• Advertisement
To advertise, place classifieds free ads by category in a forum as a new topic, or in the classified display ads section, or start a classifieds free blog.

House begins Trump impeachment inquiry over call to Ukraine leader

BREAKING: Nancy Pelosi's Son Was Exec At Gas Company That Did Business In Ukraine

Postby smix » Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:47 am

BREAKING: Nancy Pelosi's Son Was Exec At Gas Company That Did Business In Ukraine
National File

URL: https://nationalfile.com/breaking-nancy ... n-ukraine/
Category: Politics
Published: October 3, 2019

Description: Nancy featured in company video

pelosi-gas-company.jpg

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s son Paul Pelosi Jr. visited Ukraine in 2017 to meet with government officials in connection to a business initiative. Now, unearthed records reveal that Paul Pelosi Jr. was an executive of a gas industry company that did business in Ukraine – and his mother Nancy Pelosi was featured in one of the company’s promotional videos. Journalist Patrick Howley broke the story Thursday:
BOOM: Nancy Pelosi's son Paul Pelosi Jr. (who went to Ukraine in 2017) was a board member of Viscoil and executive at its related company NRGLab, which DID ENERGY Business in UKRAINE! And Nancy Pelosi appeared in a promotional video for the company!
— Patrick Howley (@HowleyReporter) October 3, 2019

Paul Pelosi Jr. travelled to Kiev, Ukraine in July 2017 in his capacity as executive director of the Corporate Governance Initiative, a position that he accepted months earlier in February 2017. Pelosi Jr. said that he was in Ukraine to discuss a youth soccer partnership with the government. The American Mirror, which flagged Pelosi Jr.’s appearance in 2017, preserved a clip of Pelosi Jr. on the Ukrainian station following the video’s removal from YouTube.
2017 — What's really going on here? Nancy Pelosi's son in Ukraine to talk about "soccer"?

ua-head-to-head.jpg

— The American Mirror (@American_Mirror) September 27, 2019

As Patrick Howley found, Paul Pelosi Jr. previously held top positions with the energy-sector companies Viscoil Group and NRGLab. On March 5, 2013, NRGLab New Technology posted two videos on Youtube. One video opened with a clip of Nancy Pelosi discussing energy-efficient technology, followed by a direct-to-camera statement from her son Paul Pelosi Jr., filmed in Washington, D.C. in 2010.



“My name’s Paul Pelosi. Of course I’m on the board of Viscoil. And Viscoil is here today to talk about accelerating the future. It’s about using cars in a more efficient manner. It’s about utilizing natural resources, whether it be electricity, or gas, or fossil fuels in a more efficient way. And Viscoil is a part of that solution,” Paul Pelosi Jr. said in the video. “That’s what Viscoil does. It utilizes technology to maximize the use of natural resources, like oil and other resources,” Pelosi Jr. said. “Paul Pelosi Jr. is a member of management team of Viscoil Group of Companies and NRGLab. Paul Pelosi Jr. is interested in developing clean energy that can replace gasoline and diesel as transportation fuel sources,” read the description on the video. Another video posted that same day confirmed that NRGLab was working in Ukraine.



“Walter Afanasieff, Brandon Stone, Mika Newton and other artists are actively involved in promoting the clean technology of Viscoil Group of Companies and NRGLab. For example, Mika Newton helped to secure the rights to build a plant for the production of SH-boxes in Ukraine,” read the description of an NRGLab & Research Council video. Mika Newton is a Ukrainian-born singer. A 2013 interview with NRGLab’s lead technician Zeev Drori reported that NRGLab was funded by environmental businesswoman Ana Shell, who writes about Ukraine energy issues on her blog. In the interview, Drori discussed gas generation techniques in Ukraine. “Currently, Ana Shell Fund also provide finances and support to groom talented artistes like Mika Newton, a Ukrainian singer who represented Ukraine in the Eurovision song contest in 2011,” reported a 2013 interview with Ana Shell, referring to the singer who brokered the S-H box deal in Ukraine. “In brief, SH-boxes are environmentally friendly generators which employs the use of poly-crystal technology to producing electricity from environmental heat. With the SH-boxes, electricity could be generated more efficiently and cleanly at a lower cost,” the interview with Ana Shell notes. Here is Mika Newton performing as Ukraine’s representative on a Eurovision talent contest:



NRGLab’s website states that the company is based in Singapore and notes, “The company’s additional projects include a strategic partnership and investment from Viscoil Holdings to recycle waste materials into eco-friendly diesel fuel. NRGLab has obtained an exclusive license for the Viscoil Technology for the South East Asian region for all raw materials.” Viscoil Holdings is currently suspended by the California Secretary of State. It was registered in 2009 to a manager named David Strawn in Escondido, California. As of 2010, it listed two managers: Strawn and an individual named Sergey Sorokin based in Moscow, Russia. Paul Pelosi Jr. co-founded the company Natural Blue Resources, which the SEC charged with securities fraud in 2014. Nancy Pelosi led a congressional delegation to Ukraine in 2015 to discuss issues including “energy security.”
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1875129
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Rich Lowry: Trump is still getting impeached over Russia

Postby smix » Sun Oct 06, 2019 6:53 pm

Rich Lowry: Trump is still getting impeached over Russia
Salt Lake Tribune

URL: https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commenta ... -is-still/
Category: Politics
Published: October 5, 2019

Description: After three years, we're still on the Russia story. To be sure, the locus has shifted 500 miles west from Moscow to Kiev, and now we are consumed with the Ukraine controversy rather than the Russia investigation, although it’s essentially the same thing — a battle over President Donald Trump’s legitimacy fought out with allegations of foreign interference. The effort to widen out the Ukraine controversy, from the core of it — Trump’s mention of the Bidens on his call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy — to his urging Ukraine, Australia and others to cooperate with Bill Barr’s investigation of the origins of the Russia probe, illustrates the point nicely. There's nothing wrong or unusual about a United States president asking foreign leaders to provide information useful to his attorney general in a duly constituted investigation. Why would there be? Except the president's detractors don't consider Barr's investigation aboveboard; in fact, they consider it another form of Trump's perfidy. In its report on Trump’s call with the Australian prime minister, The New York Times says — in a news report, mind you — that the call “shows the president using high-level diplomacy to advance his personal political interests.” Trump is pleased with Barr’s investigation. That doesn’t make it merely a pet political project, or mean that there isn’t a genuine public interest in knowing in greater detail how and why the Russia story got started. The Times of London reported of Trump's call to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson that he wanted "to gather evidence to undermine the investigation into his campaign's links to Russia." There's not really anything to undermine, though, since the investigation has been over for months. Trump is basically being accused of the entirely new offense of obstruction after the fact. The Russia investigation figures into the Ukraine story in another way. It's not clear that even Democrats would consider his Ukraine call impeachable if it weren't for their belief that Trump has gotten away with so much previously. Even the framework of the Ukraine matter reflects the Russia story. Trump's critics say he was asking for Ukrainian "interference" in our elections, when what was really going on was that he and Rudy Giuliani were interfering in Ukrainian politics. If you accept the premise that any information developed in a foreign country and used in American politics is election interference, then Trump's opponents themselves were masters at it. As Politico reported back in 2017, Ukrainian government officials "helped [Hillary] Clinton's allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers." Giuliani's Ukraine adventure was motivated, in large part, by the desire to get to the bottom of this activity in 2016, and turn the tables on Trump's critics. There will be lots of comparisons to the 1990s as the House moves toward impeachment. Yet the vitriolic politics of the 1790s might be the more apt predicate. Back then, at the outset of the republic, each nascent political party was consumed with the idea that the other was a tool of a foreign power (either France or Britain), and believed that the other was a fundamental threat to American democracy. Today, the Democrats still haven't gotten beyond the idea that Trump is somehow a tool of Russia, while Republicans point to Democratic coordination with shadowy foreign forces to get the Russia investigation rolling. Books fly off the shelves about Trump being an alleged fascist, and Republicans are gripped by a Flight 93 mentality that fears if they lose a presidential election, they will never win another one again. The Russia story contributed to and fed off this feverish atmosphere. For the longest time, it offered Democrats the hope of deliverance from a president whose election they never truly accepted. When Mueller didn't have the goods, House Democrats were briefly at sea, until Trump's call and the whistleblower complaint brought impeachment deliciously back into play. Ukraine is more an epilogue of the Russian investigation than the beginning of a new book.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1875129
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Biden, Obama Officials Stood to Gain From Ukraine Influence

Postby smix » Tue Oct 08, 2019 2:05 pm

Biden, Obama Officials Stood to Gain From Ukraine Influence
The Epoch Times

URL: https://www.theepochtimes.com/joe-biden ... 96259.html
Category: Politics
Published: April 26, 2019

Description: Newly released evidence suggests Ukraine played key role in creating Trump–Russia collusion narrative at behest of Obama officials

biden-poroshenko-jan-2017.jpg

As Ukraine underwent dramatic changes in 2014, U.S. Vice President Joe Biden played a critical role in the Obama administration’s involvement in the revolution that ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. Following the revolution, Biden would use his influence to help force the creation of the troubled National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU). Notably, during the 2016 election campaign, information leaked from NABU about Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort that helped to create the false narrative that Trump colluded with Russia to win the election. Biden also would use the threat of withholding $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees to pressure Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to fire the prosecutor general. At the time, the prosecutor had been investigating Burisma, a Ukrainian natural gas giant that had appointed Biden’s son, Hunter, as a board member. President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, recently said, “Keep your eye on Ukraine.” In his comments to the Washington Examiner, Giuliani highlighted the “plot to create an investigation of President Trump, based on a false charge of conspiracy with the Russians to affect the 2016 elections.”
Obama Administration’s 2014 Involvement
On or shortly before Feb. 4, 2014, Victoria Nuland, the assistant secretary for European and Eurasian affairs in the Obama State Department, had a conversation with the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, which was intercepted and leaked. In the call, Nuland and Pyatt appeared to be discussing the ouster of Yanukovych and the installation of opposition leader Arseniy Yatsenyuk as prime minister. Nuland favored opposition leader Yatsenyuk over his main rivals Vitali Klitschko and Oleh Tyahnybok, telling Pyatt: “I think Yats is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience. He’s the … what he needs is Klitschko and Tyahnybok on the outside.” Toward the end of the conversation, then-Vice President Biden was discussed as being willing to help cement the changeover in Ukraine: Geoffrey Pyatt: “We want to try to get somebody with an international personality to come out here and help to midwife this thing. The other issue is some kind of outreach to Yanukovych, but we probably regroup on that tomorrow as we see how things start to fall into place.” Victoria Nuland: “So, on that piece Geoff, when I wrote the note [Biden’s national security adviser Jake] Sullivan’s come back to me VFR [direct to me], saying you need Biden, and I said probably tomorrow for an atta-boy and to get the deets [details] to stick. So Biden’s willing.” Nuland and Pyatt met with Ukrainian opposition leaders Klitschko and Yatsenyuk, along with then-President Yanukovych, just days later on Feb. 7, 2014. Events then moved swiftly. On Feb. 22, 2014, Yanukovych was removed as president of Ukraine and fled to Russia. On Feb. 27, 2014, Yatsenyuk, the candidate favored by Nuland, was installed as prime minister of Ukraine. Klitschko was left out. Notably, Yatsenyuk would later resign in April 2016 amid corruption accusations.
Biden’s Involvement in Ukraine
In April, Biden would get personally involved, as would his son, Hunter. On April 18, 2014, Hunter Biden was appointed to the board of directors for Burisma–one of the largest natural gas companies in Ukraine. Four days later, on April 22, 2014, Vice President Biden traveled to Ukraine, offering his political support and $50 million in aid for Yatsenyuk’s shaky new government. Poroshenko, a billionaire politician, was elected as president of Ukraine on May 25, 2014. Biden became close to both men and helped Ukraine obtain a four-year, $17.5 billion IMF package in March 2015. In October 2016, Foreign Policy wrote a lengthy article, “What Will Ukraine Do Without Uncle Joe,” which described Biden’s role in the removal of Ukraine’s general prosecutor,

What-Will-Ukraine-Do-Without-Uncle-Joe.jpg

Victor Shokin. Shokin, the choice of Poroshenko, was portrayed as fumbling a major corruption case and “hindering an investigation into two high-ranking state prosecutors arrested on corruption charges.” The United States pushed for Shokin’s removal, and Biden led the effort by personally threatening to withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees. In an interview with The Atlantic, Biden recalled telling Poroshenko: “Petro, you’re not getting your billion dollars. It’s OK, you can keep the [prosecutor] general. Just understand—we’re not paying if you do.” Shokin was removed by Poroshenko shortly thereafter, in early 2016. But according to reporting by The Hill, at the time of his firing, Shokin had been investigating Burisma. Shokin’s investigation into Burisma had previously been disclosed in June 2017, by Front News International. Burisma is owned by Nikolai Zlochevsky (also known as Mykola Zlochevsky), the former minister of ecology for Ukraine. According to Front News, Zlochevsky issued a “special permit for the extraction of a third of the gas produced in Ukraine” to his own company, Burisma. According to the Ukrainian nonprofit Anti Corruption Action Center, Zlochevsky owns 38 permits held by 14 different companies—with Burisma accounting for the majority with 33 of the permits. Zlochevsky left Ukraine after Yanukovych fled to Russia during the Ukrainian Revolution known as Euromaidan.
Investigation Into Burisma
In the spring of 2014, the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s Office opened an investigation at the behest of the UK prosecutors office, which was investigating money laundering allegations against Zlochevsky and had just frozen $23.5 million in assets allegedly belonging to him in early April 2014. Shokin, who wasn’t appointed as general prosecutor until February 2015, wasn’t yet involved in the case. Ukrainian prosecutors refused to provide the UK with needed documents, and in January 2015, a British court ordered the assets unfrozen. This action was pointedly called out in a speech by Pyatt, who stated, “In the case of former Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, the UK authorities had seized $23 million in illicit assets that belonged to the Ukrainian people.” Instead of receiving cooperation from Ukrainian prosecutors, they “sent letters to Zlochevsky’s attorneys attesting that there was no case against him. As a result, the money was freed by the UK court, and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus.” On Feb. 10, 2015, Shokin was appointed prosecutor general of Ukraine, and he picked up the investigation into Burisma, which reportedly continued until his formal resignation in February 2016. Around the same time that Zlochevsky’s assets were being frozen in the UK, Burisma appointed Hunter Biden to its board on April 18, 2014. Hunter’s compensation had never been disclosed by Burisma, which is a private company, but Ryan Toohey, a Burisma spokesman, told The New York Times that Biden’s compensation was “not out of the ordinary” for similar board positions. However, according to The Hill’s reporting, Hunter Biden’s firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners, was receiving regular payments—“usually more than $166,000 a month”—from Burisma. The payments ran from the spring of 2014 through the fall of 2015 and reportedly totaled more than $3 million. The Hill article included a written answer from Shokin, who told Solomon that his investigation into Burisma had included plans for “interrogations and other crime-investigation procedures into all members of the executive board, including Hunter Biden.” According to Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko, following Shokin’s forced dismissal, the Burisma investigation was transferred to Sytnyk’s NABU, which then reportedly closed the investigation sometime in 2016. The Kyiv Post on March 27 published an editorial written by three members of the Anti-Corruption Action Center in Kyiv that disputed Lutsenko’s interview with The Hill. They claim that two cases relating to Burisma are still being investigated by NABU: “Two cases regarding the extraction of licenses by Zlochevsky’s companies and embezzlement of public funds at the ministry’s procurements during Zlochevsky’s Ministerial tenure remain active and are investigated by NABU.” They also claim that “none of the criminal proceedings against Burisma were closed by NABU.” They acknowledged that the case concerning illegal issuance of licenses to extract natural resources were transferred to NABU in December 2015, but claim that SAP missed procedural deadlines for a lawsuit on canceling those licenses. The politics within Ukraine are extremely complicated, and corruption is endemic, often leading to conflicting accounts of events.
US Pressure to Investigate Manafort
In January 2016, top Ukrainian corruption prosecutors and officials from Obama’s National Security Council (NSC), FBI, State Department and Department of Justice (DOJ) met in Washington, according to an April 26 article by The Hill. The meeting, which was reportedly billed as “training,” apparently also touched on two other matters—the revival of a closed investigation into payments to U.S. figures from Ukraine’s Russia-backed Party of Regions and the closure of an ongoing Ukrainian investigation into Burisma. According to The Hill’s reporting, the Ukrainian Embassy confirmed that meetings were held, but said it “had no record that the Party of Regions or Burisma cases came up in the meetings.” A Jan. 22, 2016, NABU press release confirmed that NABU Director Artem Sytnyk was in Washington from Jan. 19 to 21. At the same time as the NABU meeting with Obama officials, Vice President Biden also met with senior Ukrainian officials. On Jan. 21, 2016, Biden met with Poroshenko, the president of Ukraine. According to the White House release, the two leaders agreed “to continue to move forward on Ukraine’s anti-corruption agenda.” Just six days earlier, on Jan 15, 2016, Biden had met with Ukrainian Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman, promising to commit $220 million in new assistance to Ukraine that year. Notably, several months later, Sytnyk and Ukrainian Member of Parliament Serhiy Leshchenko would publicly disclose the contents of the Ukrainian “black ledger” to the media, which implicated Trump’s campaign manager, Paul Manafort. The revelation would force Manafort from the campaign. Leshchenko also served as a source for various individuals, including journalist Michael Isikoff and Democratic National Committee (DNC) operative Alexandra Chalupa. In addition, Leshchenko served as a direct source of information for Fusion GPS—and its researcher, former CIA contractor Nellie Ohr. Another Ukrainian-related meeting also took place in January 2016 when Chalupa, a Ukrainian-American, informed an unknown senior DNC official that she believed there was a Russian connection with the Trump campaign. Notably, this theme would be picked up by the Clinton campaign in the summer of 2016. Chalupa also told the official to expect Manafort’s involvement in the Trump campaign. How Chalupa knew to expect Manafort’s involvement with the Trump campaign in January remains unknown, but her forecast proved prescient, as Manafort reached out to the Trump campaign shortly after, on Feb. 29, 2016, through a mutual acquaintance, Thomas J. Barrack Jr. According to Manafort, he and Trump hadn’t been in communication for years until the Trump campaign responded to Manafort’s offer. As The Epoch Times previously reported, on May 30, 2016, Fusion GPS contractor Nellie Ohr sent an email to her husband, high-ranking DOJ official Bruce Ohr, and three other DOJ officials to alert them of the discovery of the “Reported Trove of Documents on Ukrainian Party of Regions’ ‘Black Cashbox.’” It was this discovery that led to Manafort’s resignation from the Trump campaign in August 2016. On Aug. 14, 2016, The New York Times published an article alleging that payments to Manafort had been uncovered from the Party of Regents’ “black box”—the 400-page handwritten ledger released by Leshchenko. The article proved to be a fatal blow for Manafort, who resigned from the Trump campaign just days later.
NABU Ties to FBI
Following the successful overthrow of Yanukovych, Joe Biden had a direct hand in the formation of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU), as he personally “pushed for the creation of an independent anti-corruption bureau to combat graft,” according to an Oct. 30, 2016, article by Foreign Policy. NABU was formally established in October 2014 in response to pressure from not only the U.S. State Department and Biden, but also by the International Monetary Fund and the European Commission. Despite the international push, the fledgling anti-corruption unit took more than a year to actually become a functioning unit. During this time, NABU officials began establishing a relationship with the FBI. In early 2016, NABU Director Sytnyk announced that his bureau was very close to signing a memorandum of cooperation with the FBI and by February 2016, the FBI had had a permanent representative onsite at the NABU offices. On June 5, 2016, Sytnyk met with U.S. Ambassador Pyatt to discuss a more formalized relationship with the FBI and, on June 30, 2016, NABU and the FBI entered into a memorandum of understanding that allowed for an FBI office onsite at NABU offices to focus on international money laundering cases. The relationship was renewed for an additional two years in June 2017. NABU has repeatedly refused to make the memorandum of understanding with the FBI public and went to court in 2018 to prevent its release. After receiving an unfavorable opinion from the Kyiv District Administrative Court, NABU appealed the ruling, which was overturned in its favor by the Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal. Sytnyk, along with parliamentarian Leshchenko, became the subject of an investigation in Ukraine and in December 2018, a Kyiv court ruled that both men “acted illegally when they revealed that Manafort’s surname and signature were found in the so-called black ledger of ousted President Viktor Yanukovych’s Party of Regions,” the Kyiv Post reported on Dec. 12, 2018. The court noted the material was part of a pre-trial investigation and its release “led to interference in the electoral processes of the United States in 2016 and harmed the interests of Ukraine as a state.” Leshchenko had publicly adopted a strong anti-Trump stance, telling the Financial Times in August 2016 that “a Trump presidency would change the pro-Ukrainian agenda in American foreign policy” and that it was “important to show not only the corruption aspect, but that he is [a] pro-Russian candidate who can break the geopolitical balance in the world.” Leschenko noted that the majority of Ukrainian politicians were “on Hillary Clinton’s side.” In December 2017, Ukrainian Prosecutor General Lutsenko accused Sytnyk of allowing the FBI to conduct illegal operations in Ukraine, claiming that the “U.S. law enforcers were allegedly invited without the permission required and in breach of the necessary procedures.” Lutsenko continued by asking, “Who actually let the foreign special service act in Ukraine?” Taras Chornovil, a Ukrainian political analyst, also questioned the FBI’s activities, writing that “some kind of undercover operations are being conducted in Ukraine with direct participation (or even under control) of the FBI. This means the FBI operatives could have access to classified data or confidential information.” Lutsenko called for an audit of NABU, claiming to “possess information of interest to the auditors” and was pushing for Sytnyk’s resignation, along with that of Nazar Kholodnitskiy, the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP). According to reporting by Euromaidan Press, Lutsenko’s efforts failed “thanks to the reaction from Ukraine’s American partners.” Michael Carpenter, an adviser to Joe Biden, personally issued a public warning to Lutsenko and others pushing for Sytnyk’s removal, stating, “If the Rada votes to dismiss the head of the Anticorruption Committee and the head of the NABU, I will recommend cutting all U.S. government assistance to #Ukraine, including security assistance.” Sytnyk remains in his position as NABU’s director.
Pinchuk’s Ties to Leshchenko, Clintons
On April 11, 2019, Greg Craig, Obama’s former White House counsel and a partner at law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, was indicted for lying about and concealing his work in Ukraine. Craig, who reportedly worked closely with Manafort, was paid more than $4 million to produce an “independent” report justifying Ukraine’s trial and conviction of the former prime minister, Yulia Tymoshenko. Notably, Craig’s name was not included in the “Black Ledger” leak from Leshchenko and Sytnyk. The indictment notes that “a wealthy private Ukrainian” was fully funding the report. In a recent YouTube video, Craig publicly stated that “it was Doug Schoen who brought this project to me, and he told me he was acting on behalf of Victor Pinchuk, who was a pro-western, Ukrainian businessman who helped to fund the project.” “The Firm understood that its work was to be largely funded by Victor Pinchuk,” Skadden wrote in recent FARA filings. Pinchuk put out a statement on Jan. 21, denying any financial involvement: “Mr. Pinchuk was not the source of any funds used to pay fees of Skadden in producing their report into the trial and conviction of Yulia Tymoshenko. He was in no way responsible for those costs. Neither Mr. Pinchuk nor companies affiliated with him have ever been a client of Skadden. Mr. Pinchuk and his team had no role in the work done by Skadden, including in the preparation or dissemination of the Skadden report.” Pinchuk is the founder of Interpipe, a steel pipe manufacturer. He owns Credit Dnipro Bank, several ferroalloy plants and a media empire. He is married to Elena Pinchuk, the daughter of former Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma. Pinchuk has been accused of profiting immensely from the purchase of state-owned assets at severely below-market prices through political favoritism. Between April 4 and April 12, 2016, Ukrainian parliamentarian Olga Bielkova had four meetings, with Samuel Charap (International Institute for Strategic Studies), Liz Zentos (National Security Council), Michael Kimmage (State Department), and David Kramer (McCain Institute). FARA documents filed by Schoen showed that he was paid $40,000 a month by Pinchuk (page 5)—in part to arrange these meetings. Schoen attempted to arrange another 72 meetings with congressmen and media (page 10). It’s unknown how many of these meetings, if any, took place. Schoen also helped Pinchuk establish ties with the Clinton Foundation. The Wall Street Journal reported on March 19, 2015, how Schoen connected Pinchuk with senior Clinton State Department staffers in order to pressure former Ukrainian President Yanukovych to release Tymoshenko–a political rival of Yanukovych–from jail. And the relationship between Pinchuk and the Clintons continued. According to the Kyiv Post: “Clinton and her husband Bill, the 42nd U.S. president, have been paid speakers at the annual YES and other Pinchuk events. They describe themselves as friends of Pinchuk, who is known internationally as a businessman and philanthropist.” Although exact numbers aren’t clear, reports filed by the Clinton Foundation indicate that as much as $25 million of Pinchuk’s donations went to the Clinton organization. Pinchuk also has ties to Leshchenko, the Ukrainian MP who leaked the information on Manafort. Leshchenko had been a frequent speaker at the Ukrainian Breakfast, a traditional private event held at Davos, Switzerland, and hosted by the Victor Pinchuk Foundation and has also been pictured with Pinchuk at multiple other events.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1875129
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Whistleblower had 'professional' tie to 2020 Democratic candidate

Postby smix » Wed Oct 09, 2019 4:14 pm

Whistleblower had 'professional' tie to 2020 Democratic candidate
Washington Examiner

URL: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news ... -candidate
Category: Politics
Published: October 8, 2019

Description: In an Aug. 26 letter, the Intelligence Community's inspector general, Michael Atkinson, wrote that the anonymous whistleblower who set off the Trump-Ukraine impeachment fight showed "some indicia of an arguable political bias ... in favor of a rival political candidate." A few weeks later, news reports said the whistleblower's possible bias was that he is a registered Democrat. That was all. Incredulous commentary suggested that Republicans who were pushing the bias talking point were so blinded by their own partisanship that they saw simple registration with the Democratic Party as evidence of wrongdoing. "Give me a break!" tweeted whistleblower lawyer Mark Zaid. "Bias? Seriously?" Now, however, there is word of more evidence of possible bias on the whistleblower's part. Under questioning from Republicans during last Friday's impeachment inquiry interview with Atkinson, the inspector general revealed that the whistleblower's possible bias was not that he was simply a registered Democrat. It was that he had a significant tie to one of the Democratic presidential candidates currently vying to challenge President Trump in next year's election. "The IG said [the whistleblower] worked or had some type of professional relationship with one of the Democratic candidates," said one person with knowledge of what was said. "The IG said the whistleblower had a professional relationship with one of the 2020 candidates," said another person with knowledge of what was said. "What [Atkinson] said was that the whistleblower self-disclosed that he was a registered Democrat and that he had a prior working relationship with a current 2020 Democratic presidential candidate," said a third person with knowledge of what was said. All three sources said Atkinson did not identify the Democratic candidate with whom the whistleblower had a connection. It is unclear what the working or professional relationship between the two was. In the Aug. 26 letter, Atkinson said that even though there was evidence of possible bias on the whistleblower's part, "such evidence did not change my determination that the complaint relating to the urgent concern 'appears credible,' particularly given the other information the ICIG obtained during its preliminary review." Democrats are certain to take that position when Republicans allege that the whistleblower acted out of bias. Indeed, the transcript of Trump's July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is a public document, for all to see. One can read it regardless of the whistleblower's purported bias. Nevertheless, Republicans will want to know more about the origins of the whistleblower complaint, especially given the unorthodox use of whistleblower law involved. There is more to learn — like who the Democratic candidate is — before Republicans will say they know enough about what happened.



Joe Biden worked with whistleblower when he was vice president, officials reveal
Washington Examiner

URL: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news ... als-reveal
Category: Politics
Published: October 10, 2019

Description: The 2020 Democratic candidate with whom the CIA whistleblower had a "professional" tie is Joe Biden, according to intelligence officers and former White House officials. Lawyers for the whistleblower said he had worked only "in the executive branch." The Washington Examiner has established that he is a career CIA analyst who was detailed to the National Security Council at the White House and has since left. On Sept. 26, the New York Times reported that he was a CIA officer. On Oct. 4, the newspaper added that he "was detailed to the National Security Council at one point." Michael Atkinson, the Intelligence Community's inspector general, told members of Congress that the whistleblower had a "professional tie" to a 2020 Democratic candidate. He had written earlier that while the whistleblower's complaint was credible, he had shown "some indicia of an arguable political bias ... in favor of a rival political candidate." A retired CIA officer told the Washington Examiner, “From everything we know about the whistleblower and his work in the executive branch then, there is absolutely no doubt he would have been working with Biden when he was vice president." As an experienced CIA official on the NSC with the deep knowledge of Ukraine that he demonstrated in his complaint, it is probable that the whistleblower briefed Biden and likely that he accompanied him on Air Force Two during at least one of the six visits the 2020 candidate made to the country. A former Trump administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters, said Biden’s work on foreign affairs brought him into close proximity with the whistleblower either at the CIA or when he was detailed to the White House. “This person, after working with Biden, may feel defensive towards him because he feels [Biden] is being falsely attacked. Maybe he is even talking to Biden’s staff,” the former official said. “Maybe it is innocent, maybe not.” Last month, the whistleblower accused President Trump of abusing his position by asking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Biden and his son, Hunter, who sat on the board of a Ukrainian gas company. His complaint is now at the center of a Democrat-led impeachment inquiry, prompting Trump and his allies to cry foul. Biden was President Barack Obama’s "point man" on Ukraine, making a half dozen trips there in his eight years as vice president. Those trips involved briefings from senior intelligence officials and NSC officers, some of whom traveled with him to Kyiv and elsewhere. “The Whistleblower has ties to one of my DEMOCRAT OPPONENTS,” tweeted Trump, after the "professional" link was revealed by the Washington Examiner. “Why does the ICIG allow this scam to continue?”
The Whistleblower’s facts have been so incorrect about my “no pressure” conversation with the Ukrainian President, and now the conflict of interest and involvement with a Democrat Candidate, that he or she should be exposed and questioned properly. This is no Whistleblower.....
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 9, 2019

Trump said Thursday he did not know the identity of the whistleblower. The connection to Biden has emerged a week after Atkinson, the Intelligence Community's inspector general, briefed the House Intelligence Committee on the whistleblower’s complaint. After the report on what Atkinson said, lawyers for the whistleblower immediately insisted their client was not motivated by political considerations, but their cryptic comment fueled speculation about his identity. The careful statement did not rule out that the whistleblower worked with one of the candidates before they started running for president. "First, our client has never worked for or advised a political candidate, campaign, or party," said Andrew Bakaj and Mark Zaid. "Second, our client has spent their entire government career in apolitical, civil servant positions in the Executive Branch."
4/Third, in these positions our client has come into contact with presidential candidates from both parties in their roles as elected officials—not as candidates.
— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) October 9, 2019

Glenn Carle, a former CIA officer who himself blew the whistle on George W. Bush administration efforts to collect intelligence on an American citizen, said the distinction was crucial. “The truth is that the whistleblower would have worked with Biden not in some partisan political sense but as a member of the government,” he said. “It is scurrilous to suppose there was a political motivation.” He added that it was possible that the CIA officer briefed senators or representatives who were now running for president.



Adam Schiff has 2 aides who worked with whistleblower at White House
Washington Examiner

URL: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news ... hite-house
Category: Politics
Published: October 11, 2019

Description: House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff recruited two former National Security Council aides who worked alongside the CIA whistleblower at the NSC during the Obama and Trump administrations, the Washington Examiner has learned. Abigail Grace, who worked at the NSC until 2018, was hired in February, while Sean Misko, an NSC aide until 2017, joined Schiff's committee staff in August, the same month the whistleblower submitted his complaint. The whistleblower was an NSC official who worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and who has expertise in Ukraine, the Washington Examiner has reported. A career CIA analyst with Ukraine expertise, the whistleblower aired his concerns about a phone conversation between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to a House Intelligence Committee aide on Schiff’s staff. He had previously informed the CIA’s legal counsel's office. Schiff initially denied he knew anything about the complaint before it was filed, stating on Sep. 17: “We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower. We would like to." But it later emerged that a member of his staff had spoken to the whistleblower before his complaint was submitted on Aug. 12. The Washington Post concluded that Schiff "clearly made a statement that was false." Grace, 36, was hired to help Schiff’s committee investigate the Trump White House. That month, Trump accused Schiff of "stealing people who work at White House." Grace worked at the NSC from 2016 to 2018 in U.S.-China relations and then briefly at the Center for a New American Security think tank, which was founded by two former senior Obama administration officials. A Schiff aide commented in February: "We have hired staff for a variety of positions, including the committee's oversight work and its investigation. Although none of our staff has come directly from the White House, we have hired people with prior experience on the National Security Council staff for oversight of the agencies, and will continue to do so at our discretion." Schiff himself said, "If the president is worried about our hiring any former administration people, maybe he should work on being a better employer." Misko, 37, worked in the Obama administration as a member of the secretary of state’s policy planning staff under deputy chief of staff Jake Sullivan, who became Hillary Clinton's top foreign policy official during her 2016 presidential campaign. In 2015, Misko was the director for the Gulf states at the NSC, remaining there into the Trump administration’s first year. A source familiar with Grace's work at the NSC told the Washington Examiner, “Abby Grace had access to executive privilege information, and she has a duty not to disclose that information. She is not authorized to reveal that information.” The same source said that Misko had not been trusted by Trump appointees. "There were a few times where documents had been signed off for final editing before they go to the national security adviser for signature," the source said. "And he actually went in and made changes after those changes were already finished. So he basically tried to insert, without his boss' approval. "There were meetings in which he protested very heavily, and next thing you know, there's an article in the paper about the contents of that meeting." Misko often clashed with other NSC personnel at meetings, another source said. Both Grace and Misko were close to Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, Trump's national security adviser from Feb. 2017 until May 2018. Misko was a CNAS fellow in 2014. Misko's name surfaced in the Hillary Clinton email controversy when he worked in the State Department during the Obama administration. In a Dec. 1, 2009, email released by Judicial Watch, Clinton adviser Huma Abedin sent classified information regarding foreign military contributions to the Afghanistan war effort to her private email account. That email originated with Misko, who wrote to Sullivan that he initially “accidentally” sent it on the “high side” (secure) but was sending the email again. The intelligence committee did not respond to a request for comment.



Democrats ratchet up impeachment secrecy
Washington Examiner

URL: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... nt-secrecy
Category: Politics
Published: October 12, 2019

Description: A week ago, House Republicans complained that Democrats imposed excessive secrecy on interviews conducted as part of the drive to impeach President Trump. Now, the situation appears to have gotten worse. Friday's interview of Marie Yovanovitch, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, marked a new point — a low point, as Republicans see it — in Democratic efforts to keep impeachment information out of public view. In this way: The two previous impeachment interviews, with former special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker and Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, were conducted in the format of what is known as a transcribed interview. Rep. Adam Schiff, who is running the Democratic impeachment effort, decreed that transcripts not be released to the public. At the same time, there were no heavily restrictive rules on what would happen should any member of Congress, acting from memory, reveal things that were said in the interview. The Yovanovitch session was different. Democrats conducted the interview in the format of a deposition, which is different from a transcribed interview. One key difference is that there are serious penalties for lawmakers who reveal the contents of a deposition. Doing so would almost surely subject the offending member to a House ethics investigation. All Republicans remember the price paid by Rep. Devin Nunes, who in 2017, as chairman of the Intelligence Committee, faced an ethics investigation based on a complaint from a Democratic-allied outside group alleging he leaked classified information. Nunes was later cleared of all the charges, but he had to distance himself from some committee activities as the investigation slowly proceeded. Now, some Republican lawmakers express fear of Democrats siccing an ethics investigation on them if they reveal what took place in the Yovanovitch interview, even though none of what was discussed was classified. Look at what happened to Nunes, they say. So Republicans feel tight restrictions on what they can say. What was Yovanovitch asked? What did she answer? Were her answers consistent with what is known about the case? Republicans can't say, fearful that Schiff and Democrats will come after them. Here is the clever part, from the Democratic perspective. As the Yovanovitch interview began, her 10-page opening statement quickly leaked. In it, Yovanovitch made her case for all the press to read. Headline after headline appeared, all based on the statement:
* Washington Post: "Ousted ambassador Marie Yovanovitch tells Congress Trump pressured State Dept. to remove her."
* Politico: "Marie Yovanovitch says Trump ousted her over 'unfounded and false claims.'"
* CNN: "Former US ambassador to Ukraine says Trump wanted her removed and blames 'unfounded and false claims.'"
* New York Times: "Ukraine Envoy Says She Was Told Trump Wanted Her Out Over Lack of Trust."
* Wall Street Journal: "Trump Pressed for Ukraine Envoy's Removal, She Tells Lawmakers."
Democrats and Yovanovitch got their side of the story out without any rebuttal from Republicans. Beyond the leaked written statement, what did she actually say in the deposition? Did Republicans question her about her claims? Did the questioning reveal any facts not included in Yovanovitch's opening statement? Were there any contradictions? None of that was known. Yovanovitch's opening statement instantly became the accepted version of the story. Meanwhile, Republicans said nothing. Take, for example, Rep. Scott Perry, one of the four GOP House members in the room. Appearing on Fox News Friday night, Perry was asked what was said at the deposition. "Unfortunately, in the ever-changing rules situation here, I can't tell you what happened in that room," Perry answered. In private conversation, other sources were equally reticent. All were silenced by the Democrats' strategic use of House procedures. "Depositions are governed by very specific House regulations," said a House staffer in a text exchange. "Only one lawyer can ask questions per round, agency counsel is barred from attending, and the testimony is close hold. Transcribed interviews, in comparison, really don't have any hard rules." The only exception, the staffer said, is a closed session of the Intelligence Committee, which is not what the Yovanovitch deposition was. Finally, the contents of the interview are being kept secret not only from the public but from other lawmakers. Perhaps a dozen members have heard any of the testimony in the impeachment hearings so far. The other 420 or so don't know what went on. In his much-criticized letter to Congress, White House counsel Pat Cipollone said Democratic handling of the impeachment investigation "violates fundamental fairness." He meant fairness toward the target of the proceeding, President Trump. But there is also the question of fairness toward the American people trying to follow an impeachment process shrouded in secrecy. Don't they have the right to know what the president's accusers say?



Schiff pushed Volker to say Ukraine felt pressure from Trump
Washington Examiner

URL: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news ... from-trump
Category: Politics
Published: October 16, 2019

Description: In a secret interview, Rep. Adam Schiff, leader of the House Democratic effort to impeach President Trump, pressed former United States special representative to Ukraine Kurt Volker to testify that Ukrainian officials felt pressured to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden's son Hunter as a result of Trump withholding U.S. military aid to Ukraine. Volker denied that was the case, noting that Ukrainian leaders did not even know the aid was being withheld and that they believed their relationship with the U.S. was moving along satisfactorily, without them having done anything Trump mentioned in his notorious July 25 phone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. When Volker repeatedly declined to agree to Schiff's characterization of events, Schiff said, "Ambassador, you're making this much more complicated than it has to be." The interview took place Oct. 3 in a secure room in the U.S. Capitol. While the session covered several topics, the issue of an alleged quid pro quo — U.S. military aid in exchange for a Ukrainian investigation of the Bidens and a public announcement that such an investigation was underway — was a significant part of the discussion. "[The Ukrainians] didn't want to be drawn into investigating a Democratic candidate for president, which would mean only peril for Ukraine, is that fair to say?" Schiff asked Volker. "That may be true," Volker said. "That may be true. They didn't express that to me, and, of course, I didn't know that was the context at the time." (Volker has said he did not know that Trump had mentioned the Bidens on the July 25 call with Zelensky until the rough transcript of the call was released on Sept. 25.) "Part of the other context is vital military support is being withheld from the Ukraine during this period, right?" Schiff asked. "That was not part of the context at the time," Volker said. "At least to my knowledge, they [Ukrainian leaders] were not aware of that." Schiff asked whether Volker had discussed the withholding of aid with Ukrainian officials. Volker said he had not. The first time he talked with the Ukrainians about that was when a story appeared in the press, an article in Politico, "Trump holds up Ukraine military aid meant to confront Russia," on Aug. 28-29, well after the July 25 Trump-Zelensky phone call. "The first conversation I had was when the diplomatic adviser to President Zelensky, Vadym Prystaiko, I believe it was, texted me a copy of the Politico article about the hold on assistance," Volker testified. "So I had had many conversations with him in the months prior to that, and this did not come up from him to me, which makes me believe that this was not on his radar until that time when he saw the article." Volker said that he already knew about the suspension in aid, having learned on July 18, a week before the Trump-Zelensky call. Volker testified that he asked around about the suspension — why was it being done? — but was not able to find out what was going on. Schiff began to push the quid pro quo allegation. He asked Volker whether he would agree that "no president of the United States should ever ask a foreign leader to help intervene in a U.S. election." "I agree with that," said Volker. "And that would be particularly egregious if it was done in the context of withholding foreign assistance?" Schiff continued. Volker balked. "We're getting now into, you know, a conflation of these things that I didn't think was actually there." Schiff wanted Volker to agree that "if it's inappropriate for a president to seek foreign help in a U.S. election, it would be doubly so if a president was doing that at a time when the United States was withholding military support from the country." Again, Volker did not agree. "I can't really speak to that," he said. "My understanding of the security assistance issue is — " Schiff interrupted. "Why can't you speak to that, ambassador? You're a career diplomat. You can understand the enormous leverage that a president would have while withholding military support from an ally at war with Russia. You can understand just how significant that would be, correct?" Volker tried to go along without actually agreeing. "I can understand that that would be significant," he said. Schiff persisted. "And when that suspension of aid became known to that country, to Ukraine, it would be all the more weighty to consider what the president had asked of them, wouldn't it?" "So again, congressman, I don't believe — " Volker began. "It's a pretty straightforward question," Schiff said. "But I don't believe the Ukrainians were aware that the assistance was being held up — " "They became aware of it," Schiff said. "They became aware later, but I don't believe they were aware at the time, so there was no leverage implied," Volker said. The two men continued to argue about the chronology of events. By the time the Ukrainians learned about the withheld aid in late August, Volker said, all sides had dropped the idea of making a statement announcing an investigation of the Bidens and events during the 2016 election. But Schiff kept pushing the notion that once the Ukrainians did learn about the withheld aid, then they would have felt tremendous pressure from Trump. "At the point they [the Ukrainians] learned that, wouldn't that have given them added urgency to meet the president's request on the Bidens?" Schiff asked. "I don't know the answer to that," Volker said. Schiff pressed Volker to agree one more time. In response, Volker tried to explain that the Ukrainians did not seem to be feeling pressure from Trump and the U.S. "Congressman, this is why I'm trying to say the context is different, because at the time they learned that, if we assume it's Aug. 29, they had just had a visit from the national security adviser, John Bolton. That's a high-level meeting already. He was recommending and working on scheduling the visit of President Zelensky to Washington. We were also working on a bilateral meeting to take place in Warsaw on the margins of a commemoration on the beginning of World War II. And in that context, I think the Ukrainians felt like things are going the right direction, and they had not done anything on — they had not done anything on an investigation, they had not done anything on a statement, and things were ramping up in terms of their engagement with the administration. So I think they were actually feeling pretty good then." At that point, Schiff gave up. Why was Volker resisting? "Ambassador, I find it remarkable as a career diplomat that you have difficulty acknowledging that when Ukraine learned that their aid had been suspended for unknown reasons, that this wouldn't add additional urgency to a request by the president of the United States. I find that remarkable." Later, Republican Rep. Scott Perry questioned Volker, returning to the colloquy with Schiff. Perry asked Volker whether he, Volker, had close relations with Ukrainian officials and whether, if those officials felt something was amiss, they would tell Volker. "The folks that you dealt with in Ukraine at the very highest level, I don't know, but I'm going to ask, do you feel like they had a fair amount of trust in you?" "Absolutely," said Volker. "So they would confide things in you if they had a question?" "They would confide things," Volker answered. "They would ask questions. They would ask for help. We had a very candid relationship ... " "In your conversation with Rep. Schiff, he kind of implied and wanted you to intimate that there was an agreement based on that conversation that: If you do the investigation, then you can have a meeting [with Trump] and maybe we'll consider this military aid. If that were the case from the call, do you feel, because they had some trust in you, that they would have come to you and said, 'Hey how do we handle this? Is this what the President of the United States is asking?' Would they confide — would they ask you that?" "Yes," said Volker. "They would have asked me exactly that, you know. How do we handle this?" Much of the coverage of Volker's testimony focused on his opening statement, which made its way to the media. (Washington Post headline: "Volker defends Biden as 'man of integrity' in testimony to Congress.") But there was much more to the testimony than the opening statement. Among other things, it showed how Schiff, as a powerful chairman in charge of impeachment, pursues his theory of the case even when a witness gives testimony that does not support it. Schiff has scheduled more interviews for this week and next.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1875129
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Rush Limbaugh: Why Dems should fear 'Crowdstrike' comment

Postby smix » Wed Oct 09, 2019 6:27 pm

Rush Limbaugh: Why Dems should fear 'Crowdstrike' comment
WND

URL: https://www.wnd.com/2019/09/rush-limbau ... e-comment/
Category: Politics
Published: September 25, 2019

Description: 'No question' that 'Trump is gonna get to the bottom of the origins of the Mueller investigation'
Now that the text of President Trump's telephone conversation with the president of Ukraine has been released, showing there was no quid pro quo as Democrats alleged, talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh is pointing out it contains a reference that should concern the Democrats. That word is "CrowdStrike." President Trump said, according to the transcript: "I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say CrowdStrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people … the server, they say Ukraine has it." He rambled a bit, but CrowdStrike was the company that examined the Democratic National Committee computers during the 2016 presidential race and concluded they were hacked by Russia. Later, DNC emails were released by WikiLeaks. The DNC didn't allow the FBI to examine the computers to verify the claim. What if it wasn't Russia? Limbaugh wondered about the willingness of Obama administration investigators to take the word of CrowdStrike. "They didn't let the FBI examine the server. And can you imagine the FBI said, 'OK'? You ever had the FBI come to your house and want to search and you say, 'No, you can't come in,' and they say, 'Oh, OK,' and leave?" "But CrowdStrike is alleged to have gotten something big wrong about Ukraine," Limbaugh said. "CrowdStrike accused Russia of hacking a Ukrainian artillery app resulting in heavy losses, even though Ukraine has no incentive to help Russia, which is attacking them. Ukraine said it never happened. And yet CrowdStrike was asserting that Russia hacked a Ukrainian artillery app. How do I know this? Well, Andy McCarthy's written about this in his book 'Ball of Collusion.' Here's the short little passage here that’s relevant," Limbaugh said. McCarthy writes: "CrowdStrike widely believed to have been wrong in a controversial 2016 judgment when it claimed that Russia hacked a Ukrainian artillery app resulting in heavy losses of howitzers in combat against separatists used by Moscow.' That’s a pretty big thing to be wrong about, and the only reason to point it out is, okay, if they're wrong about that, what if the Democrat National Committee server was not hacked?" Limbaugh speculated: "Do you realize how convenient it was for them to be able to say that Russia hacked their server and then link Trump to Russia? The FBI never assumed that because they never got to investigate it. So the presence of CrowdStrike, Trump asking the president of Ukraine to look into CrowdStrike as well as Biden and his son." With Trump's specific mention of Crowdstrike, Limbaugh said, "the Democrats have learned today, after reading that transcript, what Trump is really doing here." He explained: "Trump is soliciting assistance from allies all over the world to help [Attorney General William] Barr prove the scam run against him. That's what’s going on. That's what the Democrats have learned today with that word 'CrowdStrike' being in the transcript. CrowdStrike, the founder of CrowdStrike is a Russian emigre who hates Putin with a purple passion. It seems to color CrowdStrike's security work." Crowdstrike claimed Russians hacked the Ukrainian system and fired on its own troops, killing thousands. But when Ukraine denied that happened, CrowdStrike withdrew its claim. "This is highly relevant to this entire Russian collusion story, which is why Trump was asking about it and why the Democrats don’t want the Ukrainians to reinvestigate it," Limbaugh said. "The reference to CrowdStrike, mark my words, is momentous in this transcript today," he said. "There's no question in my mind now what this is. Trump is gonna get to the bottom of the origins of the Mueller investigation. He's gonna get to the bottom of the origins of this coup that was run against him come hell or high water and he was asking the president of Ukraine for assistance today, and part of that is illustrating and proving the vile corruption of Joe Biden, which is monumental." WND reported James Rybicki, who served as chief of staff to former FBI Director James Comey, suggested in sworn testimony that the Trump-Russia collusion investigation was orchestrated by Obama's White House in October 2016, according to bureau documents. A heavily redacted transcript of Rybicki's interview with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel includes an unidentified prosecutor's summary of the former FBI official's testimony. "So we understand," the prosecutor says, "that at some point in October of 2016, there was, I guess, a desire by the White House to make some kind of statement about Russia's. ... " The next page is omitted. The United States Office of Special Counsel, not to be confused with Robert Mueller's special counsel, is a permanent independent federal investigative and prosecutorial agency designed to protect federal employees from reprisal for "whistleblowing." Lawyer Ty Clevenger obtained the documents as part of a lawsuit on behalf of businessman Ed Butowsky, who claims columnist Ellen Ratner told him murdered Democratic National Committee worker Seth Rich and his brother provided WikiLeaks the DNC emails before the 2016 election, not Russia. Clevenger explained that the OSC prosecutors were noting that the FBI publicized its reactivation of the Clinton email investigation shortly before the 2016 election. So, why, the prosecutors wondered, did the FBI not counterbalance that disclosure by publicizing the "Russian collusion" investigation into Donald Trump? It was in that context that one of the prosecutors commented that the White House wanted some kind of statement made about Russia. Clevenger said that almost certainly refers to the Oct. 7, 2016, joint statement of the Department of Homeland Security and the Directorate of National Intelligence. The agencies said the "U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations." "In other words," Clevenger said, "it looks like the Obama White House put its thumb on the scale, pressuring intelligence agencies to adopt the Democratic National Committee's talking points, i.e., to blame the stolen emails on Russian hackers rather than an internal source (like Seth Rich)." Crowdstrike was hired by Perkins Coie, the law firm retained by the Hillary Clinton Campaign and the DNC, that hired Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS to produce the infamous anti-Trump "dossier." The dossier of unverified claims by unidentified senior Russian officials was used by the Obama Justice Department and DOJ to obtain warrants to spy on the Trump campaign.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1875129
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

MP Derkach unveils facts of pressure of U.S. Embassy on Ukraine's law enforcement bodies, possible corrupt actions of the Bidens

Postby smix » Thu Oct 10, 2019 12:05 pm

MP Derkach unveils facts of pressure of U.S. Embassy on Ukraine's law enforcement bodies, possible corrupt actions of the Bidens
Interfax-Ukraine

URL: https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/press-c ... 17799.html
Category: Politics
Published: October 9, 2019

Description: KYIV. Oct 9 (Interfax-Ukraine) – Ukraine's parliamentarian Andriy Derkach, the initiator of a criminal case on interference in the U.S. elections, publishes documents from which it follows that the first deputy director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) Gizo Uglava for several years provided the US Embassy in Kyiv with information that negatively affected the course of events in Ukraine and the U.S. At a press conference at the Interfax-Ukraine agency on Wednesday, he made public the documents received from investigative journalists, including correspondence between NABU officers and representatives of diplomatic missions of foreign states in the framework of criminal proceedings opened under Article 111 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (High Treason). In particular, the documents that the deputy possesses indicate that Uglava, through his assistant Polina Chyzh, gave information to the U.S. Embassy, which, he said, is an important part of the "puzzle" of interference in U.S. elections and international corruption. According to Derkach, he has already handed over these documents to the State Bureau of Investigations (SBI) and the Prosecutor General's Office (PGO). The MP also initiated the creation of a temporary investigative commission in parliament, and filed a petition with the court to resume the investigation of interference in the U.S. election by divulging information from a pretrial investigation. "As we see in the correspondence, repeatedly, starting from July 14, 2017, from the electronic mailbox of Polina Chyzh, the assistant to NABU First Deputy Gizo Uglava, criminal proceedings undertaken by NABU detectives were sent to the legal specialist of the anti-corruption program of the U.S. Justice Department at Ukraine's U.S. Embassy Hanna Yemelianova," Derkach said. Derkach showed a letter in which Chyzh received instructions from Yemelianova to provide information on the case involving ex-Ecology Minister and Burisma Group owner Mykola Zlochevsky. The MP also announced the amount of funds transferred to Burisma Group representatives, among whom Hunter Biden also appears. According to documents, Burisma paid at least $16.5 million in favor of Hunter Biden, Aleksander Kwasniewski, Alan Apter and Devon Archer. Derkach said international corruption of this magnitude could not take place without the participation of the fifth President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko. "International corruption of this magnitude, as well as interference in the U.S. presidential election, could not have occurred without Poroshenko's participation," he said. "We see the conflict in which the new government of Ukraine faces due to the activities of the previous president. I want to emphasize that I'm almost sure, and not only I, but many journalists, that Poroshenko personally bears responsibility for the situation in which Ukraine has ended up, for dragging Ukraine into interfering in the U.S. presidential election, for a huge number of corruption scandals and international corruption that could not have occurred without his control or participation," Derkach said. "Due to the actions of the former President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko, Ukraine's new President Volodymyr Zelensky was drawn into a scandal with interference in the U.S. presidential election and now Ukraine is accused of international corruption," Derkach believes. Derkach also showed documents that he claims show that NABU illegally collected personal information on former prosecutor general Viktor Shokin and his family. As noted in the press release, "Since 2016, Chyzh has sent documents with the subject: Text for a conversation with FBI officers on the 'Black Bookkeeping Party of Regions' by e-mail to Uglava." The press release also said data was sent about Shokin and his wife. According to a press release, Derkach has called for Chyzh to be suspended during the investigation. Derkach also said he filed a lawsuit to resume the case of interference in the U.S. election by divulging pretrial investigation data related to "synchronization of illegal actions by NABU, international corruption activities with the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign." The lawsuit will be examined on October 21. "According to the results of my appeal, a criminal proceeding was registered in 2017. On January 28, a senior investigator of the Main Investigation Department of the Prosecutor General's Office issued a decision to close this criminal proceeding. At the moment, this decision is appealed in civil procedure, the case is scheduled for October 21 in the Pechersky District Court of Kyiv," Derkach said.



Burisma paid Joe Biden $900,000 for lobbying – Ukrainian MP
Interfax-Ukraine

URL: https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/press-c ... 17936.html
Category: Politics
Published: October 9, 2019

Description: KYIV. Oct 9 (Interfax-Ukraine) – Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden received $900,000 for lobbying activities from Burisma Group, Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada member Andriy Derkach said citing investigation materials. Derkach publicized documents which, as he said, "describe the mechanism of getting money by Biden Sr." at a press conference at Interfax-Ukraine's press center in Kyiv on Wednesday. "This was the transfer of Burisma Group's funds for lobbying activities, as investigators believe, personally to Joe Biden through a lobbying company. Funds in the amount of $900,000 were transferred to the U.S.-based company Rosemont Seneca Partners, which according to open sources, in particular, the New York Times, is affiliated with Biden. The payment reference was payment for consultative services," Derkach said. He also publicized sums that were transferred to Burisma Group representatives, in particular Hunter Biden, a son of the former U.S. vice president. "According to the documents, Burisma paid no less than $16.5 million to [former Polish President, who became an independent director at Burisma Holdings in 2014] Aleksander Kwasniewski, [chairman of the Burisma board of independent directors] Alan Apter, [Burisma independent director] Devon Archer and Hunter Biden [who joined the Burisma board of directors in 2014]," Derkach said. "Using political and economic levelers of influencing Ukrainian authorities and manipulating the issue of providing financial aid to Ukraine, Joe Biden actively assisted closing criminal cases into the activity of former Ukrainian Ecology Minister Mykola Zlochevsky, who is the founder and owner of Burisma Group," he said. "Biden's fifth visit to Kyiv on December 7-8, 2015 was devoted to making a decision on the resignation of [then Ukrainian Prosecutor General] Viktor Shokin over the case of Zlochevsky and Burisma. Loan guarantees worth $1 billion that the United States was to give to Ukraine was the point of pressure. Biden himself admitted exerting pressure in his speech at the Council of Foreign Relations in January 2018, calling Shokin 'son of a bitch who was fired'," Derkach said. The timeline of events proves that the U.S. linked the Zlochevsky case to loan guarantees, he said. After the decree dismissing Shokin was published on April 3, 2016, the governments of the United States and Ukraine signed a loan guarantee agreement worth $1 billion, several months later, on June 3, he said. "In this case, there are facts should be subject to investigation. There is an agency that has powers to investigate them; the U.S. Department of Justice. If the Ukrainian Prosecutor General signs documents and send them to U.S. Department of Justice without any requests, he will accomplish his mission," he said, adding that the Ukrainian Prosecutor General has such powers. "Considering international corruption in public is a way-out for President Zelensky. I am certain that he is not involved in international corruption," Derkach said. It was reported earlier that Derkach publicized correspondence between the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and officers of the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv. According to publicized correspondence, starting from July 14, 2017, the lists of criminal proceedings undertaken by NABU officers were sent from the electronic mailbox of Polina Chyzh, an assistant to NABU first deputy head Gizo Uglava, to the electronic mailbox of Hanna Yemelianova, a legal specialist of the anti-corruption program of the U.S. Justice Department at U.S. Embassy in Ukraine. Derkach also said that NABU-leak materials will be published on his Facebook account and materials that he got from investigating journalists have already been passed to Ukraine's State Bureau of Investigations and the Prosecutor's General Office. He also said he will initiate the creation of an ad hoc parliamentary investigative commission and has already requested launching a criminal case against Ukrainian officials into interference into U.S. elections. The court session is scheduled for October 21, he said. Burisma Holdings is a Cyprus-registered gas producing company holding assets in Ukraine. It is one of Ukraine's top-three independent gas producers headquartered in Kyiv. Zlochevsky is the founder and the ultimate beneficiary owner of the company.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1875129
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Meet Eric Ciaramella — H.R. McMaster Appoints Susan Rice Ally to be his Personal Aide

Postby smix » Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:48 pm

Meet Eric Ciaramella — H.R. McMaster Appoints Susan Rice Ally to be his Personal Aide
Medium - Mike Chernovich

URL: http://archive.is/JLK0t
Category: Politics
Published: June 11, 2017

Description: West Wing officials confirmed to Cernovich Media that Eric Ciaramella, who worked closely with Susan Rice while at NSC, was recently promoted to be H.R. McMaster’s personal aide. Ciaramella will have unfettered access to McMaster’s conversations with foreign leaders. Ciaramella’s ascension is surprising considering pro-Trump sources within the Obama administration disclosed to me in December, 2016 that Ciaramella’s helped draft Susan Rice’s anti-Trump talking points before the Inauguration. In fall of 2016 as Obama’s director for Ukraine on the NSC, Ciaramella was the main force pushing Trump-Russia conspiracy theories. Some suspect Ciaramella was one of the original leakers who told the media about classified conversations Trump had with Russian diplomat Sergei Lavrov. While it’s unproven that Ciaramella leaked that conversation, it is now a fact of life that he will have access to every conversation Trump has with foreign officials, as part of his official duties for McMaster. When this story first came to me, my question was, “This is a huge personnel move. Why hasn’t Politico run it?” My sources told me other outlets passed on the story, because, “This isn’t the type of information the mainstream media wants out there.” Staunchly pro-Ukraine and anti-Russia, Ciaramella is the media’s dream, which explains why this high-profile personnel move hasn’t been covered in any mainstream media outlets. The only result for Ciaramella in Google News is a 2015 article about a meeting of religious leaders from the Ukraine meeting with Barack Obama. As a student at Yale, Ciaramella was a social justice activist.
Students convened outside Silliman at 9 a.m., all dressed in white to symbolize their future goal of bridging the gap between the United States and the Middle East through the use of the Arab language, said Eric Ciaramella ’08, one of the students who led the protest.

Nothing in his resume indicates that Ciaramella will put America First, and his entire life arc indicates he will sabotage Trump and leak information to the press whenever possible.
McMaster has been stacking the NSC with anti-Trump Republicans, Susan Rice allies, and Obama holdovers.

mcmaster-deep-state.jpg

President Trump’s America First foreign policy has been called “naive” by McMaster, who wants to make the NSC Democrat again — an obvious joke among staffers as the NSC is overwhelming left wing. McMaster recently hired a Hamas sympathizer Kris Bauman, who earlier said that, “The Obama Administration must find creative (but legal) ways to include Hamas in a solution.” McMaster tried hiring Benghazi liar Linda Weissgold to work for him at the NSC.
Weissgold apparently had a good interview with McMaster, as she was overheard saying as she left the White House she would next have to “talk to Pompeo” — as in Mike Pompeo, the director of the CIA. But Weissgold was never offered the job; days later, Trump himself overruled the effort to move Cohen-Watnick out of his senior director role. During the Obama administration Weissgold served as director of the CIA’s Office of Terrorism Analysis. She was among those who briefed Congress following the Benghazi terrorist attack in 2012, a team of intelligence and military experts who reportedly earned the nickname “the dream team” within the administration.

In addition to stacking the NSC with pro-Susan Rice, anti-Trump figures, McMaster has also tried purging anyone loyal to Trump. McMaster had the security clearance of Adam Lovinger revoked after Lovinger attended a bar mitzvah in Israel. Pro-Trump Robin Townley also had his security clearance revoked without any good reason.
A senior administration official tells ABC News that Robin Townley had his request for special security clearance denied by the CIA. The move will prevent Townley from being able to serve in the NSC post. Townley currently maintains an active top secret security clearance, but it was his request was for “Sensitive Compartmented Information” clearance that was rejected, the source says.

McMaster killed the pro-Trump “war room.”
Trump officials planned to set up a “war room” devoted to rapid response media messaging.
The White House is about to set up a ‘war room’ to battle the emerging challenges. ‘Since the firing of [FBI Director James] Comey, that really exposed the fact that the White House in its current structure … is not prepared for really a one-front war, let alone a two-front war,’ a source told Reuters. ‘They need to have a structure in place that allows them to stay focused’ while ‘also truly fighting back on these attacks and these leaks.’ ‘Obviously you want it [unity] under different circumstances but it’s really united this team and helped bring clarity to their focus,’ the source added.

McMaster personally intervened to torpedo the war room. McMaster has also been orchestrating leaks about Trump to the press through David Petraeus’s firm KKR. The Pentagon stalled Trump’s plan to pin a fourth star on McMaster, as the Army views him as unfit for command.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1875129
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Was Adam Schiff running a spy operation against the White House?

Postby smix » Sun Oct 13, 2019 8:12 am

Was Adam Schiff running a spy operation against the White House?
American Thinker

URL: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/20 ... house.html
Category: Politics
Published: October 12, 2019

Description: Seems every day brings a new revelation about Democratic efforts to rig an impeachment of the president. The false claims and astonishing conflicts of interest being thrown out there are piling up fast. The latest, from the San Francisco Examiner, exposes House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff's choice of staffers, who it turns out were two disgruntled Deep-Staters from the White House who had actually worked with the so-called "whistleblower":
Abigail Grace, who worked at the NSC until 2018, was hired in February, while Sean Misko, an NSC aide until 2017, joined Schiff's committee staff in August, the same month the whistleblower submitted his complaint. The whistleblower was an NSC official who worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and who has expertise in Ukraine, the Washington Examiner has reported. A career CIA analyst with Ukraine expertise, the whistleblower aired his concerns about a phone conversation between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to a House Intelligence Committee aide on Schiff's staff. He had previously informed the CIA's legal counsel's office. Schiff initially denied he knew anything about the complaint before it was filed, stating on Sep. 17: "We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower. We would like to." But it later emerged that a member of his staff had spoken to the whistleblower before his complaint was submitted on Aug. 12. The Washington Post concluded that Schiff "clearly made a statement that was false." Grace, 36, was hired to help Schiff's committee investigate the Trump White House. That month, Trump accused Schiff of "stealing people who work at White House." Grace worked at the NSC from 2016 to 2018 in U.S.-China relations and then briefly at the Center for a New American Security think tank, which was founded by two former senior Obama administration officials.

So these people were all buddies beforehand, and this would explain why the so-called whistleblower had been sneaking around with Schiff's staff before he made his whistleblower complaint. And that came only after someone with influence was able to get the inspector general of the Intelligence Community (IGIC) to change the rules about whistleblowers needing no firsthand knowledge about the wrongdoing they were supposedly reporting. Once that rules change was put into place, the whistleblower got going. More and more, this sounds like a pre-planned setup. One Trump operative has a very good summary of what seems to have been really going on as these anything but exculpatory stories mount:
The real headline is this: @AdamSchiff was spying on the White House illegally & rumor is the "whistleblower" met with Schiff on a regular basis before the whistleblowing - that is why he went to the Dem side of the Intel committee first...a total setup
— Tony Shaffer (@T_S_P_O_O_K_Y) October 12, 2019

Schiff was essentially running an illegal spy operation against the White House, recruiting his staffers, having them recruit their whistleblowers, grooming them up, changing the rules so they could file their complaints, and then lying that they knew anything about the lunatic efforts to get President Trump impeached. See, they were just standing there, minding their own business when all this stuff happened. Everything that did happen was just...a coincidence. Experienced intelligence operatives, and apparently this Trump operative has this sort of background, like to say there are no coincidences. As facts continue to roll out, it's getting more and more obvious that Schiff's operation was to orchestrate this impeachment scenario all along, going into high gear with the flame-out of the Mueller investigation. Trump's been having a bad time with public opinion in the wake of the Schiff operation orchestrating the media coverage as well. But the facts on the ground suggest it was all an illegal spying operation on the president. And that's a far more concrete crime than anything Trump is accused of committing. Right now, Schiff has 109 congressional representatives signed on to GOP rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona's call to condemn and censure Schiff for this sick little illegal freelance operation to spy on Trump. It's an abuse of his office, for sure, given that Schiff is supposed to be focused on intelligence, not on being one of those creepy secret police characters in The Lives of Others. It's also an outrageous misuse of taxpayer dollars. In light of this Schiff spy operation, and if Democrats don't want some backatcha next time there's a Dem in office with a Republican House, it really ought to be every last one of them signed up to that Biggs list.



Turns out Biden's family not the only one to benefit from Ukrainian fossil fuels
American Thinker

URL: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/20 ... fuels.html
Category: Politics
Published: October 12, 2019

Description: On Sept. 24, 2019, Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the official impeachment inquiry that would be led by the Intelligence Committee and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.). At first, this was a curious decision to objective persons, since the Judiciary Committee has the authority over this type of procedure. At the time, Pelosi indicated a threat by President Donald Trump to our national security during the July 25 conversation between him and President Zelensky of Ukraine. She did this without the benefit of the transcript, but she doubtless already knew much of the CIA "whistleblower's" complaint. Further, the Ukrainian president disputes her version. But this is not the rationale for her haste to convene the investigation. It appears that the D.C. swamp benefits another powerful family. The Biden family has gotten special treatment from Ukrainian oil interests, and the Pelosi family has a similar advantage. Paul Pelosi, Jr. was a board member of Viscoil and an executive at its related company NRGLab, which was involved in energy business in Ukraine. Perhaps the use of the Intelligence Committee has given the Democrats the opportunity to limit Republican questioning and maintain secrecy over the responses from subpoenaed witnesses. This would prevent any official record implicating Pelosi's son. This also explains her reluctance to take a vote authorizing the investigation, since the minority party would gain some rights. This is interesting also since much of the Democratic Party rejects carbon-based energy sources. Biden has made this a part of his campaign. The Green New Deal proposals will eventually end dependency on oil and gas as an energy source. But this does not stop these politicos from benefiting financially from this sector of the economy. This reminds one of the financial benefits that Al Gore's father had from Occidental Petroleum, which was one of the great polluters (remember Love Canal?). He chose to make money selling carbon offsets to atone and make his own name. The Ukrainian oil company Burisma used many well connected members of the D.C. establishment connected to the Obama administration. This interlocking swamp is a threat to the USA. But the media have managed to convince a vast number of Americans that Trump is the threat. When Trump railed against Pelosi in Louisiana on Friday, he was accusing her of not just splitting the nation politically, but also ignoring the financial benefits to powerful families at the detriment of our national security. This also helps explain the constant discussion in public about Biden's son Hunter, in addition to the political advantage he might gain. No wonder the establishment (including many Republicans) wants to impeach Trump. Family security always "trumps" national security in the D.C. swamp.



The Whistleblower and the 'Schiff-Biden Dossier'
American Thinker

URL: https://www.americanthinker.com/article ... ssier.html
Category: Politics
Published: October 14, 2019

Description: In a striking parallel to the Trump-Russia "collusion delusion" fueled by the manufactured Steele dossier, we now have what I will dub the "Schiff-Biden dossier," a manufactured tale of Trump corruption involving a tangled web of Deep-State swamp rats seeking to deflect attention from the real collusion and the real corruption. The Russian collusion fantasy was designed to frame Trump while diverting attention from Hilary Clinton's real collusion with Russia in Uranium One and using the Clinton Foundation as a pay-for- play cash cow as secretary of state. With the revelations by the Washington Examiner that the whistleblower worked for former vice president Joe Biden and that two of Adam Schiff's aides worked with the whistleblower, we can see Schiff's fable of a phone call between Trump and Ukraine's President Zelensky, even the whistleblower's initial complaint, to be a fraud manufactured by Schiff and Biden, to get Trump while diverting attention from the Biden family corruption from Ukraine to China. As the Washington Examiner reports:
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff recruited two former National Security Council aides who worked alongside the CIA whistleblower at the NSC during the Obama and Trump administrations, the Washington Examiner has learned. Abigail Grace, who worked at the NSC until 2018, was hired in February, while Sean Misko, an NSC aide until 2017, joined Schiff's committee staff in August, the same month the whistleblower submitted his complaint. The whistleblower was an NSC official who worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and who has expertise in Ukraine, the Washington Examiner has reported.

This mirrors the Russian collusion anti-Trump plot where members, indeed leaders, of the Intelligence Community such as John Brennan and James Clapper worked hand in hand with Obama's DOJ, Obama's FBI, and even Sen. majority leader Harry Reid to keep Hillary out of jail and Trump out of the White House. Interestingly enough, Misko has a long and strong working relationship with Hillary Clinton, the Washington Examiner reports:
Misko, 37, worked in the Obama administration as a member of the secretary of state's policy planning staff under deputy chief of staff Jake Sullivan, who became Hillary Clinton's top foreign policy official during her 2016 presidential campaign. ... Misko's name surfaced in the Hillary Clinton email controversy when he worked in the State Department during the Obama administration. In a Dec. 1, 2009, email released by Judicial Watch, Clinton adviser Huma Abedin sent classified information regarding foreign military contributions to the Afghanistan war effort to her private email account. That email originated with Misko, who wrote to Sullivan that he initially "accidentally" sent it on the "high side" (secure) but was sending the email again.

The whistleblower had contact with a Schiff aide, and Schiff had a copy of the whistleblower's complaint before it was sent to the Intelligence Community inspector general. Adam Schiff and committee staff had a copy of the letters before it was submitted to the I.G. The New York Times published a report stating that Schiff "learned about the outlines of a C.I.A. officer's concerns that President Trump had abused his power days before the officer filed a whistle-blower complaint." As the New York Times related:
The early account by the future whistle-blower shows how determined he was to make known his allegations that Mr. Trump asked Ukraine's government to interfere on his behalf in the 2020 election. It also explains how Mr. Schiff knew to press for the complaint when the Trump administration initially blocked lawmakers from seeing it. ... Before going to Congress, the C.I.A. officer had a colleague convey his accusations to the agency's top lawyer. Concerned about how that avenue for airing his allegations was unfolding, the officer then approached a House Intelligence Committee aide, alerting him to the accusation against Mr. Trump. In both cases, the original accusation was vague. The House staff member, following the committee's procedures, suggested the officer find a lawyer to advise him and file a whistle-blower complaint. The aide shared some of what the officer conveyed to Mr. Schiff. Schiff and his staff claim they had no hand in writing or editing the letter and did not coach the so-called whistleblower, even though his letter reads more like a legal brief written by a committee of lawyers. Schiff, with his track record, is not to be believed. Schiff's Ukraine fable is just that: a fable, like the Steele dossier before it. That the whistleblower worked for Joe Biden and had an aide, now working for Schiff, who worked for Hillary in the Obama administration, shows that this is yet another plot to get Trump and protect the Biden-Clinton legacy. This is not whistleblowing. It is sedition.

While we're at it, perhaps Schiff would like to produce a transcript of his secret meeting with Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson at the Aspen Security Forum in July 2018. Schiff, it may be remembered, accused House Intelligence Committee chair Devin Nunes of conspiracy with President Trump. Conspiracies against President Trump and conspiring with Deep State players is okay in Schiff's alternate universe. As Chuck Ross writes in the Daily Caller:
The Schiff-Simpson meeting has come under scrutiny because of Simpson's role in pushing the unverified Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy theory. Simpson has also been accused by some Republican lawmakers of lying to the House Intelligence Committee about his interactions with government officials while working on the dossier. During testimony to the House panel on Nov. 14, 2017, Simpson withheld that he met with Justice Department official Bruce Ohr prior to the November 2016 election. Simpson said that he met Ohr only after the election. But Ohr told Congress on Aug. 28, 2018 that he and Simpson met on Aug. 22, 2016 at Simpson's request. They met again on Dec. 10, 2016. Ohr's wife worked as a contractor for Fusion during the 2016 campaign. And after the election, Ohr served as the back channel between the FBI and Christopher Steele, the former British spy who worked for Fusion GPS on the dossier project. During the same testimony in which Simpson has been accused of lying, Schiff sought investigative leads from the Fusion GPS founder.

Schiff and Biden are both trying to hide their corruption with another anti-Trump diversion. Schiff sent a House intel staffer on a trip to Ukraine during August 24–31, just 12 days after receiving the whistleblower complaint. To do what? To dig up what? It is reported the staffer met with the previous president of the Ukraine, a friend of President Obama. As reported by Gateway Pundit, Adam Schiff has strong ties to a prominent Ukrainian arms-dealer, Igor Pasternak, who has organized fund raisers for Schiff:
In 2013 Ukrainian Igor Pasternak held two different fund raisers for Schiff asking for contributions between $1,000 and $2,500. Pasternak was reportedly in and around the Ukraine at the same time that Vice President Joe Biden had his son appointed to the Board of the Ukraine's largest oil and gas producer.

Oh, what a tangled web they have woven. Schiff should be expelled from the House for his sedition, if not prosecuted for it. And Biden should never be in the same ZIP code as the White House.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1875129
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Hunter Biden Steps Down from Chinese Board as Trump Attacks

Postby smix » Sun Oct 13, 2019 6:05 pm

Hunter Biden Steps Down from Chinese Board as Trump Attacks
Bloomberg News

URL: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... fight-back
Category: Politics
Published: October 13, 2019

Description: Hunter Biden is stepping down from the board of a Chinese-backed private equity company and promising to forgo all foreign work if his father, former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, is elected president in 2020. After months of keeping a relatively low-profile as President Donald Trump leveled a barrage of unsubstantiated accusations of corruption at him, the younger Biden is publicly vowing to avoid any conflict of interest. According to a statement released on his behalf by his lawyer George Mesires, Biden said he’ll resign at the end of the month from the management company of a private equity fund that’s backed by Chinese state-owned entities. He also pledged that he wouldn’t work for any foreign-owned companies or serve on their boards during a potential Biden administration. He reiterated that he never discussed his business activities with his father. “Hunter always understood that his father would be guided, entirely and unequivocally, by established U.S. policy, regardless of its effects on Hunter’s professional interests,” the statement said. “He never anticipated the barrage of false charges against both him and his father by the President of the United States.” Trump and his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani have repeatedly claimed, without providing evidence, that Hunter Biden made millions of dollars from China while his father was vice president. They’ve also made unsubstantiated claims that Joe Biden used his position as the U.S. administration’s point person on Ukraine to help quash an investigation in 2016 into the owner of one of the country’s largest private gas companies where Hunter sat on the board. Earlier this month, Trump publicly called on China to investigate the Bidens. A spokesman for China’s foreign ministry rejected that notion, saying it wouldn’t interfere in the internal affairs of other countries. “Under a Biden Administration, Hunter will readily comply with any and all guidelines or standards a President Biden may issue to address purported conflicts of interest, or the appearance of such conflicts, including any restrictions related to overseas business interests,” the statement said. “He will continue to keep his father personally uninvolved in his business affairs.” Hunter Biden released the statement on his own and not at the direction of the former vice president, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Ukraine, China
The statement aims to set the record straight on Biden’s past work in Ukraine and China, which Trump and Giuliani have fixated on as the 2020 campaign heats up. He served a five-year term on the board of Burisma, one of Ukraine’s biggest private gas companies, whose owner had been under investigation for alleged money laundering and abuse of power. The allegations predated his joining the board in April 2014. He stepped down earlier this year. Trump has alleged that Vice President Biden in 2016 threatened to withhold billions of dollars in loan guarantees unless Ukraine fired the country’s top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, as a way to quash the probe and help his son. But U.S. and Ukrainian officials said the investigation at the time was dormant and that Shokin was fired for the opposite reason: failing to fight corruption. “Despite extensive scrutiny, at no time has any law enforcement agency, either domestic or foreign, alleged that Hunter engaged in wrongdoing at any point during his five-year term,” the statement said. At the time he joined the Burisma board, Hunter was “of counsel” at Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, a U.S. law firm, and had been advising the company on “its corporate reform initiatives,” it said. He urged Boies Schiller to hire Nardello & Co., a consulting firm specializing in investigations, to assess Burisma’s “corporate structure and governance practices.” Aleksander Kwasniewski, the former president of Poland, sat on the board of Burisma at the time and recruited Hunter as a non-executive director because of his advisory work for the gas company, the statement said. “At no time was Hunter in charge of the company’s legal affairs,” it said. Hunter Biden also sought to counter increasing Trump campaign attacks on his ties to China. He denied Trump’s repeated allegations that he procured $1.5 billion from China for a private equity fund after he flew on Air Force Two with his father in December 2013 to Beijing. He serves on the board of BHR (Shanghai) Equity Investment Fund Management Company, which was set up in 2013 to invest Chinese capital outside China. He previously acknowledged meeting with Jonathan Li, a Chinese banker and partner in the fund, during the 2013 trip but has said it was a social visit and they didn’t talk business. BHR has the backing of several Chinese state-owned companies. Trump’s claim that Hunter walked away with $1.5 billion from China appears to be based on a fundraising target that BHR announced in 2014. But BHR never raised a discreet pool of capital, Mesires said, and instead raised money deal by deal. BHR now says it manages about $2.1 billion in investments. Biden denied he played a role in forming the company or having any equity in it while his father was vice president. The board position was unpaid, he said. After his father’s term ended in 2017, Biden bought 10% of the management company for about $420,000. He hasn’t made money from the venture to date, the statement said. He announced he’ll resign from the BHR board on Oct. 31. He didn’t comment on whether he would retain his equity stake, but his pledge to not do any foreign work under a Biden Administration indicates he would sell the stake if his father wins.
Trump Children
Biden’s pledge to avoid foreign work if his father wins the White House sets him apart from Trump’s children, who have continued working with foreign business partners from Dubai to Indonesia and India while his father sits in the White House. After Trump won the presidency in 2016, he handed the running of the Trump Organization to his sons, Don Jr. and Eric, and said they wouldn’t do any new overseas deals. But they have continued to push the Trump Organization’s existing foreign deals, including visits to promote luxury resorts in Indonesia, condo sales in India and an expansion of their golf resort in Scotland. Trump has launched increasingly personal attacks on Hunter as Democrats in the Houses of Representatives ramp up their impeachment inquiry examining the president’s pressuring of Ukraine’s president to investigate what he claims is corruption by the Bidens in the country. At a rally in Minnesota this week, Trump lashed out at the Democratic front-runner’s son, taunting him over his personal struggles with drug use and his low profile during his father’s campaign. “Whatever happened to Hunter? Where the hell is he?” Trump bellowed at the crowd. “Let’s do another t-shirt. Where’s Hunter?” Soon after the rally, Trump’s 2020 campaign website started selling $25 t-shirts emblazoned with “Where’s Hunter?” Despite continuing to advance their own foreign business deals while their father is in the White House, the Trump sons have joined in on the attacks, accusing Hunter Biden of using his family name for personal gain while his father was vice president. “At the VERY LEAST, there’s an appearance of impropriety,” Don Jr. tweeted. At the rally in Minneapolis, Eric Trump attacked Hunter, whipping up the crowd with chants of “Lock him up,” a replay of his father’s familiar campaign stump speech targeting Hillary Clinton in 2016.

like-father-like-son.jpg

Joe Biden has defended his son and vowed to make him a visible part of his campaign. “He’s a fine man. He’s been through hell,” Biden told the Reno Gazette Journal earlier this month. “I’m also confident the American people know me, and they know my son.”
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1875129
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Quid pro nothing: Trump accusers don’t care about the facts

Postby smix » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:18 am

Quid pro nothing: Trump accusers don’t care about the facts
New York Post

URL: https://nypost.com/2019/10/17/quid-pro- ... the-facts/
Category: Politics
Published: October 17, 2019

Description: Everyone who already thought the case for President Trump’s impeachment was a slam-dunk went berserk Thursday, claiming that acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney had just admitted to a quid pro quo with Ukraine. Except that what Mulvaney “admitted” is that the administration was doing what it should — pushing a foreign government to cooperate in getting to the bottom of foreign interference in the 2016 campaign. Virtually every media outlet in America — certainly all those that jumped on Mulvaney’s remarks — has spent most of the last three years painting such foreign interference as the blackest possible crime. In fact, all Mulvaney did was repeat yet again that Trump “was worried about corruption with that nation” — and specifically say those worries extended to cooperation in “the look-back to what happened in 2016.” Asked if Ukraine’s uncertainty about probing those matters was linked to the US holdup of military aid, he said “yes” — clarifying hours later that it wasn’t a quid pro quo. Which it couldn’t be: Ukraine didn’t know about the holdup until weeks after President Volodymyr Zelensky’s call with Trump. Critics complain that one specific issue Trump pushed is a “debunked conspiracy theory.” So what? The Obama administration and several Democratic senators at various times pushed Ukraine to cooperate in probes of possible Trump 2016 wrongdoing that eventually turned out not to exist. Indeed, ongoing Justice Department investigations are trying to determine what if any lines the US intelligence community crossed improperly during those probes. And Trump has been pushing Ukraine, quite appropriately, to cooperate with Justice. Heck, Ukraine in 2017 started to mend fences over its admitted pro-Hillary Clinton meddling in the 2016 campaign. In the press conference, Mulvaney also specifically ruled out any quid pro quo involving Trump’s offhand request to Zelensky to look into Hunter Biden’s activities there — which is supposedly the central charge in Democrats’ rush to impeachment. Again, the fact that Zelensky didn’t know the aid had been frozen is a giant hole in the impeachment case and the “quid pro quo” charge. Indeed, when US diplomat Karl Volker made that point in testimony the other day, Rep. Adam Schiff complained, “Ambassador, you’re making this much more complicated than it has to be.” Facts, as another president once noted, are stubborn things.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1875129
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to Politics


Mobile Device
  • 1
  • FREE CLASSIFIED ADS
    Free Classified Ads
    There are 3 ways to advertise - your choice: you can place free ads in a forum topic, in the classified display ads section, or you may start your own free blog. Please select the appropriate category and forum for the ad content before you post. Do not spam.
    Caveat emptor - let the buyer beware. Deal at your own risk and peril.
  • Advertisement