That's gambling a lot that at the end of eight years, Trump will (1) feel gratitude (for once) and (2) at his current rate of decline, be able to remember who Pence is.
Or be alive at all, for that matter. Trump isn't young and I doubt he's healthy.
(I am not advocating for Trump's death, just making an observation.)
Well if he's not, then Pence is in. That's not a problem (for him, just the rest of us).
I'm talking about the situation where Pence is (apparently) hoping for an endorsement from a living, charitable, and totally not senile ex-boss in 2024. With Trump, any one of those is pretty long odds; put them all together, and...
I agree with @Scooter: his actual best chance to ever be President is by default.
(Insert Simpsons clip here.)
Ironically, i'm pretty sure the only way Pence could ever become president is if Trump is impeached or resigns. I can't possibly see how such a bland man could win a primary, let alone a general election - he doesn't really have any of the qualities that attracted Trump's base.
Oh man, I would laugh so hard if Pence stabs Trump in the back.
It would be like watching a shit factory explode.
Until the shit starts to land, of course.
That's quite a picture you've painted...but it's apt.
I'm guessing that if Pence's call with Zelensky was problematic enough that the White House is struggling whether or not to release it -and honestly I suspect the only "struggle" they're having is whether to throw Pence under the bus now or later - then Pence is stuck with Trump all the way.
I guess the obvious political lesson here is don't play enforcer for Donald Trump, but everyone keeps doing it anyway for some reason. It's pretty funny though how every time the White House is under siege, Pence's people put out press feelers talking about how sad it is that Mike Pence is catching heat for this or that.
Ironically, i'm pretty sure the only way Pence could ever become president is if Trump is impeached or resigns. I can't possibly see how such a bland man could win a primary, let alone a general election - he doesn't really have any of the qualities that attracted Trump's base.
Oh man, I would laugh so hard if Pence stabs Trump in the back.
It would be like watching a shit factory explode.
Until the shit starts to land, of course.
That's quite a picture you've painted...but it's apt.
I'm guessing that if Pence's call with Zelensky was problematic enough that the White House is struggling whether or not to release it -and honestly I suspect the only "struggle" they're having is whether to throw Pence under the bus now or later - then Pence is stuck with Trump all the way.
I guess the obvious political lesson here is don't play enforcer for Donald Trump, but everyone keeps doing it anyway for some reason. It's pretty funny though how every time the White House is under siege, Pence's people put out press feelers talking about how sad it is that Mike Pence is catching heat for this or that.
They keep doing it because the alternative is getting tossed out of the admin. And maybe they get thrown under the bus anyway.
Ironically, i'm pretty sure the only way Pence could ever become president is if Trump is impeached or resigns. I can't possibly see how such a bland man could win a primary, let alone a general election - he doesn't really have any of the qualities that attracted Trump's base.
Oh man, I would laugh so hard if Pence stabs Trump in the back.
It would be like watching a shit factory explode.
Until the shit starts to land, of course.
That's quite a picture you've painted...but it's apt.
I'm guessing that if Pence's call with Zelensky was problematic enough that the White House is struggling whether or not to release it -and honestly I suspect the only "struggle" they're having is whether to throw Pence under the bus now or later - then Pence is stuck with Trump all the way.
I guess the obvious political lesson here is don't play enforcer for Donald Trump, but everyone keeps doing it anyway for some reason. It's pretty funny though how every time the White House is under siege, Pence's people put out press feelers talking about how sad it is that Mike Pence is catching heat for this or that.
They keep doing it because the alternative is getting tossed out of the admin. And maybe they get thrown under the bus anyway.
True, but Pence at least can't get tossed out of the administration. He was voted in on the same ticket as Trump. He of all people could have said "nah, not doing that shit." Sure he would have been isolated politically, but his entire plan in this administration seems geared towards that goal anyway.
Ironically, i'm pretty sure the only way Pence could ever become president is if Trump is impeached or resigns. I can't possibly see how such a bland man could win a primary, let alone a general election - he doesn't really have any of the qualities that attracted Trump's base.
Oh man, I would laugh so hard if Pence stabs Trump in the back.
It would be like watching a shit factory explode.
Until the shit starts to land, of course.
That's quite a picture you've painted...but it's apt.
I'm guessing that if Pence's call with Zelensky was problematic enough that the White House is struggling whether or not to release it -and honestly I suspect the only "struggle" they're having is whether to throw Pence under the bus now or later - then Pence is stuck with Trump all the way.
I guess the obvious political lesson here is don't play enforcer for Donald Trump, but everyone keeps doing it anyway for some reason. It's pretty funny though how every time the White House is under siege, Pence's people put out press feelers talking about how sad it is that Mike Pence is catching heat for this or that.
They keep doing it because the alternative is getting tossed out of the admin. And maybe they get thrown under the bus anyway.
True, but Pence at least can't get tossed out of the administration. He was voted in on the same ticket as Trump. He of all people could have said "nah, not doing that shit." Sure he would have been isolated politically, but his entire plan in this administration seems geared towards that goal anyway.
Ahh yes but Pence is dumb.
Also team Trump compromised him as soon as he was selected as a condition of being VP.
I'd say there's a good chance that the Pence transcript shows him laying out a clear quid pro quo for "missiles = investigate corruption", but that he sticks to the codeword "corruption" and doesn't mention Biden. Then you'd have an argument over whether releasing it makes Pence look more or less corrupt. Any other situation and it would probably be foregone conclusion what to do.
We're already closing in on like 50% of the people who listened to that call immediately knowing that it was Really Fucking Bad, split between those who tried to bury it and those who tried to report it through we now know multiple channels. On its face, the sanitized version they released is Fucking Bad, but you don't reach that kind of saturation of people all freaking out at once without Seriously Fucking Bad Shit, which since now we know they're deliberately hiding and obfuscating parts, really screams to me that there was a very explicit tit for tat spelled out.
An extensive review of correspondence, court documents, legal opinions and public statements from lawyers representing Mr. Trump shows the president’s attorneys have consistently pushed to put him beyond the reach of any other institution in federal, state or local government—immune to civil lawsuits, judicial orders, criminal investigations or congressional probes.
A longstanding Justice Department legal opinion says a president can’t be federally prosecuted while in office, but says nothing about being investigated, and in any case doesn’t apply to state and local efforts to enforce their own laws. Mr. Trump’s lawyers say he is beyond any such actions.
“This administration has articulated a view of presidential power in which the president is above the law,” said Erica Newland, who served in the Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel during both the Obama and Trump administrations.
At the same time, since Democrats took over Congress in January, Mr. Trump’s government and personal lawyers have fought numerous legal battles over congressional oversight—arguing that close aides don’t have to testify even if subpoenaed, that all congressional investigations must serve a “legislative purpose,” that cabinet secretaries can disobey subpoenas and that a congressional impeachment inquiry is invalid.
Further, they have argued that federal courts can’t transmit evidence of presidential wrongdoing obtained by a grand jury to Congress for possible consideration of impeachment. In some instances, Trump administration attorneys have contended that courts have no right to stop the president from taking official actions.
Some of the claims are contradictory: Mr. Trump’s personal attorneys have argued he can be held accountable only by Congress, while his White House lawyers fought efforts to hold him accountable in Congress.
Trump aides start soaking high-priced D.C. lawyers in new business
During the Mueller investigation, many Trump staffers leaned on a legal defense fund to offset their hefty bills. A similar cushion has yet to emerge for impeachment — making some skittish about defending Trump publicly.
Roughly a dozen current and former administration officials already have testified behind closed doors — including top diplomats, State Department aides and two current and former National Security Council staffers. All have had to hire attorneys, many of them from top Washington law firms that specialize in congressional investigations, white collar crime or national security matters — advice that typically costs $1,000 to $1,500 an hour, according to three lawyers.
As the Democrats’ inquiry looks deeper into the actions of staff at the Office of Management and Budget, the White House chief of staff’s office and the NSC, the need for legal representation also is expected to swell. And Trump allies and attorneys have not moved yet to establish a legal defense fund for Trump aides as they did during the Mueller investigation.
“Mid-level White House staffers are worried about getting wrapped up in the Democrats’ investigation even if they are not primary players,” said a former senior administration official who remains in touch with ex-colleagues. “People are concerned they will have to testify, so they are trying to lay low. If they do think they need a lawyer, they are trying to figure out how to get one.”
So far, no one inside the White House or Republican National Committee has signaled to current White House staff that the Trump orbit will help to cover any legal bills associated with the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry — even as Democrats eye more and more testimony from White House officials and the president’s inner circle.
One senior administration official said it was premature to discuss a legal defense fund at this time since the Democrats’ investigation seems more like a “partisan, raw political experience” than an actual legal threat, the official said. A Republican close to the White House said that despite discussions of a potential fund, no one has set one up yet for the impeachment proceedings.
The lack of an impeachment-related legal defense fund worries some Trump allies, who feel like White House staffers need cover as they attempt to protect the president or speak publicly on his behalf.
But current White House officials are skittish about discussing legal representation at all, given the fact that the president feels he did nothing wrong in his conversation with the Ukrainian president.
Are the higher ups just cheap asses or just too scared to admit there is a problem?
Not treating the threat seriously is how you end up with people who commit perjury because they think it doesn't matter.
Couscous on
+29
Options
KoopahTroopahThe koopas, the troopas.Philadelphia, PARegistered Userregular
Something about having a WH fund to handle legal fees for witnesses in exchange for speaking highly of the WH is icky.
I will laugh until I die if Trump's ouster from office is due to the fact that he can't pay for anyone to defend him, or won't pay for anyone to defend his aides.
Something about having a WH fund to handle legal fees for witnesses in exchange for speaking highly of the WH is icky.
There is the obvious conflict of interest fear from the lawyers getting paid by a source that really wants to protect the president more than the people they are paying the lawyers to represent.
The Trump people are not ones to care enough about that issue to take steps to avoid potential conflicts of interest. As an example, the people helping pay for costs during the Mueller inquiry were pretty open about the sole purpose.
OVERBY: That's because the rules for legal funds are all over the map. Congress has its rules. The Office of Government Ethics has other rules for the executive branch. The Internal Revenue Service is involved, too, since contributions can count as gifts. The Patriot Legal Defense (ph) Fund Trust, LLC is a pro-Trump legal fund with anonymous backing. It's intended to help pay legal bills for staffers from the Trump campaign, the transition and the White House. The fund's manager is former Congresswoman Nan Hayworth. Here she is in a promo video.
NAN HAYWORTH: Your support of the Patriot Fund will keep faith with the people who share President Trump's commitment to make America great again. Thank you.
OVERBY: The Patriot Fund is pooling money from many donors to be doled out to needy staffers. The fund said money from, say, an energy company won't go to a staffer handling energy policy. The arrangement got an informal thumbs-up from the Office of Government Ethics. Holman at Public Citizen said that ethically it doesn't really work.
And they basically act as an influence operation for the people giving the money, especially as the money is fungible.
Former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, who left the agency in July under a cloud of scandals, received $50,000 from a wealthy conservative businesswoman for his legal defense fund, according to his final financial disclosure report released Thursday.
The donor, self-made billionaire Diane Hendricks of Beloit, Wis., was also a major donor to President Donald Trump's campaign, which named her one of its economic advisers, and she contributed heavily to Republican Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's campaigns.
EPA ethics official Justina Fugh wrote in the filing that Pruitt did not seek advice from the agency before accepting Hendricks’ contribution, which was “believed to be in cash.”
Lawyers are important to have in these situations and you might be able to conceive of ways in which the ethics problems could be minimized, but we all know they won't do that and won't care.
I wouldn't be surprised if the lack of a legal fund for WH aides is directly related to the fact that some former and current WH aides have given damaging testimonies already, and the whistleblower's sources were said to be WH aides. Trump probably doesn't trust any of them and wants to punish them as a group. He's not going to wait until after they betray him again to turn on them anymore.
I wouldn't be surprised if this was Trump just being cheap. He doesn't think he did anything wrong and he got away with all the shit Mueller was after so he thinks it's a waste of money.
Um, its frightening that even inside their own circle they say the impeachment is "partisan, raw political experience”. Like, they know its for real when they are talking among themselves don't they? They don't drink their own kool-aid they are dishing out to their base?
Um, its frightening that even inside their own circle they say the impeachment is "partisan, raw political experience”. Like, they know its for real when they are talking among themselves don't they? They don't drink their own kool-aid they are dishing out to their base?
Trump absolutely believes it, and surrounds himself with people who either also believe it, are crooked enough to enable that belief, or are too cowardly to contradict him.
Anyone who could have been considered sane or competent is pretty much gone from this administration at this point.
Um, its frightening that even inside their own circle they say the impeachment is "partisan, raw political experience”. Like, they know its for real when they are talking among themselves don't they? They don't drink their own kool-aid they are dishing out to their base?
They all drink the koolaid. All those GOP congresspeople and their staff are getting their news from Fox News, which they watch in their official actual real-job offices.
Hell, even the donors believe this shit. Look at Romney's 47% video. Behind closed doors, to the rich money men, they are still saying the same bullshit.
I once thought the GOP used Fox as just propaganda to control their base and when behind closed door, they secretly discussed the real world ramifications but only ignored them out of greed or lust for power.
I can’t remember the exact moment, but I think it was during Romney’s campaign (not the 47% thing for me) when I finally realized that they were drinking their own koolaid.
I’m sure a rare few, like McConnell, are cunning enough to not buy into their own propaganda and are just pure evil. But a surprising amount are just your average Fox viewer that somehow made it into positions of power.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
I once thought the GOP used Fox as just propaganda to control their base and when behind closed door, they secretly discussed the real world ramifications but only ignored them out of greed or lust for power.
I can’t remember the exact moment, but I think it was during Romney’s campaign (not the 47% thing for me) when I finally realized that they were drinking their own koolaid.
I’m sure a rare few, like McConnell, are cunning enough to not buy into their own propaganda and are just pure evil. But a surprising amount are just your average Fox viewer that somehow made it into positions of power.
Fox News has been around long enough for people to never be vaccinated against it... or to have forgotten to get reinocculated.
I once thought the GOP used Fox as just propaganda to control their base and when behind closed door, they secretly discussed the real world ramifications but only ignored them out of greed or lust for power.
I can’t remember the exact moment, but I think it was during Romney’s campaign (not the 47% thing for me) when I finally realized that they were drinking their own koolaid.
I’m sure a rare few, like McConnell, are cunning enough to not buy into their own propaganda and are just pure evil. But a surprising amount are just your average Fox viewer that somehow made it into positions of power.
Fox News has been around long enough for people to never be vaccinated against it... or to have forgotten to get reinocculated.
An entire generation of GOP representatives are now used to going on TV and never being challenged on anything they say thanks to Fox so their spin skills have become rusty as hell and it shows.
I once thought the GOP used Fox as just propaganda to control their base and when behind closed door, they secretly discussed the real world ramifications but only ignored them out of greed or lust for power.
I can’t remember the exact moment, but I think it was during Romney’s campaign (not the 47% thing for me) when I finally realized that they were drinking their own koolaid.
I’m sure a rare few, like McConnell, are cunning enough to not buy into their own propaganda and are just pure evil. But a surprising amount are just your average Fox viewer that somehow made it into positions of power.
I once thought the GOP used Fox as just propaganda to control their base and when behind closed door, they secretly discussed the real world ramifications but only ignored them out of greed or lust for power.
I can’t remember the exact moment, but I think it was during Romney’s campaign (not the 47% thing for me) when I finally realized that they were drinking their own koolaid.
I’m sure a rare few, like McConnell, are cunning enough to not buy into their own propaganda and are just pure evil. But a surprising amount are just your average Fox viewer that somehow made it into positions of power.
I think this started with Jerry Falwell's moral majority. It allows them to believe that even if they lose every election, they are the ones with the true power. They just need to move farther to the right to unlock it. It's like a kid standing on a roof thinking this time will be the time he unlocks his super powers and learns to fly.
So one of devin nunes's aid's who had been previously fired from an NSC job is leaking the name of the whistleblower to conservative media. Yep always fucking projection from these clowns.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Compared to an actual court of law, Impeachment is a "raw, political experience". There are no standards for what is impeachable and what is sufficient burden of proof. The consequences are removal from office, not a sentence. In the context of deciding what kind of lawyering that means, it absolutely makes all the difference whether you think you paying out to protect yourself from future criminal liability, or just keeping your job or protecting the man upstairs.
This one also happens to be "partisan" because you can see almost zero Republicans getting behind it.
The average tenure in Congress is ~10 years. The people who stay forever are mostly outliers (and also the people you know because they have both been there forever enough to be a face, and been there forever enough to have seniority and Chair a Committee) Meaning most House Republicans were elected in the 2010 wave or subsequent to it.
The average age of the House of Representatives is also ~58. Meaning they were in college/ law school during or after the 'Regan Revolution' occurred.
They are actually true believers. Which is why you could get dozens of them to mob a SCIF, and why they are not treating the Impeachment Inquiry and it's charges with the seriousness that it deserves.
So one of devin nunes's aid's who had been previously fired from an NSC job is leaking the name of the whistleblower to conservative media. Yep always fucking projection from these clowns.
It's amazing how laser focused they are on the whistleblower when we're like 12 steps removed from them now; we have numerous other witnesses, the white house memo stating they did the thing, Trump doing the thing in front of a camera on the white house lawn, Mulvany admitting they did the thing and saying "Get over it.", and the whole kit and caboodle allegedly stored on a secured server somewhere.
The whistleblower is almost a non-issue at this point. It's the Steel Dossier all over again. "Doesn't matter if we commit crimes so long as we can discredit the first person to state we committed a crime."
The decorated Army officer who testified to House investigators on Tuesday told lawmakers that a close associate of Republican Rep. Devin Nunes “misrepresented” himself to President Donald Trump in an effort to involve himself further in Ukraine policy, according to two people familiar with his closed-door deposition.
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the National Security Council’s top Ukraine expert, told lawmakers that after attending Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s inauguration in May as part of a delegation led by Energy Secretary Rick Perry, Vindman had been looking forward to debriefing Trump and giving a positive account of Zelensky’s vision for Ukraine’s future—in his opening statement, VIndman said “the U.S. government policy community’s view is that the election of Zelenskyy and the promise of reforms to eliminate corruption will lock in Ukraine’s Western-leaning trajectory, and allow Ukraine to realize its dream of a vibrant democracy and economic prosperity.”
But Vindman was instructed “at the last second” not to attend the debriefing, he told lawmakers, because Trump’s advisers were worried it might confuse the president—Trump believed at the time that Kashyap Patel, a longtime Nunes staffer who joined the White House in February and had no discernable Ukraine experience or expertise, was actually the NSC’s top Ukraine expert instead of Vindman.
Vindman testified that he was told this directly by his boss at the time, NSC senior director for European and Russian affairs Fiona Hill.
Vindman also testified that he was told Patel had been circumventing normal NSC process to get negative material about Ukraine in front of the president, feeding Trump’s belief that Ukraine was brimming with corruption and had interfered in the 2016 election on behalf of Democrats.
Patel had previously served as Nunes’ top staffer on the House Intelligence Committee and worked to discredit the FBI and DOJ officials investigating Russia’s election interference.
For that reason, Vindman was careful to not overtly criticize Patel so as not to anger Nunes — the ranking member of the intelligence panel — who floated in and out of the 10-hour deposition, according to a person familiar with his testimony.
Despite the bipartisan outcry, the insinuation made its way to the deposition room. At one point, Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.) began asking questions implying that Vindman had been working both sides, expressing alarm that Vindman “gave the Ukrainians guidance” and asking how many times he spoke with Ukrainian officials, one of the people in the room at the time said.
It is amazing how everyone treated Trump like a toddler.
I see Republican are acting exactly as the huge hacks I expected them to act like.
So one of devin nunes's aid's who had been previously fired from an NSC job is leaking the name of the whistleblower to conservative media. Yep always fucking projection from these clowns.
So one of devin nunes's aid's who had been previously fired from an NSC job is leaking the name of the whistleblower to conservative media. Yep always fucking projection from these clowns.
Isn't this like, super illegal?
Not if you're a republican.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
The decorated Army officer who testified to House investigators on Tuesday told lawmakers that a close associate of Republican Rep. Devin Nunes “misrepresented” himself to President Donald Trump in an effort to involve himself further in Ukraine policy, according to two people familiar with his closed-door deposition.
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the National Security Council’s top Ukraine expert, told lawmakers that after attending Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s inauguration in May as part of a delegation led by Energy Secretary Rick Perry, Vindman had been looking forward to debriefing Trump and giving a positive account of Zelensky’s vision for Ukraine’s future—in his opening statement, VIndman said “the U.S. government policy community’s view is that the election of Zelenskyy and the promise of reforms to eliminate corruption will lock in Ukraine’s Western-leaning trajectory, and allow Ukraine to realize its dream of a vibrant democracy and economic prosperity.”
But Vindman was instructed “at the last second” not to attend the debriefing, he told lawmakers, because Trump’s advisers were worried it might confuse the president—Trump believed at the time that Kashyap Patel, a longtime Nunes staffer who joined the White House in February and had no discernable Ukraine experience or expertise, was actually the NSC’s top Ukraine expert instead of Vindman.
Vindman testified that he was told this directly by his boss at the time, NSC senior director for European and Russian affairs Fiona Hill.
Vindman also testified that he was told Patel had been circumventing normal NSC process to get negative material about Ukraine in front of the president, feeding Trump’s belief that Ukraine was brimming with corruption and had interfered in the 2016 election on behalf of Democrats.
Patel had previously served as Nunes’ top staffer on the House Intelligence Committee and worked to discredit the FBI and DOJ officials investigating Russia’s election interference.
For that reason, Vindman was careful to not overtly criticize Patel so as not to anger Nunes — the ranking member of the intelligence panel — who floated in and out of the 10-hour deposition, according to a person familiar with his testimony.
Despite the bipartisan outcry, the insinuation made its way to the deposition room. At one point, Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.) began asking questions implying that Vindman had been working both sides, expressing alarm that Vindman “gave the Ukrainians guidance” and asking how many times he spoke with Ukrainian officials, one of the people in the room at the time said.
It is amazing how everyone treated Trump like a toddler.
I see Republican are acting exactly as the huge hacks I expected them to act like.
So one of devin nunes's aid's who had been previously fired from an NSC job is leaking the name of the whistleblower to conservative media. Yep always fucking projection from these clowns.
It's amazing how laser focused they are on the whistleblower when we're like 12 steps removed from them now; we have numerous other witnesses, the white house memo stating they did the thing, Trump doing the thing in front of a camera on the white house lawn, Mulvany admitting they did the thing and saying "Get over it.", and the whole kit and caboodle allegedly stored on a secured server somewhere.
The whistleblower is almost a non-issue at this point. It's the Steel Dossier all over again. "Doesn't matter if we commit crimes so long as we can discredit the first person to state we committed a crime."
Authoritarians' faith is in strongmen, not facts or evidence. If the person in charge says a thing, then it is true. Supporting evidence is nice, but not necessary. Conversely, if you can discredit or unseat that person, everything they ever said becomes invalid. It's the same reason Evangelical creationists are still so fixated on Charles Darwin: they think the theory of evolution is a cult of personality, because that's how they operate.
They're attacking the whistleblower because they think that person is the root and cornerstone of the impeachment inquiry, not the first crack in the dam.
The decorated Army officer who testified to House investigators on Tuesday told lawmakers that a close associate of Republican Rep. Devin Nunes “misrepresented” himself to President Donald Trump in an effort to involve himself further in Ukraine policy, according to two people familiar with his closed-door deposition.
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the National Security Council’s top Ukraine expert, told lawmakers that after attending Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s inauguration in May as part of a delegation led by Energy Secretary Rick Perry, Vindman had been looking forward to debriefing Trump and giving a positive account of Zelensky’s vision for Ukraine’s future—in his opening statement, VIndman said “the U.S. government policy community’s view is that the election of Zelenskyy and the promise of reforms to eliminate corruption will lock in Ukraine’s Western-leaning trajectory, and allow Ukraine to realize its dream of a vibrant democracy and economic prosperity.”
But Vindman was instructed “at the last second” not to attend the debriefing, he told lawmakers, because Trump’s advisers were worried it might confuse the president—Trump believed at the time that Kashyap Patel, a longtime Nunes staffer who joined the White House in February and had no discernable Ukraine experience or expertise, was actually the NSC’s top Ukraine expert instead of Vindman.
Vindman testified that he was told this directly by his boss at the time, NSC senior director for European and Russian affairs Fiona Hill.
Vindman also testified that he was told Patel had been circumventing normal NSC process to get negative material about Ukraine in front of the president, feeding Trump’s belief that Ukraine was brimming with corruption and had interfered in the 2016 election on behalf of Democrats.
Patel had previously served as Nunes’ top staffer on the House Intelligence Committee and worked to discredit the FBI and DOJ officials investigating Russia’s election interference.
For that reason, Vindman was careful to not overtly criticize Patel so as not to anger Nunes — the ranking member of the intelligence panel — who floated in and out of the 10-hour deposition, according to a person familiar with his testimony.
Despite the bipartisan outcry, the insinuation made its way to the deposition room. At one point, Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.) began asking questions implying that Vindman had been working both sides, expressing alarm that Vindman “gave the Ukrainians guidance” and asking how many times he spoke with Ukrainian officials, one of the people in the room at the time said.
It is amazing how everyone treated Trump like a toddler.
I see Republican are acting exactly as the huge hacks I expected them to act like.
I get Patel was trying to discredit the Russia investigation on partisan grounds. How was trying undermine the Ukrainian government back then in the GOP's interest?
That's shady as fuck.
(Not that being hand-picked by Flynn and Nunes spoke well of his character to begin with)
But the Republican strategy for the open hearings also is coming into focus. They plan to zero in on the lack of direct contact with Trump -- and contend that the diplomats' concerns were merely stating their own personal opinions. It's a key argument they'll make with Taylor, who told lawmakers he never met with Trump one-on-one, according to a source familiar with his testimony.
"A lot of that information is based off of second-, third- and even fourth-hand information," said New York Rep. Lee Zeldin, who has been a Republican spokesman following many of the depositions. Zeldin said Taylor's remarks contained "only two references in his opening statement to the Bidens," and that the reference to investigating the Bidens came to Taylor from his conversation with National Security Council staffer Tim Morrison who was told by US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland.
Sources told CNN that when Republicans questioned Taylor, one of the things they focused on was his relationship with Morrison, who is scheduled to testify behind closed doors Thursday. While Republicans initially tried to cast them as friends, Taylor said he had never met Morrison before they both ended up in these roles, according to one source. They also tried to get at the idea that it would be improper for Morrison to convey to Taylor what Sondland said about his conversation with Trump, but Taylor explained that was Morrison's job.
Taylor did not record any of his phone calls, one source said, but he's been a note-taker his whole life and had extensive notes of his conversation with Sondland, Morrison and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs George Kent. The items that he quoted in his opening statement were quotes from his notes or from WhatsApp messages, the source said.
This is an amazingly common mob tactic and kind of doesn't matter when what Trump has already admitted to is illegal.
"Sure, all my underlings says I ordered it and the underling I put in charge of that area was pretty explicit about it, but you don't have any record of me explicitly ordering it!"
But the Republican strategy for the open hearings also is coming into focus. They plan to zero in on the lack of direct contact with Trump -- and contend that the diplomats' concerns were merely stating their own personal opinions. It's a key argument they'll make with Taylor, who told lawmakers he never met with Trump one-on-one, according to a source familiar with his testimony.
"A lot of that information is based off of second-, third- and even fourth-hand information," said New York Rep. Lee Zeldin, who has been a Republican spokesman following many of the depositions. Zeldin said Taylor's remarks contained "only two references in his opening statement to the Bidens," and that the reference to investigating the Bidens came to Taylor from his conversation with National Security Council staffer Tim Morrison who was told by US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland.
Sources told CNN that when Republicans questioned Taylor, one of the things they focused on was his relationship with Morrison, who is scheduled to testify behind closed doors Thursday. While Republicans initially tried to cast them as friends, Taylor said he had never met Morrison before they both ended up in these roles, according to one source. They also tried to get at the idea that it would be improper for Morrison to convey to Taylor what Sondland said about his conversation with Trump, but Taylor explained that was Morrison's job.
Taylor did not record any of his phone calls, one source said, but he's been a note-taker his whole life and had extensive notes of his conversation with Sondland, Morrison and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs George Kent. The items that he quoted in his opening statement were quotes from his notes or from WhatsApp messages, the source said.
This is an amazingly common mob tactic and kind of doesn't matter when what Trump has already admitted to is illegal.
"Sure, all my underlings says I ordered it and the underling I put in charge of that area was pretty explicit about it, but you don't have any record of me explicitly ordering it!"
"and also I said I did it and then did it again on camera"
But the Republican strategy for the open hearings also is coming into focus. They plan to zero in on the lack of direct contact with Trump -- and contend that the diplomats' concerns were merely stating their own personal opinions. It's a key argument they'll make with Taylor, who told lawmakers he never met with Trump one-on-one, according to a source familiar with his testimony.
"A lot of that information is based off of second-, third- and even fourth-hand information," said New York Rep. Lee Zeldin, who has been a Republican spokesman following many of the depositions. Zeldin said Taylor's remarks contained "only two references in his opening statement to the Bidens," and that the reference to investigating the Bidens came to Taylor from his conversation with National Security Council staffer Tim Morrison who was told by US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland.
Sources told CNN that when Republicans questioned Taylor, one of the things they focused on was his relationship with Morrison, who is scheduled to testify behind closed doors Thursday. While Republicans initially tried to cast them as friends, Taylor said he had never met Morrison before they both ended up in these roles, according to one source. They also tried to get at the idea that it would be improper for Morrison to convey to Taylor what Sondland said about his conversation with Trump, but Taylor explained that was Morrison's job.
Taylor did not record any of his phone calls, one source said, but he's been a note-taker his whole life and had extensive notes of his conversation with Sondland, Morrison and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs George Kent. The items that he quoted in his opening statement were quotes from his notes or from WhatsApp messages, the source said.
This is an amazingly common mob tactic and kind of doesn't matter when what Trump has already admitted to is illegal.
"Sure, all my underlings says I ordered it and the underling I put in charge of that area was pretty explicit about it, but you don't have any record of me explicitly ordering it!"
"and also I said I did it and then did it again on camera"
"vote trump maga"
"No, I just asked for some protection money and never said there was quid pro quo for not breaking his knee caps! The shop keeper even said there was no pressure!"
Croft says a lobbyist told her Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch should be fired, according to Croft's opening statement.
Croft was unaware of a hold on aid to Ukraine until a July 18 video conference with the Office of Management and Budget, where she was informed a hold was placed on security assistance to Ukraine, stemming from an order "at the direction of the President."
Anderson will say that former National Security Adviser John Bolton said Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, who took part in a pressure campaign in Ukraine, "could be an obstacle to increased White House engagement."
Edit: I find it amazing how they appeared to believe or pretended to believe Trump actually cared about corruption.
Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan testified today that he was aware that outside forces, including Rudy Giuliani, had been lobbying of the removal of Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch from Ukraine.
He also confirmed that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo pushed back on the efforts to have her recalled from her post.
“This had been a discussion that I’d had with the Secretary over a period of time and the Secretary had pushed back and sought justification from those who were criticizing Ambassador Yovanovitch,” Sullivan said during his Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing. “And after several months had elapsed, the secretary finally told me there had come a point that the President had lost confidence in the ambassador and we needed to make a change in our mission to Ukraine.”
Sullivan is appearing this morning before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to be vetted as the next US ambassador to Russia.
"I'm increasingly worried that President Trump will want to shut down the government again because of impeachment," Schumer told reporters. "He always likes to create diversions. I hope and pray he won’t want to cause another government shutdown because it might be a diversion away from impeachment."
This is just an offhand quote from Schumer but I could definitely see Trump making this play.
I figured Trump's dipping approval rating & lack of any policy wins during the last shutdown would prevent him from trying it again, but if anyone tells him he can delay impeachment and get it out of the news with a shutdown, we might be beating the 35-day record.
The closer he pushes impeachment toward the 2020 election, the more traction he'll have in claiming it's a political hit job. And he can easily buy himself a month or two vetoing a CR.
Posts
Well if he's not, then Pence is in. That's not a problem (for him, just the rest of us).
I'm talking about the situation where Pence is (apparently) hoping for an endorsement from a living, charitable, and totally not senile ex-boss in 2024. With Trump, any one of those is pretty long odds; put them all together, and...
I agree with @Scooter: his actual best chance to ever be President is by default.
(Insert Simpsons clip here.)
That's quite a picture you've painted...but it's apt.
I'm guessing that if Pence's call with Zelensky was problematic enough that the White House is struggling whether or not to release it -and honestly I suspect the only "struggle" they're having is whether to throw Pence under the bus now or later - then Pence is stuck with Trump all the way.
I guess the obvious political lesson here is don't play enforcer for Donald Trump, but everyone keeps doing it anyway for some reason. It's pretty funny though how every time the White House is under siege, Pence's people put out press feelers talking about how sad it is that Mike Pence is catching heat for this or that.
They keep doing it because the alternative is getting tossed out of the admin. And maybe they get thrown under the bus anyway.
True, but Pence at least can't get tossed out of the administration. He was voted in on the same ticket as Trump. He of all people could have said "nah, not doing that shit." Sure he would have been isolated politically, but his entire plan in this administration seems geared towards that goal anyway.
Ahh yes but Pence is dumb.
Also team Trump compromised him as soon as he was selected as a condition of being VP.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-attorneys-assert-immunity-from-broad-sweep-of-law-11572346801
Are the higher ups just cheap asses or just too scared to admit there is a problem?
Not treating the threat seriously is how you end up with people who commit perjury because they think it doesn't matter.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
There is the obvious conflict of interest fear from the lawyers getting paid by a source that really wants to protect the president more than the people they are paying the lawyers to represent.
The Trump people are not ones to care enough about that issue to take steps to avoid potential conflicts of interest. As an example, the people helping pay for costs during the Mueller inquiry were pretty open about the sole purpose.
https://www.npr.org/2018/06/15/620230403/legal-defense-funds-for-trump-allies-multiply
And they basically act as an influence operation for the people giving the money, especially as the money is fungible.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/06/scott-pruitt-legal-defense-fund-1047404
Lawyers are important to have in these situations and you might be able to conceive of ways in which the ethics problems could be minimized, but we all know they won't do that and won't care.
Trump absolutely believes it, and surrounds himself with people who either also believe it, are crooked enough to enable that belief, or are too cowardly to contradict him.
Anyone who could have been considered sane or competent is pretty much gone from this administration at this point.
They all drink the koolaid. All those GOP congresspeople and their staff are getting their news from Fox News, which they watch in their official actual real-job offices.
Hell, even the donors believe this shit. Look at Romney's 47% video. Behind closed doors, to the rich money men, they are still saying the same bullshit.
I can’t remember the exact moment, but I think it was during Romney’s campaign (not the 47% thing for me) when I finally realized that they were drinking their own koolaid.
I’m sure a rare few, like McConnell, are cunning enough to not buy into their own propaganda and are just pure evil. But a surprising amount are just your average Fox viewer that somehow made it into positions of power.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Fox News has been around long enough for people to never be vaccinated against it... or to have forgotten to get reinocculated.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
An entire generation of GOP representatives are now used to going on TV and never being challenged on anything they say thanks to Fox so their spin skills have become rusty as hell and it shows.
This was the tea party "revolution"
I think this started with Jerry Falwell's moral majority. It allows them to believe that even if they lose every election, they are the ones with the true power. They just need to move farther to the right to unlock it. It's like a kid standing on a roof thinking this time will be the time he unlocks his super powers and learns to fly.
So one of devin nunes's aid's who had been previously fired from an NSC job is leaking the name of the whistleblower to conservative media. Yep always fucking projection from these clowns.
pleasepaypreacher.net
This one also happens to be "partisan" because you can see almost zero Republicans getting behind it.
The average age of the House of Representatives is also ~58. Meaning they were in college/ law school during or after the 'Regan Revolution' occurred.
They are actually true believers. Which is why you could get dozens of them to mob a SCIF, and why they are not treating the Impeachment Inquiry and it's charges with the seriousness that it deserves.
It's amazing how laser focused they are on the whistleblower when we're like 12 steps removed from them now; we have numerous other witnesses, the white house memo stating they did the thing, Trump doing the thing in front of a camera on the white house lawn, Mulvany admitting they did the thing and saying "Get over it.", and the whole kit and caboodle allegedly stored on a secured server somewhere.
The whistleblower is almost a non-issue at this point. It's the Steel Dossier all over again. "Doesn't matter if we commit crimes so long as we can discredit the first person to state we committed a crime."
It is amazing how everyone treated Trump like a toddler.
I see Republican are acting exactly as the huge hacks I expected them to act like.
Isn't this like, super illegal?
Not if you're a republican.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Good Lord this is dumb. Just really really stupid
PSN: Robo_Wizard1
Authoritarians' faith is in strongmen, not facts or evidence. If the person in charge says a thing, then it is true. Supporting evidence is nice, but not necessary. Conversely, if you can discredit or unseat that person, everything they ever said becomes invalid. It's the same reason Evangelical creationists are still so fixated on Charles Darwin: they think the theory of evolution is a cult of personality, because that's how they operate.
They're attacking the whistleblower because they think that person is the root and cornerstone of the impeachment inquiry, not the first crack in the dam.
I get Patel was trying to discredit the Russia investigation on partisan grounds. How was trying undermine the Ukrainian government back then in the GOP's interest?
That's shady as fuck.
(Not that being hand-picked by Flynn and Nunes spoke well of his character to begin with)
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/10/30/politics/bill-taylor-willing-testify-publicly/index.html This is an amazingly common mob tactic and kind of doesn't matter when what Trump has already admitted to is illegal.
"Sure, all my underlings says I ordered it and the underling I put in charge of that area was pretty explicit about it, but you don't have any record of me explicitly ordering it!"
"and also I said I did it and then did it again on camera"
"vote trump maga"
"No, I just asked for some protection money and never said there was quid pro quo for not breaking his knee caps! The shop keeper even said there was no pressure!"
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/30/trump-impeachment-inquiry-opening-statements-croft-anderson/4095480002/
Edit: I find it amazing how they appeared to believe or pretended to believe Trump actually cared about corruption.
https://cnn.com/cnn/politics/live-news/impeachment-inquiry-10-30-2019/index.html
This is just an offhand quote from Schumer but I could definitely see Trump making this play.
I figured Trump's dipping approval rating & lack of any policy wins during the last shutdown would prevent him from trying it again, but if anyone tells him he can delay impeachment and get it out of the news with a shutdown, we might be beating the 35-day record.
The closer he pushes impeachment toward the 2020 election, the more traction he'll have in claiming it's a political hit job. And he can easily buy himself a month or two vetoing a CR.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126