Transcript edited or in it`s entirety?

[balloonshark]

Can anyone on the right explain this lie? Is this really the leader you choose to follow?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1176559966024556544

Edit: From post #33.

 

[Jhhnn]

Imagine being Zelensky & the POTUS calling you on the phone to spread incoherent half baked conspiracy theory, like this, straight from the White House transcript-

The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you're surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible.

Per “transcript,” Trump seems to think DNC-hired security firm is from Ukraine

CrowdStrike, “one of your wealthy people,” mentioned in rambling reconstruction of phone call.

arstechnica.com

That's our President, our national disgrace.

 

[cytg111]

Imagine being Zelensky & the POTUS calling you on the phone to spread incoherent half baked conspiracy theory, like this, straight from the White House transcript-

Per “transcript,” Trump seems to think DNC-hired security firm is from Ukraine

CrowdStrike, “one of your wealthy people,” mentioned in rambling reconstruction of phone call.

arstechnica.com

That's our President, our national disgrace.

This is his thing... communicating in an incoherent way, still getting the message across... and afterwards he will claim "I never said that". Trump 101. That is also why he acts as if he is innocent and have nothing to hide this time around... Though it may be dawning on him that he fucked up bigly this time.

 

[Paratus]

So for those struggling with what articles of impeachment the House may codify from the phone call memo/non-transcript released today:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/09/articles-of-impeachment-from-trump-ukraine-call.html

Article I: Extortion
Trump, without explanation, withheld $391 million in aid from Ukraine at the same time he was pressuring Zelensky to take action against former Vice President and potential 2020 opponent Joe Biden. His defenders have noted that there would be no explicit “quid pro quo” in the transcript. But in the call readout, Trump lays the groundwork for a pressure campaign by Giuliani to coincide exactly with the as-yet-unexplained withholding of aid. First, Trump repeatedly hints that the United States is overly generous to Ukraine:

I will say that we do a lot for Ukraine. We spend a lot of effort and a lot of time. Much more than the European countries are doing and they should be helping you more than they are. Germany does almost nothing for you. All they do is talk and I think it’s something that you should really ask them about.

Yeah, we give you plenty of money, unlike those lousy Germans! Trump then directly says that he doesn’t think the United States is getting enough in exchange for all this support:

[T]he United States has been very, very good to Ukraine. I wouldn’t say that it’s reciprocal necessarily, because things are happening that are not good but the United States has been very, very good to Ukraine.

At least in this version of the call, Trump uses somewhat oblique language, but the message is clear: We do a lot for Ukraine, what are you going to do for us?

Article II: Obstruction of Justice
Right after reminding Zelensky how good the United States—and by extension Trump—has been to Ukraine, he asks for a “favor.”

I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people… The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation… I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people.
I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you said yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.

Because the TELCON has been so clearly abridged in this portion (notice three separate ellipses), it’s very hard to figure out precisely what Trump might have been discussing here. CrowdStrike was the company that uncovered and investigated the Russian hack of the Democratic National Committee, which then kicked off the federal investigation of Russian election interference. Obviously, the server that was investigated by CrowdStrike was at the center of that hack, but it is unclear which server Trump might be talking about.

The New York Times reported, though, that this portion of the conversation might involve a conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, was behind the hack in 2016:

Mr. Trump specifically asked his Ukrainian counterpart to come to the aid of the United States by looking into the unsubstantiated theory pushed by Mr. Giuliani holding that Ukrainians had some role in the emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee.

The TELCON is ambiguous, but the possibility nonetheless warrants further investigation. If Trump was asking Ukraine to help undercut Robert Mueller’s findings that Russia interfered in the 2016 election or any other part of his probe, that would be a whole new round of obstruction of justice.

Article III: Violation of Election Law by Soliciting a Thing of Value From a Foreign Power and/or Abuse of Power
This is the potential charge at the center of the whole affair. Giuliani has said he has pressured Ukraine to investigate Biden and his son. This call seems to have set up an August meeting between Giuliani and representatives for Zelensky, during which Giuliani has said he elicited an assurance from Ukraine that Biden would be investigated. In the call itself, Trump makes clear what he wants:

Rudy very much knows what’s happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. […] The other thing, there’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it … It sounds horrible to me.

Here, Trump is directly asking Zelensky to attack his political rival. Even without the dangling of the aid—which did happen—this would constitute a flagrant abuse of power. As Richard Hasen has noted in Slate, it could also violate federal election law that makes it a felony to solicit a “thing of value” from a foreign national. According to the New York Times, a whistleblower referred this phone call to the Department of Justice on the grounds that it might be a campaign finance crime. The Times further reported that the DOJ “concluded that there was no basis for a criminal investigation into Mr. Trump’s behavior.” Given the actions that Attorney General William Barr and his DOJ have taken to try to shield this president in the past, further investigation is warranted here.

Article IV: Abuse of Power by Using the Department of Justice to Investigate Political Rivals
One of the key new facts of this TELCON is that Trump repeatedly pressured Zelensky to work hand in hand with Barr to do Trump’s corrupt bidding, and not just Giuliani. In the previous two potential articles of impeachment, Trump specifically mentions that Ukraine should work with Barr on the apparent attempt to smear Biden and effort to diminish the Mueller probe.

Trump mentions Barr twice more, with Trump saying that he is “going to have Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom of it” after Zelensky noted having his own prosecutor “look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue” and “the investigation of the case,” apparent references to CrowdStrike and Biden. At the end of the call, Trump again says, “I will tell Rudy and Attorney General Barr to call.”

The DOJ released a statement Wednesday saying that Trump has not personally asked Barr to contact Ukraine or investigate Biden, that Barr has not discussed this with Giuliani or contacted Ukraine in any way. Still, Barr has in past Senate testimony refused to say whether the president or the White House suggested he open an investigation into anyone.

The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee has already demanded that Barr recuse himself from “this mess,” but the attorney general should also be investigated for his own involvement in this affair.

Article V: Violation of the Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause
The Constitution says that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under [the United States], shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.” By failing to divest from his company, Trump has been in violation of this clause of the Constitution—which the Framers described as enforceable by impeachment—since Day 1.

But the call log is the clearest example yet of a foreign leader directly offering Trump emoluments to curry favor. As Zelensky casually mentions during the call:

Actually, last time I traveled to the United States, I stayed in New York near Central Park and I stayed at the Trump Tower.

Oh, I just stopped by your tower in New York City! No big deal, but I did do that, by the way.This is the precise sort of corruption the emoluments clause was intended to prevent, and here’s a call with a foreign leader openly flaunting it.

 

[UNCjigga]

Pelosi is claiming that Trump has retroactively classified the whistleblower complaint and IC IG’s criminal referral after releasing it to Intel committees. Basically, Democrats discussing the contents would be committing a crime.

Not sure what the he’ll is actually going on with this... but this genie isn’t going back in the bottle.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

So for those struggling with what articles of impeachment the House may codify from the phone call memo/non-transcript released today:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/09/articles-of-impeachment-from-trump-ukraine-call.html

Article I: Extortion
Trump, without explanation, withheld $391 million in aid from Ukraine at the same time he was pressuring Zelensky to take action against former Vice President and potential 2020 opponent Joe Biden. His defenders have noted that there would be no explicit “quid pro quo” in the transcript. But in the call readout, Trump lays the groundwork for a pressure campaign by Giuliani to coincide exactly with the as-yet-unexplained withholding of aid. First, Trump repeatedly hints that the United States is overly generous to Ukraine:


Yeah, we give you plenty of money, unlike those lousy Germans! Trump then directly says that he doesn’t think the United States is getting enough in exchange for all this support:


At least in this version of the call, Trump uses somewhat oblique language, but the message is clear: We do a lot for Ukraine, what are you going to do for us?

Article II: Obstruction of Justice
Right after reminding Zelensky how good the United States—and by extension Trump—has been to Ukraine, he asks for a “favor.”


Because the TELCON has been so clearly abridged in this portion (notice three separate ellipses), it’s very hard to figure out precisely what Trump might have been discussing here. CrowdStrike was the company that uncovered and investigated the Russian hack of the Democratic National Committee, which then kicked off the federal investigation of Russian election interference. Obviously, the server that was investigated by CrowdStrike was at the center of that hack, but it is unclear which server Trump might be talking about.

The New York Times reported, though, that this portion of the conversation might involve a conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, was behind the hack in 2016:


The TELCON is ambiguous, but the possibility nonetheless warrants further investigation. If Trump was asking Ukraine to help undercut Robert Mueller’s findings that Russia interfered in the 2016 election or any other part of his probe, that would be a whole new round of obstruction of justice.

Article III: Violation of Election Law by Soliciting a Thing of Value From a Foreign Power and/or Abuse of Power
This is the potential charge at the center of the whole affair. Giuliani has said he has pressured Ukraine to investigate Biden and his son. This call seems to have set up an August meeting between Giuliani and representatives for Zelensky, during which Giuliani has said he elicited an assurance from Ukraine that Biden would be investigated. In the call itself, Trump makes clear what he wants:


Here, Trump is directly asking Zelensky to attack his political rival. Even without the dangling of the aid—which did happen—this would constitute a flagrant abuse of power. As Richard Hasen has noted in Slate, it could also violate federal election law that makes it a felony to solicit a “thing of value” from a foreign national. According to the New York Times, a whistleblower referred this phone call to the Department of Justice on the grounds that it might be a campaign finance crime. The Times further reported that the DOJ “concluded that there was no basis for a criminal investigation into Mr. Trump’s behavior.” Given the actions that Attorney General William Barr and his DOJ have taken to try to shield this president in the past, further investigation is warranted here.

Article IV: Abuse of Power by Using the Department of Justice to Investigate Political Rivals
One of the key new facts of this TELCON is that Trump repeatedly pressured Zelensky to work hand in hand with Barr to do Trump’s corrupt bidding, and not just Giuliani. In the previous two potential articles of impeachment, Trump specifically mentions that Ukraine should work with Barr on the apparent attempt to smear Biden and effort to diminish the Mueller probe.

Trump mentions Barr twice more, with Trump saying that he is “going to have Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom of it” after Zelensky noted having his own prosecutor “look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue” and “the investigation of the case,” apparent references to CrowdStrike and Biden. At the end of the call, Trump again says, “I will tell Rudy and Attorney General Barr to call.”

The DOJ released a statement Wednesday saying that Trump has not personally asked Barr to contact Ukraine or investigate Biden, that Barr has not discussed this with Giuliani or contacted Ukraine in any way. Still, Barr has in past Senate testimony refused to say whether the president or the White House suggested he open an investigation into anyone.

The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee has already demanded that Barr recuse himself from “this mess,” but the attorney general should also be investigated for his own involvement in this affair.

Article V: Violation of the Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause
The Constitution says that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under [the United States], shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.” By failing to divest from his company, Trump has been in violation of this clause of the Constitution—which the Framers described as enforceable by impeachment—since Day 1.

But the call log is the clearest example yet of a foreign leader directly offering Trump emoluments to curry favor. As Zelensky casually mentions during the call:


Oh, I just stopped by your tower in New York City! No big deal, but I did do that, by the way.This is the precise sort of corruption the emoluments clause was intended to prevent, and here’s a call with a foreign leader openly flaunting it.

Well that's about 2 percent of all articles I would expect.

 

[Jhhnn]

Pelosi is claiming that Trump has retroactively classified the whistleblower complaint and IC IG’s criminal referral after releasing it to Intel committees. Basically, Democrats discussing the contents would be committing a crime.

Not sure what the he’ll is actually going on with this... but this genie isn’t going back in the bottle.

If true, that's threat by intimidation. And a really stupid one at that.

 

[thilanliyan]

The question is whether or not his base is large enough at this point to carry the election. I'm not sure that's the case. The kind of Trump drone who's completely unfazed by this corruption is probably already committed to voting in 2020. The problem in 2016 was more that the Democrats' supporters didn't come out to vote, because they assumed that someone as vile as Trump wasn't going to win. And those indecisive types who picked Trump because he promised more jobs... well, they're not going to vote for him again given that he failed to deliver.

While there is truth to what you say, I wouldn't discount party over candidate voters. There are some people who will just not vote dem, regardless of who the reps are running.

I hope I'm wrong but I don't think 2020 is a foregone conclusion. Case in point, those farmers who got screwed but will still vote for Trump...

Get the ball rolling on impeachment, but that isn't going to bring Rep voters (not talking about the Trump base) on side. Hopefully the Dem candidate can get the message across that voting rep is keeping the average person down.

 

[Jhhnn]

While there is truth to what you say, I wouldn't discount party over candidate voters. There are some people who will just not vote dem, regardless of who the reps are running.

I hope I'm wrong but I don't think 2020 is a foregone conclusion. Case in point, those farmers who got screwed but will still vote for Trump...

Get the ball rolling on impeachment, but that isn't going to bring Rep voters (not talking about the Trump base) on side. Hopefully the Dem candidate can get the message across that voting rep is keeping the average person down.

2020 will be about turnout, I think. Trump may yet find a way to froth up culture warrior ire but he hasn't found it yet. He won't have Crooked Hillary to kick around anymore, either. Meanwhile, Dems have fire in their bellies, as 2018 shows.

 

[baydude]

In a way that doesn't match the regurgitated bullshit fed to you by right-wing media.

From CNN... asking a US Congressman about Biden and his son and his response
“I think Biden’s actions need to be investigated . . . I certainly applaud him for highlighting that. I think it’s something that should be looked into. It’s very serious.”

https://twitter.com/x/status/1176541107825664001

 

[Denly]

I am actually surprised by how "understandable" it was and not a bunch of word salads.

 

[Jhhnn]

From CNN... asking a US Congressman about Biden and his son and his response
“I think Biden’s actions need to be investigated . . . I certainly applaud him for highlighting that. I think it’s something that should be looked into. It’s very serious.”

https://twitter.com/x/status/1176541107825664001

Trump sycophant backs Trump. Shocking!

 

[Jhhnn]

I am actually surprised by how "understandable" it was and not a bunch of word salads.

Surely you jest. See #177. That, or you have some sort of secret Trump decoder ring.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Hello China are you listening......if you can find a recording of this and other conversations with our President the press will greatly reward you.

 

[Sunburn74]

So for those struggling with what articles of impeachment the House may codify from the phone call memo/non-transcript released today:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/09/articles-of-impeachment-from-trump-ukraine-call.html

Article I: Extortion
Trump, without explanation, withheld $391 million in aid from Ukraine at the same time he was pressuring Zelensky to take action against former Vice President and potential 2020 opponent Joe Biden. His defenders have noted that there would be no explicit “quid pro quo” in the transcript. But in the call readout, Trump lays the groundwork for a pressure campaign by Giuliani to coincide exactly with the as-yet-unexplained withholding of aid. First, Trump repeatedly hints that the United States is overly generous to Ukraine:


Yeah, we give you plenty of money, unlike those lousy Germans! Trump then directly says that he doesn’t think the United States is getting enough in exchange for all this support:


At least in this version of the call, Trump uses somewhat oblique language, but the message is clear: We do a lot for Ukraine, what are you going to do for us?

Article II: Obstruction of Justice
Right after reminding Zelensky how good the United States—and by extension Trump—has been to Ukraine, he asks for a “favor.”


Because the TELCON has been so clearly abridged in this portion (notice three separate ellipses), it’s very hard to figure out precisely what Trump might have been discussing here. CrowdStrike was the company that uncovered and investigated the Russian hack of the Democratic National Committee, which then kicked off the federal investigation of Russian election interference. Obviously, the server that was investigated by CrowdStrike was at the center of that hack, but it is unclear which server Trump might be talking about.

The New York Times reported, though, that this portion of the conversation might involve a conspiracy theory that Ukraine, not Russia, was behind the hack in 2016:


The TELCON is ambiguous, but the possibility nonetheless warrants further investigation. If Trump was asking Ukraine to help undercut Robert Mueller’s findings that Russia interfered in the 2016 election or any other part of his probe, that would be a whole new round of obstruction of justice.

Article III: Violation of Election Law by Soliciting a Thing of Value From a Foreign Power and/or Abuse of Power
This is the potential charge at the center of the whole affair. Giuliani has said he has pressured Ukraine to investigate Biden and his son. This call seems to have set up an August meeting between Giuliani and representatives for Zelensky, during which Giuliani has said he elicited an assurance from Ukraine that Biden would be investigated. In the call itself, Trump makes clear what he wants:


Here, Trump is directly asking Zelensky to attack his political rival. Even without the dangling of the aid—which did happen—this would constitute a flagrant abuse of power. As Richard Hasen has noted in Slate, it could also violate federal election law that makes it a felony to solicit a “thing of value” from a foreign national. According to the New York Times, a whistleblower referred this phone call to the Department of Justice on the grounds that it might be a campaign finance crime. The Times further reported that the DOJ “concluded that there was no basis for a criminal investigation into Mr. Trump’s behavior.” Given the actions that Attorney General William Barr and his DOJ have taken to try to shield this president in the past, further investigation is warranted here.

Article IV: Abuse of Power by Using the Department of Justice to Investigate Political Rivals
One of the key new facts of this TELCON is that Trump repeatedly pressured Zelensky to work hand in hand with Barr to do Trump’s corrupt bidding, and not just Giuliani. In the previous two potential articles of impeachment, Trump specifically mentions that Ukraine should work with Barr on the apparent attempt to smear Biden and effort to diminish the Mueller probe.

Trump mentions Barr twice more, with Trump saying that he is “going to have Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom of it” after Zelensky noted having his own prosecutor “look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue” and “the investigation of the case,” apparent references to CrowdStrike and Biden. At the end of the call, Trump again says, “I will tell Rudy and Attorney General Barr to call.”

The DOJ released a statement Wednesday saying that Trump has not personally asked Barr to contact Ukraine or investigate Biden, that Barr has not discussed this with Giuliani or contacted Ukraine in any way. Still, Barr has in past Senate testimony refused to say whether the president or the White House suggested he open an investigation into anyone.

The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee has already demanded that Barr recuse himself from “this mess,” but the attorney general should also be investigated for his own involvement in this affair.

Article V: Violation of the Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause
The Constitution says that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under [the United States], shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.” By failing to divest from his company, Trump has been in violation of this clause of the Constitution—which the Framers described as enforceable by impeachment—since Day 1.

But the call log is the clearest example yet of a foreign leader directly offering Trump emoluments to curry favor. As Zelensky casually mentions during the call:


Oh, I just stopped by your tower in New York City! No big deal, but I did do that, by the way.This is the precise sort of corruption the emoluments clause was intended to prevent, and here’s a call with a foreign leader openly flaunting it.

Absolutely spot on
Emoluments, abuse of power, extortion at minimum and probably another campaign finance violation (don't forget Cohen is in jail right now for the first one and trump is a co conspirator being protected by his office) .

We are well in impeachment territory I would say and have been so for a long time.

 

[zzyzxroad]

I am actually surprised by how "understandable" it was and not a bunch of word salads.

Probably because of this and I am sure the real conversation had a lot more word salad...

CAUTION: A Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation (TELCON) is not a verbatim transcript of a discussion. The text in this document records the notes and recollections of Situation Room Duty Officers and NSC policy staff assigned to listen and memorialize the conversation

 

[Denly]

Surely you jest. See #177. That, or you have some sort of secret Trump decoder ring.

Ur right, when I read it again I actually LOL ed.

 

[Jhhnn]

Throw this bit of information into the mix-

Ex-adviser to Ukraine's president says Biden case was precondition to Trump phone call

"This issue was raised many times. I know that Ukrainian officials understood."

www.axios.com

 

[UNCjigga]

Also, NYT is saying the IC IG concluded that what Trump did amounted to soliciting an illegal campaign donation.

That’s the conclusion Barr replaced with his own analysis and withheld from Congress. Barr is an accessory to the crime.

 

[interchange]

Also, NYT is saying the IC IG concluded that what Trump did amounted to soliciting an illegal campaign donation.

That’s the conclusion Barr replaced with his own analysis and withheld from Congress. Barr is an accessory to the crime.

I mean...his name is on the transcript. If he's anywhere in the actual complaint then his actions to keep the complaint from Congress is slam dunk obstruction. Hell, even if his name isn't in there it's hard to argue against.

 

[brandonbull]

LOL, he ended his co-statement with Zelensky by declaring Pelosi is no longer Speaker of the House. (Trump said this, not Zelensky.)

https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/stat...886162944?s=20

"Nancy Pelosi, as far as I'm concerned, unfortunately, she's no longer the Speaker of the House"

(Zelensky hangs up. Asks his interpreter): "Can he do that?" (Interpreter shrugs)

Since she is proceeding with the pre-impeachment inquiry based on the Ukraine stuff without have read the "evidence", it does seem like Nancy is no longer in charge.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Since she is proceeding with the pre-impeachment inquiry based on the Ukraine stuff without have read the "evidence", it does seem like Nancy is no longer in charge.

Haha using the Presidents Retarded talking point good boy.

 

[brandonbull]

Also, NYT is saying the IC IG concluded that what Trump did amounted to soliciting an illegal campaign donation.

That’s the conclusion Barr replaced with his own analysis and withheld from Congress. Barr is an accessory to the crime.

So what the Democrats are now telling us is that criminals and mafia bosses should declare to be a political candidate and they are immune from investigation? Trump never asked or even implied any kind of quid pro quo or campaign donation. How in the hell can it be considered a campaign donation? It looks like members of the Democrat party should be investigated for illegal campaign donations. They had to know that bringing up the Ukraine was going to come back on Groper Joe. So Joe Biden's true political rivals are benefiting from a foreign government.

 

[brandonbull]

Haha using the Presidents Retarded talking point good boy.

So you are telling me the Nancy did read and have access to the whistle blower complaint and the memo of the phone call to the Ukraine? What rational leader would declare action based on unknown information unless they are really just a figure head? Can't wait for you to counter facts with the truth.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

So you are telling me the Nancy did read and have access to the whistle blower complaint and the memo of the phone call to the Ukraine? What rational leader would declare action based on unknown information unless they are really just a figure head? Can't wait for you to counter facts with the truth.

No I’m calling you an NPC