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: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @04:26PM (3 children)
In the first paragraph hemocyanin engages in a "whatabout" by speculating, without evidence, that other politicians are corruptly funneling tax payer money to themselves, their friends, and their relatives, and wonders to what extent this is happening. hemocyanin continues this in the second paragraph, while also making an oblique, but obvious, reference to Hunter Biden. By the third paragraph, hemocynanin has dropped the hypothetical nature of the first and second paragraphs to assume this corruption is actively occurring, and demands an explanation with the condition that the reply not engage in the same kind of fallacy he himself engaged in.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday November 13 2019, @04:55PM (2 children)
Let me engage in "whateverism". I wasn't saying I was not saying "whatabout" -- I was saying lay off the "whatabout" deflection because it's about freakin' time we ask whatabout. As in, what about due process free execution? Why is that not impeachable? What about starting a war without Congressional approval. Why is that not impeachable? What about excusing torture. Why is that not impeachable? What about mass surveillance. Why is that not impeachable? What about bailing out banksters and never prosecuting the financial crimes that destroyed so many people? Why all that not impeachable? Why is the only thing that is impeachable, is looking to dig up dirt on Biden's obvious corruption?
Because the ONLY crimes that matter to the DNC, are those which impinge on its ability to be corrupt apparently. They sat on their thumbs through Bush and Obama when incredibly cynical hard Constitutional violations proliferated, and said not a word, unless it was to participate in that rot and celebrate: "we came we saw he died" or "the son should have had a better father."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 13 2019, @09:04PM (1 child)
This is a good point and I don't think it is lost on anyone here. The vast majority of people are fed up with the lack of accountability and insane levels of corruption.
However, we don't need your whataboutism concerns in a discussion about Trump. You can being those points up, but they should be IN ADDITION and not phrased as "bbbut those eeeevuhl demonrsts!!"
All the more liberal users around here regularly criticize Obama and others who failed the public good, yet conservatices just can't let go of their tribal loyalty.
Try again when you're ready to say Trump should at least be removed from office, and preferably prosecuted properly for his crimes.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday November 14 2019, @02:07AM
I'll be all aboard the Trump impeachment train just as soon as the mass indictments start flowing, because otherwise, all Trump impeachment can possibly do is elevate other -- often worse -- corruption.