Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
and then

Ukrainian Meddling for Clinton & the DNC

Recommended Posts

and then

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

This article from a Left wing publication that was bolstered by being picked up by another Left wing publication, New York Times, removes any doubt that Ukrainian meddling occurred in 2016 on behalf of HRC.  Why are we not hearing anything about it from the MSM?  Could it be that the corruption by Biden and others was so ubiquitous that the MSM had to hide it no matter the cost?  If so, why did Politico and the NYT come clean in January of 2017?

From the Politico piece:

"Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found"

With this documented meddling in mind, why is Trump's interest in Ukrainian corruption so off limits as to be "Impeachable"?  

Those who like to sling out the phrase "debunked" need to cite the articles/investigations and witnesses that did this.  If you can't then you're just mouthing talking points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
ChrLzs

Even if we accept that report as is, one crime exonerates another, does it?  Good Grief.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind

For the record, I first posted about this when it was originally revealed back in 2017. I have since linked back to that article twice, I think.

Trying to claim that they meddled, however, is a stretch.

No evidence Ukraine president helped Hillary Clinton, as GOP senator claimed

Quote

There’s no question that some Ukraine officials publicly objected to comments then-candidate Trump made about Russia annexing Crimea, about 10,000 square miles of what had been Ukrainian territory. Trump cast the Russian land grab essentially as a done deal. 

But Kennedy said the Ukrainian response went beyond a few officials. He said the Ukrainian anti-Trump effort came from the very top.

------------------------------------------------------

In January 2017, Politico covered some of the same ground, but focused more on the work of a Democratic political contractor who tried to dig up dirt on Trump and his advisers. Republicans frequently mention that article. We vetted it and found that the GOP has used its findings selectively.

The article specifically said there was little evidence of a top-down effort in Ukraine.

Politifact

So 'Ukraine meddling' actually translates to 'a few low level Ukranians', and it mainly had to do with Manafort who is now in prison for the crimes suspected back then. Not nothing, as I state in my original post on the matter, but also not anything anywhere near resembling 'Ukraine' meddling and in no way comparable to the Russian operation. There was nothing official in any capacity from Ukraine or the Clinton campaign (or even officially the DNC).

5 hours ago, and then said:

With this documented meddling in mind, why is Trump's interest in Ukrainian corruption so off limits as to be "Impeachable"?  

Because the article and accusation of meddling has nothing to do with corruption, and Trump's interest in Biden and Ukraine, going by Trump's words and actions along with those of his administration, also had nothing to do with corruption, never mind this particular story. If you can't see the difference between Trump directly pressuring another President to announce investigations into Biden and some low-level DNC operative reaching out to low-level Ukrainian officials then you really need to sit back and take a fresh look at what actually happened.

Also, this:

5 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

Even if we accept that report as is, one crime exonerates another, does it?  Good Grief.

 

Edited by ExpandMyMind
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind

Also, also:

Your own Republican Senate decided there was nothing there.

  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs

Now this one has also come up blank, despite barr/trump handpicking the stooge to do it.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/04/politics/william-barr-russia-conspiracy-theory-inspector-general/index.html

Gosh, it's almost like trump and his cronies are in fact the swamp they promised to drain... 

Or was it a sewer?  Anyway, the big chunks certainly rose to the top...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
34 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Now this one has also come up blank, despite barr/trump handpicking the stooge to do it.

Actually Horowitz is a pretty stand up guy.  He looked, didn't find anything big enough to satisfy Barr and Trump.  Now if Durham doesn't dig up enough dirt, he too will likely be discredited.

I will be you that if he finds nothing ,major, the Republicans will just say they both are incompetent, or never Trumpers, or traitors.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
On 12/5/2019 at 12:07 AM, ChrLzs said:

Even if we accept that report as is, one crime exonerates another, does it?  Good Grief.

That's kind of the point, ChrLzs... those who rale against the president refuse to admit that his opponents not only did the same thing... they used the Federal government's resources to do so.  THAT tears at the foundation of our Republic and those who did it deserve no mercy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
1 hour ago, ChrLzs said:

Now this one has also come up blank, despite barr/trump handpicking the stooge to do it.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/04/politics/william-barr-russia-conspiracy-theory-inspector-general/index.html

Gosh, it's almost like trump and his cronies are in fact the swamp they promised to drain... 

Or was it a sewer?  Anyway, the big chunks certainly rose to the top...

Horowitz is an Obama appointee AND as with nearly every other "BOMBSHELL" the Left screams about:

 "people familiar with a draft of the report due out Monday tell CNN."

Maybe those people got an advanced copy but considering how often CNN has been dead wrong for 3 years, I think I'll wait to see what Barr has to say about that report.  We've also got an unverified report from WaPo that Barr has stated he disagrees with a major premise of Horowitz report.  I'll wait for the actual words from Barr on THAT story as well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
16 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

He looked, didn't find anything big enough to satisfy Barr and Trump.

You've read the report that isn't going to be released until the 9th?  Does it bother you at all to be seen as a partisan hack?  It won't surprise me if Horowitz returns a report saying no FBI members did anything wrong.  It WILL surprise me if Durham does the same thing.  There's already been an announcement of CRIMINAL investigation from Durham's work.  

If it turns out that Barr and Durham refuse to prosecute anyone then while you are crowing about your "team" winning, you might want to reckon the cost from the spreading lawlessness.  People who think that half the nation will just sit down under this kind of travesty and not demand a reckoning are just kidding themselves.  The law either works for all or it WILL be ignored and enforcers become targets.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
5 minutes ago, and then said:

You've read the report that isn't going to be released until the 9th? 

Nope, all I know is what I have been hearing so far, if there is something major in the report that is different than early hints then I will be surprised. I think Horowitz and Durham are pretty honest stand up guys, but I think that about Mueller too.  If Durham brings charges, I will believe that he has the evidence to back them up.

I guess we will see about Durham.  He may indeed come up with something more substantial.   

Barr will prosecute if he has a solid case. I may not like much about the guy, but i think he will do his duty.  He is not going to get bought off or intimidated by the Democrats if that is what you are worried about.

And if they say they do not have enough evidence of a crime being committed, and do not prosecute, what reckoning will be demanded?  

You think that will be unjust because you hate Hillary and Obama and you "know" in your heart they must be guilty of something? 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
1 hour ago, and then said:

You've read the report that isn't going to be released until the 9th?  Does it bother you at all to be seen as a partisan hack?  It won't surprise me if Horowitz returns a report saying no FBI members did anything wrong.  It WILL surprise me if Durham does the same thing.  There's already been an announcement of CRIMINAL investigation from Durham's work.  

If it turns out that Barr and Durham refuse to prosecute anyone then while you are crowing about your "team" winning, you might want to reckon the cost from the spreading lawlessness.  People who think that half the nation will just sit down under this kind of travesty and not demand a reckoning are just kidding themselves.  The law either works for all or it WILL be ignored and enforcers become targets.
 

Quote

Even the prosecutor personally selected by Attorney General Bill Barr to review the Russia probe couldn’t find evidence to back up right-wing conspiracy theories about the origins of the investigation.

The Washington Post reported Wednesday that Connecticut US Attorney John Durham, whom Barr tapped in May to examine the origins of the Russia inquiry, said he doesn’t have evidence to back up the allegation that the FBI planted an informant to “spy” on the Trump campaign.

He reportedly told that to Inspector General Michael Horowitz, Justice Department’s independent watchdog, who is carrying out a separate investigation from Durham. Horowitz’s long-awaited report on the Russia probe is expected on Monday.

Reports have suggested the inspector general’s report will criticize the FBI’s handling of some matters relating to the Russia probe, including the alleged falsification of a document by an FBI attorney in the wiretapping of a former Trump aide.

But Horowitz is also expected to broadly say the FBI met the bar to launch the investigation, and that federal law enforcement did not pursue the probe because of political bias against Trump.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/12/5/20996935/russia-investigation-inspector-general-john-durham-mifsud

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.