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: 3, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Wednesday November 13 2019, @08:54AM (4 children)
yup.
I didn't vote for Trump (or Hillary) but the tsunami of negativity spewed at him is incredible. It isn't like he decided to give the executive branch the power to execute Americans without trial based on secret legal memos -- something which should be immediately recognizable as impeachable because of the 5th amendment and all that. No -- there's never a peep about that or other insane Constitutional violations. Mat Taibbi noted in a recent episode of the Useful Idiots podcast (worth it) that presidents don't get impeached for crimes -- they get impeached for stepping on the toes of the other party, for violating their prerogatives.
Anyhow, I'm feeling that bitter desire to vote for Trump more strongly over time. Not because I like him. But because there's a whole swathe of chattering bobbleheads who need another bitch slap.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @05:52PM (3 children)
But whatabout...
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday November 13 2019, @08:18PM (2 children)
Yeah -- that's so valid. Let's just forget about the insidious slide into authoritarianism via egregious Constitutional destruction because orange man bad.
It seems to me the MOST relevant question is "whatabout".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @09:10PM (1 child)
Well since that was precipitated by Bush I don't think your point is what you think it is. Instead of uniting against corruption and supporting candidates that want to help "we the people" like Sanders you focus on the FUD fed to you by the GOP and the "titans of industry" that promote their pyramid scheme socio-economic policies.
The most relevant task is to make sure the most corrupt piece of shit to ever sit in the WH is held accountable, otherwise what hope do you have that the next corrupt bastard will be the line where we uphold the Constitution?
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday November 14 2019, @02:04AM
It goes back farther than Bush of course, but Obama hit the pinnacle with Due Process Free Execution. If death squads aren't the mark of unconstitutional authoritarianship, what the fuck is?