Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday November 12 2019, @09:40PM   Printer-friendly
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

Enlarge this image

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


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by qzm on Wednesday November 13 2019, @07:22AM (5 children)

    by qzm (3260) on Wednesday November 13 2019, @07:22AM (#919751)

    However, "I would appreciate it if you would restart this investigation that you stopped after pressure from the US" is probably not.

    If there was ANY sign that Trump tried to pressure them for a specific OUTCOME that would be quite different, however asking a country to INVESTIGATE something is entirely legit.
    In the same was asking US agencies to INVESTIGATE something is legit, as long as you dont pressure them about the outcome.

    Or do you think the investigations of Trump should have resulted in Obama being prosecuted?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   0  
       Troll=2, Redundant=1, Insightful=1, Interesting=2, Total=6
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @01:28PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @01:28PM (#919816)

    And it was so legit that he felt the need to construct a parallel shadow state department to ensure it stayed out in the open and wasn't misconstrued as shady.

  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @06:17PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @06:17PM (#919952)

    However, "I would appreciate it if you would restart this investigation that you stopped after pressure from the US" is probably not.

    George Kent's opening statement before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (see second bullet point on page 4) [cnn.com] seems most apropos to address your concern.

  • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday November 13 2019, @07:44PM (1 child)

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Wednesday November 13 2019, @07:44PM (#919976) Journal

    He asked them to publicly announce an investigation in return for MY money.

    That alone would harm the Biden campaign.

    He understands that's how Comey won it for him in 2016.

    • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday November 13 2019, @08:25PM

      by hemocyanin (186) on Wednesday November 13 2019, @08:25PM (#919995) Journal

      And MY money too. I'd really like to believe I wasn't funding Biden's coke habit.

  • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday November 13 2019, @08:08PM

    by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday November 13 2019, @08:08PM (#919987)

    If there was ANY sign that Trump tried to pressure them for a specific OUTCOME that would be quite different...

    Oh, is that the current defense?

    Sounds pretty weak to me, not that it will matter as the Republicans have no interest in responsible government any more, they just want power at any cost now, so no repercussions for Mr. Trump.