September 27, 2019

"Dems hold Trump to double standard – What was OK for Obama isn’t OK for Trump."

Writes Andrew McCarthy (Fox News).

126 comments:

rhhardin said...

It's not a double standard. It's making up rules as you go along.

Wince said...

Andrew McCarthy should have taken another run at editing that column.

It kind of buried the lede.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Rich Lowry has a somewhat different take.

Shouting Thomas said...

The next year and a half is going to be a constant attempt to inflame people with anger and worry.

My life is fine and it will most likely continue to be. I've got important things to do, like playing with my grandkids and getting a classical repertoire for pipe organ under my belt.

President Trump, in my opinion, is going to win re-election in 2020, impeach or not. He isn't going to walk away.

So, I'll mostly be sitting it out. I was very politically active when I was young, and I was convinced I was right and I probably was. However, that obsession wreaked terrible havoc on my professional and personal life.

One of the nice things about internet jabber is that I can isolate this shit from my life. I absolutely never talk politics in a social or professional setting.

AustinRoth said...

If it wasn’t for double standards, Democrats would have none at all.

Birkel said...

ARM takes his legal analysis from Lowry over McCarthy.
Cool, bro.

gilbar said...

It's Not a double standard, it's always the SAME Standard: Dems better than Reps

gilbar said...

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan cites the National Review

I had been wondering what new Alias poor Chuck was using.

rehajm said...

I agree with rhhardin that is not a double standard. It's no standard really, right up there with the No Reasonable Prosecutor standard, sanctuary cities, and quasi legal pot.

campy said...

I should hope there would be different standards for a Lightbringer and a nazi!

iowan2 said...

Andrew McCarthy was almost a neverTrumper. Refused to entertain the notion that the DoJ and FBI were anything but pure. McCarthy, to his credit started to actual apply facts to talking points and today, he is a non-emotional fact finder.
Instead of playing dualing opinion pieces find anything in McCarthys writings that have been non factual.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

The Biden Quid Pro Quo is right there - no transcript needed. It's in your face with laughter and an 'atta boy! and his son's Ukrainian + Chinese billion dollar windfall - means nothing to people like ARM.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

"It’s definitely horrible for Biden. The former vice president brought this issue on himself, recounting in 2018 how he told Poroshenko years earlier to fire Shokin or forfeit a promised $1 billion U.S. loan.

“I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours,’ ” Biden said at an event hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations. ” ‘If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ ”

This was supposed to make Biden look like a tough customer apparently, but it raised the issue of conflict of interest, not to mention extortion. And they accuse President Trump of shakedown tactics? Please."

-Glenn Reynolds

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

David Harsnayi

Wherever Joe Biden went, son Hunter cashed in

Democrats don't care about money grubbing extortion or corruption when it comes to their loyalty to all things team D. See Hillary Clinton. The most infamous of the international pay-to-play players. Private Server comes in handy. So do bleachbit and hammers.
She was never really investigated. It was a shit show from the start. No way Trump could delete 30,000+ e-mails after they were subpoenaed and find an exit. The FBI and the CIA are corrupt political organizations now.


pious agnostic said...

Water wet.

tim in vermont said...

A self declared “NEVER Trumper” has a different take. So he started off the Trump presidency by declaring he had a closed mind, and we should listen to him after three years why?

It’s like a lobotomy patient. They get frozen in the period during which they got their lobotomy, and find adapting to the present difficult. Never Trumpers have lobotomized themselves.

ARM, of course continues his cut and past and cut and run tactics, because he can’t put his own thoughts into words he can defend. He knows that he would be asked questions and made to look like a fool.

Dave Begley said...

I know this is not a café post, but I bought the book "The Education of Brett Kavanugh" at my local bookstore. (Sorry, Ann.) When I went to post a review on Amazon, the note is "We have noticed unusual regarding this book and will only post reviews that are verified purchases."

Correction: Purchases from Amazon.

So, if I didn't buy the book from AMZN then does that mean I didn't buy it or read it?

You can bet that's not the case for books written by conservatives.

What a bunch of fascist non-free speech people. Bezos is such a hypocrite. I hope he moves to Mars with his girlfriend and then finds out there is no oxygen there.

tim in vermont said...

It’s not that there aren’t legitimate questions about Ukraine and the role of various players there in the 2016 election and aftermath. But they are appropriately handled by the Justice Department, which is currently looking into the sources of the Russia investigation.

As for Hunter Biden, he, too, is a fit subject for investigation and an apt symbol of one of the worst aspects of American life, namely, how easy it is for people with proximity to power to get rich. Hunter had no evident talent worthy of a $50,000-a-month gig with a Ukrainian energy company, except for being the vice president’s son.

There’s a reason, though, that oppo-research firms exist. No one could claim an abuse of power if the Trump campaign hired such an operation
. - ARM’s link

So Lowry’s position is that everything that Trump did would have been fine if he used shell corporations to protect himself the way Hillary did, and he should be impeached for not carefully enough covering his tracks.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

Oso Negro said...

I am of the opinion that Democrats, establishment Republicans, and the members of their varied institutions, have no idea the degree of contempt in which they are held by a very large number of American citizens. Double-standard? Really? Whatever made you think so? What will happen if Donald Trump is impeached for EXACTLY the conversation that was published in the press. Exactly that, no more. Do you think that regular Americans, deplorables as it were, will find that reasonable and just? Do you think there will be no consequences? Someone once said "if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand." We are divided against ourselves, and this cannot continue.

Oso Negro said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

"The new government was desperate for American help, financially and security-wise, which is why Vice President Joe Biden was in a position to pressure it into firing the prosecutor who was conducting a corruption investigation of Burisma, the energy company that had appointed Hunter Biden to its board and was lavishly compensating him.

In “Ball of Collusion,” I outline some of the extensive evidence that in 2016, the Obama administration’s law enforcement agencies pressured their Ukrainian counterparts to revive a dormant corruption investigation of Paul Manafort. I summarized the matter in an excerpt for Fox News a few days back."

Bob Boyd said...

The White House needs someone constantly whispering in the president’s ear, “There’s no freaking way we’re doing that.”

That's the Republican way.

"They want us to repeal Obamacare."
“There’s no freaking way we’re doing that.”

"They want us to stand up to China on the trade imbalance and jobs going overseas."
“There’s no freaking way we’re doing that.”

"They want us to get a handle on illegal immigration."
“There’s no freaking way we’re doing that.”

"They want us control spending."
“There’s no freaking way we’re doing that.”

"Well let's at least tell them we're going to do it."
"Okay, that we can do."

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Hillary is out full force on this.

Corruption x100. She's got her slimy talking points down. People Like ARM buy it wholesale.

The walls should be closing in on what Obama-Clinton-Biden did. Instead we have a corrupt media pedaling Schitt.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Trump's biggest mistake to date is not purging the DOJ, CIA and FBI and going full force after the queen mob-boss Hillary.

Mike Sylwester said...

In McCarthy's final paragraph, he links to a previous article he wrote, titled Triangulating Manafort -- Obama, Clinton and Ukraine. The previous article includes the following passages:

.... Just a week after the [Trump] campaign introduced Carter Page as a Trump foreign policy adviser, it announced that Manafort had been brought on board, too. ...

These arrangements [Manafort's activities in Ukraine] had already been spun into a narrative of political corruption in 2007 and 2008 by Glenn Simpson — then a Wall Street Journal scribe. In 2016, as the Fusion GPS impresario, Simpson would pull these articles off the shelf to help weave the Russia-gate tale.

In February 2014, the Ukrainian Euromaidan uprising finally forced the flight to Moscow of Manafort’s client, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. With American attention intensifying as tensions boiled over in Kiev, Manafort reentered the FBI’s investigative cross-hairs, as did other American political consultants who did work that benefitted the Party of Regions.

Yanukovych’s abdication delighted the Obama administration, which was quick to back the new administration of President Petro Poroshenko. Kiev became so dependent on Washington for desperately needed financial support that, by threatening to withhold funds, Vice President Joe Biden pressured Poroshenko into firing Viktor Shokin, one of his top prosecutors. Shokin just happened to be investigating a natural gas company called Burisma, which just happened to have placed Hunter Biden, the vice president’s son, on its board of directors.

While the Veep pushed the International Monetary Fund to grant Ukraine a $17.5 billion loan package, Burisma lavishly compensated Hunter’s law firm, to the tune of more than $3 million over an eighteen-month span. ...

Under the circumstances, it may seem ironic that the Obama administration prodded Ukraine to establish a National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) — but the IMF, like most progressive institutions, is duly impressed by such Orwellian titles. Naturally, the fledgling NABU developed a close-knit relationship with the FBI.

In 2014, NABU alerted the bureau to a ledger said to have belonged to Yanukovych, bête noire of the new Ukrainian government. The ledger purports to show $12.7 million in cash payments to Manafort. The FBI used the information to interview Manafort, but the authenticity of the ledger has not been established. Manafort dismisses it as fake, contending that the Party of Regions paid him by wire transfer, not cash. Ukrainian officials have conceded that they cannot prove the payments reflected in the ledger were made. The case was thus reportedly closed with no charges.

(Perhaps not coincidental to the Obama Justice Department’s decision not to pursue the case: Manafort had brought influential Democrats into his Ukrainian work, such as former Obama White House Counsel Greg Craig and the consulting firm started by Obama and Clinton adviser John Podesta — a firm that is still run by Podesta’s brother.) ....

dbp said...

""Dems hold Trump to double standard – What was OK for Obama isn’t OK for Trump.""

Yes, obviously. The same people who defended Obama's right to declare via presidential order, that he would selectively enforce immigration law, ALSO said it was illegal for Trump to reverse this and enforce the law!

wendybar said...

Andrew is 100% right, and Americans are pissed. The propaganda media is going to die off when Trump is no longer President, because NOBODY believes their lies anymore.

iowan2 said...

ARM is on it. President Trump is honest and transparent in his actions.
This is proper

There’s a reason, though, that oppo-research firms exist. No one could claim an abuse of power if the Trump campaign hired such an operation to thoroughly vet Hunter Biden’s various ventures, and spread damaging material to media outlets. If the campaign wanted to be just a little clever, it could take a page from Hillary Clinton 2016 and use a law firm as a cut-out.

So, it is legal to have foreign govts interfer in US elections...as long as the proper cut-outs are utilized.

Anonymous said...

No he doesn't, ARM. He just says that the tactics were poor.

Make your own arguments for once. You're boring.

Freder Frederson said...

The prosecutor was not investigating Burisma. That is simply a lie. The U.S. and the EU wanted him gone because he was not investigating anyone.

How this story got turned 180 degrees shows the desperation of the right wing media and Trump supporters to ignore facts.

Hagar said...

The MAM hoped they could make Joe Biden look presidential on TV.

Michael K said...

The former vice president brought this issue on himself,

Biden has done this going back at least to 1987. His rant about being smarter than a questioner in a townhall in New Hampshire had him claiming to be first in his class in law school, etc. It was in a public setting and preceded the evidence about his plagiarism and low class rank. He just can't help himself. The corruption follows the pattern established by the Clintons that began in Arkansas. American politics will never be the same after they arrived on the scene. Furthermore, Hillary is now tooling up for another try as Biden and Warren seem to be imploding.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

I hope Elizabeth Warren can beat fucking Hillary in the primary.

daskol said...

Maybe McCarthy is still, amazingly, a bit naive and trusting when it comes to government--he showed himself to be that at outset of the Russia Hoax, believing as he did in the essential correctness of the orientation of institutions like the DOJ. He's not yet cynical enough. But he also tackles the strong form of the Dems' argument in this piece: let's say Trump did what you say he did. In conceding the larger point about approaching a foreign government for assistance in a domestic corruption/political matter, he invites the question of how is it different or worse than what Obama did? There are big differences, of course, in the way that Obama admin vs. Trump admin approached Ukraine for assistance.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

The Biden Quid Pro Quo is right there - no transcript needed

That's the funniest thing about this. The impeachment strategy is supposed to take out Trump and Biden. However, even with the video of Slow Joe doing exactly what Trump is accused of, no one in the media is interested. If they report on Biden's Ukraine troubles at all, they add the usual DNC approved disclaimer "without evidence" to any accusations of Democrat wrongdoing.

It will be hilarious if Biden continues to be the front runner after this.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

It's like the media is in their reflexive "protect Democrats" mode and hasn't digested the DNC directive to take out Joe.

Todd said...

Well, not just Trump. He is just the most visible. They hold any "not Democrat" to this alternate standard.

It is who they are. It is what they do.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

I like how the media have removed Biden's name. He is now Trump's "Political rival"

rehajm said...

I hope Elizabeth Warren can beat fucking Hillary in the primary.

If it actually comes down to performance instead of coronation, Liz is a pushover. Just like the other day she only has to be asked a coherent question and she's lost.

It's because she's dumb. Not that dumb disqualifies anyone from winning the Democratic nomination...

Maillard Reactionary said...

Ya think?

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Lowry is suggesting that Trump take a page from Hillary's corruption scheming.

Wow. He doesn't see the big corruption picture. It's all about optics and playing nice.
Eh - dumb Romney holdovers.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Hillary is going full tilt hack-media propaganda this week.

The most corrupt person in politics is still in charge. Meet mama mob boss.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Who is better at weaving a tale, that Hillary? With Schitt to disseminate

doctrev said...

The interesting thing about the era of moderated comments is who Althouse lets through. What will it take to ban Media Matters shills like Freder? Will it take a sworn affadavit from the prosecutor, Shokin, that says Burisma was absolutely under investigation and that he was fired because Biden exerted pressure because of the case?

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/09/26/former-ukranian-prosecutor-
viktor-shokin-sworn-affidavit-outlining-joe-biden-shakedown/

To be clear, Freder doesn't honestly believe in his lies. He's just completely confident that Althouse is a woman, and therefore a creature who flits from one emotion to another, utterly unburdened with the capacity for rational thought. The lie is a gesture of contempt, pronouncing that Althouse is completely unfit to teach anything, let alone a subject as serious as law. She can be intimidated into letting a drooling mongoloid post obvious lies because she is weak and old.

Is she really going to let him get away with that?

narciso said...

Oh that detail:
https://mobile.twitter.com/charliespiering/status/1177579992768757760

Drago said...

Noted Bundy Case Liar Freder: "The prosecutor was not investigating Burisma. That is simply a lie. The U.S. and the EU wanted him gone because he was not investigating anyone."

LOL

Freder is lying again!!

The documents released this week which include Ukrainian govt docs AND Burisma's US Law firm docs demonstrate conclusively there was an active investigation into Burisama AND Li'l Hunter was due to be interviewed AND we know that the investigation was halted by Slow Joes threats!!

Freder is up to his old Bundy Case tricks again!!

LOL

Sorry Freder. I am afraid your latest Brennan/Soros/FusionGPS/Schiff-ty ploy has already been exposed and will not be moving the political needle at all.

Why dont you shift tactics like ARM?

TreeJoe said...

Actual evidence - not claims - we have so far:

1. A transcript of the call the President released, unredacted. Shows the favor he asked for involved crowdstrike and a server the DNC handed over to a private company and refused to hand over to the FBI on multiple occasions (see Comey's testimony on the matter). This is all public record stuff readily available. Much later in the call he (the President) asked about Biden and BIDENS OWN STATEMENTS of extorting the ukrainian government. Also public record - on video.

2. A whistleblower complaint who acknowledges they didn't hear the call or read the transcript, but heard instead from other IC members (who may be have violating laws in sharing this information). A whistleblower complaint that apparently was in Adam Schiff's hands in August.

3. Democratic leadership deciding to announcing Impeachment proceedings before they supposedly had either the transcript of the whistleblower complaint and without naming a specific crime.

...

I'm not a fan of the way Trump does stuff, and involving Giuliani in this smells weird, unless you consider the the President appears to trust almost no one even in his inner circle - including in the DOJ and IC - and seems to have valid reasons for that mis-trust. In that situation, involving Giuliani makes a certain degree of sense.

But moreso you have to look at the evidence and chain of events and ask yourself: Why did the democratic leadership go to the mat for this?

Michael K said...

How this story got turned 180 degrees shows the desperation of the right wing media and Trump supporters to ignore facts.

Freder would not know a fact if one bit him in the ass. Other than that, Freder....

Mike Sylwester said...

Re: my comment at 8:33 AM

Past this ...

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/andrew-mccarthy-manafort-obama-clinton-ukraine

into your search bar.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

And here I thought Republicans were saying it wasn’t OK for Obama.

Nonapod said...

iowan2 said...
So, it is legal to have foreign govts interfer in US elections...as long as the proper cut-outs are utilized.


The irony here is that Trump is actually too honest. Evidently in The Swamp the "proper" way to do things is not to straight up ask a foriegn leader to investigate a poltical opponent who has literally admitted on camera to his wrong-doing. The correct way is to utilize agents of foreign powers in concert with agents of our own intelligence apparatus and the media to fully incept supposed "crimes" whole cloth using entrapment.

Ray - SoCal said...

I wish I knew which posters here are fake, and just spewing talking points they cut and paste.

Amazon does have a bit of a double standard on reviews. They are Very protective of liberal political authors for reviews. Hillarys book was treated with kid gloves for reviews, and a lot of negative reviews were deleted.

There is a HUGE industry of fake reviews. And to get sales, you need lots of positive reviews due to Amazon’s algorithm.

Requiring a verified purchase is part of Amazon’s attempt to police reviews.

This is the first I heard of can’t do a review, it’s usually just labeled not verified. Makes sense with something political.

Same issue with blog commenters, there is a huge amount of fake commenters doing this for political purposes. China and Russia employ people to do this as a way to impact public opinion around the world.

The revelation / documentation of the Clintons training people to call into Talk Radio was revelatory.

The email memo to claim to be a conservative to build credibility floored me, as a way to spread liberal talking points. Was that think progressive that did that?

Something related:

https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/01/more-cases-discovered-of-democrat-operatives-who-pushed-fake-political-pages-ads-on-facebook/

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Be nice if at least one democrat could be normal and not part of the Hillary-Schitt corruption party.

dbp said...

"The prosecutor was not investigating Burisma. That is simply a lie."

I've seen this talking point a lot, never with any proof--other than other people who don't know making the same claim.

Looking at it logically, why would Biden threaten to withhold a Billion Dollars over a prosecutor not doing his "job"? What exactly did Biden want the prosecutor to investigate? It makes more sense if the prosecutor was investigating someone Biden didn't want investigated.

hombre said...

Obama? Who’s Obama?

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Be nice if the Democrat party could offer someone normal. Instead all we get is the repeated corruption parade that is the Hillary Schitt show.

Mike Sylwester said...

Freder Frederson at 8:39 AM
The prosecutor was not investigating Burisma.

The relevant State Department documents should be released to the public:

* Reports and position papers about Brisma

* Reports and position papers about Hunter Biden

* Reports and position papers about the prosecutor

* Briefing papers for Joe Biden's meeting with the Ukrainian President

* Reports and memorandums written after the meeting

* Consultations with the EU and other international organizations about the prosecutor -- before and after the meeting

* Expressions of approval or disapproval from the EU and other international organizations -- before and after the meeting

RMc said...

In other news, water is wet.

CWJ said...

"Wherever Joe Biden went, son Hunter cashed in"

This is what I find so curious. Is Joe really so solicitous of Hunter's welfare? Or is Hunter, Joe's preferred cut-out for back door bribes and money laundering. The money flows to Hunter seem to be pretty well documented. I wish somebody would look into the money trail between Hunter and Joe.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

It's illegal to go after political rivals on the left.

Hillary was supposed to walk in. That's what this is all about. She is supposed HAVE power.

Drago said...

My favorite new bit of information about his latest dem/lefty/LLR-left ploy is the fact that the official review of the funds that were to flow to Ukraine did not even occur until 4 weeks AFTER the phone call!!

So there was no quid and no pro quo!!

LOLOLOLOL

But don't worry. That won't stop Noted Bundy Case Liar Freder for even a moment!

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

It's illegal to ask anyone anywhere to look into democratic corruption.

Impeach!

hombre said...

Blogger Freder Frederson said...
“The prosecutor was not investigating Burisma. That is simply a lie. The U.S. and the EU wanted him gone because he was not investigating anyone.”

Let’s see, Biden on videos says he told Ukraine, “Fire the prosecutor or you don’t get the $billion.” It was the leftmedia, not the “ right wing,” that exposed the connection to little Biden.

So what was your point again, that political extortion is okay when done by a Democrat?

CWJ said...

"Political rival"

BB&H,
This gives me a chuckle as well. Two men who have never held political office contemporaneously, much less gone head to head on any significant policy issue or were the party nominees for the same office, are "rivals."

rhhardin said...

Adam Schiff Performs Dramatic Re-Enactment of Pee Tape
https://www.thederringer.com/

hombre said...

ARM (7:50) and Rich Lowry (National Review) think Trump’s request to Ukraine’s President was “in the context of a discussion of military aid....” It was not.

It just goes to show that TDS-inspired stupidity crosses political lines.

n.n said...

Political congruence and other euphemisms.

Howard said...

Manafort was not a candidate, but he is a convicted felon for being a foreign agent of murderous despots. #metoo fail

tim in vermont said...

"The prosecutor was not investigating Burisma. That is simply a lie.”

That’s not what the prosecutor who was fired said in this sworn deposition.

https://www.scribd.com/document/427618359/Shokin-Statement

Read the whole thing, but I am sure you won’t so just go to page 11 if you want to see that whoever is feeding you that line is lying themselves. I know it’s a cliché, but I want to say “wake up!”

MadisonMan said...

The prosecutor was not investigating Burisma. That is simply a lie. The U.S. and the EU wanted him gone because he was not investigating anyone.

Freder, do you think Biden was right in using extortion to have the Prosecutor removed?

narciso said...

Heres another concerning the form:

https://mobile.twitter.com/ClimateAudit/status/1177603118101647365

tim in vermont said...

Some media outlets have reported that, at the time Joe Biden forced the firing in March 2016, there were no open investigations. Those reports are wrong. A British-based investigation of Burisma's owner was closed down in early 2015 on a technicality when a deadline for documents was not met. But the Ukraine Prosecutor General's office still had two open inquiries in March 2016, according to the official case file provided me. One of those cases involved taxes; the other, allegations of corruption. Burisma announced the cases against it were not closed and settled until January 2017. . - The Hill

If the case against Trump is so strong, what’s with the lying Freder?

Michael K said...

Howard said...
Manafort was not a candidate, but he is a convicted felon for being a foreign agent of murderous despots. #metoo fail


Whereas the Democrats like Podesta are unconvicted felons because SHUT UP !

narciso said...

That last link is about the redeaigned complaint form

narciso said...

Its in his nature, they didnt shut down the investigation till september of that year, remsmbsr the all star team the oligarch had defending him.

Todd said...

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...
Be nice if the Democrat party could offer someone normal. Instead all we get is the repeated corruption parade that is the Hillary Schitt show.

9/27/19, 9:40 AM


Sorry, that is all that they have left and that is all that could survive the DNC primary process...

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

"The prosecutor was not investigating Burisma. That is simply a lie. The U.S. and the EU wanted him gone because he was not investigating anyone.”

Incorrect. Wrong.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

The left must lie about the prosecutor. MUST.

rehajm said...

How this story got turned 180 degrees shows the desperation of the right wing media and Trump supporters to ignore facts.

Freder would not know a fact if one bit him in the ass.


There seems to be much disagreement on what happened. Maybe we should ask someone to look into it?

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

CWJ - exactly.

"political rival" - and yet they are offended that Biden's name was mentioned in a conversation. When the narrative unravels...

Rick said...

Freder Frederson said...
The prosecutor was not investigating Burisma. That is simply a lie. The U.S. and the EU wanted him gone because he was not investigating anyone.

How this story got turned 180 degrees shows the desperation of the right wing media and Trump supporters to ignore facts.

9/27/19, 8:39 AM


1. The current accusations against Trump claim conditioning aid on events not included in the aid legislation is inappropriate. Even Freder's lie admits Biden did this.

2. Does it make any sense the EU and US would have such a strong opinion about a prosecutor for doing nothing that they would condition aid on his termination? How stupid is this? Our own government includes a myriad of bureaucrats not doing anything and we don't even bother firing them much less threatening to abandon a country being invaded over it. It's absurd.

3. Are there any other instances where Biden intervened to condition aid on firing an ineffective bureaucrat? So we're to presume all other aid-recipient governments were functioning perfectly? Who believes this nonsense?

Ralph L said...

I wish somebody would look into the money trail between Hunter and Joe.

Follow it up his nose.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Solomon: These once-secret memos cast doubt on Joe Biden's Ukraine story

Proof Biden is lying about Burisma

"Former Vice President Joe Biden, now a 2020 Democratic presidential contender, has locked into a specific story about the controversy in Ukraine.

He insists that, in spring 2016, he strong-armed Ukraine to fire its chief prosecutor solely because Biden believed that official was corrupt and inept, not because the Ukrainian was investigating a natural gas company, Burisma Holdings, that hired Biden's son, Hunter, into a lucrative job.

There’s just one problem.
Hundreds of pages of never-released memos and documents — many from inside the American team helping Burisma to stave off its legal troubles — conflict with Biden’s narrative.

And they raise the troubling prospect that U.S. officials may have painted a false picture in Ukraine that helped ease Burisma’s legal troubles and stop prosecutors’ plans to interview Hunter Biden during the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

For instance, Burisma’s American legal representatives met with Ukrainian officials just days after Biden forced the firing of the country’s chief prosecutor and offered “an apology for dissemination of false information by U.S. representatives and public figures” about the Ukrainian prosecutors, according to the Ukrainian government’s official memo of the meeting. The effort to secure that meeting began the same day the prosecutor's firing was announced.

In addition, Burisma’s American team offered to introduce Ukrainian prosecutors to Obama administration officials to make amends, according to that memo and the American legal team’s internal emails."

... more

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

The memos raise troubling questions:

1.) If the Ukraine prosecutor’s firing involved only his alleged corruption and ineptitude, why did Burisma's American legal team refer to those allegations as “false information?"

2.) If the firing had nothing to do with the Burisma case, as Biden has adamantly claimed, why would Burisma’s American lawyers contact the replacement prosecutor within hours of the termination and urgently seek a meeting in Ukraine to discuss the case?

Ukrainian prosecutors say they have tried to get this information to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) since the summer of 2018, fearing it might be evidence of possible violations of U.S. ethics laws. First, they hired a former federal prosecutor to bring the information to the U.S. attorney in New York, who, they say, showed no interest. Then, the Ukrainians reached out to President Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani.

Ukraine’s new president, Volodymyr Zelensky, told Trump in July that he plans to launch his own wide-ranging investigation into what happened with the Bidens and Burisma.

“I’m knowledgeable about the situation,” Zelensky told Trump, asking the American president to forward any evidence he might know about. "The issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue of making sure to restore the honesty so we will take care of that and will work on the investigation of the case.”

Biden has faced scrutiny since December 2015, when the New York Times published a story noting that Burisma hired Hunter Biden just weeks after the vice president was asked by President Obama to oversee U.S.-Ukraine relations. That story also alerted Biden’s office that Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin had an active investigation of Burisma and its founder.

cubanbob said...

Democrats are now the party of Communists and criminals. Obama presumably is not thrilled with Biden running. He has good cause to not want Biden running.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Documents I obtained this year detail an effort to change the narrative after the Times story about Hunter Biden, with the help of the Obama State Department.

Hunter Biden’s American business partner in Burisma, Devon Archer, texted a colleague two days after the Times story about a strategy to counter the “new wave of scrutiny” and stated that he and Hunter Biden had just met at the State Department. The text suggested there was about to be a new “USAID project the embassy is announcing with us” and that it was “perfect for us to move forward now with momentum.”

I have sued the State Department for any records related to that meeting. The reason is simple: There is both a public interest and an ethics question to knowing if Hunter Biden and his team sought State’s assistance while his father was vice president.

The controversy ignited anew earlier this year when I disclosed that Joe Biden admitted during a 2018 videotaped speech that, as vice president in March 2016, he threatened to cancel $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, to pressure Ukraine’s then-President Petro Poroshenko to fire Shokin.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

At the time, Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma. Shokin told me he was making plans to question Hunter Biden about $3 million in fees that Biden and his partner, Archer, collected from Burisma through their American firm. Documents seized by the FBI in an unrelated case confirm the payments, which in many months totaled more than $166,000.

Some media outlets have reported that, at the time Joe Biden forced the firing in March 2016, there were no open investigations. Those reports are wrong. A British-based investigation of Burisma's owner was closed down in early 2015 on a technicality when a deadline for documents was not met. But the Ukraine Prosecutor General's office still had two open inquiries in March 2016, according to the official case file provided me. One of those cases involved taxes; the other, allegations of corruption. Burisma announced the cases against it were not closed and settled until January 2017.

After I first reported it in a column, the New York Times and ABC News published similar stories confirming my reporting.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Joe Biden has since responded that he forced Shokin’s firing over concerns about corruption and ineptitude, which he claims were widely shared by Western allies, and that it had nothing to do with the Burisma investigation.

Some of the new documents I obtained call that claim into question.

In a newly sworn affidavit prepared for a European court, Shokin testified that when he was fired in March 2016, he was told the reason was that Biden was unhappy about the Burisma investigation. “The truth is that I was forced out because I was leading a wide-ranging corruption probe into Burisma Holdings, a natural gas firm active in Ukraine and Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, was a member of the Board of Directors,” Shokin testified.

“On several occasions President Poroshenko asked me to have a look at the case against Burisma and consider the possibility of winding down the investigative actions in respect of this company but I refused to close this investigation,” Shokin added.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Shokin certainly would have reason to hold a grudge over his firing. But his account is supported by documents from Burisma’s legal team in America, which appeared to be moving into Ukraine with intensity as Biden’s effort to fire Shokin picked up steam.

Burisma’s own accounting records show that it paid tens of thousands of dollars while Hunter Biden served on the board of an American lobbying and public relations firm, Blue Star Strategies, run by Sally Painter and Karen Tramontano, who both served in President Bill Clinton’s administration.

Just days before Biden forced Shokin’s firing, Painter met with the No. 2 official at the Ukrainian embassy in Washington and asked to meet officials in Kiev around the same time that Joe Biden visited there. Ukrainian embassy employee Oksana Shulyar emailed Painter afterward: “With regards to the meetings in Kiev, I suggest that you wait until the next week when there is an expected vote of the government’s reshuffle.”

Ukraine’s Washington embassy confirmed the conversations between Shulyar and Painter but said the reference to a shakeup in Ukrainian government was not specifically referring to Shokin’s firing or anything to do with Burisma.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Painter then asked one of the Ukraine embassy’s workers to open the door for meetings with Ukraine’s prosecutors about the Burisma investigation, the memos show. Eventually, Blue Star would pay that Ukrainian official money for his help with the prosecutor's office.

At the time, Blue Star worked in concert with an American criminal defense lawyer, John Buretta, who was hired by Burisma to help address the case in Ukraine. The case was settled in January 2017 for a few million dollars in fines for alleged tax issues.

Buretta, Painter, Tramontano, Hunter Biden and Joe Biden’s campaign have not responded to numerous calls and emails seeking comment.

On March 29, 2016, the day Shokin’s firing was announced, Buretta asked to speak with Yuriy Sevruk, the prosecutor named to temporarily replace Shokin, but was turned down, the memos show.

Blue Star, using the Ukrainian embassy worker it had hired, eventually scored a meeting with Sevruk on April 6, 2016, a week after Shokin’s firing. Buretta, Tramontano and Painter attended that meeting in Kiev, according to Blue Star’s memos.

Sevruk memorialized the meeting in a government memo that the general prosecutor’s office provided to me, stating that the three Americans offered an apology for the “false” narrative that had been provided by U.S. officials about Shokin being corrupt and inept.

CWJ said...

"And here I thought Republicans were saying it wasn’t OK for Obama."

Asuming your "it" is the Manafort request, I don't recall that being a public issue at the time. Nor do I recall the frenzied calls for impeachment even if you're correct.

But other than that, yeah the circumstances are totally comparable.

rehajm said...

How this story got turned 180 degrees...

Assuming someone was willing to make the unfathomable Free Solo leap of faith that it's true Joe Biden was demanding the the firing of the prosecutor because he wasn't doing enough investigating...Joe Biden is a career politician with many decades of experience, has a substantial support team, all available government investigatory assets more or less at his disposal...yet he decides it should be Joe Biden to make the threat despite the risk of the appearance of the compromising position that he finds himself in. Then brags about it.

It's almost as bad as assuming Trump is capable of the subtle threat the left is accusing him of. When is Trump ever subtle?

MayBee said...

If it's true Biden just wanted corruption investigated and was therefore withholding money, what did Trump do that was different? He says Biden is going around bragging about stopping the prosecution and asked him about looking into it. If the problem is Biden actually wanted *more* prosecution*, why is what Trump said wrong?

Charlie Eklund said...

All this talk about Amazon’s animosity to conservatives brings up a question that’s been on my mind for a while now. Since the Jeff Bezos-ownedWashington Post is now nothing more than a newsletter of the Democratic Party and Jeff Bezos-owned Amazon is hostile to conservatives’ expressing their opinions via their review process, might it now be the time for every right-of-center voter to cease and desist buying from Amazon? I’m a conservative yet I have been spending anywhere from $200-$500 a month on Amazon for the last 5-plus years. Everything I buy there could be purchased locally from brick and mortar stores or online from vendors who are not openly hostile to conservatives.

Would it make a difference in how Amazon and the Washington Post treat the 63 million people who voted for Trump? Probably not, but at least none of the pennies from my pocket will ever get into theirs.

Francisco D said...

I wish I knew which posters here are fake, and just spewing talking points they cut and paste.

I don't think its that hard, Ray.

Most of the lefties here get their talking points from one of the usual websites or TV shows. That is how the media works for the Left. Their thinking is rarely original, expansive or interesting.

If any are getting paid to troll, it is a waste of money.

narciso said...

Theres no evidence the weapons were held back,

Yancey Ward said...

At this point, I think Trump is trying to encourage the Democrats to pull the trigger on impeachment. The trial in the Senate would be epic, and Trump would, I think, actually take center stage himself.

The problem for the Democrats is this- Biden is on that video, and all the evidence suggests that threat against Shokin was about Burisma. John Solomon put up an article last night at The Hill based on actual documents from Burisma's American legal team that makes it very clear that they believed the case was active at the time of Shokin's firing, because they were actively soliciting a dismissal from the new prosecutor. Shokin himself, in a sworn affadavit said so, too. Add to this that Trump, in phone call, made it clear he thought this was corrupt and should be investigated- really, who wouldn't think such a thing might be corrupt?

What I saw in the hearing yesterday is that the Democrats were blindsided by Trump's release of the transcript and the complaint- the entire hearing really did have the appearance of an attempted gotcha that would have been really effective but for one thing- the documents were already made public. This is why Schiff's attempted paraphrase fell so flat- people can actually look at what Schiff was paraphrasing and see that he was outright lying.

As I wrote, the people the Democrats have to convince aren't other Democrats, and right now the Democrats have convinced no one outside their party except for the last dregs of the NeverTrump LLRs at the dying National Review, and even there they can't convince the guy writing there that has any real legal experience, Andrew C. McCarthy.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

The relevant State Department documents should be released to the public:

Oh I'm sorry. You want documents released that could detail Democrat corruption? Sorry, no time for that. Our government is too busy working for the DNC.

Drago said...

Left Bank of the Charles: "And here I thought Republicans were saying it wasn’t OK for Obama."

LOL

This is the point where you know the die hard morons on the left have given up the basic fight and have shifted to the "everyone does the same thing" argument.

obama/Biden/Hillary did all the things that Trump did not do but was accused of.

As with slavery and Jim Crow, we are now nearing the point in this latest left smear/hoax debacle where the lefties will begin to shift responsibility for the specific and now documented Biden/obama/Hillary actions to Trump across the board.

The FISA abuse, Brennan's treasonous Crossfire Hurricane BS and ties to Crowdstrike and their shenanigans, etc are all going to be laid bare with the coming IG and Durham reports.

The jig is up on the lefties fully weaponizing the federal govt against domestic political foes as well as enlisting at least 5 allied nation intelligence services in the pursuit of this Stasi-like coup.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

I got a kick out of Ace's post that highlighted Michael Barbaro's claim that Hugh Hewitt "circulates personal attacks on a candidates child" for a tweet Hewitt made about a woman filing a paternity suit against Hunter. Talk about double standards. Apparently you can no longer say anything negative about a 50 year old if that person is a "child" of a Democrat. Talk about double Standards.

Barron couldn't be reached for comment.

RobinGoodfellow said...

Blogger rhhardin said...
It's not a double standard. It's making up rules as you go along.


Trumplaw is like Calvinball.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

The relevant State Department documents should be released to the public

Speaking of document requests, when was the last time a Democrat actually provided requested information related to any investigation without first being granted immunity? Further, when was the last time a Republican was offered immunity?

Trump has gone above and beyond to provide requested information. Democrats? Well, when they aren't stuffing stolen documents into their pants, they're busy either deleting emails, hammering mobile devices or cleaning servers.

It's almost like there are two sets of rules.

Michael K said...

The FISA abuse, Brennan's treasonous Crossfire Hurricane BS and ties to Crowdstrike and their shenanigans, etc are all going to be laid bare with the coming IG and Durham reports.

I hope you are right. I am coming slowly to the conclusion that the CIA has to be shut down. It is morphing into a secret police.

rehajm said...

are all going to be laid bare with the coming IG and Durham reports

When is that laid bare stuff happening exactly?

Yancey Ward said...

You know who I have gained a new respect for- Chuck. You have to know that it is probably killing him that he is shut out of here, now, and yet he hasn't changed his ID and posted against the ban- that, at least, garners respect.

Sebastian said...

"Freder, do you think Biden was right in using extortion to have the Prosecutor removed?"

Freder and the lefties buying the latest talking point are just changing the quid in the quid pro quo.

Of course, the double standard remains.

Original Mike said...

"You know who I have gained a new respect for- Chuck. You have to know that it is probably killing him that he is shut out of here, now, and yet he hasn't changed his ID and posted against the ban- that, at least, garners respect."

Chuck got banned? What for? (I miss stuff, because I can't possibly read all the threads. I don't know how some people, apparently, accomplish it).

MayBee said...

The CIA is obviously operating as a cover for someone/some group to make a lot of money or have a lot of power or both. But the power isn't for the US, it is for the individuals running whatever it is they are running.

JAORE said...

"I should hope there would be different standards for a Lightbringer and a nazi!"

Brilliant satire. Second only to Congressman Schiff.

Kirk Parker said...

Michael K.,

" I am coming slowly to the conclusion that the CIA has to be shut down. It is morphing into a secret police."

I came to that conclusion years ago, the moment Snowdon revealed the extent of the (lied-about) NSA collection of American communication. CIA, NSA, FBI... they all need to go and we need to reconstitute brand new agencies, as needed, from the ground up, with better safeguards... perhaps no civil service or qualified immunity protections for anyone working in them. (That's just off the top of my head, I'm certainly open to better ideas and/or explanation of what's wrong with mine.)

Kirk Parker said...

Bleach Bit,

Please, for the love of Mike don't use the phrase "fucking Hillary", ok???

Howard said...

It only looks like a double standard when you lack the cajones to compete

Drago said...

Howard: "It only looks like a double standard when you lack the cajones to compete"

LOL

Howard really has nothing to contribute.

Sad. Even gadfly can usually cut and paste some nonsense together to pretend he/she/xe is informed.

Sam L. said...

Nooooooooooooooooooooooo. They'd do THAT????? Well. OF COURSE THEY WOULD.

narciso said...

In trevanians shibumi, the company has become a government/corporate monolith called the mother company, which is rather inefficient, along the lines buckley used to say 'this had all the hallmarks of a cia operation, everyone one but the target was killed'

under brennan, for instance, the drone program was a very narrowly drawn quadrant in the northwest frontier and yemen, there was no targeting in north Africa or near asia, at least till 2014, because after all it was considered jay vee targeting,

daskol said...

Around the time Sue Gordon got pushed out, it appears that the DNI changed the rules on submitting a whistleblower complaint. Previously, the standard called for firsthand knowledge, but the new form eliminates that requirement.

Is complaining about this dirty business a sign of a lack of cojones for competition?

We really, really need to get rid of many parts of our government.

Yancey Ward said...

The complaint form had to be changed, and not because it allowed the complaint to move forward through the system- the change had to done because the whistleblower had to have a defense against getting details wrong- in other words, the complaint could only be hearsay, anything else left him open to perjury charges, regardless of whether he did a whistleblower complaint, or a direct leak to the House Intelligenc Committee.

The whistleblower, though, is in for a big surprise should the Democrats actually go forward with impeachment- he won't be able to stay anonymous- the Democrats still need a live witness, and that witness is going to be cross-examined and will have to identify the people whose 1st hand accounts the whistleblower has related in his complaint. There is no dodging this. He may as well come forward right now.

Yancey Ward said...

This is Blasey-Ford all over again- someone willingly makes a anonymous complaint with the full support of Democratic politicians who no doubt issue firm assurances that their identity will be protected, then said politicians out the person to the media in steps to force the anonymous complaint filer into public testimony.

I think the new whistleblower never intended to be revealed, but Schiff and the Democrats have already started the process of outing him- they were the sources of the NYTimes story yesterday, but left the dirty work to others in naming suspects based on the details of the NYTimes story. Clean hands maintained by assiduous use of gloves.

Birkel said...

Yeah, what the fuck happened to my favourite fopdoodle?

iowan2 said...

Howard said...
Manafort was not a candidate, but he is a convicted felon for being a foreign agent of murderous despots. #metoo fail


I know who else is a convicted felon. General Flynn. Oh, wait. A judge tossed out the Mueller crafted prosecution and conviction. #malicious prosecution

iowan2 said...

Howard said...
Manafort was not a candidate, but he is a convicted felon for being a foreign agent of murderous despots. #metoo fail


I know who else is a convicted felon. General Flynn. Oh, wait. A judge tossed out the Mueller crafted prosecution and conviction. #malicious prosecution

Drago said...

OM: "Chuck got banned? What for?"

The Poor Soul. He was just too high strung.....

Tina Trent said...

McCarthy underwent an interesting transformation when he began digging into Obama's associations with domestic terrorists and how the media colluded to conceal it in 2008. He was shocked; the shock grew into outrage, then rational articulation. He stayed on the National Review wagon to keep some sanity there, as did Victor Davis Hansen.

How they don't punch David French in the face on those stupid cruises, I don't know.

He's a serious person with no ego in the game, a legal version of Theodore Dalrymple.

I can't think of anyone else I'd like to see run for president in 2024.

Howard said...

Your right Drago. I do need to work on my jokes and quips since you have a new keyboard. It's tough with Chuck gone and with Mommy putting all of us on timeout.

Nichevo said...

I know who else is a convicted felon. General Flynn. Oh, wait. A judge tossed out the Mueller crafted prosecution and conviction. #malicious prosecution


?! Link

h said...

Replying to Nichevo and to the commenters in general. Nichevo claimed that a judge threw out Flynn "conviction" (plea of guilty). When I googled I couldn't find anything in the last 6 months. (For example a March 2019 NBC news report that says, "He's expected to be sentenced later this year." ) Anybody have a link to an update on this? And does Flynn have any insight/testimony on Ukraine?