Category: Ukraine

Schiff: Trump team’s claim Giuliani wasn’t conducting policy a ‘breathtaking’ admission

Posted on by Joan McCarter

In response to a question from Democrat Joe Manchin and Kristin Sinema, and Republicans Lisa Murkowski, and Susan Collins about whether the White House would assure the Senate that it would not allow private citizens to conduct foreign policy, White House lawyer Patrick Philbin stepped in it, and Rep. Adam Schiff pounced. Philbin answered "I just want to make clear that there was no conduct of foreign policy being carried on here by a private person."

That was all the opening Schiff needed. "We have just heard a breathtaking admission by the President's lawyer," he said. "What the President's counsel said was that no foreign policy was being conducted by a private person here. That is Rudy Giuliani was not conducting U.S. foreign policy. Rudy Giuliani was not conducting policy. That is a remarkable admission," Schiff continued. They have suggested, he said, that "this is a policy issue," about burden-sharing or corruption, but "they have no acknowledged that this was not about policy. […] This was not policy conducted by Mr. Giuliani."

"They have just undermined their entire argument," he added. "If Giuliani wasn't there conducting foreign policy, it must have been a "personal political errand."

x

Trump’s defense lawyers try to memory-hole Mick Mulvaney’s quid pro quo ‘Get over it’

Posted on by Laura Clawson

“Get over it,” acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said in October about Donald Trump’s Ukraine quid pro quo. “There’s going to be political influence in foreign policy.” Hours later, under pressure, he walked it back in a statement attacking the media and denying that he said what he said.

Guess which of these accounts Trump’s impeachment team has decided to focus on? What Mulvaney said of his own accord, or the careful statement presumably written by the official White House ass-covering committee?

Yeah, obviously the second one. Two members of Trump’s defense team made that effort during Wednesday’s question-and-answer period. According to Patrick Philbin, “it’s been clear in the record since that press conference that what he was saying was garbled and or misunderstood” and “He immediately clarified, and said on that day, quote, The president never told me to withhold any money until the Ukrainians did anything related to the server. End quote.” Hearing that, you might think that Mulvaney immediately clarified in the same press conference, realizing as he spoke that he was coming across wrong and correcting himself on the fly. He did not. The line Philbin quotes as coming “immediately” was in the statement later the same day. 

But more importantly, Mulvaney was not “garbled.” He was crystal clear. “There’s going to be political influence in foreign policy” and there was “no question” that Trump had, in blocking the aid to Ukraine, mentioned his conspiracy theory about Ukraine and 2016.

Trump defense lawyer Mike Purpura also read out Mulvaney’s walk-back statement on Wednesday, in response to a softball question from Republican Sen. Richard Burr. Because Mulvaney’s brash honesty in his original press conference is really inconvenient for Republicans hoping their cover-up won’t look too obvious. So sad for them that the cover-up is right out in the open and everyone sees it.

Adam Schiff Claims ‘I Don’t Know Who the Whistleblower Is’

Posted on by Guest Author

On Wednesday, House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff insisted that he did not know the identity of the so-called “whistleblower” who filed the original complaint about President Donald Trump that led to the impeachment trial.

‘I don’t know who the whistleblower is’

“First of all, I don’t know who the whistleblower is, I haven’t met them or communicated with them in any way,” Schiff said Wednesday during the Senate impeachment trial.

What Schiff failed to mention was that the “whistleblower” approached a House Intelligence Committee aide with supposed details about Trump’s phone call with Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

RELATED: Chris Wallace Hosts Republican Will Hurd of Texas, Who Breaks with GOP on Whistleblower Identity

The New York Times reported that a Schiff committee staffer told the “whistleblower” to meet with the inspector general and file a whistleblower complaint.

Schiff Denies His Staff Did Anything to Help Whistleblower

Yet Schiff is still denying that any member of his staff did anything to help the “whistleblower.”

“The committee staff did not write the complaint or coach the whistleblower what to put in the complaint,” Schiff said.

Schiff condemned what he called a “conspiracy theory” that someone on his committee staff allegedly “colluded” with the whistleblower to craft a complaint that launched the impeachment investigation.

A spokesman for Schiff told the NYT that the whistleblower, “contacted the committee for guidance on how to report possible wrongdoing within the jurisdiction of the intelligence community.”

Schiff said his staff has shown “complete professionalism,” adding that members of his staff had become subject to threats on social media thanks to “smears” committed by President Trump and his allies.

Schiff Vowed Not to Reveal Identity

Schiff vowed he would not do anything to reveal or endanger the identity of the “whistleblower” as the trial continues.

Republican Congresswoman Elise Stefanik of New York accused Schiff on Twitter of lying about the “whistleblower.”

“Stunning that Adam Schiff lies to millions of Americans when he says he doesn’t know the identity of the whistleblower,” she wrote. “He absolutely knows the identity of the whistleblower because he coordinated with the individual before the whistleblower’s complaint! His staff helped write it!”

RELATED: ‘This Ain’t Over’: Doug Collins Challenges Schiff To Testify About Whistleblower

Many Republicans have called for the “whistleblower” to testify as part of the impeachment process, with Schiff repeatedly refusing at each turn.

On Wednesday, Schiff told the Senate that the “whistleblower” testifying was no longer relevant because President Trump released the transcript of the call.

“There’s no need for that whistleblower any more except to further endanger that person’s life,” Schiff said.

The post Adam Schiff Claims ‘I Don’t Know Who the Whistleblower Is’ appeared first on The Political Insider.

#WeWantWitnesses takes off on Twitter as Americans demand justice

Posted on by Walter Einenkel

As the Senate impeachment trial of Donald Trump continues, the Republican Party, behind Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, continues to work a cover-up. Americans everywhere are fed up with the transparent abuses of power of the conservative-led Senate, and #WeWantWitnesses has begun to trend on social media.

x

x

And people are taking this opportunity to make those calls ...

x

… and to organize people on the ground.

x

x

“Do your job.”

x

And the theatricality resulting from McConnell’s creation of a fiction to hide the facts increases.

x

And while all of this is going on, the White House, after saying that John Bolton’s book didn’t matter, is making a legal play because … it seems to matter.

x

And a reminder: Donald Trump is guilty.

x

Drip, drip, drip: Top House Democrat reveals Bolton expressed deep concern about Trump, Ukraine

Posted on by Kerry Eleveld

As Senate Republicans attempt to recover from their tailspin in arguments over calling former national security adviser John Bolton to testify in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump, new information emerged Wednesday directly refuting Trump's assertion that Bolton never expressed concern about his Ukraine policy at the time.

In a statement Wednesday, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Eliot Engel relayed that Bolton "strongly implied" in a Sept. 23 phone call with him that Trump's ouster of U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch was improper. “On that call, Ambassador Bolton suggested to me — unprompted — that the committee look into the recall of Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch,” Engel said of a phone call between the two men. "He strongly implied that something improper had occurred around her removal as our top diplomat in Kyiv.”

In an attempt to dismiss Bolton's bombshell book excerpts, Trump tweeted Tuesday night that Bolton had said "NOTHING" about his Ukraine policy when Bolton was ousted from the White House last September. "Why didn’t John Bolton complain about this 'nonsense' a long time ago," Trump tweeted. Well, good news, Trump! He did. In fact, Bolton's use of the word "improper" implies that he may have even wondered whether Trump had done something illegal. 

Engel said he had contacted Bolton following his departure from the White House to thank him for his service when Bolton offered the information about Yovanovitch unsolicited. Engel added that he didn't speak publicly about Bolton's disclosure at the time, although he did share the information with his colleagues who were running investigations of Trump. "It was one of the reasons we wished to hear from Ambassador Bolton, under oath, in a formal setting," Engel said. Of course, Bolton refused that invitation at the time.

Now, however, Bolton has offered to testify under oath if subpoenaed by the Senate, leaving Senate Republicans in quite the bind after leaked excerpts of his book revealed that Trump told him directly that he wanted aid withheld from Ukraine until its officials undertook the investigations he wanted.

As Engel noted, Bolton has made clear that he has "more to say on the issue," and he deserves the chance to say it, particularly since Trump has smeared his account. "It's telling that, of all people, John Bolton is now the target of right-wing ire," Engel said, adding that the smears have only heightened the need to hear his testimony. 

Moscow Mitch’s 2020 campaign fund helped out by Trump’s impeachment defense team

Posted on by Joan McCarter

You can't make this degree of corruption up. Moscow Mitch McConnell, the guy who has promised again and again that he is working with Donald Trump's impeachment lawyers to make sure that Trump will not be convicted and removed from office, has gotten campaign donations from those lawyers. This year. For his 2020 reelection campaign.

The Louisville Courier Journal reviewed campaign finance data for McConnell, finding that Ken Starr gave the maximum allowed, $2,800, on July 31, 2019. He's been a donor to every one of McConnell's campaigns since 2020. McConnell's gotten two separate donations from Robert Ray for a total of $5,600. Those were on Sept. 30, 2019, 12 days after The Washington Post reported on the whistleblower report that Trump was withholding aid to Ukraine until the country agreed to announce an investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden.

McConnell's campaign blew off the glaring appearance of corruption in the transaction, taking a swipe at House Democrats. "The absence of any adequate arguments by House impeachment managers seems to be playing a pretty meaningful role however," McConnell's campaign manager Kevin Golden said. Clearly the money isn't a bribe for McConnell to ensure Trump's acquittal, because that's been a foregone conclusion from the get-go. Moscow Mitch promised it. So it must be a reward.

It's time to end McConnell's destructive stranglehold on the republic. Please give $1 to our nominee fund to help Democrats and end McConnell's career as Senate majority leader.

America has spoken: A fair impeachment hearing requires relevant witnesses

Posted on by Joan McCarter

As Senate Republicans try to figure out a way to deal with the impeachment witness issue, perhaps how the American public—the people they represent—can help clarify. Because what they say, even among Republican voters, is that you can't have a trial without witnesses. They've been saying that since before the John Bolton bombshell that he has firsthand knowledge that Trump did the abuse of power. Let's just go through the numbers of voters saying witnesses should testify:

Quinnipiac (1/28): 75% overall; 49% of Republicans, and 75% of independents Quinnipiac (1/13): On whether Bolton specifically should testify—66% say yes; 39% of Republicans, 71% of independents Monmouth, (1/21): 80% support witnesses (not broken down clearly by party) Reuters, (1/22): 72% want witnesses, including 69% of Republicans CNN, (1/20): 69% want new witnesses, including 48% of Republicans AP/NORC (1/22): 68% want witnesses; including 36% Republicans ABC-WaPo 71 (1/24): 66% overall; 45% of Republicans, 65% of independents

Again, the majority of these are from before the Bolton bombshell, including a poll released from Navigator research Tuesday that had 82% of voters wanting to hear specifically from Bolton. That included 70% of Republicans, a number that would undoubtedly decline now that they know what Bolton would like say. Trials are supposed to have witnesses, that's fundamental to our system of justice. Everyone knows that. Without relevant witnesses, it's a cover up. Everyone knows that, including Senate Republicans however much they'll argue otherwise.

Trump Blasts Bolton Over ‘Nasty’ and ‘Untrue’ Book

Posted on by Guest Author

On Wednesday, President Trump blasted John Bolton, calling his former national security adviser’s upcoming book that reportedly reveals details about the Ukraine affair at the center of the president’s impeachment “nasty” and “untrue.”

Trump said Bolton “begged” him for a job and that his former top aide made “mistakes of judgment” during his time at the White House, citing a television appearance in April 2018 in which Bolton said the administration was considering the “Libya model” for North Korea regarding negotiations over halting nuclear weapons development.

RELATED: Top Republican Leader Sends Stern Message to GOP Senators Thinking About Caving To Democrats On Impeachment

‘If I listened to him, we would be in World War Six by now’

Trump said Bolton was “fired because, frankly, if I listened to him, we would be in World War Six by now.”

Trump wondered why Bolton would write a book about his tenure “IMMEDIATELY” after his firing, calling it “nasty & untrue.”

These tweets come in the wake of a report by The New York Times that Bolton wrote in his upcoming book that Trump told him he wanted to continue to suspend U.S. aid to Ukraine until the country agreed to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden.

Trump has repeatedly denied Bolton’s accusation, as have allies of the president who continue to question Bolton’s credibility and motives.

Will Bolton Take the Stand?

Bolton’s revelations have had an impact on the ongoing Senate impeachment trial, raising pressure on Republicans to support calling him as a witness, something the White House would like to avoid.

The Hill reports, “The excerpt contradicts a key part of Trump’s defense — namely that he never tied security assistance for Ukraine to investigations, something House impeachment managers have alleged.”

“Trump’s defense attorneys addressed the issue during their opening arguments on Monday and Tuesday, with the president’s personal attorney Jay Sekulow citing Trump’s denial and urging senators to disregard the reported details of the manuscript by calling it ‘inadmissible,” noted The Hill. “Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz also argued Monday evening that even if Bolton’s reported account were true, the allegations would not rise to the level of an impeachable offense.”

Trump to GOP: Don’t Get Played By Democrats

Trump tweeted about Bolton and the impeachment trial a few times late night on Tuesday and into Wednesday morning.

“Why didn’t John Bolton complain about this ‘nonsense’ a long time ago, when he was very publicly terminated. He said, not that it matters, NOTHING!” Trump wrote.

RELATED: John Bolton To Write Book About Trump Administration: Report

Trump continued, “Remember Republicans, the Democrats already had 17 witnesses, we were given NONE! Witnesses are up to the House, not up to the Senate,” the president tweeted. “Don’t let the Dems play you!”

Will Republicans let the Dems “play” them?

Stay tuned.

The post Trump Blasts Bolton Over ‘Nasty’ and ‘Untrue’ Book appeared first on The Political Insider.