosing how to do so they took a page from Saul Alinsky: "Accuse your opponent of what you are doing, to create confusion and to inculcate voters against evidence of your own guilt".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @07:34AM (2 children)
If you think the above post is trolling, you're emphasizing the issue. Here [wikipedia.org] is the Wiki entry on Hunter Biden. None of the above facts were in any way misstated or taken out of context.
Hunter Biden is absolutely and completely unqualified for the positions he was given. The Direct Military Commissioning is tangential, but also some of the most direct evidence of this. He was literally disqualified from this position in at least 3 different ways. Direct military commissions are generally used for things like granting commissions to e.g. physicians. Joe Biden abused the system to try to make his son an officer in the military. His son then fucked that up by deciding to continue to use cocaine while an officer. One can only assume he thought his father could make the drug tests disappear. That or perhaps he slipped, fell, and some cocaine just accidentally found its way up his nose.
The one and only way he ended up on the executive board of a Ukrainian corporation pulling in > $50k a month is due to Joe Biden using his influence to get him on that board. And the key problem with this is that the corporations obviously do not engage in these behaviors out of the good of their hearts. They expect "favors" in return. This is what corruption really looks like. You don't need to bend words, try to find hidden meaning in them, or rely on partisan whistle blowers. It's like the congressman who threatened to throw a reporter "off this fucking balcony", on camera [npr.org]. These people become so used to having such immense power that they don't bother trying to hide the things they're doing because in general high level politicians are not held accountable. At least in Congressman Balcony's case, he did end up in prison - all be it on a slew of unrelated charges.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @12:11PM (1 child)
I think Biden just the type of the iceberg. Eg, this "whistleblower" seems to be the previously unknown "Charlie" who was acting as an informant for Strozk and Page. The entire thing is a deflection operation: https://saraacarter.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2019-04-25-CEG-RJ-to-DOJ-Surveillance-of-Trump-Transition-Team.pdf [saraacarter.com]
The only reason anyone would even risk being involved in this farce is that they have been up to no good.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @05:03PM
The whistleblower is either Melania or Ivanka or both.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @06:18AM
This is a very poor assessment of the situation: "Using government resources and power to extort help from foreign governments in an attempt to enhance one's domestic political standing (by smearing your competitors) is, and always has been illegal, unethical and generally a scumbag thing to do."
I have my doubts about "illegal", but I won't challenge it.
You have no possible way to prove that there was "an attempt to enhance one's domestic political standing". That would require an ability to read Trump's mind.
Meanwhile, Trump has a job to perform. Running the executive branch means being in charge of federal prosecution. (federal prosecutors ultimately report to Trump) It sure seems like it would be "illegal, unethical and generally a scumbag thing" for Trump to prevent prosecution of a crime, except via the right to pardon. Being the head of state means that Trump is our top negotiator for getting foreign cooperation. As our negotiator, he is expected to use "government resources and power to extort help from foreign governments". That's just his job.
Basically, you're complaining that one of Trump's job duties (ensuring justice by supporting the prosecution of Biden corruption) could possibly provide Trump with some political benefit. It may. (doubtful) If so, that's just coincidence. Trump is required to do his job.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday November 13 2019, @06:10PM (1 child)
Your, and many democrat's, primary falsehood here, is that the allegations against Biden and his son were never "debunked". The investigator was fired, at the request of Joe Biden. That is not "debunked" by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, having the investigator fired seems to strengthen the allegations of corruption. Why bother having him fired, if you're innocent?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 15 2019, @08:02PM
Well according to MSM he got the guy fired for NOT investigating corruption and it had nothing to do with his son. That could be wrong but since you're the accuser you should investigate the timelines and let us know if your theory holds up. I don't give a shit, if Biden is guilty of protecting his son etc. then I'm fine with charging him, but Trump's actions were still illegal so it doesn't really change anything.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @04:07PM (2 children)
They have not released a transcript yet. Perhaps you're looking for the highly edited memo.
Gotta love the arm chair lawyers making pronouncements off of ... I'm not sure what to call it, hearsay? The WH edited and removed a lot of wording. I guess simply "lies" will do.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @05:06PM (1 child)
The highly edited memo? More parroting of fake news, everyone who heard the call said it was accurate. Look it up.
It is just hilarious, everything you people believe is wrong! That is why you get or stay poor, and you will fight people like me who try to enlighten you thus proving you deserve it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @10:13PM
Big brain time!
Back to the dungeon little incel, your daddy was cucked and that's why he doesn't love you.