House launches Trump impeachment inquiry , Only 4th time in history


US diplomat reportedly said there was a 'quid pro quo' between Donald Trump and Ukraine


TELEMMGLPICT000213656468_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqI3FCE1f7boN3_RkHZJyAaSJ2hmdxzgkpja8nHX4emyY.jpeg

Gordon Sondland, the US Ambassador to the EU Credit: Reuters
Nick Allen, Washington 27 October 2019 • 11:19pm

A diplomat at the centre of the Donald Trump impeachment inquiry did say there was a "quid pro quo" between the US president and Ukraine, according to his lawyer.
Gordon Sondland, the US ambassador to the European Union, gave evidence earlier this month to congressional committees.
His lawyer Robert Luskin, told the Wall Street Journal his client had been asked if there was a quid pro quo.

He said Mr Sondland had given a caveat that he was not a lawyer, but that he believed the answer was yes.

Mr Sondland was said to have been referring to a meeting between Mr Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian president, that would happen only if Ukraine agreed to investigate allegations of corruption against Joe Biden, one of Mr Trump's chief political rivals.


Related

icon13.png
Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell throws Republican Prez Trump under the bus
 
it says a lot about how much of the country they want you to think hates Trump.
You're wrong about this. This isn't because they are trying to gin up opposition or frighten supporters: this says a lot about how much of the country they really believe hates trump. Never underestimate delusion.
 
Dems kick things in high gear:


House committee unveils impeachment resolution text

By Jeremy Herb, CNN
Updated 5:23 PM ET, Tue October 29, 2019

(CNN)A key House committee on Tuesday set the stage for the next phase of impeachment by releasing the rules that will guide Democrats through impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump.

The House Rules Committee released the text of the resolution Tuesday that the House will vote on later this week to formalize the impeachment proceedings. The full House is expected to vote on the resolution on Thursday.
The resolution provides the procedural details for how the House will move its impeachment inquiry into its next phase, and it also represents the first time that the full chamber will take a vote related to impeaching the President. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has argued that the vote is not being taken to formally authorize the impeachment inquiry, as Republicans have demanded, but will help "to eliminate any doubt as to whether the Trump administration may withhold documents, prevent witness testimony, disregard duly authorized subpoenas, or continue obstructing the House of Representatives."
Republicans and the White House have criticized the resolution as a measure that's coming too late following weeks of closed-door depositions. But it's also a sign that public hearings are on the way, where Republicans will have to debate Democrats more on the substance of Trump's actions on Ukraine rather than the process of the impeachment inquiry.
The text of the resolution lays out how the House Intelligence Committee will conduct public hearings and how the House Judiciary Committee "shall report to the House of Representatives such resolutions, articles of impeachment, or other recommendations as it deems proper."
LIVE UPDATES: The latest on the Trump impeachment inquiry
For the public hearings, the resolution includes language allowing the chairman and ranking member -- in this case, the top-ranking Republican -- of the Intelligence Committee to question witnesses for up to 90 minutes, split 45 minutes between each party. It also allows them to give that time to committee aides to conduct questioning. A Democratic summary of the resolution says that the set-up "permits staff counsels to follow their lines of inquiry to their ends," rather than the back-and-forth five-minute rounds that lawmakers typically have in hearings.
"The House impeachment inquiry has collected extensive evidence and testimony, and soon the American people will hear from witnesses in an open setting. The resolution introduced today in the House Rules Committee will provide that pathway forward," four Democratic committee chairs — Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff of California, Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler of New York, Foreign Affairs Chairman Eliot Engel of New York and acting Oversight Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney of New York — said in a statement.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/29/politics/impeachment-resolution-released-rules-committee/index.html



House Republicans are blowing Trump's impeachment defense

by Gabriel Malor | October 29, 2019
House Republicans are losing their only opportunity to contribute in a meaningful way to President Trump's Senate defense against articles of impeachment. While Democrats spent two weeks busily gathering evidence behind closed doors, with two more weeks of depositions already on the schedule, Republicans complained about the process — and complained and complained and complained.
Now some Republicans are saying that the complaints must have worked since the Democrats have announced that later this week they will formalize the rules for public hearings to be instituted in the coming month. House Republicans have fundamentally misunderstood this moment and neglected their role in helping prepare the president's defense.
It started with the whistleblower. Because they could not deny the whistleblower's general claim, thanks to Trump's decision to release the memorandum of his call with the Ukrainian president, House Republicans complained instead about the process: It's unfair that the president can't confront his accuser and, anyway, the whistleblower did not have first-hand information. But that process objection only had force until the Democrats subpoenaed contemporaneous evidence (text messages and other documents) that corroborated the whistleblower's claims.
The House Republican response? More complaints about process. The subpoenas weren't valid, they argued, even as witnesses began to voluntarily comply, turning over reams of evidence. The Democrat's information-gathering then continued in the form of depositions of people who could also corroborate the whistleblower's claims and bring some concerning claims of their own. The Republican response? Game-playing about exposing the whistleblower and asking a witness about an unfounded conspiracy theory (spread in part by the president, naturally) that Ukraine faked the Steele Dossier.
The most forceful process complaint that Republicans have managed to muster: The depositions are being held in secret. Setting aside the fact that depositions are always held close so as to prevent one witness from contaminating the testimony of other potential witnesses, this complaint has now also run its course. As noted above, the Democrats are going to start public hearings within a matter of weeks — after they complete their fact-finding depositions.
The Democrats are engaged in a specific, obvious mission with two goals in mind:


  1. Impeach the president in the House.
  2. Convince 20 Republican senators to join them in removing him from office.
Despite this patently obvious mission, House Republicans have dismissed impeachment proceedings as partisan and unfair and, therefore, unworthy of being treated seriously. As a result, they have neglected their only role to play in uncovering evidence to foil the second Democratic goal, the trial in the Senate.
washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/house-republicans-are-blowing-trumps-impeachment-defense





Related


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8XUs2y_o54

Trump draws boos when introduced to crowd at World Series

Associated Press
October 28, 2019

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump's low-profile appearance Sunday night at Game 5 of the World Series came at a high-profile moment of his presidency. Yet he still drew loud boos and jeers when introduced to the crowd.
At the end of the third inning, ballpark video screens carried a salute to U.S. service members that drew cheers throughout the stadium. When the video cut to Trump and his entourage and the loudspeakers announced the Trumps, cheers abruptly turned into a torrent of boos and heckling. Chants of "Lock him up!" broke out in some sections.
Trump appeared unfazed and continued waving. Later, some fans behind home plate held a sign reading "VETERANS FOR IMPEACHMENT". Another banner appeared during the game: "IMPEACH TRUMP!"
The president was on hand for seven innings before heading back to the White House. The Astros took a 3-2 series lead with a 7-1 victory in Game 5.
news.yahoo.com/trump-series-visit-comes-high-223943092.html
 
These two developments just a coincidence but nonetheless would be cause for concern for GOP-Adelson wing leadership, pro Iran war donors and Deep Neocons lobbies:


Oct 28:

13980806103522606187594510.jpg


At the end of the third inning, ballpark video screens carried a salute to U.S. service members that drew cheers throughout the stadium. When the video cut to Trump and his entourage and the loudspeakers announced the Trumps, cheers abruptly turned into a torrent of boos and heckling. Chants of "Lock him up!" broke out in some sections.
Trump appeared unfazed and continued waving. Later, some fans behind home plate held a sign reading "VETERANS FOR IMPEACHMENT". Another banner appeared during the game: "IMPEACH TRUMP!"
news.yahoo.com/trump-series-visit-comes-high-223943092.html



Oct 29:

'He's a patriot': Republicans defend key impeachment witness from attacks

Senior GOP lawmakers rejected the assault from conservative pundits on Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman.

191029-vindman-ap-773-3.jpg


Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman told House impeachment investigators that he thought President Donald Trump undermined national security with his Ukraine pressure campaign.
By BURGESS EVERETT and MELANIE ZANONA

10/29/2019

Republican leaders are stepping up to defend Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman against vicious attacks from President Donald Trump's allies.
Republicans may quibble with the substance of Vindman’s testimony as they try to protect Trump from the fast-moving impeachment inquiry. But congressional GOP leaders say it’s out of bounds to question Vindman’s patriotism and allegiance to the United States, as some conservative pundits did on Monday night.

Several top Republicans on Tuesday made emphatic statements in support of Vindman, a National Security Council official who heard Trump’s phone call with the Ukrainian president and testified that it was improper for Trump to demand an investigation into Joe Biden and represented a threat to U.S. national security.

“That guy’s a Purple Heart. I think it would be a mistake to attack his credibility,” South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the No. 2 Senate Republican, said in an interview. “You can obviously take issue with the substance and there are different interpretations about all that stuff. But I wouldn’t go after him personally. He’s a patriot.”
“I’m not going to question the patriotism of any of the people who come forward," said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), though he declined to comment "on the merit of what’s going forward" or Vindman's suggestion that he was concerned Trump's actions had undermined national security.
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/29/republicans-defend-impeachment-witness-vindman-061057




4 hours ago
First son-in-law Jared Kushner in Israeli TV interview:

Trump's "record of accomplishments is unimpeachable"

President Trump's senior adviser Jared Kushner told me during an exclusive interview with Israel's Channel 13 News that the president’s "record of accomplishments is unimpeachable" — and that "he hasn't done anything wrong."

Why it matters: Kushner is one of the officials working on the White House's impeachment strategy, per CNN — but this is the first time he has spoken publicly about the issue since the Ukraine scandal erupted.


  • Kushner told me that House Democrats have been trying to impeach Trump for the last three years but that all their efforts had failed.
  • He added: "The best thing going for the president is that he hasn't done anything wrong, and, at this point, they investigated him over and over and over again. I think the American people are sick and tired of it."
The big picture: Kushner argued the Trump administration had notched many achievements, like lowering drug prices, completing trade deals and creating jobs.

  • He criticized congressional Democrats, saying, "If they want to play silly games we will obviously deal with that in an appropriate manner but we are not going to let that distract us as an administration."
axios.com/jared-kushner-donald-trump-impeachment-interview-530c2248-1cb2-4e0a-987d-1740629b9cb6.html








Potentially-Related

stealth-data-machine1.png


19 Mar 2018
Revealed: Trump’s election consultants filmed saying they use bribes and sex workers to entrap politicians

i.png


Jared Kushner, Shanda

How the scion of one tri-state crime family married into another, in a story equal parts ‘Sopranos’ and ‘Game of Thrones.’
By James Kirchick
Determined to prevent Billy from testifying, Charles set up a honey trap for his brother-in-law in a motel room—fully equipped with video cameras—and paid a prostitute $10,000. Kushner then sent a tape of the assignation to his sister, who promptly turned her brother’s attempt at blackmail over to the authorities.

“Morning Joe” co-hosts claim that the White House attempted to blackmail the morning show
“Kushner told Scarborough that he would need to personally apologize to Trump in exchange for getting Enquirerowner David Pecker to stop the story,” Sherman wrote. “Scarborough says he refused, and the Enquirer published the story in print on June 5, headlined ‘Morning Joe Sleazy Cheating Scandal!'”

From: Trump Election Consultant Firm Cambridge Analytica Execs Caught Discussing Extortion,Fake News
 
Last edited:
Hopefully this will turn out to be fakenews. As always, extreme caution should be used when dealing with claims made without naming sources.

Top headline on Drudge today:


11/06/2019

Exclusive: Book Claims Senior Officials Believed Pence Would Support Use Of 25th Amendment

The anonymous author of “A Warning,” reportedly a current or former White House official, said talk of removing Trump escalated after Comey was fired.

The much-anticipated book “A Warning,” reportedly written by an unnamed senior White House official, claims that high-level White House aides were certain that Vice President Mike Pence would support the use of the 25th Amendment to have President Donald Trump removed from office because of mental incapacity.

According to the exposé, which is written by someone that The New York Times and the publisher of the book say is a current or former senior White House official, using the pen name “Anonymous,” highly placed White House officials did a back-of-the-envelope tally of which Cabinet members would be prepared to sign a letter invoking Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution, which says that if the president is deemed unfit to discharge the duties of his office, the vice president would assume the role.

That letter would need to be signed by a majority of the Cabinet, delivered to Pence for his signature and then submitted to Congress.

According to Anonymous, there was no doubt in the minds of these senior officials that Pence would support invoking the 25th Amendment if the majority of the Cabinet signed off on it.



Related

trump1_0.png

trump-birther-tweet.jpg





Drudge is turning on Trump
 
Hopefully this will turn out to be fakenews. As always, extreme caution should be used when dealing with claims made without naming sources.

Top headline on Drudge today:






Related

trump1_0.png

trump-birther-tweet.jpg





Drudge is turning on Trump

Yes. Hopefully it is fake news. I’m sure it is keeping you up late at night with anxiety. And thank you for the warning about unnamed sources. It is better to wait until the facts all come in before jumping to conclusions. Of course, it doesn’t stop you from peddling the info out because that is what your assignment is. But we who have more than half a brain know your type and your deceptive practices.

By the way “enhanced deficit”, how is your comrade “golden equity”? I see he stopped posting here after getting called out and even scrubbed much of his posting history. What’s wrong? Worried about visa issues in the future?

Enhanced deceit is your name from now on.
 
Republicans seek public testimony of Hunter Biden and anonymous whistleblower at impeachment hearings

by Susan Ferrechio
| November 09, 2019

Republicans are seeking the public testimony of Vice President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, as well as the anonymous whistleblower when the House holds public impeachment proceedings next week.
Rep. Devin Nunes of California, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, requested the witnesses in a letter to committee Chairman Adam Schiff on Saturday morning.
Schiff is likely to refuse many of the witness requests, and as the chairman, Schiff has the power to block any witnesses from testifying under a resolution setting out the rules that the House voted on earlier this month.
“Americans see through this sham process despite the Democrats’ efforts to retroactively legitimize it last week,” Nunes wrote to Schiff.

The GOP list includes eight witnesses, as well as “all individuals relied upon by the anonymous whistleblower in drafting his or her secondhand complaint.”
Democrats are seeking to impeach the president because they believe he used his office to try to coerce Ukraine to investigate Biden and Democratic interference in the 2016 election. The process began after an anonymous whistleblower received secondhand information about a July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukraine’s president and filed a complaint.
On the call, Trump asked President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate corruption involving former Vice President Joe Biden as well as the Democratic National Committee.

washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/republicans-seek-public-testimony-of-hunter-biden-and-anonymous-whistleblower-at-impeachment-hearings


Bolton a No-Show at Impeachment Panel; Pence Aide Appears

Pence aide Jennifer Williams was listening in on a July phone call between Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy

By Mary Clare Jalonick
Published Nov 7, 2019
AP
Jennifer Williams, a special adviser to Vice President Mike Pence for Europe and Russia who is a career Foreign Service officer, arrives for a closed-door interview in the impeachment inquiry on President Donald Trump's efforts to press Ukraine to investigate his political rival, Joe Biden, at the Capitol in Washington, Thursday, Nov. 7, 2019. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Former national security adviser John Bolton failed to appear for an interview with impeachment investigators Thursday, making it unlikely that he will provide testimony to the House about President Donald Trump's handling of Ukraine.
Democrats indicated they have no interest in a drawn-out court fight over Bolton's testimony or that of any others as they move into a more public phase of their impeachment inquiry. They say they will simply use the no-shows as evidence of the president's obstruction of Congress.
An attorney for Bolton, Charles Cooper, said his client had not received a subpoena. Cooper had said Bolton wouldn't appear without one.
An aide to Vice President Mike Pence did appear under subpoena Thursday to speak with impeachment investigators and was deposed for more than four hours.
nbcphiladelphia.com/news/politics/Pence-Aid-Jennifer-Williams-Testifies-in-Impeachment-Probe-564608411.html

Even if Bolton is really Deep State, he's not ready to throw MAGA under the bus going by this report.



Related

Hunter Biden Calls Donald Trump Jr. “Prince Humperdinck”
 
Last edited:
[h=1]Was Trump call with Ukraine ‘perfect’? GOP has many answers[/h]
By LISA MASCAROtoday


1 of 5
FILE - In this Nov. 5, 2019, file photo, Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, gets in an elevator as he is followed by reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington. Republicans have no unified argument in the impeachment inquiry of Donald Trump in large part because they can’t agree on how to defend the president. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File)


WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans have no unified argument in the impeachment inquiry of Donald Trump , in large part because they can’t agree on how best to defend the president — or for some, if they should.
Full Coverage: Trump impeachment inquiry
That would require a level of consensus that Trump’s call with the Ukraine president was “perfect,” as he insists. Or it would take a measure of GOP independence from Trump to suggest there may be a need to investigate.
Instead, it’s every Republican for himself or herself.
Utah Sen. Mitt Romney says the president’s actions toward Ukraine are “troubling.” Other Republicans say the behavior may raise concerns, but it’s not impeachable.
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham calls the whole impeachment inquiry “B.S.”
The result is a mishmash of GOP commentary spilling from Capitol Hill that may shield lawmakers, for now, from risky political choices, but leaves them with a disjointed defense of Trump as impeachment hearings push into the public realm this coming week.
“It’s not good,” said veteran GOP strategist Alex Conant. “Normally you want to establish the facts, get them out on their own terms, and build a message around that strategy. They’re not doing any of that.”
He added: “It’s hard to rally people to your side without a coherent and sustainable message.”

apnews.com/85e2ff2477314800bab722c3a2f3b92d
 
Edward Snowden Condemns Trump’s Mistreatment of Whistleblower Who Exposed Ukraine Scandal

The House Intelligence Committee has released the declassified whistleblower complaint, which details a July phone call between President Trump and the Ukrainian president. The White House is trying “to make the conversation not about the allegations,” Snowden told Democracy Now! “They want to talk about the whistleblower rather than the government’s own wrongdoing.”

"This case that we see before us today is, I think, actually quite clear-cut. It’s one of the simplest cases and simplest controversies we’ve seen in a while, because we’re talking about what appears to be, at least as alleged in the press so far, is a single exchange, a single complaint, about a particularized thing, and it doesn’t threaten the institutions of power broadly. This is about the activities of an individual.

And what we see in the system that’s been built today for whistleblowing is you’re told there are proper channels that you go through, and you’ll be safe if you do this. You will be heard, and your complaints will be investigated, and any improprieties that are borne out by the facts will be corrected.
We know historically this is not the case. There have been academic articles published for years — and there was actually one just published today — looking back through previous cases of, for example, NSA whistleblowers who did go through this process, and they had their lives destroyed. They lost their careers, they lost their homes, in some cases they lost their families, because of the stress and retaliation and consequences they face. Some of them lost their freedom. Chelsea Manning right now is sitting in prison. We have had so much mistreatment of whistleblowers here.
And the question that we have to ask is: Why? Don’t we need, as a public, to understand what the government is doing? And does not the press require access to sources and evidence of what the government is actually doing behind closed doors, which it might not think is comfortable for the public to know, but certainly it serves the public interest for the people to know?
And so, in this context — right? — we now have someone who’s coming forward. And the reason I say this is so clean-cut is, more than any other factor, what academics find when they look at what’s wrong with the whistleblowing process in the United States today is your outcome is entirely determined by the centers of power and how they respond to it."


"And this is the reason I think, although this whistleblower is absolutely being mistreated by this White House, and this White House is doing absolutely everything it can to stop this person from communicating what the public needs to know to the public in a meaningful way, so that we can evaluate it — I do not think they will succeed, because in this case the White House is in isolation and, in a meaningful way, in opposition to the Congress that feels their prerogatives are being stepped on by this. And that’s quite unusual in the context of whistleblowing. Typically, we see all three branches of government aligned against the whistleblower. In this case, because the at least alleged bad behavior is so bright-line clear, and because the White House is trying to deny Congress access to the complaint, more so than the public itself, I think there are enough people who will go to bat for whoever this person is, that they will end up all right. And that’s actually a wonderful thing. It’s not enough, and whistleblowers are today and will remain, unfortunately, a vulnerable class, until we fix the broader system.
But the most alarming part of what we see in the treatment of this person today by the White House is what every White House does. They try to make the conversation not about the allegations. They try to make the conversation about the source of the allegations. They want to talk about the whistleblower rather than the government’s own wrongdoing. And we need to have access to the facts, and we need to hear this person out, because it doesn’t matter the provenance of an allegation. What matters is the proof of it. Is what this person is alleging to be true in fact true? And if it is, what are we going to do about it? Who they are does not matter. Whether or not the allegations they are leveling are true matters absolutely."

democracynow.org/2019/9/26/edward_snowden_on_writing_his_memoir





Related

Rand: Snowden a Whistleblower. Not a traitor

Cenk gives Justin Amash some props for calling Snowden a 'whistleblower'

Snowden calls for whistleblower shield after claims by new Pentagon source


Un-Related

Developing: Politically what's the difference between a 'whistleblower' and a 'rat'...

Trump's suggestion on what to do with Snowden: kill him.

'Prepare to die' Stone texted witness, trial jury hears

lead_720_405.jpg


 
KY GOP Governor Loses in the State Trump Won by 30 Points
Trump supported KY candidate loses in deep-red state

n_wh_deadline_kentucky_191106_1920x1080.nbcnews-fp-1200-630.jpg


Trump told Kentucky to make the governor’s race all about him. And they did. And his guy lost.
Nov 6, 2019

There was voter fraud and Trump still brought Bevin even from being way behind.
 
Edward Snowden Condemns Trump’s Mistreatment of Whistleblower Who Exposed Ukraine Scandal

The House Intelligence Committee has released the declassified whistleblower complaint, which details a July phone call between President Trump and the Ukrainian president. The White House is trying “to make the conversation not about the allegations,” Snowden told Democracy Now! “They want to talk about the whistleblower rather than the government’s own wrongdoing.”

"This case that we see before us today is, I think, actually quite clear-cut. It’s one of the simplest cases and simplest controversies we’ve seen in a while, because we’re talking about what appears to be, at least as alleged in the press so far, is a single exchange, a single complaint, about a particularized thing, and it doesn’t threaten the institutions of power broadly. This is about the activities of an individual.

And what we see in the system that’s been built today for whistleblowing is you’re told there are proper channels that you go through, and you’ll be safe if you do this. You will be heard, and your complaints will be investigated, and any improprieties that are borne out by the facts will be corrected.
We know historically this is not the case. There have been academic articles published for years — and there was actually one just published today — looking back through previous cases of, for example, NSA whistleblowers who did go through this process, and they had their lives destroyed. They lost their careers, they lost their homes, in some cases they lost their families, because of the stress and retaliation and consequences they face. Some of them lost their freedom. Chelsea Manning right now is sitting in prison. We have had so much mistreatment of whistleblowers here.
And the question that we have to ask is: Why? Don’t we need, as a public, to understand what the government is doing? And does not the press require access to sources and evidence of what the government is actually doing behind closed doors, which it might not think is comfortable for the public to know, but certainly it serves the public interest for the people to know?
And so, in this context — right? — we now have someone who’s coming forward. And the reason I say this is so clean-cut is, more than any other factor, what academics find when they look at what’s wrong with the whistleblowing process in the United States today is your outcome is entirely determined by the centers of power and how they respond to it."


"And this is the reason I think, although this whistleblower is absolutely being mistreated by this White House, and this White House is doing absolutely everything it can to stop this person from communicating what the public needs to know to the public in a meaningful way, so that we can evaluate it — I do not think they will succeed, because in this case the White House is in isolation and, in a meaningful way, in opposition to the Congress that feels their prerogatives are being stepped on by this. And that’s quite unusual in the context of whistleblowing. Typically, we see all three branches of government aligned against the whistleblower. In this case, because the at least alleged bad behavior is so bright-line clear, and because the White House is trying to deny Congress access to the complaint, more so than the public itself, I think there are enough people who will go to bat for whoever this person is, that they will end up all right. And that’s actually a wonderful thing. It’s not enough, and whistleblowers are today and will remain, unfortunately, a vulnerable class, until we fix the broader system.
But the most alarming part of what we see in the treatment of this person today by the White House is what every White House does. They try to make the conversation not about the allegations. They try to make the conversation about the source of the allegations. They want to talk about the whistleblower rather than the government’s own wrongdoing. And we need to have access to the facts, and we need to hear this person out, because it doesn’t matter the provenance of an allegation. What matters is the proof of it. Is what this person is alleging to be true in fact true? And if it is, what are we going to do about it? Who they are does not matter. Whether or not the allegations they are leveling are true matters absolutely."

democracynow.org/2019/9/26/edward_snowden_on_writing_his_memoir





Related

Rand: Snowden a Whistleblower. Not a traitor

Cenk gives Justin Amash some props for calling Snowden a 'whistleblower'

Snowden calls for whistleblower shield after claims by new Pentagon source


Un-Related

Developing: Politically what's the difference between a 'whistleblower' and a 'rat'...

Trump's suggestion on what to do with Snowden: kill him.

'Prepare to die' Stone texted witness, trial jury hears

lead_720_405.jpg



Snowden is an enemy who happened to do us a favor.

[h=3]Snowden[/h]
 
Last edited:
Fox legal analyst Napolitano emerges as Trump critic

By DAVID BAUDER today


800.jpeg

FILE - This Nov. 27, 2018 file photo shows Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano hosting the inaugural broadcast of "Liberty File" on the new streaming service Fox Nation, in New York. (AP Photo/Richard Drew)

NEW YORK (AP) — More than two decades into his career as a commentator at Fox News Channel, Andrew Napolitano reached a milestone of sorts when he was called a “fool” on his own network.
Not to his face, of course. But Tucker Carlson guest Joseph diGenova’s dismissal of Napolitano for saying that soliciting campaign aid from a foreign government is against the law illustrates the awkward place that the former New Jersey Superior Court judge finds himself in at Fox during the Trump era.

Napolitano, who joined Fox News in 1998, has emerged as one of Donald Trump’s bluntest critics on a network where the president expects to hear encouragement.

Napolitano has defended an impeachment inquiry that many Trump supporters call unfair, noting it follows rules written by Republicans. He said the White House counsel’s arguments against the process were “profoundly misguided,” and described Trump’s since-withdrawn proposal to host a summit of world leaders at his Miami resort as a constitutional violation “about as direct and profound ... as one could create.” He has questioned how seriously Trump takes his oath of office, and said he governs like a mafia don.
The commentator’s assertion that Robert Mueller had found 10 instances of obstruction of justice that could have resulted in a criminal indictment if Trump hadn’t been president earned him an angry tweet from the White House.
“He’s beginning to sound like Judge Shepard Smith,” said Tim Graham, director of media analysis at the conservative Media Research Center.

It was Smith, the since-departed Fox News anchor who occasionally fact-checked claims by Fox opinion hosts, who came to Napolitano’s defense after diGenova’s remark on Sept. 24. Smith called the attack repugnant.
“It just sort of rolls off my back,” Napolitano said in an interview. “I realize that when you’re in this business — and I’m on the opinion side, not the news side — that it’s going to ruffle some feathers. I never take it personally.”

He suspects his opinions have cost him airtime on Fox, although he says it can be cyclical. While he appears regularly on the “Fox & Friends” morning show, he’s invisible on the prime-time opinion shows hosted by Carlson, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham. Many of his commentaries appear online, taped on the plaza outside of Fox’s Manhattan headquarters.
Does he think some of his colleagues resent his opinions? “I don’t think so,” Napolitano said. “I think they’re mature enough to respect intellectual honesty.”

His commentaries are a frequent topic on Fox News message boards. “I wonder what changed him or if he was just faking it before?” one viewer wrote. “Either way, I don’t like this version of Nappy.”
Fox did not make an executive available to talk about Napolitano, but issued a statement saying his legal insights “have become a critical element in our breaking news coverage.”

apnews.com/52b6a16fa159457b907cc90c4846d6a0


Related

This kind of tweets should stop now:

tumblr_pqnhl4pBVi1we4t2no1_500.png

[SIZE=+7]Leaked Recording From ABCNEWS Reveals Network Killed Story Implicating Epstein, reportedly Alan Dershowitz also pressured the network to kill the story[/SIZE]
 
Pentagon official testifies freeze on aid to Ukraine came from Oval Office...


Democrats, GOP to vie for impeachment narrative -- on TV

By MARY CLARE JALONICK and ZEKE MILLER
2 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Impeachable or not?
Both Democrats and Republicans see the televised impeachment hearings starting this week as their first and best opportunity to shape public opinion about President Donald Trump’s dealings with Ukraine.
Democrats believe the testimony will paint a vivid picture of presidential misconduct. Republicans say it will demonstrate just how lacking the evidence is for impeachment.
The stakes are high, and historic. Trump faces the prospect of being just the third American president impeached by the House of Representatives, a dubious distinction for a commander in chief facing reelection. Yet Democrats are privately uncertain about how the public will view the proceedings, particularly if Trump is impeached along party lines.
In the hearings beginning Wednesday, Democrats plan a narrow focus and a narrative retelling of Trump’s pressure on Ukraine to investigate Democrats as his administration withheld military aid to an Eastern European ally on Russia’s border.
All three witnesses this week — top Ukraine diplomat William Taylor, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent and former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch — expressed concerns about Trump’s efforts in closed-door depositions last month.

apnews.com/15e3ce69ef7b49219ff3855fb75be96f


KY GOP Governor Loses in the State Trump Won by 30 Points
Trump supported KY candidate loses in deep-red state

READ THE TRANSCRIPT
n_wh_deadline_kentucky_191106_1920x1080.nbcnews-fp-1200-630.jpg


Trump told Kentucky to make the governor’s race all about him. And they did. And his guy lost.


Nov 6, 2019


Related

Virginia cyclist who flipped off Trump's motorcade wins race for local office



We know about Judge Swamp already.

Similar stuff used to be said about GOPA wing's top donor globalist neocons swamp... but people seem to have short memory when it comes to swamps.

Bring back #DrainTheSwamp slogan for 2020.
 
Last edited:
[SIZE=+7]
800.jpeg

CURTAIN-UP [/SIZE]
[SIZE=+7]
[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+7]
[/SIZE]

Risks for all sides as Trump impeachment hearings swing open

By LISA MASCARO 26 minutes ago

800.jpeg

President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump walk on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, Tuesday, Nov. 12, 2019, as they return from New York. (AP Photo/Steve Helber)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The closed doors of the Trump impeachment investigation are swinging wide open.
When the gavel strikes at the start of the House hearing Wednesday morning, America and the rest of the world will have the chance to see and hear for themselves for the first time about President Donald Trump’s actions toward Ukraine and consider whether they are, in fact, impeachable offenses.
It’s a remarkable moment, even for a White House full of them.
All on TV, committee leaders will set the stage, then comes the main feature: Two seasoned diplomats, William Taylor, the graying former infantry officer now charge d’affaires in Ukraine, and George Kent, the deputy assistant secretary in Washington, telling the striking, if sometimes complicated story of a president allegedly using foreign policy for personal and political gain ahead of the 2020 election.
So far, the narrative is splitting Americans, mostly along the same lines as Trump’s unusual presidency. The Constitution sets a dramatic, but vague, bar for impeachment, and there’s no consensus yet that Trump’s actions at the heart of the inquiry meet the threshold of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Whether Wednesday’s proceedings begin to end a presidency or help secure Trump’s position, it’s certain that his chaotic term has finally arrived at a place he cannot control and a force, the constitutional system of checks and balances, that he cannot ignore.

apnews.com/77645ee9804c4056a9a6e42e64cb755a




Dems' lead lawyer known for prosecuting mobsters, swindlers ...


Devlin Barrett
22 hrs ago

The Democrats’ lead impeachment hearing lawyer made his bones as a prosecutor by sending mobsters, stock swindlers and a multimillion-dollar inside trader to prison, cases in which colleagues said he mixed brains and “swagger” to win convictions.
© Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/AP Daniel Goldman, counsel to the House Intelligence Committee, will have 45 minutes to question…Daniel S. Goldman spent a decade as an assistant U.S. attorney in Manhattan, a jurisdiction known for its tough, high-profile cases. He left that job in 2017 to become a television legal analyst but now holds a weightier role questioning witnesses called to testify about President Trump’s effort to convince Ukraine to investigate a political rival.

At the public hearings before the House Intelligence Committee due to begin Wednesday, Goldman is slotted to question each witness for 45 minutes, followed by five-minute question sessions for each lawmaker. Stephen R. Castor, general counsel for the House Oversight Committee, will be the Republicans’ point man.

The format is a significant departure from routine congressional hearings, where lawmakers have the spotlight and seldom cede the microphone and live television coverage to a staffer. By assigning a big chunk of the questioning to a committee lawyer, and in Goldman’s case, an accomplished former prosecutor, party leaders are tacitly acknowledging just how serious the stakes are.

msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democrats-impeachment-lawyer-cut-his-teeth-prosecuting-mobsters-wall-street-cheats/ar-BBWF2p4


SCHIFF: Impeachable Offenses Include 'Bribery'...
Republican senator: All comes down to motive...
Trump Considered Firing Intel Inspector General...
In private speech, Bolton says some of President's policy decisions guided by personal interest...
Napolitano emerges as top critic...
FACEBOOK Sued for Censoring Posts Naming Whistleblower...
FOX HOST: WHY IS DRUDGE COVERING NEWS?
VIDEO...
MCCONNELL: WE WILL HAVE A TRIAL...
 
Last edited:
Back
Top