JANUARY 30, 2020
Senate Impeachment Trial, Day 10
Trump's lawyers are misleading the US Senate.
December 12, 2019
By Manu Raju and Phil Mattingly
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (click here) and President Donald Trump's top lawyer sketched out a plan Thursday to coordinate closely for an impeachment trial but haven't reached agreement on a final strategy to defend Trump against charges of high crimes and misdemeanors, according to two sources familiar with the conversation.
The closed-door meeting Thursday between the Kentucky Republican and White House counsel Pat Cipollone occurred as Senate Republicans and the White House have diverged on what they would like to see take place in the looming trial in the chamber. Trump has made clear he wants witnesses to testify, in person, while senators -- including McConnell in private -- have warned that going down that path could lead to a politically precarious slippery slope in the GOP effort to acquit the President.
"We are having a lot of good conversations with Senate Republicans," Eric Ueland, the White House director of legislative affairs, told reporters as he departed the meeting with Cipollone. "We will continue to do that here over the next few days and weeks as we work through all these issues and priorities the President has outlined when it comes to where we should go on these articles."...
Trump already agreed to witnesses. The US Constitution does not demand citizens not give up their rights. Americans can assert their rights under the Fifth Amendment.
The Fifth Amendment (click here) to the U.S. Constitution guarantees that an individual cannot be compelled by the government to provide incriminating information about herself – the so-called “right to remain silent.” When an individual “takes the Fifth,” she invokes that right and refuses to answer questions or provide information that might incriminate her.
H.Res.660 (click here) - Directing certain committees to continue their ongoing investigations as part of the existing House of Representatives inquiry into whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its Constitutional power to impeach Donald John Trump, President of the United States of America, and for other purposes.
House Rules of 116th Congress (click here)
----------------------------------
It is strange to see my journalism (click here) twisted, perverted, and turned into lies and poisonous propaganda by Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and their enablers. But that’s what has happened to a news story I wrote four years ago.
In 2015, I wrote a story for the New York Times about Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and Ukraine. Many observers now seem to think this suddenly hot story came out of nowhere this year, but that is not true.
The truth behind that story has been lost in a swamp of right-wing opposition research, White House lies, and bizarre follow-up stories. Now it appears that the Biden-Ukraine story will play a role in a new impeachment inquiry against Trump, amid evidence that he sought to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky by withholding U.S. aid unless Zelensky agreed to investigate the Bidens....
...In December 2015 I was an investigative reporter in the Washington bureau of the Times. That month, I published a story reporting that Vice President Joe Biden had just traveled to Ukraine, in part to send a message to the Ukrainian government that it needed to crack down on corruption.
But I also wrote that his anti-corruption message might be undermined by the association of his son Hunter with one of Ukraine’s largest natural gas companies, Burisma Holdings, and with its owner, Mykola Zlochevsky. Zlochevsky had been Ukraine’s ecology minister under former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, a pro-Russian leader who had been forced into exile in Russia.
Hunter Biden had joined the board of Burisma in April 2014, the same month that British officials froze Zlochevsky’s London bank accounts containing $23 million. Britain’s Serious Fraud Office, an independent government agency, was conducting a money-laundering investigation and refused to allow Zlochevsky or Burisma Holdings, the company’s chief legal officer, and another company owned by Zlochevsky access to the accounts....
Turley was the only one of the four witnesses to state the US House should wait for more records before filing. He never objected to the filing and even stated there would be more chance it would be successful if the US House would wait.
December 4, 2019
Jonathan Turley, (click here) a George Washington University law professor, is expected to caution House lawmakers against impeaching President Donald Trump based on the evidence they currently have at their disposal.
“Will a slipshod impeachment make us less mad or will it only give an invitation for the madness to follow in every future administration?” Turley will say, according to his prepared opening statement obtained by the PBS NewsHour.
“This is not how an American president should be impeached,” he will add....
Turley's Opening Statement (click here)
§30121. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals (click here)
(a) Prohibition
It shall be unlawful for-
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make-
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or
(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
Philbin is speaking in half-truths. Trump released A PORTION of the aid after the whistleblower's report became evident.
The Northern Triad is also a highly contentious issue SINCE THE MIGRATIONS STARTED AFTER TRUMP HELD AID TO THE THREE COUNTRIES. However, Guatemala was hit the heaviest and that is where the majority of the migrants have come from.
So, Philbin is misrepresenting the ISSUES with Trump holding up monies to the Northern Triad. It could be said the refusal of aid to the Northern Triad CAUSED the border wall so called emergency and shifting monies out from the military housing fund.
December 13, 2019
By Phillip Bump
...Over the past three months, (click here) though, we’ve learned a lot more about how fraught those visits can be. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky repeatedly made clear his desire for a meeting at the White House, a visit that would solidify his position as Ukraine’s new leader and demonstrate the United States’ ongoing support for Ukraine in its conflict with Russia. And yet it was continually out of reach, held hostage, according to witnesses who testified in the impeachment inquiry targeting President Trump, until Ukraine agreed to launch investigations that would politically benefit Trump himself.
While Zelensky and his aides wrestled with Trump’s team to try to get a visit confirmed, leader after leader walked through the White House for a grip-and-grin. Strong allies of the United States, such as Canada and Australia. More dubious leaders such as Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. And, the salt in the wound, Russia’s foreign minister, even as the House finalized articles of impeachment....
Speaker Pelosi was very cautious about impeaching Donald John Trump, even after the Whistleblower's complaint. Speaker Pelosi decided to move forward with the impeachment inquiry that lead to the Articles of Impeachment because the evidence was so overwhelming.
October 15, 2019
By John Bresnahan, Heather Caygle and Sarah Ferris
...Trump, White House officials and Republicans on Capitol Hill (click here) have seized on the absence of such a vote as an unacceptable break with House precedent and have vowed to resist what they describe as an illegitimate probe.
But Democrats defended their current impeachment process, which has multiple House committees interviewing witnesses in private and gathering evidence related to allegations that Trump and his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, pressured Ukrainian officials to begin an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son — potentially at the risk of losing U.S. military aid.
"There's no requirement that we have a vote, and at this time, we will not have a vote," Pelosi told reporters Tuesday evening.
"We're not here to call bluffs. We're here to find the truth, to uphold the Constitution of the United States," Pelosi added. "This is not a game for us, this is deadly serious."
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters, “The processes that are being pursued are consistent with the Constitution and the law, and by the way, Republican rules.”
Yet Pelosi and other top Democrats couldn't come to an agreement among themselves during internal discussions on Tuesday over whether to move forward with the vote, which would mark an escalation of their impeachment battle with Trump. Vulnerable House Democrats from swing districts were also largely opposed, with some lawmakers fearing that the American public would confuse a vote authorizing an impeachment inquiry as actually impeaching Trump....
I find it interesting that the Trump lawyers arguments align with Shokin. The Trump lawyers have absolutely no sense of what threatens the USA national security. They should not be providing talking points to Putin and Shokin. Trump's lawyers observations about conversations by Ukrainian to the New York Times or otherwise is irrelevant. THE UKRINAIANS ARE COMPROMISED AND WILL NOT SAY ANYTHING TO RUFFLE TRUMP'S FEATHERS.
Standing USA policies are not the issue at hand. That is an excuse for aid to Ukraine being held SO IT WOULD EXPIRE (click here) and not be available for military funding. Every person that testified about the aid stated they were feeling pressed to have the Trump remove the hold. This is not a minor issue and a matter of a few days here or there. Witness after witness stated the release was important and they were pressing for that release.
New findings:
January 30, 2020
By Josh Dawsey and Rosalind S. Helderman
Ten days before Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman (click here) dined with President Trump at his Washington hotel, they were part of a small group of Republican Party donors who met with the president at Mar-a-Lago, his Florida estate, a new recording shows.
The two men — who later assisted Rudolph W. Giuliani’s efforts in Ukraine — were part of a gathering held in an ornate room of the property and also attended by Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, according to the video and people in attendance.
While it was known that Fruman and Parnas had attended an event at Mar-a-Lago, the focus of the event, the timing and who else was in attendance had not been made public.
The April 2018 meeting came days before the two men took part in a donor dinner with the president at his Washington hotel, an encounter captured on a video released last week by Parnas’s attorney....
December 13, 2019
By Phillip Bump
...Over the past three months, (click here) though, we’ve learned a lot more about how fraught those visits can be. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky repeatedly made clear his desire for a meeting at the White House, a visit that would solidify his position as Ukraine’s new leader and demonstrate the United States’ ongoing support for Ukraine in its conflict with Russia. And yet it was continually out of reach, held hostage, according to witnesses who testified in the impeachment inquiry targeting President Trump, until Ukraine agreed to launch investigations that would politically benefit Trump himself.
While Zelensky and his aides wrestled with Trump’s team to try to get a visit confirmed, leader after leader walked through the White House for a grip-and-grin. Strong allies of the United States, such as Canada and Australia. More dubious leaders such as Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. And, the salt in the wound, Russia’s foreign minister, even as the House finalized articles of impeachment....
Speaker Pelosi was very cautious about impeaching Donald John Trump, even after the Whistleblower's complaint. Speaker Pelosi decided to move forward with the impeachment inquiry that lead to the Articles of Impeachment because the evidence was so overwhelming.
October 15, 2019
By John Bresnahan, Heather Caygle and Sarah Ferris
...Trump, White House officials and Republicans on Capitol Hill (click here) have seized on the absence of such a vote as an unacceptable break with House precedent and have vowed to resist what they describe as an illegitimate probe.
But Democrats defended their current impeachment process, which has multiple House committees interviewing witnesses in private and gathering evidence related to allegations that Trump and his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, pressured Ukrainian officials to begin an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son — potentially at the risk of losing U.S. military aid.
"There's no requirement that we have a vote, and at this time, we will not have a vote," Pelosi told reporters Tuesday evening.
"We're not here to call bluffs. We're here to find the truth, to uphold the Constitution of the United States," Pelosi added. "This is not a game for us, this is deadly serious."
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters, “The processes that are being pursued are consistent with the Constitution and the law, and by the way, Republican rules.”
Yet Pelosi and other top Democrats couldn't come to an agreement among themselves during internal discussions on Tuesday over whether to move forward with the vote, which would mark an escalation of their impeachment battle with Trump. Vulnerable House Democrats from swing districts were also largely opposed, with some lawmakers fearing that the American public would confuse a vote authorizing an impeachment inquiry as actually impeaching Trump....
I find it interesting that the Trump lawyers arguments align with Shokin. The Trump lawyers have absolutely no sense of what threatens the USA national security. They should not be providing talking points to Putin and Shokin. Trump's lawyers observations about conversations by Ukrainian to the New York Times or otherwise is irrelevant. THE UKRINAIANS ARE COMPROMISED AND WILL NOT SAY ANYTHING TO RUFFLE TRUMP'S FEATHERS.
Standing USA policies are not the issue at hand. That is an excuse for aid to Ukraine being held SO IT WOULD EXPIRE (click here) and not be available for military funding. Every person that testified about the aid stated they were feeling pressed to have the Trump remove the hold. This is not a minor issue and a matter of a few days here or there. Witness after witness stated the release was important and they were pressing for that release.
New findings:
January 30, 2020
By Josh Dawsey and Rosalind S. Helderman
Ten days before Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman (click here) dined with President Trump at his Washington hotel, they were part of a small group of Republican Party donors who met with the president at Mar-a-Lago, his Florida estate, a new recording shows.
The two men — who later assisted Rudolph W. Giuliani’s efforts in Ukraine — were part of a gathering held in an ornate room of the property and also attended by Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, according to the video and people in attendance.
While it was known that Fruman and Parnas had attended an event at Mar-a-Lago, the focus of the event, the timing and who else was in attendance had not been made public.
The April 2018 meeting came days before the two men took part in a donor dinner with the president at his Washington hotel, an encounter captured on a video released last week by Parnas’s attorney....
Voters should decide the elections, however, Former Special Counsel proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Russia interfered in the 2016 election even at the invitation by Trump. The question is about whether or not the people will be able to make a decision in 2020 at all and why risk the chance Trump will receive another manipulated election win. That doesn't even begin to address Trump's lawlessness to remove him from office. The longer the lawlessness goes on, the worst it gets.
The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA) (click here) reasserted Congress’ power of the purse. Specifically, Title X of the Act – “Impoundment Control” – established procedures to prevent the President and other government officials from unilaterally substituting their own funding decisions for those of the Congress. The Act also created the House and Senate Budget Committees and the Congressional Budget Office.
The then majority Republican House members with a Trump Executive Branch wrote to the GAO about withholding monies beyond their expiration date.
December 10, 2018
Subject: Impoundment Control Act—Withholding of Funds through Their Date ofExpiration (click here)
...As discussed below, we conclude that the ICA does not permit the withholding of funds through their date of expiration. The statutory text and legislative history of the ICA, Supreme Court case law, and the overarching constitutional framework of the legislative and executive powers provide no basis to interpret the ICA as a mechanism by which the President may unilaterally abridge the enacted period of availability of a fixed-period appropriation. The Constitution vests in Congress the power of the purse, and Congress did not cede this important power through the ICA. Instead, the terms of the ICA are strictly limited. The ICA permits only the temporary withholding of budget authority and provides that unless Congress rescinds the amounts at issue, they must be made available for obligation. The President cannot rely on the authority in the ICA to withhold amounts from obligation, while simultaneously disregarding the ICA’s limitations....
GAO Page (click here)
The most any president can withhold funding authorized by Congress is 45 days WITH NOTICE PROVIDED TO BOTH THE US HOUSE AND SENATE FOR THE propose OF rescission of specific funds.
Where is the notification of Congress regarding the rescission of the Ukraine funding?
REGARDLESS
The timeline states that Trump secretly held the Ukraine funding for at least 10 weeks far exceeding 45 days. Trump wanted to end funding as far back as December 10, 2018 with the assistance of two members of Congress. The president is mentioned in the answer by the GAO. The original letter by the Congressmen are not at this cite.
Timeline (click here)
A look at key dates involving the nearly $400 million in military assistance that had been approved for release in the early months of 2019:
July 3
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a national security official working at the White House, becomes aware that the military aid has been held up. He testified that he received a notice from the State Department. “That’s when I was concretely made aware of the fact there was a hold placed,” he said in testimony to lawmakers....
...September 11
The funds are suddenly released. Senate Republicans said that happened in part because Sen. Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, threatened to block $5 billion in Pentagon spending for 2020 if the aid wasn’t given to Ukraine. They said the aid was held up while Trump looked into whether Zelenskiy was serious about fighting corruption. Taylor and other diplomats involved in Ukraine were not given a reason for the aid being released.
Donald J. Trump broke the law and in an obvious and troubling way. Just because the DOJ won't indict doesn't mean it didn't happen.
The US Senate cannot deny the US House facts are correct and must be acted on to remove a criminal president. Trump is completely untrustworthy. THERE IS LEGAL ADVICE GIVEN BEFORE THE SECRET WITHHOLDING OF FUNDING FROM UKRAINE.
THERE EXISTED A LEGAL FINDING BY THE GAO BEFORE TRUMP WITHHELD THE FUNDING SECRETLY.
TRUMP KNEW THE LEGAL IMPACT OF THE IMPOUNDMENT ACT BEFORE HE SECRETLY WITHHELD THE FUNDING FOR UKRAINE IN CONFLICT WITH RUSSIA.
I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO DISCUSS. THIS IMPEACHMENT IS ABOUT HIS ACTIONS AGAINST UKRAINE AND HE NEEDS TO BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE!
