Trump Timeline ... Trumpocalypse



The whistleblower complaint that has triggered a tense showdown between the U.S. intelligence community and Congress involves President Trump’s communications with a foreign leader, according to two former U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

Trump’s interaction with the foreign leader included a “promise” that was regarded as so troubling that it prompted an official in the U.S. intelligence community to file a formal whistleblower complaint with the inspector general for the intelligence community, said the former officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

It was not immediately clear which foreign leader Trump was speaking with or what he pledged to deliver, but his direct involvement in the matter has not been previously disclosed. It raises new questions about the president’s handling of sensitive information and may further strain his relationship with U.S. spy agencies. One former official said the communication was a phone call.


Fox News translation: “Deep state within the intelligence community rears its ugly head.”
 


Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said on Tuesday that while serving in President Trump's Cabinet, the Israeli government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would sometimes share "misinformation" to persuade Trump on particular issues, the Harvard Gazette reports.

What he's saying: "They did that with the president on a couple of occasions, to persuade him that ‘We’re the good guys, they’re the bad guys,’ Tillerson said at a panel with Harvard professors. "We later exposed it to the president so he understood, ‘You’ve been played.' It bothers me that an ally that’s that close and important to us would do that to us."
  • Tillerson called Netanyahu "an extraordinarily skilled" diplomat and politician, but also described him as "a bit Machiavellian."
 


A whistleblower complaint about President Trump made by an intelligence official centers on Ukraine, according to two people familiar with the matter, which has set off a struggle between Congress and the executive branch.

The complaint involved communications with a foreign leader and a “promise” that Trump made, which was so alarming that a U.S. intelligence official who had worked at the White House went to the inspector general of the intelligence community, two former U.S. officials said.

Two and a half weeks before the complaint was filed, Trump spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/he-once-played-ukraines-president-on-tv-now-he-just-took-office-as-the-real-one/2019/05/20/594c6322-77e5-11e9-a7bf-c8a43b84ee31_story.html?tid=lk_inline_manual_3 (a comedian and political newcomer) who was elected in a landslide in May.
 
WHISTLEBLOWER LEFT HANGING
Whistleblower Left Hanging

Even before anyone seriously thought Donald Trump would ever be president, we knew it would be a disaster because he’d eventually break the law. We knew he’d break the law intentionally because he’s a conman, and inadvertently because he’s stupid. What we did not count on was the entire system of checks and balances caving in to protect this stupid, racist grifter. We did not foresee the entire Republican Party trading in their loyalty to the American people and their patriotism to join a cult. We didn’t foresee agencies that have historically been institutionally independent becoming protection agencies for this greedy, selfish, lying, corrupt, poodle of Putin’s. We didn’t foresee that laws would no longer apply, even in the most extreme measures of a president placing loyalty of a hostile nation over the nation he swore to protect and serve.

A whistleblower has filed a complaint against Donald Trump and this much is true. That whistleblower is in danger.

The Washington Post broke the news on Wednesday that a “promise” Donald Trump made to a foreign leader was so troubling that it prompted an unidentified U.S. intelligence official to file a whistleblower complaint in mid-August with the Inspector General for the intelligence community. The Inspector General, Michael Atkinson, reviewed the complaint and found it troubling enough to be a matter of “urgent concern,” a legal threshold that REQUIRES notification of congressional oversight committees. Atkinson told the committee it was not a single conversation that prompted the whistleblower complaint. If you’re a Republican, “not a single” conversation means there was more than conversation.

The acting Director of National Intelligence (who’s been acting in that position since Dan Coats was forced out), Joseph Maguire (Trump had him at “hello”), has refused to share the complaint with Congress and it’s believed he’s been directed to sit on it by the Justice Department (who’s director is set to spend $30,000 on a party at Trump’s crappy D.C. hotel) and the White House. By law, whistleblower complaints are to be delivered to Congress and the person filing the complaint is to be protected.

Atkinson, the IG, sought to disclose the complaint to Congress, as the law requires, but he was denied by Maguire, the acting DNI. The argument is that this doesn’t “concern an intelligence activity within the DNI’s authority.” A spokeswoman for the Justice Department pointed at a September 13 letter from Maguire’s General Counsel, Jason Klitenic, that argues “there were serious concerns about whether the complaint met the statutory definition of an ‘urgent concern.’ ” That means, protect Donald Trump at all cost, even if it violates the law. They’re arguing there’s nothing to see here, so we’re not gonna show you.

Here’s a good question: Why was the complaint delivered to the person the complaint was about? That’s like complaining about sexual harassment to the person who sexually harassed you. Good luck with that. Another question is: Does the White House know the identity of the person who filed the complaint?

Donald Trump asked, probably rhetorically, “Is anybody dumb enough to believe that I would say something inappropriate with a foreign leader?” Let’s see how “dumb” we are.

Donald Trump publicly asked Vladimir Putin to assist his campaign. At campaign rallies, he waved information hacked from the Democrats by Wikileaks like they were a pornstar’s panties at a Jeffrey Epstein party. He disclosed classified information, given to us by an ally, to Russians in the Oval Office. He was standing next to Putin when he said he believed his denial about hacking our election over our nation’s intelligence agencies’ claims that he did. He told translators to destroy their notes after his “private” in-person conversations with Putin. He once made an unscheduled stop at Putin’s table and relied on Putin’s translator, with no other witnesses. He said he wouldn’t allow a half-brother of Kim Jong Un to spy on our behalf “under my auspices” (someone else had probably just used the word “auspices” in a meeting). He tweeted a classified photo just a few days ago. So, are we dumb to believe he wouldn’t say something “inappropriate” with a foreign leader? Not only would he say something “inappropriate,” he’d give away the store. You’d have to be dumb to believe he wouldn’t.

There was speculation over which foreign leader Trump had made this disturbing “promise” to. Was it Benjamin Netanyahu? Vladimir Putin? Kim Jong Un? The Queen of Denmark in his attempts to seize Greenland? Now, all signs are pointing at Ukraine.

According to two people familiar with the matter, the complaint centers on Ukraine and a “promise” Trump made to that nation’s leader, President Volodymyr Zelensky, a comedian (we got the clown) who was elected in a landslide last May.

As if this wasn’t failing the smell test already, Rudy Giuliani is a part of this shit show. Giuliani’s fear that “he lied for Trump” will be on his gravestone should be replaced with a fear of going to prison.

House Democrats were already investigating whether Trump and his personal attorney (not a government attorney), Giuliani, sought to manipulate the Ukrainian government into helping Trump’s reelection campaign by threatening to withhold $250 million in aid, already approved by Congress, in its struggle against Russian-backed separatists.

According to reports, Giuliani traveled to Ukraine to pressure that government outside of formal diplomatic channels to help the Trump campaign by investigating Hunter Biden’s time on the board of a Ukrainian gas company. Hunter is the son of former vice-president Joe Biden, the Democratic candidate Trump is most afraid of. If this is true, it is extortion. In case you’re a Republican, extortion is illegal, even if a president does it.

Thursday night while being interviewed by Chris Cuomo on CNN, in what turned into a conspiracy-laden shouting display, Giuliani admitted asking Ukraine to look into Biden 30 seconds after denying it.

Former FBI Director James Comey was fired for not being “loyal” to Trump and for not scaling back the bureau’s investigation of the Trump campaign’s involvement with receiving help from Russia. FBI agent Peter Strzok was fired for his part in the investigation. Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was also fired, hours before he was to qualify for his pension, for his part in the investigation. So, whoever filed the complaint is in danger.

Giuliani has speculated that the whistleblower is an Obama holdover and he used the term “deep state” in his unhinged appearance on CNN. Despite going through all the legal channels, following protocol, and putting his career on the line to protect his nation, you can expect Trump and Republicans to out the person and conduct a smear campaign before he or she is professionally destroyed. Don’t expect Trump to commend the individual for doing what they thought was right, even if he disagrees with his or her assessment. Ha! If the whistleblower is a black female, you can expect all hell to break loose.

Using the government to enrich himself by funneling money into his properties calls for impeachment. Obstructing justice, even attempts should qualify for impeachment. Asking a foreign government to help in the 2016 campaign qualifies for impeachment. Giving aid and comfort to Nazis should get the guy impeached. Abusing the pardon power should is impeachable. Handing classified information to the Russians should get him impeached. Directing the Justice Department to go after his political enemies should get him impeached. Throwing babies in cages should get him impeached. Making illegal contributions to his campaign by silencing his mistresses should get him impeached. Not divesting from his businesses should get him impeached. Directing government agencies to lie to back up his lies, like on weather reports, begs for impeachment. Everything else he’s done qualifies to enact the 25th Amendment.

Extortion is a big deal. If true, Donald Trump used a proxy to go around diplomatic channels to extort a foreign government to aid his campaign. He used taxpayer money, approved by Congress to aid a foreign nation, in the extortion scheme. He’s subverting U.S. foreign policy for his political and electoral ambitions. He’s using the power of the presidency and the U.S. government to acquire the help of a foreign government in his re-election bid.

If this is true, and it probably is because it’s Donald Fucking Trump, he shouldn’t just be impeached. He should go to prison, and toss in Giuliani for good measure.

cjones09262019-1.jpg
 


Lawyers for President Trump argued in a lawsuit filed on Thursday that he could not be criminally investigated while in office, as they sought to block a subpoena from state prosecutors in Manhattan demanding eight years of his tax returns.

Taking a broad position that the lawyers acknowledged had not been tested, the president’s legal team argued in the complaint that the Constitution effectively makes sitting presidents immune from all criminal inquiries until they leave the White House.

Presidents, they asserted, have such enormous responsibility and play a unique role in government that they cannot be subject to the burden of investigations, especially from local prosecutors who may use the criminal process for political gain.

Several constitutional law scholars interviewed by The New York Times said that if the lawyers’ position were accepted by the court, it would set a sweeping new precedent.

But they also said it was far from certain that the theory, which was not based on established case law, would succeed. While an onslaught of investigations would most assuredly disrupt a presidency, the Constitution does not explicitly say that presidents are shielded from criminal inquiries.

“President Trump’s position that he is unequivocally beyond the reach of criminal investigators is doubtfully absolutist,” said Joshua Matz, who wrote, with Laurence H. Tribe, “To End a Presidency: The Power of Impeachment.”

At the least, the lawsuit, which was filed in federal court in Manhattan, is likely to delay the latest attempt to secure Mr. Trump’s financial records.
 
Back
Top