https://twitter.com/YAppelbaum/status/1190262611578966016

11/1/2019 1:26:14 PM

Currently speculative but seems to fit also:

Quote :

" > According to Cockburn’s source about the seven whistleblowers, there’s more. **It is that Kushner (allegedly) gave the green light to MBS to arrest the dissident journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, who was later murdered and dismembered in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.** A second source tells Cockburn that this is true and adds a crucial twist to the story. This source claims that Turkish intelligence obtained an intercept of the call between Kushner and MBS. **And President Erdogan used it to get Trump to roll over and pull American troops out of northern Syria before the Turks invaded.** Cockburn hears that investigators for the House Intelligence Committee know this whole tale and the identities of some of the people telling it. Whether any of is true is another matter but Adam Schiff certainly seems to be smiling a lot these days."

https://spectator.us/seven-whistleblowers-jared-kushner-bin-salman/

11/4/2019 12:47:47 AM

https://twitter.com/nytmike/status/1191786730925514753?s=21

Sondland didn’t want to go to jail. Smart decision.

Now the GOP will explicitly say they are fine with egregious abuses of power and using the full weight of the presidency to investigate perceived enemies.

Also, the Volker testimony just confirms what we all already knew. The entire GOP has been rotted from the inside out by Roger Ailes. They are essentially a party full of Alex Jones’.

11/5/2019 1:46:02 PM

There’s been so much coming out of these hearings I don’t even know what’s going on.

Last I was aware the Whitehouse released a call transcript, multiple witnesses have confirmed they asked for a quid pro quo, one guy said the transcript released had missing info that even was worse.

Has anything new come out beyond this?

11/5/2019 5:25:41 PM

https://twitter.com/lucian_kim/status/1192420068401041410?s=21

Whatever you think about Biden, the whistle blower forced Trump to release the aid to Ukraine without starting a politically motivated hitjob.

This is absolutely 100% impeach and remove stuff. It would’ve worked if not for the WB and the Insepctor General. Zelenskiy was going to do it. And that is NOT an incitement of him — he needed to for his country and I don’t blame him. Just like he needs to soften any fallout between he and Trump until Trump is gone.

11/7/2019 7:42:49 AM

What I think is that this is a win/win (of sorts) for Trump. Using this strategy, assuming he was aware of it, he gets the whole world talking about corruption amongst the Bidens without actually having a quid pro quo with Ukraine. There is no proof of it, because it never actually happened. However, the end result in terms of smearing Biden is still basically the same. People are talking about "alleged" crimes that his family is responsible for which weren't even mentioned before this scandal dropped.

If, on the other hand, the whistle blower hadn't of blown his whistle, resulting in an announcement by Ukraine that they were going to investigate the Bidens followed by an immediate release of millions in US aid, then that surely would have caught the attention of many people in the justice department. Furthermore, since this would have been actual proof of a "pay off" type of scheme, the Dems would of had much more leverage for impeachment than they do now.

I never went to law school, but there is nothing here that I can't see trump just blaming on his subordinates and scapegoats. "I never meant for it to be a quid pro quo, maybe he though that, but I never did it." The sad fact is that this transaction never happened, so no crime actually took place.

[Edited on November 7, 2019 at 11:49 PM. Reason : z]

11/7/2019 11:48:29 PM

Quote :

"without actually having a quid pro quo with Ukraine. There is no proof of it, because it never actually happened."

If you attempt to rob a bank, but are stopped from doing so in the lobby by a cop, you are still a bank robber. There is mounting evidence, from multiple sources, all pointing at Trump engaging in a quid pro quo. The reason this quid pro quo never took place was because the whistleblower forced this issue into the public sphere, causing Trump to 'come clean'.

11/8/2019 6:16:33 AM

You don't have to try to argue with banjo

11/8/2019 9:19:26 AM

He's not a thinking man, eh?

11/8/2019 9:36:23 AM

President Trump literally sought a quid pro quo during a phone call with President Zelensky.

11/8/2019 9:38:00 AM

You can't prove anything if you ignore all the evidence!

Quote :

"People are talking about "alleged" crimes that his family is responsible for which weren't even mentioned before this scandal dropped."

Everytime I see Biden's supposed crimes mentioned, it's quickly followed by phrases such as "no evidence," "conspiracy theory" and "President Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani". Who are these people earnestly discussing Biden family crimes? Why did you put alleged in quotes?

[Edited on November 8, 2019 at 9:52 AM. Reason : PS: Trump doesn't play nth dimensional chess]

11/8/2019 9:51:30 AM

it's one of those logic puzzles, you can't trust anything that trump or guiliani says and both trump and guiliani have said there was quid quo pro, so who knows maybe there wasn't -- it's really a 4d galaxy brain puzzler.

11/8/2019 10:27:57 AM

Quote :

"f you attempt to rob a bank, but are stopped from doing so in the lobby by a cop, you are still a bank robber. "

Except that there is still no direct proof of Trump trying to rob a bank. The transcript said, "can you please do me a favor?", not, "do me favor and then I'll release the aid".

Trump has a lot of exit strategies here. He could easily say that his aids misinterpreted what he was saying. He could even, theoretically, say that he gave the go ahead to the whistle blower when he found out about the scheme. This is what you call plausible deniability.

The other thing is that the Trump organization apparently wanted this guy to make his announcement of corruption charges on CNN, which can only mean that if the quid pro quo were true, that Trump didn't care about the actual investigation but just wanted the media coverage on biden. He ended up getting that without holding back the aid.

11/8/2019 12:14:49 PM

TIL witness testimony is not evidence

[Edited on November 8, 2019 at 12:18 PM. Reason : also it's still a crime without any quid pro quo ]

11/8/2019 12:16:09 PM

nobody has yet to say that Trump told them directly to do it, and nobody will because he prolly never said it.

11/8/2019 12:17:40 PM

sondland

[Edited on November 8, 2019 at 12:22 PM. Reason : you're bad at this]

11/8/2019 12:21:10 PM

didn't sondland say that he "assumed" that they two were linked by Trump?

11/8/2019 12:39:21 PM

11/8/2019 12:42:32 PM

correct me if Im wrong, but he's never directly linked Trump to it.

11/8/2019 12:48:56 PM

Sondland says Trump told him to talk Guiliani (Trump's personal attorney, America's Mayor™) and that Guiliani "knows everything" (or similar).

11/8/2019 1:05:01 PM

yeah, that sounds like deliberately vague instructions to stay out of trouble. Like when a drill instructor says "clearly your not motivating him enough to succeed!"

Everyone knows that he is talking about hazing, but technically he is not talking about hazing.

Am the only one in here with loads of experience with this technical, deceptive talk?

11/8/2019 1:16:12 PM

Quote :

" The transcript said, "can you please do me a favor?", not, "do me favor and then I'll release the aid"."

Do you believe that in order for a theoretical attempted quid pro quo to be illegal it needs to be explicitly stated?

11/8/2019 1:39:58 PM

the "no homo" defense

11/8/2019 1:45:40 PM

Quote :

"Do you believe that in order for a theoretical attempted quid pro quo to be illegal it needs to be explicitly stated?"

Um....yeah. Especially when said person is the fuckin POTUS.

11/8/2019 2:03:21 PM

And if one were to present case law stating that it does not, in fact, have to be explicitly stated you would retort with what?

11/8/2019 2:06:39 PM

where is the precedent? Lettuce discuss criminal law, yay!

11/8/2019 2:19:53 PM

It doesn't matter. Impeachment isn't a criminal trial.

[Edited on November 8, 2019 at 2:22 PM. Reason : It's basically a work hr investigation ]

11/8/2019 2:22:12 PM

https://www.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/microsites/public-integrity/a_guide_to_commonly_used_federal_statutes_in_public_corruption_cases.pdf

Quote :

"The evidence of a quid pro quo need not be explicit. A corrupt agreement may be implied from the public official’s words and actions, as “otherwise the law’s effect could be frustrated by knowing winks and nods.” Evans v. United States, 504 U.S. 255, 274 (1992) (Kennedy, J., concurring)."

11/8/2019 2:22:12 PM

This isn't a sandwich. This is simply some pastrami between two slices of bread, with some Russian dressing and lettuce, some Italian seasoning, oil, vinegar, and a pimento stuffed olive.


[i]Look, I don't want a quid pro quo. I just want you to make a statement about investigating the Bidens publicly, after which I will release the aid promised to you previously.

11/8/2019 2:23:39 PM

Quote :

"[i]Look, I don't want a quid pro quo. I just want you to make a statement about investigating the Bidens publicly, after which I will release the aid promised to you previously."

lol, don't get your hopes up. Again, Trump never directly connected the two in a phone call. Four more years incoming.

And to think that Dave Chappelle of all people predicted this, and people laughed at him.


[Edited on November 8, 2019 at 2:28 PM. Reason : j]

11/8/2019 2:24:49 PM

so your response to the legal precedent that it need not be explicit is?

11/8/2019 2:31:07 PM

"Four more years!"

11/8/2019 2:39:26 PM

^^ The problem is that he hasn't said anything remotely close to a quid pro quo, and has a ton of plausible deniability here, even the whistle blower. I guess that there is some light at the end of the tunnel based on that, but against a POTUS? I just don't see it.

11/8/2019 2:42:29 PM

Trump's language and actions absolutely imply corrupt intent...just because you either don't see it or don't believe that's enough to be impeached doesn't make it not apparent to anyone that doesn't wear a red hat

[Edited on November 8, 2019 at 2:47 PM. Reason : asd]

11/8/2019 2:47:19 PM

Banjo must be trolling or just uninformed, or both i suppose.

11/8/2019 2:57:49 PM

....and just because you want to see him impeached more than 50 euro ass in Amsterdam, it doesn't change the fact that lawyers are gonna have a field day with this.

Just go back to Nixon and Clinton; there was the type of hard proof in both of those cases that's lacking here.

11/8/2019 2:59:46 PM

Quote :

"Banjo must be trolling or just uninformed, or both i suppose."

ok, so did the transcripts reveal him explicitly stating a quid pro quo?

Did someone explicitly state "Trump made me do it," or "Trump implied that I had to do it?"

Just being realistic here. I hate the guy as much as the next, but this isn't really looking good for the dems. It almost feels like bait. Bait that they fuckin took.

Also, why would the WH openly release the transcripts if there was any doubt that Trump wouldn't get fucked for it?

[Edited on November 8, 2019 at 3:06 PM. Reason : u]

11/8/2019 3:04:41 PM

well we haven't seen the transcript yet, only a summary and we know portions and phrases were removed, but yes trump admits to a crime in the summary

11/8/2019 3:06:19 PM

He released the "transcript" to make people like you think that if he was doing it voluntarily it must be fine

At that point it was clear this was all going to come out eventually anyways

And yes, it wasn't even a full transcript, and what has been released is alleged to be missing some key moments, but I'm sure you already knew that right?

[Edited on November 8, 2019 at 3:11 PM. Reason : asdf]

11/8/2019 3:11:13 PM

Giuliani has already admitted a quid pro quo. Graham is saying there’s nothing wrong with a quid pro quo. I think everyone has moved on from whether IF there was a quid pro quo to what to do about it.

All the recent witnesses have testified trump wanted Ukraine to call out Biden and Hillary conditional on them receiving the congressional aid.

What makes it even worse is the recent testimony showing trump actively tried to hide this information from the career staff. The official diplomats were trying out of the loop, trump brought in Guiliani and Sondland to execute these illegal dealings.

This couldn’t be more damning for trump at this point... and we don’t even know what trump has been saying to Putin or MBS or Erdogan yet. Bolton announced today through his lawyers he knows of additional meetings that would be of interest to the impeachment inquiry that haven’t come up yet.

11/8/2019 4:12:28 PM

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/469592-trump-rails-against-impeachment-they-shouldnt-be-having-public

l

o

l

11/8/2019 8:32:48 PM

^didn't GOPers storm the closed-door sessions because it wasn't "transparent?

[link]http://https://thehill.com/homenews/house/467092-republicans-storm-into-house-hearing-to-break-up-trump-impeachment-testimony[/link]

Quote :

"Giuliani has already admitted a quid pro quo."

So has Mulvaney. Before he walked it back.

11/8/2019 9:46:51 PM

too bad those guys ain't up for impeachment.

11/8/2019 9:56:15 PM

or, i mean, too bad for the president who they said did the illegal thing

11/8/2019 9:57:31 PM

have they said that he did it yet?

11/8/2019 10:24:51 PM

Guiliani said a week or so ago he was working for trump directly.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-07/giuliani-says-ukraine-efforts-solely-for-trump-s-legal-defense

11/8/2019 10:27:07 PM

Meh.

Allegedly "plotting" is not the same as executing. Plotting can always fail to coalesce. As it did in this case. Plotting can fall apart. Plotting is just words. Plotting can turn out to be bullshit. And since in this case, the quid pro quo never happened, what's left is just that: bullshit for lawyers to argue over.

11/9/2019 3:22:28 AM

Lol

11/9/2019 8:34:42 AM

If BanjoMan offered a cop a beejay to get out of a speeding ticket, but the cop refused, BanjoMan would still be charged with bribing a cop.

11/9/2019 9:17:01 AM

The plan only failed because of the whistleblower. It’s also just the latest in a string of corrupt acts mueller identified and things we know of publicly re emoluments

11/9/2019 11:16:37 AM