Yovanovitch back in the news so soon after testifying

Ann

But this time, Yovanovitch (appointed by Obama) potentially directed the State Department in Ukraine to monitor conservative journalists, public figures, and others tied to Trump. Maybe Trump was right, yet again, when he said she was "bad news". The left media couldn't speak enough about her integrity in recent days!

"For Dr. Sebastian Gorka, this appears to be the last straw. The Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign and now others in the conservative movement may be under illegal surveillance as well.

"Not only did Obama’s CIA and FBI illegally surveil the Trump campaign and our White House, we now find out his Ukrainian ambassador had leading conservative names spied upon too," Gorka told Townhall. "The victims of Obama’s latest conspiracy are considering a group legal action action Obama and his accomplices.""

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/10/14/judicial-watch-believes-the-state-dept-spied-on-conservative-journalists-and-trum-n2554711

SaveComment102Like1
Comments (102)
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Joaniepoanie

townhall....nope!

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

Right or left, I think what matters is if the info is true, don't you?

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
soupgirl53

There is a high probability that the information is not accurate. Just how does one "potentially" direct something? It is a hedging word and a clue that the rest of the story is a fabrication.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

I put "potentially" because it's still a new and developing story. I heard it reported on Fox News tonight. I'll continue to post more info as the story develops more fully.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Eat Well

We’ll be waiting with bated breath.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
soupgirl53

I doubt it. Judicial Watch is good when it comes to announcing their fishing expeditions but if they turn up nothing, you'll not hear another word about it from Judicial Watch.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
cattyles

More lame sliming of good people because you can’t defend the Mad King. Even he knows his time is up. He’s busted.

12 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Eat Well

So, how about that crazy letter?

7 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

There it is again...that word in all the RW reports that are designed to attack the messenger as they can't defend the president. That word is, "potentially".

Here's the right decrying "hearsay" testimony from the WB despite the fact that it is completely backed up by testimony of other witnesses and *the information released by the WH itself*!

But when it comes to rw reports attacking the witnesses? Nonsourced, with no evidence, just "potential" smearing of the witness...no problem. It must all be true as it agrees with their preconceived notions. The president can't do anything wrong, so it's all part of the witch hunt deep state conspiracy.

Stop attacking the many, many messengers who have come forward about trump's illegal and inappropriate behavior and just listen to what they say. They are putting themselves at great risk to get the truth out for the sake of the country. They have *nothing* to gain and *everything* to lose by doing so.


7 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Nicole (CO Z5b)(5b)

Oh dear, Yovanovitch has been with the State Department over 30 years...long before Obama appointed her, wouldn't you agree Ann?

7 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Conspiracy theories from these fraud media are one of the reasons so many are still enraptured with trump as if he is some poor victim of the left.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

Nicole (CO Z5b)(5b)

Oh dear, Yovanovitch has been with the State Department over 30 years...long before Obama appointed her, wouldn't you agree Ann?

Not in dispute. Ann posted: But this time, Yovanovitch (appointed by Obama) potentially directed the State Department in Ukraine to monitor conservative journalists, public figures, and others tied to Trump.

That is true. Yovanovitch was appointed ambassador to Ukraine by Obama:

Yovanovitch was appointed by then-President Barack Obama in 2016 https://www.npr.org/2019/10/11/769049841/fired-u-s-ukraine-ambassador-arrives-on-capitol-hill-to-testify-in-impeachment-p

It doesn't matter what she did for the State Department prior to that appointment, but here you go:

Yovanovitch joined the Foreign Service in 1986. Her early assignments included postings in Ottawa, Moscow, London, and Mogadishu. But with her educational background, she began to focus on Russia and its neighbors. She was deputy director of the State Department’s Russian desk from 1998 to 2000. The following year, she was sent to Kiev, Ukraine, as Deputy Chief of Mission in the embassy there.

She returned to Washington in 2004 as senior adviser to the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. Yovanovitch was named an ambassador for the first time the following year, when she took over the U.S. embassy in Kyrgyzstan, which served as a vital base in the U.S. war in Afghanistan.

In 2008, Yovanovitch was nominated to be ambassador to Armenia. She was confirmed by the Senate, but not before going through hard questioning on why she wouldn’t use the term “genocide” to refer to the killing by Turkey of 1.5 million Armenians from 1915 to 1917.

http://www.allgov.com/news/appointments-and-resignations/us-ambassador-to-ukraine-who-is-marie-yovanovitch-160911?news=859458

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Do you think Fox reported the letter?

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

It looks like many of you think this is fake news. Is that correct?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

"...Ukraine to monitor conservative journalists, public figures, and others..."

Were they monitored **because*** they were **conservative journalists or was there there something concerning about them?

Were they monitored **because*** they were connected to Trump or was there there something concerning about them (motives, other connections, etc).

And, Gorka's connection to Nazis (actual ones) did (does?) warrant checking out.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

Don't think it's about thinking all of it fake.

It's the attempt to label the work of previous US administrations and of many European nations to work with Ukraine to root out corruption as being anti-Trump.

It's about the blatant attempt to label this anti-corruption work as evil.


3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

He's Tweeting again.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
linaria_gw(zone 7 (about))

Gorka - the Xpert, master of knowledge and integrity



https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/10/sebastian-gorka-former-trump-adviser-media-figure/  (so, the linked article is somewhat opinionated but a fun read)

Sebastian Gorka, Fish-Oil Salesman

By Kyle Smith



October 1, 2019 6:30 AM

The Hungarian-British-American national-security mandarin fell from grace, and just keeps falling.

When Lionel Trilling said, in 1950,
that the conservative impulse manifests itself in “irritable mental
gestures which seek to resemble ideas,” he had no idea just how
irritable some conservatives might become. Fast-forward to July of 2019,
when former presidential adviser Sebastian Gorka was a guest at a Rose
Garden ceremony in the White House. Hearing some clownish remarks among
the peanut gallery by Playboy White House reporter Brian Karem, Gorka walked up to Karem to yell, “You’re a punk! You’re not a journalist; you’re a punk!”

Gorka’s gesture was a bit overstated; prior to this viral (like meningitis) moment, few Americans would have guessed that The Lonely Wanker’s Illustrated Monthly
even employed a White House correspondent. Hamlet praised those who
“find quarrel in a straw / When honor’s at the stake.” Gorka can find
quarrel in a tweet, or a joke wafting over from the press pen, or a
Jonah Goldberg wisecrack, but like Hamlet he fights with his lips, which
flap endlessly and with decreasing consequence. His sword remains
sheathed, his dueling pistols locked away, his fists restful, though
doubtless balled up for much of each day. Irritable is the word.

Thing is, Gorka first gained admittance to White House grounds as one
of the ideas chaps, not one of the irritability specialists.
Irritability is plentiful; you can find it in any saloon or comments
section. Irritability-wise, we’re in an age of plenty. Irritability
seeks out the most irritable TV news-channel personalities for succor,
gets extra irritated, and goes looking for people to follow-on irritate
on social media. Gorka is the embodiment of all this, our champion
jouster on the lists of stupidity. Brian Karem, whoever you are, you got
PWNED, son! ...

---

and so on

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Andie

So much grasping at straws.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

As soon as I saw Gorka I was suspect. They is much more reason to think this fake than fact. Seems to me if Gorka " knew" this then the Republicans on the Committee would "know" this yet they wasn't one peep of this from them.

This is an all too familiar MO. Attack the person not the substance of the argument. It happens over and over when anyone speaks poorly of Trump.

The only arguments we here from Trump and his supporters are against process and people, they entirely avoid any discussion about the facts or the substance.

Not one word from any of them on the testimony over the last three days, not one word.....then boom a smear campaign from FOX .

6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jama7(6)

Gorka??? You jest. It is NO news Ann. It's the ranting of a known conspiracy theorist and now pill salesman whose pill ad looks like an SNL preview.

This man of yours is a raving lunatic. What's your take on this ridiculous letter to Erdogan that he's so proud of? And then he posts that picture of the meeting yesterday with Pelosi thinking it makes him look strong? THIS is the level of judgement that's guiding our foreign policy......

Town Hall....please.


4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jama7(6)

Odd.....can't find anything about Gorka even on Fox News. Apparently even they don't acknowledge his crap.

But here's an example of how Fox constantly covers for Trump in every little way, day in day out. Typically, he doesn't normally get much right language wise and yesterday he called Pelosi a "third GRADE politician." Knowing it is just one more thing that shows what an idiot he is Fox changes it to what it SHOULD be: "Third RATE politician."

Just another lie giving cover.



Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Not one word on the content of the article.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

There is no content in the article to comment on...only supposition and hot air. Provide some evidence or facts or reporting from a reliable source, or perhaps a whistleblower to say she did something wrong.

Rather, even her boss as she was being relocated in the state dept said she did nothing wrong. Rather she was moved out as she would not tolerate the illegal extortion scheme trump & co wanted to foist on the ukrainians.

7 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
barncatz

Maybe Trump was right, yet again, when he said she was "bad news". [ bolding added]

You need ID to buy groceries. Trump was right, yet again.

And whatever his opinion of her, Trump's little gossip session, during which he denigrated an American official to a non- American, yet again, was a violation of his oath of office.....where is his loyalty to our system of government?



2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

The gist is Trump pals around with mobsters then complains when he gets caught with his pants down.

It isn’t about Obama or anyone else spying. It is about the mob not being able to operate unbeknownst to the law anymore.


3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

only supposition and hot air. Provide some evidence or facts or
reporting from a reliable source

lol, If we hold the left to that standard, we'll never hear from them again. :)

6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
barncatz

This article "Rudy Guliani's Twitter Feed Is A Boomer Conspiracy Theory xxxxxxxx" is worth reading. During the "Mpls Rally Spitting" thread, someone posted that Congresswoman Omar had attended the rally. I searched and couldn't find any reference to that, thought about interacting on it, and decided not to.

This article mentions the extreme right wing accounts Guliani follows and, in passing, that they were the source of this Omar lie:

Taken together, the accounts circle around a few popular right-wing targets: the Clintons, the Obamas, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN). Several accounts Giuliani follows recently claimed, without any proof, that Omar had donned a disguise to take part in a gathering of left-wing antifascist activists. Another promoted a long-discredited idea that a photograph proves Omar attended a terrorist training camp (in fact, the picture was taken years before Omar was even born). [Emphasis added]


https://www.thedailybeast.com/rudy-giulianis-twitter-feed-is-a-boomer-conspiracy-theory-shtshow?ref=home

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
margaux

What exactly did she ask them to do? A Google search? My word!! Lock her up!!!!!!

"Judicial Watch has obtained information indicating Yovanovitch may have violated laws and government regulations by ordering subordinates to target certain U.S. persons using State Department resources," the watchdog group said in a press release. "Yovanovitch reportedly ordered monitoring keyed to the following search terms: Biden, Giuliani, Soros and Yovanovitch."

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

lurker111

only supposition and hot air. Provide some evidence or facts or
reporting from a reliable source

lol, If we hold the left to that standard, we'll never hear from them again. :)

What standards? With today's prog leftists, that is sadly true^^^! How I long for the days of true, honorable Democrats. Ah well. They're not fashionable anymore, let along PC. They now pretend (I hope they're pretending) to believe the trending drivel. What a shame. Maybe the real, true-blue dems will make a comeback, I would welcome that.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
queenmargo

Maybe the real, true-blue dems will make a comeback, I would welcome that.

If they try to make a comeback after Trump, I would never trust them.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

Hey, this is a more reliable story than the so called WB. In this case we actually have a real person. We have what Dems are trying to call an impeachment process and the WB at the basis of the entire process never needs to testify. You've just got to love that one. I'd say, clearly, no politics are being played there!

But, we do get testimony from Yovanovitch, who apparently, was just a hard working dedicated, full of integrity, non-partisan person who was doing an excellent job:))))) Yup, she was simply a dedicated worker with only good intentions regarding the new administration - just like any non-partisan professional would be. OR, was she "bad news"? Trump and those Trump instincts.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

"The only arguments we here from Trump and his supporters are against process and people, they entirely avoid any discussion about the facts or the substance.

Not one word from any of them on the testimony over the last three days, not one word.....then boom a smear campaign from FOX ."

Whoa, I love so much about this. The process (behind closed doors, in secret, and wholly one sided), and the people (highly partisan individuals dedicated to the "get Trump somehow" since before he even took office goal) - I simply can't imagine anyone questioning this process or these people (after all, who would ever question an upstanding Representative like Schiff:). The substance and facts were released by the "accused" immediately. Not much to talk about there. The only possible conversation could be whether it even approaches an impeachable offence (and that conversation was over after a few days with two varying views). But that never was the goal. The goal was to start the process over anything at all and then see if the Dems could somehow trigger or trap the president, since previous nearly identical attempts have thus far failed.

Then, even better - "Not one word from any of them on the testimony over the last three days". The behind closed doors, secret, tactically leaked out of context snippets, testimony. Lots to discuss there with this open, transparent, fair, public testimony! No one can discuss the testimony because no one has any clue what is being said in this sleazy secret game.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

It is obvious a Trump is incompetent as well as unqualified to be President. Reading his letter he would never have passed an interview in a service industry let alone a job in government.

If he doesn’t have dementia he is of such low intelligence he needs to be guarded every moment. Obviously he is street smart. Now I understand why his dad supported him until he died.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

"Provide some evidence or facts or reporting from a reliable source, or perhaps a whistleblower to say she did something wrong."

Oh, I love this too. Provide a whistleblower - Ummmm, really? This whole "impeachment" started with one, wait - two, wait - several, WBs and none of them have yet to make an appearance! Sure, you want a WB - okay - I'll invent an entire room full. There are, uh, 7 of them. Is that sufficient?

ETA: I forgot the most important part about these 7. They all fear for their lives, so please, respect that, and just take my word for it. Really, I've talked to them all and they are all non-partisan and highly credible - BUT we must protect their safety. You certainly understand that, don't you?

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Ann, there are Republicans on the committees. It isn’t like they are shut out. The only ones who can’t get in are the troublemakers from the GOP who want to disrupt and delay. The process is lawful and respectful to the people testifying.

Remember, Trump supplied his summary which is evidence and he got on national TV and incriminated himself.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
soupgirl53

The Republicans that tried to barge in were in violation of the committee's rules. Only members of the committee, their staff and staff attorneys are allowed to attend. The Republicans who tried to crash were not members of the committee and, of course, were looking for some attention.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

The GOP tries to portray that everything is secret and they have no idea what is going on. That is a lie and nothing but political fodder for the ones who drink the koolaid.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

"Remember, Trump supplied his summary which is evidence and he got on national TV and incriminated himself."

Yes, this is what we have. The transparency Trump himself provided immediately. If that's what you consider impeachable and Trump has indeed committed a crime and/or impeachable offense - and the House and Senate agree, Trump will be removed from office. But, good luck with using Dem abuse of power to try to trap Trump into a yet to be committed crime. It didn't work last time and I don't expect it will work this time. But, it's most certainly a wasteful and expensive process each time we go around this block unnecessarily. There is a way that is fair and democratic and it's not too far off. Maybe Dems ought to try the old fashioned method of removing a president - win the election.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
cattyles

Branch out. Read some other sources.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Trump also produced his very stunning letter to Erdogan thinking it made him look tough. Did it? And the picture of Pelosi? That made him look tough he thought. That kind of judgement is incompetent to say the least. He would be better off keeping his mouth shut and not proving how stupid he really is.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
HU9999

A conspiracy theory spun by a known bias website is more reliable than a whistleblower who went through the proper channels to make their complaint.

When this is the prevalent thinking of Trump supporters, it is not possible to have a rational fact based conversation with them.

They believe what they want to believe. Facts do not matter. It's why they are Trump supporters.

6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

I heard that multiple European countries were working to uncover corruption in Ukraine - at least up until recently.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

This was an interesting statement from Sonland today. I think I'll believe him over Gorka.


"I worked with Ambassador Yovanovitch personally during my first official visit to Ukraine in February 2019, and I found her to be an excellent diplomat with a deep command of Ukrainian internal dynamics, the U.S.-Ukraine relationship, and associated regional issues. She was a delight to work with during our visit to Odessa, Ukraine. I was never a part of any campaign to disparage or dislodge her, and I regretted her departure."

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Stan Areted

Ann

"The only arguments we here from Trump and his supporters are against process and people, they entirely avoid any discussion about the facts or the substance.

Not one word from any of them on the testimony over the last three days, not one word.....then boom a smear campaign from FOX ."

Whoa, I love so much about this. The process (behind closed doors, in secret, and wholly one sided), and the people (highly partisan individuals dedicated to the "get Trump somehow" since before he even took office goal) - I simply can't imagine anyone questioning this process or these people (after all, who would ever question an upstanding Representative like Schiff:). The substance and facts were released by the "accused" immediately. Not much to talk about there. The only possible conversation could be whether it even approaches an impeachable offence (and that conversation was over after a few days with two varying views). But that never was the goal. The goal was to start the process over anything at all and then see if the Dems could somehow trigger or trap the president, since previous nearly identical attempts have thus far failed.

Then, even better - "Not one word from any of them on the testimony over the last three days". The behind closed doors, secret, tactically leaked out of context snippets, testimony. Lots to discuss there with this open, transparent, fair, public testimony! No one can discuss the testimony because no one has any clue what is being said in this sleazy secret game.

Thank you, Ann, for dispelling the narrative and telling the truth.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
cattyles

Trump is busted. He’s a criminal. The messengers are not the enemy.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Stan Areted

Thar thar!

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Delilah66

"this sleazy secret game..." in conformance with the Constitution. Outrage is misspent.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Is Trump on Fifth Ave yet?

The sleazy secret game Giuliani and Trump were playing is more to the point.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

I think Mulvaney has now definitely placed Trump on Fifth Avenue.

Is Mulvaney counting on a presidential pardon, or too ignorant to answer the reporters' questions without (metaphorically) shouting "Guilty, guilty, guilty."

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

There is so much wrong with Ann's statement, repeated by Stan, that I barely know where to start.

The process (behind closed doors, in secret, and wholly one sided)

a) it is not a one-sided process at all. The gop in the committee are given the same amount of time to question the witnesses as the dems are.

The substance and facts were released by the "accused" immediately

b) the substance and facts were *not* released by the accused immediately. All we have in the public record are notes of a single phone call and *not* a transcript nor access to other calls. Moreover, the phone call as released made references to other meetings with giuliani and others and we have no evidence of the substance of those meetings yet. However, what was released by the WH also demonstrates illegal activity on the part of the president, and clear evidence that his staffers recognized it as they were then burying the evidence of the call in the super secret servers rather than risk it being made public. They demonstrated a consciousness of guilt.

The only possible conversation could be whether it even approaches an impeachable offence [sic]

c) No, this is an impeachment inquiry which must be done to gather the facts first before a determination can be made as to whether the actions taken by the president rise to an impeachable offense. I believe it does as do many others. He extorted a foreign government, subverting US policy and congressional will for personal gain. That is illegal.

...the Dems could somehow trigger or trap the president...

d) there is absolutely no need to trigger or trap the pres...he is impeaching himself on a regular basis with his own words and actions. The only way this is a *trap* is if one considers a trap to be exposing the truth of what happened to the sunlight of an investigation.

"Not one word from any of them on the testimony over the last three days". The behind closed doors, secret, tactically leaked out of context snippets, testimony.

e) there is a most important reason why there is so much secrecy around this investigation...same reason as there was so much secrecy around the Mueller investigation. The point is, just as during grand jury testimony, what is said is not to be made public at all as a way of preventing both the other witnesses from coordinating their testimony and manufacture lies to cover up the truth. It is also to keep the target of the investigation in the dark about what was said so that he can't devise and manufacture alibis and lies or attempt to tamper with witnesses and their statements. You see there is a fundamental difference between what's going on now about ukraine with what went on with the Mueller investigation. Mueller was able to run his own investigation in secret, digging into documents and interviewing witnesses without any input from the target of the investigation or coordination among witnesses. That's how an investigation should be run. But in this case, there is no Mueller special counsel running the investigation, so the house committee must play that role, and in so doing, need to keep everything under wraps as much as possible for now as a way of getting at the truthfulness of witnesses and testimony.

8 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

^^^^^ Geee you are very good at explaining.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Mulvaney already walked back the quid pro quo. All those mouths agape must have attacked him as soon as he got off the podium. These people are running America. No wonder we look so stupid on the world stage.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
HU9999

Annie - a million thanks. I cannot like your post enough. The patience you show in dispelling the untruths told here every day is very admirable. And, yes ubro is correct. You have a talent to get to the salient points without all the fluff. Kudos.

Unfortunately, the ones that should read it won't, and if they do they won't believe it because it's not what Fox and Trump tell them. But it's important to do it anyway.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Wants to Grow

Hi Annie,

Until there is an authorization vote to impeach, Minority GOP members are not permitted to participate in Due Process. How is this not one-sided?

How is storing a transcript of a call with a foreign leader on a government server considered a demonstration of consciousness of guilt? Was the server located offsite in a private bathroom? And what's up with the "thought police" accusation?

As for gathering facts, we've already seen how Shifty Schiff handles facts, when he made up his own facts to enter into the congressional record from his "parody".

Shifty Schiff's soviet styled justice most certainly needs some sunlight and censuring.

Why is there an insistence by Democrats that their baseless investigations are being conducted like a Grand Jury trial? When has there ever been leaks of testimony from a Grand Jury trial?

As I previously posted, this political theater is the Democratic Party's 2020 campaign.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Nicole (CO Z5b)(5b)

Thank you Annie, you have the patience of a saint and a mind as sharp as a knife. I echo HU9999's sentiments.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

How is storing a transcript of a call with a foreign leader on a government server considered a demonstration of consciousness of guilt? Was the server located offsite in a private bathroom? And what's up with the "thought police" accusation?

I thought it was because the server they used was for confidential phone calls that related to national security. By using this server, for what they deemed a 'perfect' call with no criminal intent, it begs the question, why would you need the server for a call that was harmless?

Has anyone had access to that call other than the watered down transcript version?

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Carro

WTG, they're just parroting the pablum the Democrats are putting out there-that they simply can't have witnesses hearing testimony. But that supposes leaks--figures. In any deposition, this would not stand.


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
barncatz

Do you believe Mark Meadows?

Meadows, one of Trump’s staunchest allies, said each side has been allowed an unlimited amount of questions they can ask of witnesses.

[Then the questions begin to fly, largely from the expert staff hired by lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee and other panels participating in the probe. Each side gets an equal amount of questions, as dictated by long-standing House rules guiding these interviews.]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/republicans-criticize-house-impeachment-process--while-fully-participating-in-probe/2019/10/16/9baf01dc-f037-11e9-89eb-ec56cd414732_story.html


Yes, hiding the phone record in a server not where other presidential calls are stored, and one reserved for absolute secrecy, with limited access by White House officials, demonstrates consciousness of guilt, that is, it is analagous to your off site bathroom. The knowledge that the conversation needed to be kept secret because it would be damaging if released is demonstrated by hiding it.

Schiff should not have paraphrased the conversation but since everyone had the real conversation, it was more humiliating than misleading.

You object to the secrecy, which is absolutely how initial investigations are run, and also object when the witnesses release their opening statements. I take it your objection is the release does not accurately convey the rest of the testimony. That is true. Most of the testimony is secret, like a Grand Jury. The parts that have been released by the witnesses are damaging to Trump's White House of Chaos. Get over it, as Mick Mulvaney would say.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Carro

"Like a grand jury". It's not. It's nothing. It's Nancy making up the rules as she goes.

Pfft...nothing leaked is remotely damaging to Trump or going to get him impeached. No crimes.


Get a Clinton-level offense and then maybe we'll take this seriously.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Do you folk televise grand jury testimony? Do you televise witness depositions? This is an inquiry to establish whether there are facts to go forward wth an impeachment....it' s not Judge Judy.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Eat Well

I agree Chase. Trump apologists are just parroting the talking heads. All have little or no idea abut what is going on in committees and behind closed doors. Nor should they.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Wants to Grow

Hi ubro, Trump is using the SAME procedures for storing on a separate server as Obama. Why is this only a problem for Trump?

Hi barncatz, How generous to allow Republicans to question the Democrats' witnesses. When will the Republicans be permitted to include their own witnesses and general counsel on behalf of the accused?

I will never get over this fascist and communistic abuse of American justice. Please note, I am not alone with these sentiments. Perhaps we will see true justice served next November.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

Trump is using the SAME procedures for storing on a separate server as Obama.

Not true.

The separate server is used for CLASSIFIED documents, which the memo notes of the telephone conversation were not.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

When will the Republicans be permitted to include their own witnesses and general counsel on behalf of the accused?

The actual trial of Trump, should the House draw up Articles of Impeachment, takes place in the Senate.


1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
margaux

Hi barncatz, How generous to allow Republicans to question the Democrats' witnesses. When will the Republicans be permitted to include their own witnesses and general counsel on behalf of the accused?

Do the Republicans have witnesses to Trump's phone call with Zelensky that the Democrats aren't interested in hearing from? Who are these witnesses who want to come forward but the Dems are blocking them from testifying?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

I agree that having the house do the investigation is not optimal. But that is what we're left with. This case should have a special counsel do the investigation separate and apart from the justice dept and free from interference from the wh and anyone else, done in an objective, impartial manner, but that's not going to happen. There is no way that barr would ever appoint an investigator. He was hired *specifically* by trump to stop the mueller investigation. No way would he open another.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-and-when-the-white-house-and-the-justice-department-learned-of-the-whistleblower-complaint-2019-09-30

The wb initially reported concerns to the CIA which then alerted the DoJ and the WH who then proceeded to suppress info about the phone call. So barr, rather than do the right thing to protect and defend the Constitution, instead protected the president. This is consistent with the WH's insistence that no one in the WH or outside of it cooperate with the congressional investigation...in and of itself an obstruction of justice and another feather in the quiver of impeachment.

So with no one else to investigate the very "urgent and credible" charges by the wb, which have only been supported by the evidence *released by the wh*, it has been left to the house to run the investigation themselves.

Like it or not, the dems are in charge of the house, and they are using their power to keep the investigation focused on the criminal behavior of the president and his minions, and not let it be diverted by the gop to investigating the investigators -- their only defense as they can't defend against the facts being revealed about trump's criminal behavior: diverting funds approved by congress to extort a foreign government for personal political gain. That is illegal.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

Thanks for the kind words, ubro, hu9999 and nicole. Nice of you to say.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
cattyles

Chain yanking. It was explained on another thread yesterday.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

Re the server, just because obama used the server doesn't make it right or wrong. Rather the server is super secret to serve a specific purpose...for storing the absolutely most tippy top secret documents. Storing material there that is not secret or even classified is a cover-up.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

"Do you folk televise grand jury testimony? Do you televise witness depositions? This is an inquiry to establish whether there are facts to go forward wth an impeachment....it' s not Judge Judy."

We folk televise impeachment proceedings for hours and hours and hours. Well, not this time:)

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

Not right now because this is *not* an impeachment...not yet. It is an *investigation* to determine *if* there are sufficient facts in evidence to impeach the president and what those articles of impeachment might be should it get that far.

Mueller did not hold public hearings during his investigation. The house is now trying to gather evidence, similar to what mueller did, and they've expressed their reasons why the depositions they are now gathering need to be private.

6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

None of us are alone in "this".

I guess you can take "opinion on Trump's success as president" as "this".

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

"Until there is an authorization vote to impeach, Minority GOP members are not permitted to participate in Due Process. How is this not one-sided?"

From all the sources I have checked - this description is not true. It is being repeated frequently but that doesn't make it so.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Izzy Mn(4)

When I read Annie's post it reminded me that before the last election the House majority was Republican. I doubt this inquiry would be taken place if the Speaker of the House were a republican. It makes me shudder to think of the Republicans being the majority. How much more Trump would be getting away with with no one telling him no. They just don't seem to care that Trump seems to have broken every rule in the book. Republicans just don't care, it boggles my mind. What is wrong with them?

What would be going on if Pelosi wasn't Speaker. That's what keeps me up at night at this point.

Kudos for everyone who got out to vote and changed the Majority to Democrats in the House.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
HU9999

Until there is an authorization vote to impeach, Minority GOP members are not permitted to participate in Due Process. How is this not one-sided?

False. Expand your news sources so you know what is happening.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
adoptedbyhounds

a) it is not a one-sided process at all. The gop in the committee are given the same amount of time to question the witnesses as the dems are.

So both sides get to call witnesses?


2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
soupgirl53

What witnesses do the GOP members of the committee wish to call?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

At this point it is an inquiry for evidence. If there is enough evidence the impeachment moves forward.

When or if it moves to the Senate there will be a trial. Then there will be witnesses for or against Trump.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Until there is an authorization vote to impeach, Minority GOP members are not permitted to participate in Due Process. How is this not one-sided?

Ann, the rankling member himself stated , on camera, that the Republicans were not being limited in any way either in time or number of questions during the inquiry hearings

You also seem to be under the mistaken impression that a simple vote gives some sort of automatic powers to the Republicans...that is not true. The specifc rules for the inquiry must be spelled out in the resolution and Nancy writes the resolution . It's not a pre defined resolution.

In my view , this is precisely why Pelosi will not bring a vote to the floor. She knows the Republicans will stage a gong show trying to make all sorts of changes to the resolution.



4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Pelosi's actions are unconstitutional. The private meetings are just to save them from making a mockery of themselves. She has no authority for her actions so it's just dog and pony show.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
soupgirl53

Lol.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Pony up or wag the dog. :)

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
jama7(6)

1, 2, 3.......................

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

I read the constitution. You should try it. Pelosi is playing with you.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

They are not private meetings. They are committees with both parties represented. They are looking for facts. It is never done in public until they put out a transcript approved by the witnesses. There is information good or bad that will be brought up in a trial if it goes to the Senate.

Trump will be impeached.

We have seen the evidence in public.

Whether the Senate will remove him us debatable. Mulvaney was most likely trying to lead the witnesses with his spiel.

Pelosi is above reproach and if Pence keeps being Trump’s gofer she could end up as President.

.


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Trump will be impeached by the speaker of the house. There is nothing in the constitution to allow that. It takes an act of congress and the house must vote. Pelosi is just the voice of the house. She is only speaking for herself, and has violated her oath of office. The house is dysfunctional under her leadership and acting against the constitution and the American people.

Take the vote or shut up.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Did someone say Pelosi would impeach him by herself? The house will vote when they have examined the evidence.

whinning by the pubs won’t change anything.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

lol

Pelosi is above reproach and if Pence keeps being Trump’s gofer she could end up as President.

You always have the best jokes. :)

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

From the House Rules: Rule XI Clause 2

Calling and questioning of witnesses

(j)(1) Whenever a hearing is conducted by a committee on a measure or
matter, the minority members of the
committee shall be entitled, upon request to the chair by a majority of
them before the completion of the
hearing, to call witnesses selected by
the minority to testify with respect to
that measure or matter during at least
one day of hearing thereon.

So if instead of beeyatching, if the gop got their act together, they could spend a day talking to whatever witnesses they want.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

Chase, you've got the wrong poster. Your quote was from Wants to Grow.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Sorry about that Ann.

None the less , I am quite sure you have expressed similar thoughts, particularly about the vote somehow automatically granting certain rights to the Republicans.....it doesn't.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Stan Areted

None the less, wrong is wrong!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Izzy Mn(4)

None the less, wrong is wrong!

----------

Same has been said by the other side of the arguments. What did the White House say, "Get over it".

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Lurker, it’s no joke what Trump has pulled on the gullibles of the US. Now he is granting himself contracts and paying for them with our tax money. I guess that’s okay with the conservatives? The no values GOP. Make Trump Rich Again.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

"None the less" - now that was funny!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

The US Constitution still doesn't say how the investigation must be done.

The US Constitution still doesn't say "behind closed door sessions" are not allowed.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
barncatz

Speaking of the original topic, has it been noted that Sondland praised Yovanovitch in his testimony, saying she was "great" and he had nothing negative to say about her performance, despite Trump calling her, for some reason, "bad news"?

He joined "The left media [who] couldn't speak enough about her integrity in recent days!"


2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

whinning by the pubs won’t change anything.

Do you mean "winning" or "whining"? Makes a big difference. "Winning" made a yuge difference!

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
HU9999

"None the less" - now that was funny!

The obsession is not funny. It's not healthy. And very tiring.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
adoptedbyhounds

Key Words:

Whenever a hearing is conducted by a COMMITTEE...

Committees can't launch an official impeachment inquiry on their own. All members get to vote. Hasn't happened yet, much as Nancy would like Americans to believe it has. Maybe she doesn't have the votes. Maybe she's trying to drag out the impression Dems are conducting an impeachment inquiry. In any event. thanks for posting the committee rules on calling witnesses. I wouldn't expect a single day for the "deplorables" to fly for long.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

the impression Dems are conducting an impeachment inquiry

More than an impression -- more like fact.

1 Like Save    
Browse Gardening and Landscaping Stories on Houzz See all Stories
Feel-Good Home How to Ease Back Into Real Life After Vacation
Keep the relaxed vibe going as you transition back into your daily routine
Full Story
Your First House So You're Thinking About Getting a Dog
Prepare yourself for the realities of training, cost and the impact that lovable pooch might have on your house
Full Story
Your First House So You Want to Get a Cat
If you're a cat lover, the joys outweigh any other issue. If you haven't lived with one yet, here are a few things to know
Full Story
All of our tradesmen are craftsmen in their field and specialize in the service we provide. Our internal staff... Read More