Pelosi Impeachment Inquiry

Trump now claiming Shchiff is doctoring transcripts. No dangerous rhetoric there, no sir.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...1f0d60-0472-11ea-8292-c46ee8cb3dce_story.html

Live updates: Democrats release transcripts of testimony from three officials ahead of first impeachment inquiry public hearing

Democrats on Monday released the testimony of three Trump administration officials, two days before public hearings are set to begin in the House impeachment inquiry.

In one of the testimonies, Laura Cooper, a senior defense official, told House impeachment investigators last month that the Pentagon sought clarification from the Trump administration on July 18 about the holdup of aid to Ukraine.

Cooper, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, said that at a July 23 meeting, the Office of Management and Budget told agencies that “the White House chief of staff has conveyed that the president has concerns about Ukraine and Ukraine security assistance.”

Transcripts of the testimony of Catherine Croft and Christopher Anderson, two State Department Ukraine specialists, were also released Monday.

Hours earlier, President Trump lashed out anew at the investigation, claiming without any evidence that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) had doctored transcripts from closed-door depositions.

Democrats have chosen the top U.S. diplomat to Ukraine, William B. Taylor Jr., and the deputy assistant secretary of state responsible for Ukraine, George Kent, as their lead witnesses on Wednesday as they seek to build the case that Trump improperly pressed Ukraine for an investigation of former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter at a time when U.S. military aid was being withheld.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/tr...es-trump-directed-freeze-aid-ukraine-n1080256

Pentagon official testifies Trump directed freeze on aid to Ukraine
Asked if the president was authorized to order that type of hold, Laura Cooper said there were concerns that he wasn’t.

Laura Cooper, the top Pentagon official overseeing U.S. policy regarding Ukraine, told House impeachment investigators last month that President Donald Trump directed the relevant agencies to freeze aid to Ukraine over the summer, according to a transcript of her testimony released Monday.

Cooper, during Oct. 23 testimony before the three House committees leading the impeachment inquiry into Trump's Ukraine dealings, testified that she and other Pentagon officials had answered questions about the Ukraine assistance in the middle of June — so she was surprised when one of her subordinates told her that a hold had been placed on the funds after an interagency meeting in July.

“I got, you know, I got a readout from the meeting — there was discussion in that session about the — about OMB [Office of Management and Budget] saying that they were holding the Congressional Notification related to” Ukraine, Cooper testified, according to the transcript.

Cooper, according to the transcript of her testimony, described the hold as "unusual."

Cooper said that she attended a meeting on July 23, where "this issue" of Trump's "concerns about Ukraine and Ukraine security assistance" came up. She said the president's concerns were conveyed by acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.

Days later, on July 26, she testified that she found out that both military and humanitarian aid had been impacted.

Asked if the president was authorized to order that type of hold, Cooper said there were concerns that he wasn't.

"Well, I'm not an expert on the law, but in that meeting immediately deputies began to raise concerns about how this could be done in a legal fashion because there was broad understanding in the meeting that the funding — the State Department funding related to an earmark for Ukraine and that the DOD funding was specific to Ukraine security assistance. So the comments in the room at the deputies' level reflected a sense that there was not an understanding of how this could legally play out. And at that meeting the deputies agreed to look into the legalities and to look at what was possible," she said, according to the transcript.

At the next meeting with national security personnel, she said she told attendees "there were two legally available mechanisms should the President want to stop assistance" — a presidential rescission notice to Congress or for the Defense Department to do “a reprogramming action.”

“But I mentioned that either way, there would need to be a notification to Congress,” she said, according to the transcript.

Asked if that happened, Cooper said, "That did not occur."

Investigators have zeroed in on the testimony of several key figures in the Ukraine affair — including Bill Taylor, the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine, and George Kent, a deputy assistant secretary of state who worked on Ukraine and five other countries — to support the allegation that the Trump administration froze aid intended for Ukraine as part of an attempt to pressure the country to open probes that would benefit Trump politically.

The freeze on military aid to Ukraine — which Cooper’s testimony corroborates — is a crucial part of the narrative that Democrats have woven together in attempting to prove that the president sought a quid pro quo with Ukraine.

Top Republicans, including Trump himself, have said there couldn't have been a quid pro quo because, they claim, the Ukrainians were not aware that military aid was being withheld in the first place.

However, Cooper testified that she had concluded from conversations she'd had with Kurt Volker, the then-U.S. special envoy to Ukraine, and Taylor, that that couldn't possibly be true.

"I knew from my Kurt Volker conversation and also from sort of the alarm bells that were coming from Ambassador Taylor and his team that there were Ukrainians who knew about this," she said, according to the transcript.


Cooper also testified that there was a concerted effort within the executive branch to try to get the president to lift the hold.

“My sense is that all of the senior leaders of the U.S. national security departments and agencies were all unified in their — in their view that this assistance was essential, that we could work with the government of Ukraine to tackle corruption, and they were trying to find ways to engage the President on this,” Cooper said.

She said she discussed the frozen aid with Volker on Aug. 20.

"So in that meeting he did mention something to me that, you know, was the first about somehow an effort that he was engaged in to see if there was a statement that the government of Ukraine would make that would somehow disavow any interference in U.S. elections and would commit to the prosecution of any individuals involved in election interference. And that was about as specific as it got," she said.

The transcript of Cooper's closed-door testimony was just the latest document made public as the probe moves to a new phase. House Democrats last week released transcripts of testimony from Taylor, Kent, Volker, U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland and ousted U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.

The testimony of those key figures have largely established a narrative that suggests the Trump administration sought to tie the nearly $400 million in military and security aid to Ukraine as well as the prospect of a coveted White House meeting to demands that Volodymyr Zelenskiy announce probes into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden and a conspiracy related to the 2016 election.

In a statement, the chairs of the three committees leading the inquiry — House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff, D-Calif.; House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Eliot Engel, D-N.Y.; and House Oversight Committee acting Chair Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y. — said Cooper testified that Trump "through the Office of Management and Budget, directed the freeze on hundreds of millions of dollars of critical military aid for Ukraine, against the judgment of career officials in the Department of Defense, Department of State, and other relevant agencies."

They also said that she had "raised concerns, as did others on several occasions, to senior U.S. government officials about the legality of withholding the congressionally-authorized money, and the challenges that White House delays would put on spending it."

Cooper's testimony was delayed by five hours after a group of House Republicans who don't sit on the committees that questioned her stormed the secure room where her deposition was taking place.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ions-about-key-gop-impeachment-witness-trump/

As Mother Jones noted, though, Volker in his later testimony downplayed his knowledge of Biden’s proximity to that push.

“At no time was I aware of or took part in an effort to urge Ukraine to investigate former vice president Biden,” Volker said in his Oct. 3, 2019, deposition. “You will see from the extensive text messages I am providing, which convey a sense of real-time dialogue with several different actors, Vice President Biden was never a topic of discussion.”

He echoed this in his later testimony: “At no time was I aware of or knowingly took part in an effort to urge Ukraine to investigate former vice president Biden. As you know from the extensive real-time documentation I have provided, Vice President Biden was not a topic of our discussions.”


The idea that the Trump team’s push might somehow not actually have been about the Bidens was a very fine line walked by another member of the “three amigos” whose testimony Republicans initially played up, then-European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland. Then-Energy Secretary Rick Perry also tried to make a similar argument. The problem with all of that: Giuliani himself had explicitly connected the requested investigations to Biden in his public comments months before. The motivation here would seem to have been no secret, especially for someone who actually pays regular attention to U.S.-Ukraine relations.


And the recording obtained by CNN shows Giuliani indeed making those connections in a call featuring Volker himself.

“All we need from the [Ukraine] President [Volodymyr Zelensky],” Giuliani says on the call, “is to say, I’m going to put an honest prosecutor in charge, he’s gonna investigate and dig up the evidence that presently exists, and is there any other evidence about involvement of the 2016 election, and then the Biden thing has to be run out.”


Giuliani adds: “Somebody in Ukraine’s got to take that seriously.”

At another point, Giuliani refers to his conversations with former Ukraine prosecutor general Viktor Shokin. Giuliani had worked with Shokin to push the theory that there was something wrong with then-Vice President Biden’s role in applying pressure on Ukraine to fire Shokin.

Again, Giuliani invokes Biden.


“My interest in it was about the collusion, let’s call it — I hate that word — I guess ‘conspiracy,’ to affect the 2016 election,” Giuliani said. “But here I was stuck with this allegation about Biden. And I don’t know what — I mean, now it’s out of my hands, it’s being investigated. But at the time, I didn’t know who would investigate it.”


Again, we’re dealing with some fine lines here. That latter quote doesn’t technically involve asking Ukraine to investigate, but it sure indicates a healthy interest in such investigations. And Giuliani’s first quote suggests a clear desire for a Ukrainian investigation involving Biden, even if you could argue it’s not a direct request.

Volker’s testimony is worth a careful parse. He also referred specifically to the idea that Biden wasn’t brought up in the text messages he turned over — rather than at all in any conversations. And whether he was specifically party to “an effort to urge Ukraine to investigate former vice president Biden” is also debatable, for reasons mentioned above.


Another issue: Volker in his deposition presented the Giuliani-Yermak call as “just an introductory phone call so they could talk to each other.”


“It was literally, you know, ‘Let me introduce,’ you know, ‘Mr. Giuliani,’ ” Volker said. “ ‘Let me introduce Mr. Yermak.’ ” Volker might have been referring narrowly to his own role, but the call lasted more than 40 minutes and dealt with plenty of the substantive subjects that would later come up in the impeachment trial.

Volker declined to comment to Mother Jones, saying, “I have nothing to add to what was already covered in my public testimony.” He also declined to comment to The Washington Post.


Volker has already clarified his testimony, to some degree, allowing that perhaps there was more of a quid pro quo than he had personally been aware of. His testimony that he was unaware of a quid pro quo was also called into question by a contemporary text message in which he seemingly referred to one of the key carrots in the Giuliani-Trump effort: Zelensky’s much-desired White House meeting.



“Heard from White House — assuming President [Zelensky] convinces trump he will investigate / ‘get to the bottom of what happened’ in 2016, we will nail down date for visit to Washington” for Zelensky, Volker said.

One of the witnesses Republicans initially highlighted, Sondland, later confirmed there was a quid pro quo, effectively turning him into a hostile witness for Trump. This would seem to point to valid questions about the testimony of a second key witness cited in Trump’s defense.
 
upload_2021-8-3_22-29-11.png
 
I know about a dozen other ex-employees that could turn this into a class action lawsuit.

upload_2022-2-24_18-45-45.png

"This campaign of intimidation and retaliation has had severe and deeply personal ramifications for Lt. Col. Vindman," Vindman's lawsuit says. "It also left a stain on our democracy."

Vindman is asking a federal judge to rule that Trump Jr., Giuliani, Scavino and Hahn all engaged in the conspiracy campaign, and to award him financial damages in an amount that would be determined after trial.

The lawsuit against the four alleges that they violated sections 1 and 2 of the Ku Klux Klan Act, which is intended to bar threats or intimidation against government officials carrying out their constitutional duties.

Vindman, in the suit, also ties the alleged harassment campaign against him to the ongoing investigation by the House select committee on the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

The suit claims that the message sent to Vindman "reverberates to this day, as witnesses subpoenaed by Congress in connection with its investigation into the events of January 6, 2021, continue to heed former President Trump's instructions to defy those subpoenas, undermining Congress's constitutional oversight role and the fundamental principle of checks and balances between three co-equal branches of government."
 
What does this traitor say about the 3.6 million people who died in other countries...was that the fault of Trump
If the Congress didn't tie up their time in February for impeachment maybe they could have better dealt with the China virus


Congress still did their regular business during a few weeks of impeachment hearings....so.....trump had more free time actually...
 
What does this traitor say about the 3.6 million people who died in other countries...was that the fault of Trump
If the Congress didn't tie up their time in February for impeachment maybe they could have better dealt with the China virus
EXCELLENT POSTING
 
upload_2022-10-1_16-49-38.png

[Maggie Haberman’s Confidence Man] shows Trump’s failure to grasp basic policy concepts, such as Trump suggesting in an interview with Haberman that the Senate’s minority party could block legislation by skipping votes. “The vice president’s vote doesn’t count. It doesn’t count. You might want to check this,” Trump said.

When the House introduced articles of impeachment against Trump for the first time in 2019, Trump reacted with a familiar refrain, according to the book: “I’ll just sue Congress. They can’t do this to me.”
 
Back
Top