SPOILER: Het Kabinet-Trump

Het kabinet:
Secretary of State - Mike Pompeo
Secretary of Treasury - Steven Mnuchin
Secretary of Defense - Patrick M. Shanahan (Acting)
Attorney General - William Barr
Secretary of the Interior - David Bernhardt (Acting)
Secretary of Agriculture - Sonny Perdue
Secretary of Commerce - Wilbur Ross
Secretary of Labor - Alexander Acosta
Secretary of Health and Human Services - Alex Azar
Secretary of Housing & Urban Development - Ben Carson
Secretary of Transportation - Elaine Chao
Secretary of Energy - Rick Perry
Secretary of Education - Betsy DeVos
Secretary of Veterans Affairs - Robert Wilkie
Secretary of Homeland Security - Kirstjen Nielsen

Cabinet-level officials:
White House Chief of Staff - Mick Mulvaney (Acting)
Trade Representative - Robert Lighthizer
Director of National Intelligence - Dan Coats
Ambassador to the UN - Jonathan Cohen (Acting)
Director of the Office of Management & Budget - Mick Mulvaney
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency - Gina Haspel
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency - Andrew R. Wheeler (Acting)
Administrator of the Small Business Administration - Linda McMahon

Andere kopstukken:
Ivanka Trump (Advisor to the President), Jared Kushner (Senior Adviser Strategic Planning), Stephen Miller (Senior Adviser Policy), John Bolton (National Security Adviser), Kellyanne Conway (Counselor), Donald McGahn (White House Counsel), Sarah Huckabee Sanders (Press Secretary), Christopher Wray (Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation), Robert Mueller (Special Counsel), Rod Rosenstein (United States Deputy Attorney General).

Verdwenen of voormalige kopstukken:
Kabinet: Tom Price (HHS), David Shulkin (VA), Rex Tillerson (State)
DOJ/FBI: Sally Yates, James Comey, Preet Bharara, Andrew McCabe
Communicatie WH: Mike Dubke, Sean Spicer, Anthony Scaramucci, Hope Hicks
Adviseurs enzo: Michael Flynn, Herbert McMaster, Reince Priebus, Rob Porter, Gary Cohn, Steve Bannon, John McEntee, General Jim 'Mad Dog' Mattis, Jeff Sessions. John F. Kelly, Ryan Zinke, Nikki Haley, Scott Pruitt

SPOILER: Overzicht van lopende onderzoeken

Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections
Timeline of investigations into Trump and Russia (2017)
Timeline of investigations into Trump and Russia (2018)
Timeline of investigations into Trump and Russia (2019)

SPOILER: Hoe werkt een impeachment?

Van Arjen van der Horst (Nieuwsuur-correspondent).

Hoe werkt een impeachmentprocedure?

Een afzettingsprocedure kun je niet zomaar beginnen. Er moet sprake zijn van een serieuze schending van de wet. Artikel II van de Amerikaanse grondwet formuleert het zo:

“The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

Het Congres fungeert bij een afzettingsprocedure als een soort rechtbank, waarbij het Huis van Afgevaardigden de rol van aanklager heeft en de Senaat de rol van rechtbankjury. Leden van het Congres kunnen een afzettingsprocedure initiëren, maar de aanzet kan in theorie ook van buiten het Congres komen.

De commissie-Justitiële Zaken van het Huis van Afgevaardigden (en in sommige gevallen ook de House Committee on Rules) buigt zich over het verzoek. Veel van het voorwerk en het onderzoek vindt in deze commissie plaats. Als de commissie oordeelt dat Trump de wet heeft overtreden, dan stellen ze de zogeheten Articles of Impeachment op. In wezen is dit de formulering van de aanklacht: wat heeft de president precies fout gedaan? De commissie stuurt een aanbeveling naar het hele Huis van Afgevaardigden.

De procedure bestaat vervolgens uit twee fases.
De eerste is de impeachment zelf. Het Huis van Afgevaardigden moet oordelen of de overtreding van de wet zwaar genoeg is voor afzetting van de president. Een simpele meerderheid voldoet. Nadat het Huis van Afgevaardigden voor impeachment heeft gestemd, selecteert het een aantal ‘managers’. Die fungeren als aanklagers die de zaak presenteren aan de Senaat.
Een impeachment is niet hetzelfde als een afzetting. Alleen de Senaat kan de president daadwerkelijk afzetten.

In de Senaat begint dan ook de tweede fase: trial. De opperrechter van het Supreme Court leidt deze procedure en de senatoren worden beëdigd als juryleden. Zij beslissen uiteindelijk of impeachment ook daadwerkelijk tot afzetting leidt. Voor afzetting is een tweederde meerderheid vereist. Als de Senaat voor afzetting stemt, dan moet de president onmiddellijk aftreden. De uitspraak is niet aanvechtbaar via de rechter. Wel kan de afgezette president in aanmerking komen voor strafrechtelijke vervolging.

In de Amerikaanse geschiedenis is nog nooit een presidentiële afzettingsprocedure met succes afgerond. Wel stemde een meerderheid van het Huis van Afgevaardigden twee keer voor een impeachment van een president (Andrew Johnson in 1868 en Bill Clinton in 1998). Het kwam in beide gevallen niet tot een daadwerkelijke afzetting, omdat er niet genoeg steun was in de Senaat. Tegen Nixon werden tijdens het Watergate-schandaal Articles of Impeachment opgesteld, maar het kwam niet tot een afzetting, omdat Nixon uit eigen beweging aftrad.

twitter:

Acosta twitterde op dinsdag 29-10-2019 om 20:26:38 McGovern introduces resolution accusing Trump of abusing power, setting up vote on affirming impeaching inquiry https://t.co/pfzsDhN2fy reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 29 oktober 2019 20:49 schreef Mike het volgende:

[..]

Dit is wel prettig. Niet dat gehaast met 5 minuten per persoon, maar gewoon een grondige ondervraging zonder interrupties.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 29-10-2019 om 18:30:31 Acting House Oversight Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney told NBC News that she found Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman's deposition "extremely, extremely, extremely disturbing." https://t.co/PAvB8Mo1rC reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 29 oktober 2019 21:07 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Eens. Veel beter dan het "standaard" formaat wat ze hanteren met al die schreeuwers tussendoor.

Weet iemand hoe dat destijds ging bij Nixon en Clinton? En, kan Nunes alsnog de boel gaan frustreren door bijvoorbeeld zelf of een staffer elke keer 45 minuten lang een telefoonboek op te gaan/laten lezen om maar wat te noemen?

quote:

Op dinsdag 29 oktober 2019 21:12 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Live op TV? Terwijl de Dems de ene na de andere misdaad aantonen? Het lijkt me een debiele strategie.

twitter:

Olivia_Beavers twitterde op dinsdag 29-10-2019 om 16:57:52 Source familiar with Vindman’s closed doors deposition says he has testified that he took notes during the July 25th phone call, and made two or so recommended edits to the summarized call transcript that weren’t used in the end (ie using company in place of Burisma) reageer retweet

twitter:

shannonrwatts twitterde op dinsdag 29-10-2019 om 21:19:46 What Americans don’t know you put Halloween candy in the bag the kid is carrying and not on top of their head? They’re like robots trying to mimic humans. https://t.co/3gv50msCLT reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 29 oktober 2019 21:45 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

shannonrwatts twitterde op dinsdag 29-10-2019 om 21:19:46 What Americans don’t know you put Halloween candy in the bag the kid is carrying and not on top of their head? They’re like robots trying to mimic humans. https://t.co/3gv50msCLT reageer retweet

Raar

quote:

Op dinsdag 29 oktober 2019 21:52 schreef koemleit het volgende:

[..]

hahaha ik heb hier gewoon wel even hardop om gelachen.
schitterend.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 00:00:36 Testimony from Alexander Vindman appeared to contradict Energy Secretary Rick Perry's ardent denials that he ever heard former Biden or his son Hunter discussed in relation to U.S. requests that Ukraine investigate corruption. https://t.co/kkhEMmk7Z4 reageer retweet

quote:

"Not once, as God is my witness, not once was a Biden name — not the former vice president, not his son — ever mentioned," Perry told the CBN News on Oct. 7. He repeated those denials in a Fox News radio interview last week.

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 01:19 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Rick Perry heeft ook nog wat uit te leggen

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 00:00:36 Testimony from Alexander Vindman appeared to contradict Energy Secretary Rick Perry's ardent denials that he ever heard former Biden or his son Hunter discussed in relation to U.S. requests that Ukraine investigate corruption. https://t.co/kkhEMmk7Z4 reageer retweet

[..]

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 02:00:08 Breaking via NYT: Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman told House investigators that the White House transcript of a July call between President Trump and Ukraine's president omitted crucial words and phrases, and that his attempts to restore them failed.https://t.co/4n2hCEO00x reageer retweet

quote:

The omissions, Colonel Vindman said, included Mr. Trump's assertion that there were recordings of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. discussing Ukraine corruption, and an explicit mention by Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelensky, of Burisma Holdings, the energy company whose board employed Mr. Biden's son Hunter.

Colonel Vindman, who appeared on Capitol Hill wearing his dark blue Army dress uniform and military medals, told House impeachment investigators that he tried to change the reconstructed transcript made by the White House staff to reflect the omissions. But while some of his edits appeared to have been successful, he said, those two corrections were not made.

Colonel Vindman did not testify to a motive behind the editing process. But his testimony is likely to drive investigators to ask further questions about how officials handled the call, including changes to the transcript and the decision to put it into the White House's most classified computer system -- and whether those moves were meant to conceal the call's most controversial aspects.

The phrases do not fundamentally change lawmakers' understanding of the call. There are plenty of other examples of Mr. Trump referring to Ukraine-related conspiracy theories and asking for investigations of the Biden family. But Colonel Vindman's account offered a hint to solving a mystery surrounding the conversation first reported by the intelligence whistle-blower whose complaint launched the impeachment inquiry: what Mr. Trump's aides left out of the transcript in places where ellipses indicate dropped words.

quote:

The note-takers and voice recognition software used during the July 25 call had missed Mr. Zelensky saying the word "Burisma," but the reconstructed transcript does reference "the company," and suggests that the Ukrainian president is aware that it is of great interest to Mr. Trump.

The prosecutor general, Mr. Zelensky said, according to the document, "will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue."

The rough transcript also contains ellipses at three points where Mr. Trump is speaking. Colonel Vindman told investigators that at the point of the transcript where the third set of ellipses appears, Mr. Trump said there were tapes of Mr. Biden.

Mr. Trump's mention of tapes is an apparent reference to Mr. Biden's comments at a January 2018 event about his effort to get Ukraine to force out its prosecutor general, Viktor Shokin. Supporters of Mr. Biden have said Mr. Shokin was widely criticized for his lax anti-corruption efforts. Republicans charge, without evidence, that Mr. Biden was trying to stop an investigation into his son.

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 03:45:39 Trump has called it an "exact" transcript at least 16 times. https://t.co/A624sQDqYp reageer retweet

twitter:

PhilArballo2020 twitterde op dinsdag 29-10-2019 om 22:22:04 "Rep. Nunes will likely be running President Trump’s defense on the impeachment inquiry under rules the House plans to vote on Thursday." Bet Nunes is looking forward to spouting some of his newest material. What conspiracy do you think Nunes will push?https://t.co/1FxUgYpmMV reageer retweet

twitter:

Mimirocah1 twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 03:16:05 GOP: Taylor, Hill, Volker, Vindeman (& Sondland?) got WB to file a complaint so they could lie to Congress about a Ukraine shakedown, got Mulvaney to admit it on TV, got Giuliani to admit it in a butt dial & even created text messages to corroborate their future lies. 👌🙄 reageer retweet

twitter:

JasonSCampbell twitterde op dinsdag 29-10-2019 om 00:11:14 Lou Dobbs says Trump never talks about himself. Instead, "President Trump is truly the president of 'we'" https://t.co/EtEhNLs65v reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 29 oktober 2019 21:16 schreef AnneX het volgende:
Kijk eens, zouden de R’s wijzer (kunnen) worden?

“ To my Republican congressional colleagues and dear friends: President Trump takes your loyalty for granted and mocks your support. Stand up, reclaim your institutional prerogatives, protect your legacy and do what's best for our country.”

https://mobile.twitter.co(...)/1189226514220552193

Meer: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2(...)tter_impression=true

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 08:15 schreef De_Hertog het volgende:

[..]

Dat is wel weer een voormalig congreslid. Het aantal zittende (of niet binnenkort met pensioen gaande) Republikeinen met kritiek is nog steeds erg klein.

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 08:49 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Ik hoor anders ook geen massale onvoorwaardelijke steunbetuigingen. De meesten houden hun mond.

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 09:49 schreef Geytenbeekje het volgende:
Welke mensen erkennen die genocide niet dan ?

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 09:51 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

De turken.

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 09:51 schreef Geytenbeekje het volgende:

[..]

Zijn dat er veel ?
Allemaal Democraten denk ik ?

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 09:54 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:

[..]

1 D, 15 R

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 09:51 schreef Geytenbeekje het volgende:

[..]

Zijn dat er veel ?
Allemaal Democraten denk ik ?

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 09:54 schreef Geytenbeekje het volgende:

[..]

15 Republikeinen ?
15 turken ?

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 05:32 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Het is dus geen ‘transcript’. Dat is woord voor woord exact opgeschreven wat er is gezegd.

Trump gaf notities.

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 10:26 schreef ATuin-hek het volgende:

[..]

Dat het geen volledige transcript is kom je niet nu pas achter hoop ik?

quote:

Op dinsdag 29 oktober 2019 21:49 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

MASH-UP: Trump’s al-Baghdadi Speech & Obama’s Bin Laden Speech

Korte vergelijking tussen Obamas en Trumps speeches na het neerschieten van Bin Laden en al-Baghdadi.

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 10:26 schreef ATuin-hek het volgende:

[..]

Dat het geen volledige transcript is kom je niet nu pas achter hoop ik?

twitter:

NBCPolitics twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 10:08:39 Acting White House Chief of Staff Mulvaney first learned about the US military raid against ISIS leader Baghdadi after the operation was already underway, according to 5 current and former senior administration officials. https://t.co/OC0HqVAHYn reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 13:59:14 Yesterday’s Never Trumper witness could find NO Quid Pro Quo in the Transcript of the phone call. There were many people listening to the call. How come they (including the President of Ukraine) found NOTHING wrong with it. Witch Hunt! reageer retweet

twitter:

thehill twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 14:28:02 JUST IN: Pathologist finds Jeffrey Epstein's body shows signs of homicide https://t.co/VlFgUJ9prp https://t.co/itDkxHKo2S reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 15:17 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

thehill twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 14:28:02 JUST IN: Pathologist finds Jeffrey Epstein's body shows signs of homicide https://t.co/VlFgUJ9prp https://t.co/itDkxHKo2S reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 15:49 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Het is natuurlijk wel bij Fox & Comrades verteld. Dat maakt het per definitie wel verdacht.

twitter:

alx twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 15:40:32 The Left will put Veterans like Alexander Vindman on a pedestal when they are willing to trash President Trump.How did they treat Michael Flynn?How did they treat Tulsi Gabbard?“You only get total absolution if you are a Leftist”- @DonaldJTrumpJr https://t.co/MedvUG2CKm reageer retweet

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 14:45:35 Well here's a new character...https://t.co/A7ZP0MXxvC @AndrewDesiderio @kyledcheney https://t.co/5DgLOLudUj reageer retweet

twitter:

kyledcheney twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 14:47:03 @NatashaBertrand @AndrewDesiderio More to come on him. He's the former GOP speaker-in-waiting of the House (resigned before taking the post) and is FARA registered on behalf of a Ukrainian steel association. https://t.co/34f3nE6n1r reageer retweet

quote:

Two veteran foreign service officers plan to reveal new details to House impeachment investigators on Wednesday about the unconventional efforts by President Donald Trump’s associates to influence U.S. policy toward Ukraine, according to copies of their opening statements obtained by POLITICO.

Catherine Croft and Christopher Anderson, State Department officials who served as senior advisers on Ukraine, plan to describe to investigators the unusual intrusion into U.S. foreign policy by Trump-aligned consultants, including his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and Robert Livingston, a lobbyist and former GOP congressman.

The officials’ opening statements implicitly criticize Trump’s posture toward Ukraine, with Croft singling out Trump’s “long-held view of Ukraine as a corrupt country,” which she and her colleagues hoped to reverse.

Croft and Anderson served separately under Kurt Volker, the former U.S. special representative for Ukraine negotiations, and witnessed an unusual effort by non-government officials to influence U.S. foreign policy toward the besieged country as it was facing intensifying aggression from Russia.

twitter:

AndrewDesiderio twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 14:31:45 Catherine Croft on the withheld military aid:“The only reason given was that the order came at the direction of the president.”https://t.co/Fu8P9kY8fP reageer retweet

twitter:

AndrewDesiderio twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 14:48:56 !!!!! >> Anderson says senior WH officials blocked the issuing of a statement condemning Russia after Moscow seized Ukrainian ships in November 2018. Instead, “Ambassador Volker drafted a tweet condemning Russia’s actions, which I posted to his account.”https://t.co/Fu8P9kY8fP reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 17:05 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
lobbyist

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 18:12 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

AndrewDesiderio twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 14:31:45 Catherine Croft on the withheld military aid:“The only reason given was that the order came at the direction of the president.”https://t.co/Fu8P9kY8fP reageer retweet

Whoa.....

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 18:14 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

AndrewDesiderio twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 14:48:56 !!!!! >> Anderson says senior WH officials blocked the issuing of a statement condemning Russia after Moscow seized Ukrainian ships in November 2018. Instead, “Ambassador Volker drafted a tweet condemning Russia’s actions, which I posted to his account.”https://t.co/Fu8P9kY8fP reageer retweet

Whoa whoa

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 19:12 schreef Jojoke het volgende:

[..]

Wie heeft die lobbyist daarvoor betaald? En wiens balang was dat? Dit is een hele vreemde zaak.

quote:

Foreign Agents Registration Act filings show that Mr. Livingston’s firm, the Livingston Group, has represented Ukrainian clients in the past, including in 2018.

NYT

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 19:21 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Livingston Group

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 19:31 schreef Jojoke het volgende:

[..]

Misschien betalen dezelfde personen Giuliani, Parnas en Fruman.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 19:45:59 Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan implicitly broke with Trump, telling lawmakers that it would not be "in accord with our values" for a president to ask a foreign government to investigate a political rival. https://t.co/g2MWLBz9lI reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 19:20 schreef Jojoke het volgende:

[..]

Die beerput gaat steeds verder open...
[..]

Er lijkt steeds meer informatie boven tafel te komen die niemand van te voren had verwacht.

twitter:

jmartNYT twitterde op maandag 28-10-2019 om 18:24:22 A real beauty, via @playbookplus President DONALD TRUMP urged Republicans this morning to drop their crusade on the process....“I'd rather go into the details of the case rather than process. ... Process is good, but I think you ought to look at the case." reageer retweet

twitter:

RepAdamSchiff twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 18:46:50 Trump has urged Republicans to focus on the substance in the impeachment inquiry, not the process.I can confirm our focus will continue to be on the President’s own words and misconduct. Glad we all agree. https://t.co/bxJuEFSWPx reageer retweet

twitter:

thehill twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 19:52:05 JUST IN: US diplomat William Taylor willing to testify publicly: report https://t.co/TL327qrgsm https://t.co/HQHnzeWXWp reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 29 oktober 2019 21:49 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

MASH-UP: Trump’s al-Baghdadi Speech & Obama’s Bin Laden Speech

Korte vergelijking tussen Obamas en Trumps speeches na het neerschieten van Bin Laden en al-Baghdadi.

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 17:49 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Vandaag laat een poll uit New Hampshire een aantal opvallende ontwikkelingen zien voor wat betreft de Democratische kandidaten. Weet niet of dit slechts een outlier is of het begin van een trend.

Zo is Biden gezakt naar de 3e plek, komt Buttigieg vanuit het niets op de 4e plaats met 10% en krijgt Gabbard er maar liefst 4% bij waardoor ze plotseling op 5 staat!

Bernie trouwens op 1 en Warren op 2.

Heel apart iig...

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 20:56 schreef Hexagon het volgende:

[..]

Pfff, waarom blijven mensen achter een kandidaat aan lopen die qua gezondheid wellicht 2021 niet haalt

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 21:05 schreef livelink het volgende:

[..]

Warren is wel een krasse tante volgens mij. Die kan nog wel 1 ronde mee. Maar Sanders
Sowieso ben ik niet enthousiast over de democratische kandidaten.

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 21:10 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Bolton heeft een uitnodiging gehad om volgende week donderdag te komen getuigen. Ben benieuwd of hij erop ingaat.

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 18:17 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Het lijkt dus dat Trump een dealtje sloot met Poetin:

“Jij valt Oekraïne militair lastig, dan chanteer ik ze zodat ik herkozen word. Doen ze dat niet heb je vrij spel want dan krijgen ze geen steun van de VS, doen ze het wel heb je gegarandeerd vier jaar langer je man in het WH.”

twitter:

business twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 21:08:29 BREAKING: Twitter will ban political advertising from its platform, CEO Jack Dorsey says. The new policy, to be enforced globally, will go into effect Nov. 22 https://t.co/Tt2tRVCFnp https://t.co/lekwbFdMpX reageer retweet

twitter:

washingtonpost twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 21:16:40 Trump tweeted a photo of a Medal of Honor recipient — who was edited out and replaced by a dog https://t.co/O3VWxMTt9E reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 21:40 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

Zag net ook nog een grappig onderzoekje op TV, de meeste Republikeinse stemmers wonen blijkbaar in gebieden waar geen internationale luchthavens zijn. Tsja...

quote:

The reason I'm so calm about it is that I see Trump for who he really is. It's very hard to get this across to the public, because every time people talk about him, they start out with the unspoken unconscious assumption that he's basically like the rest of us.

But in order to explain and predict Trump’s behavior, you have to begin with awareness that he is essentially a predator. Once you keep in mind that Trump lacks a conscience and lacks empathy, he becomes very easy to follow. Unlike normal people, who are complex, he's basically running on a very simple and very disordered program.

twitter:

robertarampton twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 22:12:52 BREAKING - Tim Morrison - slated to testify in the impeachment inquiry tomorrow - to leave Trump's National Security Council, via @FrancoOrdonez @nprpolitics https://t.co/dcO1YKIG6b reageer retweet

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 22:32:00 Morrison, a Bolton acolyte, had only been there for about 3 months. But testimony and documents released so far suggest he was uncomfortable with the shadow Ukraine foreign policy campaign (which Fiona Hill briefed him on when she left the WH, I'm told) https://t.co/ZCOF6Y5VRN reageer retweet

quote:

Tim Morrison, the top Russia official on President Trump's National Security Council, who is scheduled to testify in the impeachment inquiry on Thursday, is expected to leave his White House post imminently, three sources familiar with the plan told NPR.

Morrison, a conservative hawk who has served as the senior director for European and Russian affairs on the National Security Council, will be replaced by Andrew Peek, the deputy assistant secretary of state for Iraq and Iran in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, according to the sources.

Morrison and Peek could not immediately be reached for comment by NPR. The National Security Council declined comment.

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 23:06 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Exit Tim Morrison

twitter:

robertarampton twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 22:12:52 BREAKING - Tim Morrison - slated to testify in the impeachment inquiry tomorrow - to leave Trump's National Security Council, via @:FrancoOrdonez @:nprpolitics https://t.co/dcO1YKIG6b reageer retweet

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 22:32:00 Morrison, a Bolton acolyte, had only been there for about 3 months. But testimony and documents released so far suggest he was uncomfortable with the shadow Ukraine foreign policy campaign (which Fiona Hill briefed him on when she left the WH, I'm told) https://t.co/ZCOF6Y5VRN reageer retweet

[..]

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 23:15 schreef Jojoke het volgende:

[..]

Er is waarschijnlijk flinke druk op hem uitgeoefend door het Witte Huis. Hij is ontslagen of hij had er genoeg van.

quote:

Morrison had alerted NSC lawyers about alleged demands being placed on the Ukrainian government to investigate a company where the son of former Vice President Joe Biden sat on the board, according to testimony this month from William Taylor, the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine.

Taylor testified that Morrison told him that Gordon Sondland, Trump's ambassador to the European Union, had informed a top Ukrainian official that U.S. military aid hinged on Zelenskiy's committing to investigating the firm connected with Biden's son.

An attorney for Morrison said Morrison planned to appear before House investigators on Thursday if subpoenaed.

NPR

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 18:08:03 We previously reported that Hill testified that Trump thought Patel was in charge of Ukraine policy for the NSC, but Vindman’s exclusion from a key Ukraine meeting because of concerns over a potential conflict with Trump has not been disclosed before. https://t.co/eOBF1raK7J reageer retweet

quote:

The decorated Army officer who testified to House investigators on Tuesday told lawmakers that a close associate of Republican Rep. Devin Nunes “misrepresented” himself to President Donald Trump in an effort to involve himself further in Ukraine policy, according to two people familiar with his closed-door deposition.

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the National Security Council’s top Ukraine expert, told lawmakers that after attending Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s inauguration in May as part of a delegation led by Energy Secretary Rick Perry, Vindman had been looking forward to debriefing Trump and giving a positive account of Zelensky’s vision for Ukraine’s future.

“The U.S. government policy community’s view is that the election of Zelenskyy and the promise of reforms to eliminate corruption will lock in Ukraine’s Western-leaning trajectory, and allow Ukraine to realize its dream of a vibrant democracy and economic prosperity,” Vindman said in his opening statement.

But he was instructed “at the last second” not to attend the debriefing, Vindman told lawmakers, because Trump’s advisers worried it might confuse the president: Trump believed at the time that Kashyap Patel, a longtime Nunes staffer who joined the White House in February and had no discernible Ukraine experience or expertise, was actually the NSC’s top Ukraine expert instead of Vindman.

Vindman testified that he was told this directly by his boss at the time, NSC senior director for European and Russian affairs Fiona Hill.

Hill told Vindman that she and national security adviser John Bolton thought it best to exclude Vindman from the debriefing to avoid “an uncomfortable situation,” he said.

POLITICO previously reported that Hill testified that Trump thought Patel was in charge of Ukraine policy for the NSC, but Vindman’s exclusion from a key Ukraine meeting because of concerns over a potential conflict with Trump has not been disclosed before.

SPOILER

It helps explain why the president tweeted on Tuesday that he’d never met Vindman despite his clear interest in Ukraine — senior officials have said that Trump directed them to consult with his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, on matters of Ukraine policy.

And Vindman’s exclusion sheds even more light on the unusual steps top NSC officials were taking as early as May to avoid angering or annoying Trump on Ukraine issues — and the unusual level of access Patel had to the president.

“It’s crazy,” said one person familiar with Vindman’s testimony. “Vindman should have been in that meeting.”

Vindman also testified that he was told Patel had been circumventing normal NSC process to get negative material about Ukraine in front of the president, feeding Trump’s belief that Ukraine was brimming with corruption and had interfered in the 2016 election on behalf of Democrats.

That upset Vindman, along with Hill and Bolton, he testified, because they were constantly having to counter that narrative with the president.

It’s still not clear what materials Patel was giving Trump, or where he was getting them. But he was not interacting with Ukraine experts at the State Department and Pentagon on the issue, and never had a conversation with Vindman, the NSC’s director for Ukraine, about Ukraine — or about anything for that matter, Vindman testified.

Patel joined the National Security Council’s International Organizations and Alliances directorate in February and was promoted to a senior counterterrorism role around the same time as Trump’s July 25 call with Zelensky, in which he urged the newly elected leader to investigate Biden and “get to the bottom of” Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election.

Patel had previously served as Nunes’ top staffer on the House Intelligence Committee and worked to discredit the FBI and DOJ officials investigating Russia’s election interference.

For that reason, Vindman was careful to not overtly criticize Patel so as not to anger Nunes — the ranking member of the intelligence panel — who floated in and out of the 10-hour deposition, according to a person familiar with his testimony.

Vindman, a combat veteran and Purple Heart recipient who has served in the Army for more than two decades, joined the White House in July 2018 as a detailee from the office of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He testified on Tuesday wearing his uniform, in keeping with past practice for active members of the military.

[..]

twitter:

nytmike twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 23:18:52 Bolton's lawyer, Charles Cooper, has responded to the House request for his testimony, saying "Bolton is not willing to appear voluntarily." Cooper added: "I stand ready at all times to accept service of a subpoena on his behalf." reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 23:40 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

nytmike twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 23:18:52 Bolton's lawyer, Charles Cooper, has responded to the House request for his testimony, saying "Bolton is not willing to appear voluntarily." Cooper added: "I stand ready at all times to accept service of a subpoena on his behalf." reageer retweet

Bolton komt niet vrijwillig maar staat klaar om een dagvaarding te ontvangen

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 23:36 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Nog een artikel over Kash Patel, het hulpje van Nunes, waarvan Trump blijkbaar (onterecht) dacht dat hij de leiding had over het Oekraine beleid en waardoor Vindman buitengesloten werd van een debriefing meeting om verwarring te voorkomen.

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 18:08:03 We previously reported that Hill testified that Trump thought Patel was in charge of Ukraine policy for the NSC, but Vindman’s exclusion from a key Ukraine meeting because of concerns over a potential conflict with Trump has not been disclosed before. https://t.co/eOBF1raK7J reageer retweet

[..]

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 21:28 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

business twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 21:08:29 BREAKING: Twitter will ban political advertising from its platform, CEO Jack Dorsey says. The new policy, to be enforced globally, will go into effect Nov. 22 https://t.co/Tt2tRVCFnp https://t.co/lekwbFdMpX reageer retweet

twitter:

jack twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 21:05:11 For instance, it‘s not credible for us to say: “We’re working hard to stop people from gaming our systems to spread misleading info, buuut if someone pays us to target and force people to see their political ad…well...they can say whatever they want! 😉” reageer retweet

quote:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1189634360472829952.html

We've made the decision to stop all political advertising on Twitter globally. We believe political message reach should be earned, not bought. Why? A few reasons...?

A political message earns reach when people decide to follow an account or retweet. Paying for reach removes that decision, forcing highly optimized and targeted political messages on people. We believe this decision should not be compromised by money.

While internet advertising is incredibly powerful and very effective for commercial advertisers, that power brings significant risks to politics, where it can be used to influence votes to affect the lives of millions.

Internet political ads present entirely new challenges to civic discourse: machine learning-based optimization of messaging and micro-targeting, unchecked misleading information, and deep fakes. All at increasing velocity, sophistication, and overwhelming scale.

These challenges will affect ALL internet communication, not just political ads. Best to focus our efforts on the root problems, without the additional burden and complexity taking money brings. Trying to fix both means fixing neither well, and harms our credibility.

For instance, it's not credible for us to say: "We're working hard to stop people from gaming our systems to spread misleading info, buuut if someone pays us to target and force people to see their political ad...well...they can say whatever they want! ?"

We considered stopping only candidate ads, but issue ads present a way to circumvent. Additionally, it isn't fair for everyone but candidates to buy ads for issues they want to push. So we're stopping these too.

We're well aware we're a small part of a much larger political advertising ecosystem. Some might argue our actions today could favor incumbents. But we have witnessed many social movements reach massive scale without any political advertising. I trust this will only grow.

In addition, we need more forward-looking political ad regulation (very difficult to do). Ad transparency requirements are progress, but not enough. The internet provides entirely new capabilities, and regulators need to think past the present day to ensure a level playing field.

We'll share the final policy by 11/15, including a few exceptions (ads in support of voter registration will still be allowed, for instance). We'll start enforcing our new policy on 11/22 to provide current advertisers a notice period before this change goes into effect.

A final note. This isn't about free expression. This is about paying for reach. And paying to increase the reach of political speech has significant ramifications that today's democratic infrastructure may not be prepared to handle. It's worth stepping back in order to address.

quote:

Former US President Barack Obama has challenged "woke" culture telling young people: "The world is messy."

He made the comments at the Obama Foundation's annual summit in Chicago on Tuesday.

Mr Obama said that calling people out on social media did not bring about change, and that change was complex.

"Woke" is described as being alert to racial or social discrimination and injustice, along with being aware of what's going on in the community.

Mr Obama told the audience: "I get a sense among certain young people on social media that the way of making change is to be as judgemental as possible about other people.

"If I tweet or hashtag about how you didn't do something right or used the wrong verb, then I can sit back and feel pretty good about myself because 'Man did you see how woke I was? I called you out!'"

"That's enough," he said. "If all you're doing is casting stones, you are probably not going to get that far."

Mr Obama added that "people who do really good stuff have flaws".

His comments come as Democrats prepare for the 2020 presidential nomination race. So far, there has been a focus on how "woke" candidates are, with a number apologising for past incidents.

Before withdrawing from the race, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand went on television to apologise for using the term "illegal alien" in the past. Elizabeth Warren has apologised for identifying as Native American, while Pete Buttigieg has apologised for his use of the phrase "all lives matter".

Last April, he told a crowd at an Obama Foundation event in Berlin: "One of the things I do worry about among progressives in the United States, maybe it's true here as well, is a certain kind of rigidity where we say 'Uh, I'm sorry, this is how it's going to be' and then we start sometimes creating what's called a 'circular firing squad', where you start shooting at your allies because one of them has strayed from purity on the issues."

Jen Psaki, former Obama White House communications director, told CNN that she believed Mr Obama's most recent comments were a message for the Democratic Party and those running for election.

"If we are launching purity tests, we are going to have such a small party and will not be able to win. Governing is not about saying: 'You don't agree with me, then you can't be part of the conversation.'"

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 03:30:03 Inbox tonight: "In a court filing on Wednesday evening, the State Department agreed to release multiple categories of Ukraine-related records, including any communications with Rudy Giuliani, to American Oversight by November 22, 2019." reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 04:05:17 Breaking via WaPo: Lt. Col. Vindman told John Eisenberg, the NSC's lead counsel, about his concerns over Trump's call with Zelensky. Eisenberg then proposed moving a transcript of the call to a highly classified server and restricting access to it.https://t.co/SUeger1wzY reageer retweet

quote:

Moments after President Trump ended his phone call with Ukraine’s president on July 25, an unsettled national security aide rushed to the office of White House lawyer John Eisenberg.

Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the top Ukraine adviser at the White House, had been listening to the call and was disturbed by the pressure Trump had applied to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate his political rivals, according to people familiar with Vindman’s testimony to lawmakers this week.

Vindman told Eisenberg, the White House’s legal adviser on national security issues, that what the president did was wrong, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation.

Scribbling notes on a yellow legal pad, Eisenberg proposed a step that other officials have said is at odds with long-standing White House protocol: moving a transcript of the call to a highly classified server and restricting access to it, according to two people familiar with Vindman’s account.

The details of how the White House clamped down on information about the controversial call comes as the House impeachment inquiry turns its focus to the role of Eisenberg, who has served as deputy White House counsel since the start of Trump’s administration. House impeachment investigators on Wednesday evening announced they have asked Eisenberg and a fellow White House lawyer, Mike Ellis, to testify Monday.

On Thursday, the House is scheduled to vote on rules governing the next phase of the inquiry and hear from Tim Morrison, a former deputy to national security adviser John Bolton. Bolton has also been asked to testify next week.

Vindman’s account marks the first known instance in which a witness before the impeachment inquiry has provided a firsthand account linking Eisenberg to the decision to move the problematic transcript to a highly classified server.

Eisenberg did not respond to requests for comment. A White House spokesman declined to discuss Eisenberg’s role in handling the July 25 transcript or how he addressed the concerns he heard from staff.

“Consistent with the practices of past administrations from both parties, we will not discuss the internal deliberations of the White House Counsel’s Office,” said deputy White House press secretary Hogan Gidley.

[..]

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 23:40 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

nytmike twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 23:18:52 Bolton's lawyer, Charles Cooper, has responded to the House request for his testimony, saying "Bolton is not willing to appear voluntarily." Cooper added: "I stand ready at all times to accept service of a subpoena on his behalf." reageer retweet

Bolton komt niet vrijwillig maar staat klaar om een dagvaarding te ontvangen

quote:

Rachel Maddow highlights reporting on a piece of impeachment inquiry testimony from diplomat Christopher Anderson in which he reveals some backstory on the Trump administration's failure to condemn Russian aggression toward Ukrainian ships in 2018.

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 04:04 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 03:30:03 Inbox tonight: "In a court filing on Wednesday evening, the State Department agreed to release multiple categories of Ukraine-related records, including any communications with Rudy Giuliani, to American Oversight by November 22, 2019." reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 05:37 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Dan kan hij zeggen dat hij wel moest.

Immigration chief spars with Missouri lawmaker over ‘medical deferred-action’ policy

quote:

The acting director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services faced tough questions from several members of the House Oversight and Reform hearing Wednesday on the agency's since-reversed decision to end granting foreign nationals with serious medical conditions the temporary ability to stay in the country.

Rep. William Lacy Clay, D-Mo., used his allotted five minutes to ask Ken Cuccinelli if he had heard about several cases interest groups had brought to the agency's attention. Clay characterized them as "truly heartbreaking."

quote:

Pelosi has never been quick to cry “Impeach!” She pointed out that she dismissed demands from some House Democrats to pursue impeachment against George W. Bush over the Iraq War in the final two years of his presidency. More recently, she rebuffed demands from her party’s liberal wing to impanel a full-scale impeachment effort following Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report about Trump and Russian interference in 2016. But now that she’s begun an impeachment inquiry, she betrays no doubt about seeing it through. Impeachment promises to be an ordeal, especially against a president so volatile, combative, and willing to twist the truth. Approaching that heaving sea, Pelosi projected resolve. “When we decide if we are going to go forward, we will be ready, and we will be ironclad,” she said, referring to potential votes on articles of impeachment. It sounded less like a boast than a statement of fact.

Without detailing specific plans, Pelosi left the clear impression that the impeachment process will conclude sooner rather than later, and its focus will be more narrow than broad. She refused to answer when asked directly whether any eventual articles of impeachment will cover issues beyond Trump’s interactions with Ukraine and the administration’s defiance of subpoenas from the committees investigating them. Some House Democrats have advocated for articles that address everything from family separations to emoluments. “No one should infer from what we’re doing that there is an imprimatur to do emoluments if it’s not” listed among Democrats’ justifications for impeaching Trump, Pelosi said. (She was careful to say, too, that if Trump’s team has “exculpatory testimony they want to present” on Ukraine, House Democrats are open to it: “We pray that that will be the case—something we don’t understand about how he interprets the Constitution.”)

Though Pelosi is vague on just how much longer the inquiry will go on, she expressed concern about Americans’ appetite for a lengthy process. “How much drama can the American people handle?” she asked. “Where does the law of diminishing returns set in? Where is the value added not worth the time?”

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 06:52 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Pelosi spreekt: Nancy Pelosi’s Predictions for Impeachment
[..]

Denk niet dat Trump nog veel slaap krijgt de komende weken.

twitter:

RepMGriffith twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 00:35:01 I am in the Rules Committee room where Democrats are marking up their impeachment resolution. @RepDLesko offered an amendment requiring any evidence which is exculpatory regarding the President to be given to the Judiciary Committee.Democrats rejected it. reageer retweet

quote:

Bannon is ramping up his own efforts in part because he has come to believe that some Republicans are willing to save Trump only if he makes concessions to the party on issues like immigration and trade. “They want to see the end of the Trump presidency and the beginning of a Republican presidency,” Bannon said of mainstream Republicans.

“I think they’ve had enough of Trump.”

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 08:20 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

twitter:

RepMGriffith twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 00:35:01 I am in the Rules Committee room where Democrats are marking up their impeachment resolution.@:RepDLesko offered an amendment requiring any evidence which is exculpatory regarding the President to be given to the Judiciary Committee.Democrats rejected it. reageer retweet

Blijkbaar is er dus ontlastend bewijs, waarom zou je als democraat anders tegenstemmen?
Als het er namelijk niet zou zijn zou je gewoon ja stemmen.

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 08:20 schreef Refragmental het volgende:

twitter:

RepMGriffith twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 00:35:01 I am in the Rules Committee room where Democrats are marking up their impeachment resolution.@:RepDLesko offered an amendment requiring any evidence which is exculpatory regarding the President to be given to the Judiciary Committee.Democrats rejected it. reageer retweet

Blijkbaar is er dus ontlastend bewijs, waarom zou je als democraat anders tegenstemmen?
Als het er namelijk niet zou zijn zou je gewoon ja stemmen.

quote:

Op woensdag 30 oktober 2019 23:33 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Interessant, Boltons advocaat vraagt zélf om een dagvaarding voor z'n cliënt hoor ik net, dat betekend dat Bolton waarschijnlijk wel degelijk komt getuigen.

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 08:30 schreef speknek het volgende:
Dat lijkt me een wat haastige conclusie zonder het amendement te zien. "Any evidence" kan ook de deur open zetten naar filibusteren, waarbij de republikeinen voortdurend nieuwe wissewasjes ter tafel brengen om het proces een jaar te frustreren.

Edit: vroeg me ook al af waarom de judiciary genoemd werd, maar dacht dat die misschien ook een rol hadden.

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 08:41 schreef Fir3fly het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

Dat is dus die Lesko. Ja, die zal goede bedoelingen hebben met zo'n amandement .

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 08:41 schreef Fir3fly het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

Dat is dus die Lesko. Ja, die zal goede bedoelingen hebben met zo'n amandement .

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 08:53 schreef Nibb-it het volgende:

[..]

Is dat niet een van de SCIF stormers?

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 09:00 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

kan best: ERG effectieve tactiek.
[ afbeelding ]

Oeps, dat is een ander plaatje

twitter:

ansleyvaughan twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 02:53:49 Baseball fans booing at a trump commercial at the nationals stadium viewing party #WorldSeries #Nationals https://t.co/9SrUjPfHKK reageer retweet

quote:

Mr. VanDyke’s accomplishments are offset by the assessments of interviewees thatMr. VanDyke is arrogant, lazy, an ideologue, and lacking in knowledge of the day-to-day practice including procedural rules. There was a theme that the nominee lacks humility, has an “entitlement” temperament, does not have an open mind, and does not always have a commitment to being candid and truthful.

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 12:38 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

ansleyvaughan twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 02:53:49 Baseball fans booing at a trump commercial at the nationals stadium viewing party #WorldSeries #Nationals https://t.co/9SrUjPfHKK reageer retweet

Het begint een volkssport te worden in de stadions......

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 12:47 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Gister is een potentiele rechter in de Senaat in huilen uitgebarsten omdat de American Bar Association hem onder andere als volgt kwalificeerde:
[..]

https://www.rawstory.com/(...)zy-and-an-ideologue/

Als dat klopt vraag je je toch af hoe zo iemand in vredesnaam ooit genomineerd kan zijn?!

SPOILER

vandaag · 3 minuten lezen
In de Blendle-app kun je dit artikel (en een heleboel andere stukken) beluisteren.
Als een hond maar 'de juiste drift' heeft
legerhond - De herdershond die betrokken was bij de dood van IS-leider Baghdadi, kon weleens uit Best komen. En dat is geen toeval. Hier opgeleide honden gaan de hele wereld over.
SYBILLA CLAUS, REDACTIE BINNENLAND

Hondentrainer Marco van Hoof herkende de hond op de foto die Trump vrijgaf meteen.foto merlin daleman
Een Brabantse legerhond heeft meegedaan aan het uitschakelen van IS-leider Baghdadi in Syrië. De hond raakte lichtgewond toen hij de terrorist opzocht in de tunnel waar die zijn laatste toevlucht zocht. Veel blijft top secret, om de Mechelse herder, zijn begeleider en hun missie te beschermen.
Droeg hij zijn peperdure vest met daarop een infrarood-, een nachtzichtcamera en een speaker? Was hij op het spoor gezet door de geur uit een gestolen onderbroek, zoals Syrische Koerden van het SDF beweren? Het zijn vragen die in de hand werken om er wild op los te fantaseren.
President Trump zag een persmoment. Zaterdag liet hij weten dat Baghdadi 'stierf als een hond', zondag zette hij deze echte herder, 'een prachtige hond, een getalenteerde hond' vol in de schijnwerpers. Uit die foto die hij vrijgaf, bleek de Brabantse connectie.
'Nergens ter wereld is zo'n goed systeem als het onze, met langdurig opgeleide honden'

Want Marco van Hoof zegt dat hij de hond op de foto direct herkende. De nu vijfjarige herder had hij als eenjarige aangekocht voor een training bij hem in Best. Daar is hij eigenaar van het Hondenadviescentrum en D.A.C.H. Police Dogs and Services, dat honden traint voor defensie, politie en beveiliging. Van Hoof werkte lang bij de luchtmacht als hondenbegeleider. Hij is een van de grote hondenexporteurs van Nederland.
"Nederland is een mekka voor leger- en politiehonden. Wij staan wereldwijd goed bekend", zegt zijn rechterhand Esther Jansen. Zij denkt dat de rijke geschiedenis van trainen in Nederland de basis is voor het internationale succes. "De Koninklijke Nederlandse Politiehond Vereniging (KNPV) bestaat al sinds 1907. Als je aan hun standaarden voldoet, krijgt een hond na twee à drie jaar trainen een certificaat. Dan kan hij of zij verkocht worden."
De KNPV bevestigt dat door hen gecertificeerde honden wereldwijd erkend worden als topper en dat ze vanuit Nederland overal worden ingezet. "Nergens ter wereld is zo'n goed systeem als het onze, met langdurig opgeleide en gecertificeerde honden", zegt een woordvoerster. Of de hond op de foto werkelijk uit de kennel in Best komt, is door alle geheimhouding in deze branche niet te controleren.
Als exportland is vooral de VS populair, waar leger en politie vele honderden honden inzetten. "Bizar hoeveel honden er naar de VS gaan. Van ons alleen al zo'n 150 per jaar", zegt Jansen. Hoeveel levert een hele goede exporthond op? Enkele duizenden euro's? "Zet daar maar een nul achter."
Nederland heeft een handjevol opleidingscentra. Dach werkt met eigen puppy's én oudere honden. "We hebben in de kennel plek voor 25 honden, maar het zit nooit vol. Met de puppy's gaan we vanaf week vijf of zes naar buiten. De andere trainen we in binnen- en buitenland."
Veel belangrijker dan een goede stamboom is of ze 'de juiste drift' hebben, legt Jansen uit. "Ze mogen absoluut niet zenuwachtig zijn, moeten sociaal zijn en een lief karakter hebben. En vooral: goed willen zoeken en apporteren."
Sommige rassen leren sneller, en daarom zijn de Mechelse, Duitse en Hollandse herders zo geliefd. Labradors werken voor blinden of sporen drugs op. "Maar het échte werken, daar zijn de herders geknipt voor."
Er is een groot verschil tussen politie- en legerhonden. Legerhonden moeten nóg meer kunnen leren, zoals parachutespringen met het baasje of in het water werken. Soms blijkt pas tijdens de opleiding of een hond kan uitgroeien tot een topper. "Na een jaar of anderhalf jaar zien we of ze geschikt zijn."
Gisteren waren Van Hoof en Jansen de hele dag op locatie bezig. Fotografen en bezoekers zijn daarbij niet gewenst. "Wij leiden ook de begeleiders op en we hebben volgens het contract vaak geheimhoudingsplicht. Daarom mogen we ook niet zeggen hoe deze hond heet."

twitter:

jonathanchait twitterde op woensdag 30-10-2019 om 15:35:57 🚨Pay close attention to Gabbard's WSJ op-ed. She is heavily hinting at a spoiler campaign to help Trump. https://t.co/HCPf64tsen reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 12:47 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Gister is een potentiele rechter in de Senaat in huilen uitgebarsten omdat de American Bar Association hem onder andere als volgt kwalificeerde:
[..]

https://www.rawstory.com/(...)zy-and-an-ideologue/

Als dat klopt vraag je je toch af hoe zo iemand in vredesnaam ooit genomineerd kan zijn?!

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 13:22 schreef AnneX het volgende:
Via Blendle, in Trouw.
Een Nederlandse honT

SPOILER

vandaag · 3 minuten lezen
In de Blendle-app kun je dit artikel (en een heleboel andere stukken) beluisteren.
Als een hond maar 'de juiste drift' heeft
legerhond - De herdershond die betrokken was bij de dood van IS-leider Baghdadi, kon weleens uit Best komen. En dat is geen toeval. Hier opgeleide honden gaan de hele wereld over.
SYBILLA CLAUS, REDACTIE BINNENLAND

Hondentrainer Marco van Hoof herkende de hond op de foto die Trump vrijgaf meteen.foto merlin daleman
Een Brabantse legerhond heeft meegedaan aan het uitschakelen van IS-leider Baghdadi in Syrië. De hond raakte lichtgewond toen hij de terrorist opzocht in de tunnel waar die zijn laatste toevlucht zocht. Veel blijft top secret, om de Mechelse herder, zijn begeleider en hun missie te beschermen.
Droeg hij zijn peperdure vest met daarop een infrarood-, een nachtzichtcamera en een speaker? Was hij op het spoor gezet door de geur uit een gestolen onderbroek, zoals Syrische Koerden van het SDF beweren? Het zijn vragen die in de hand werken om er wild op los te fantaseren.
President Trump zag een persmoment. Zaterdag liet hij weten dat Baghdadi 'stierf als een hond', zondag zette hij deze echte herder, 'een prachtige hond, een getalenteerde hond' vol in de schijnwerpers. Uit die foto die hij vrijgaf, bleek de Brabantse connectie.
'Nergens ter wereld is zo'n goed systeem als het onze, met langdurig opgeleide honden'

Want Marco van Hoof zegt dat hij de hond op de foto direct herkende. De nu vijfjarige herder had hij als eenjarige aangekocht voor een training bij hem in Best. Daar is hij eigenaar van het Hondenadviescentrum en D.A.C.H. Police Dogs and Services, dat honden traint voor defensie, politie en beveiliging. Van Hoof werkte lang bij de luchtmacht als hondenbegeleider. Hij is een van de grote hondenexporteurs van Nederland.
"Nederland is een mekka voor leger- en politiehonden. Wij staan wereldwijd goed bekend", zegt zijn rechterhand Esther Jansen. Zij denkt dat de rijke geschiedenis van trainen in Nederland de basis is voor het internationale succes. "De Koninklijke Nederlandse Politiehond Vereniging (KNPV) bestaat al sinds 1907. Als je aan hun standaarden voldoet, krijgt een hond na twee à drie jaar trainen een certificaat. Dan kan hij of zij verkocht worden."
De KNPV bevestigt dat door hen gecertificeerde honden wereldwijd erkend worden als topper en dat ze vanuit Nederland overal worden ingezet. "Nergens ter wereld is zo'n goed systeem als het onze, met langdurig opgeleide en gecertificeerde honden", zegt een woordvoerster. Of de hond op de foto werkelijk uit de kennel in Best komt, is door alle geheimhouding in deze branche niet te controleren.
Als exportland is vooral de VS populair, waar leger en politie vele honderden honden inzetten. "Bizar hoeveel honden er naar de VS gaan. Van ons alleen al zo'n 150 per jaar", zegt Jansen. Hoeveel levert een hele goede exporthond op? Enkele duizenden euro's? "Zet daar maar een nul achter."
Nederland heeft een handjevol opleidingscentra. Dach werkt met eigen puppy's én oudere honden. "We hebben in de kennel plek voor 25 honden, maar het zit nooit vol. Met de puppy's gaan we vanaf week vijf of zes naar buiten. De andere trainen we in binnen- en buitenland."
Veel belangrijker dan een goede stamboom is of ze 'de juiste drift' hebben, legt Jansen uit. "Ze mogen absoluut niet zenuwachtig zijn, moeten sociaal zijn en een lief karakter hebben. En vooral: goed willen zoeken en apporteren."
Sommige rassen leren sneller, en daarom zijn de Mechelse, Duitse en Hollandse herders zo geliefd. Labradors werken voor blinden of sporen drugs op. "Maar het échte werken, daar zijn de herders geknipt voor."
Er is een groot verschil tussen politie- en legerhonden. Legerhonden moeten nóg meer kunnen leren, zoals parachutespringen met het baasje of in het water werken. Soms blijkt pas tijdens de opleiding of een hond kan uitgroeien tot een topper. "Na een jaar of anderhalf jaar zien we of ze geschikt zijn."
Gisteren waren Van Hoof en Jansen de hele dag op locatie bezig. Fotografen en bezoekers zijn daarbij niet gewenst. "Wij leiden ook de begeleiders op en we hebben volgens het contract vaak geheimhoudingsplicht. Daarom mogen we ook niet zeggen hoe deze hond heet."

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 16:32 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Resolutie is zojuist aangenomen 232 voor, 196 tegen.

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 16:32 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Resolutie is zojuist aangenomen 232 voor, 196 tegen.

Welke resolutie?

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 16:44 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Welke resolutie?

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 16:44 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Welke resolutie?

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 16:39 schreef Mryc het volgende:

[..]

- de enige independent stemde voor
- twee Democraten stemden tegen
- alle Republikeinen stemden tegen

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 15:49 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Geld geven aan politici in ruil voor steun is toch gewoon omkoping? Kunnen deze senatoren die dit vragen of accepteren daarvoor worden aangepakt?

twitter:

kyledcheney twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 14:42:30 NEWS: There are now four impeachment depositions scheduled for Monday: https://t.co/MljioUKvJV reageer retweet

SPOILER

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 14:44:09 EISENBERG, NSC lawyer who allegedly suggested placing Trump calls in top secret code word system to conceal them, is expected to testify on Monday >>; https://t.co/RBupOAUheO reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 16:53 schreef speknek het volgende:

[..]

Van wat ik begrijp geeft Trump niet letterlijk geld, maar vraagt hij de donors geld te geven aan geprefereerde senatoren. Lijkt me dat aan zo campagnevoeren voor andere Republikeinen voor de rest niets (wettelijk) mis is.

quote:

TRUMP IS COMMITTING 'FELONY BRIBERY' BY GIVING FUNDRAISING CASH TO GOP SENATORS AHEAD OF IMPEACHMENT TRIAL: EX-BUSH ETHICS LAWYER (Newsweek)

Attorney Richard Painter, who served as the chief White House ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush administration, warned on Thursday that President Donald Trump appeared to be committing "felony bribery" by giving Republican senators fundraising cash ahead of an increasingly likely impeachment trial in the Senate.

[...]

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 16:53 schreef speknek het volgende:

[..]

Van wat ik begrijp geeft Trump niet letterlijk geld, maar vraagt hij de donors geld te geven aan geprefereerde senatoren. Lijkt me dat aan zo campagnevoeren voor andere Republikeinen voor de rest niets (wettelijk) mis is.

twitter:

PaulBegala twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 17:17:11 New PA poll from respected @FandMCollege shows @realDonaldTrump in big trouble. Approval 35%, re-elect 37%, with 59% ready to vote him out. 57% support impeachment inquiry. Current GOP strategy is not working. But they’re doubling down nonetheless. https://t.co/kRfOEHTlX9 reageer retweet

quote:

Save as PDF My Authors
I’ve long said (w/ others) that the WH and especially the president are astoundingly, even historically, weak in their ability to assert executive power to control what happens within the administration. The Executive branch response to the impeachment inquiry is revealing.1/
On 10-8, WHC Cipollone said that to avoid “lasting institutional harm on the Executive Branch and lasting damage to the separation of power, Trump *cannot permit his Administration to participate in this partisan inquiry under these circumstances*.” 2/
assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6459…
This was, like many Trumpian threats, empty. In the last few weeks we have seen former and, more amazingly, current officials of the Trump administration appearing before Congress to discuss intimate presidential conversations related to core presidential responsibilities. 3/
Yovanovitch, Kent, Cooper, Taylor, and Sondland, all current executive officials, have testified to the president’s detriment on Ukraine matter and in defiance of WH instructions not to cooperate. I think Vidman defied the WH as well, but cannot confirm that. 4/
This is a really remarkable breakdown of soft and hard presidential power. Congress might have legal authority to access some of this info. It’s a complicated question how much. But the WH isn't even putting up a fight. 5/
The WH is asserting no legal authorities, and does not appear even to be trying to manage what executive officials can and cannot say. The WH has no juice, no tools. The Cipollone letter was pure bluster. In so, so many ways, Trump is a weak, not a strong, president. 6/

twitter:

catturd2 twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 17:26:04 For all you foolish Tulsi Gabbard fans ...She just voted for the illegal impeachment coup. She's just a better looking Nancy Pelosi. reageer retweet

twitter:

AnnCoulter twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 18:14:38 No she didn't. Tulsi is a SENATOR, meaning she's in the SENATE and doesn't vote on HOUSE resolutions. https://t.co/QnG2XyL1LB reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 19:14 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Oh ja, dit ook nog...

twitter:

catturd2 twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 17:26:04 For all you foolish Tulsi Gabbard fans ...She just voted for the illegal impeachment coup. She's just a better looking Nancy Pelosi. reageer retweet

twitter:

AnnCoulter twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 18:14:38 No she didn't. Tulsi is a SENATOR, meaning she's in the SENATE and doesn't vote on HOUSE resolutions. https://t.co/QnG2XyL1LB reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 20:34 schreef Ulx het volgende:
De frontpage is verdacht stil. Jammer hoor. Ik had wel wat genuanceerde reacties willen lezen.

twitter:

ABCPolitics twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 20:17:04 "Will you all go on record and say that the president did nothing inappropriate?" @marykbruce asks Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy as Trump pushes GOP to defend him more forcefully."Very clear yes," McCarthy says as other GOP lawmakers echo his response https://t.co/sW7SOCqHej https://t.co/MAw2KL8ogP reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 31 oktober 2019 20:42 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Tja, op een of andere manier posten ze mijn inzendingen over Trump nooit. Het lijkt wel of ze daar niet van een fris tegengeluid houden.

twitter:

rebeccaballhaus twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 20:49:13 NSC official Tim Morrison told impeachment investigators today that Gordon Sondland told an aide to the Ukrainian president that U.S. aid would be released if Ukraine committed to investigating Burisma Group, corroborating Bill Taylor’s testimony. https://t.co/bDZXkyDSuD reageer retweet

twitter:

travisakers twitterde op donderdag 31-10-2019 om 17:53:53 JUST IN: Lindsey Graham is stepping down as the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.Chuck Grassley will assume Chair, a role he has previously held.https://t.co/vk1HgnBr67 reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 02:40:11 Chairman Schiff to @maddow: "One of the aspects of the resolution that we passed today authorizes me to begin releasing transcripts. And I would expect that process will begin as early as next week." reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 03:02 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Vanaf volgende week worden de transcripts vrijgegeven van de getuigenverklaringen achter gesloten deuren.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 02:40:11 Chairman Schiff to @:maddow: "One of the aspects of the resolution that we passed today authorizes me to begin releasing transcripts. And I would expect that process will begin as early as next week." reageer retweet

Ik ben benieuwd of de Republikeinen het dan eindelijk eens over de inhoud gaan hebben en niet meer alleen over de procesgang nu er gestemd is over de impeachmentprocedure, de transcripts worden vrijgegeven en de verhoren openbaar worden.

quote:

A federal judge sharply challenged the Trump administration on Thursday over its objections to a House Democratic lawsuit trying to force the testimony of one of Robert Mueller’s star witnesses as part of their broader impeachment inquiry.

Lawmakers have been fighting to bring in former White House counsel Don McGahn for questioning since he showed up repeatedly at the center of anecdotes detailing President Donald Trump’s potential obstruction of justice in the special counsel’s final report. But the Justice Department has tried to block McGahn’s testimony, arguing that the ex-Trump aide can essentially ignore a congressional subpoena related to his time in the White House, and that the courts shouldn’t weigh in on a dispute between Congress and the executive branch.

U.S. District Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson on Thursday struggled to size up the department’s argument. The judge’s approach is being closely watched because her ultimate decision could have an effect on separate court battles over Democrats’ attempts to subpoena other reluctant witnesses as it investigates Trump’s attempts to pressure Ukraine into launching politically advantageous probes. During the hearing, Jackson directed several pointed questions at the Justice Department.

SPOILER

“So what does checks and balances mean?” Jackson, an appointee of President Barack Obama,asked at one point during the court arguments.

James Burnham, arguing for the Justice Department, replied that the dispute between the House Judiciary Committee and McGahn should not be resolved through litigation. He argued that the Constitution and more than two centuries of interactions between the White House and Congress hadn’t required courts to weigh in. And Jackson shouldn’t now, he said.

“So the House can never go to court?” Jackson asked.

“As a general proposition, that’s correct,” replied Burnham, a former White House aide under McGahn who is now serving in a senior position in the Justice Department’s civil division.

Burnham insisted on a broad interpretation of the “absolute immunity” argument the Trump White House has been making in its fight against the House’s various impeachment-related oversight efforts. He said it extended both to former presidents and to top White House aides, whom he called “the alter ego of the president.” Burnham said these aides shouldn’t be forced to answer questions via subpoena because they might reveal information protected under executive privilege.

Facing a barrage of skeptical questions from Jackson, Burnham later conceded, “If you don’t think the president has absolute immunity, that’s a serious problem for my argument.”

The suit, filed by the House Judiciary Committee, centers on McGahn’s role in the White House response to the criminal investigation of alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

At Thursday’s hearing, House attorneys insisted that McGahn’s testimony was critical to lawmakers’ efforts to get to the bottom of matters investigated by Mueller, the former special counsel who declined to pass legal judgment on episodes that prosecutors considered potential obstruction of justice.

McGahn showed up hundreds of times in Mueller’s final report, often as the source of vivid recountings of Trump’s attempts to try to stymie an investigation into whether his campaign conspired with Russia on its election-interference attempts.

“The committee needs information from Mr. McGahn, who was a key witness to the allegations of obstruction of justice by the president in the Mueller Report,” House attorney Megan Barbero said. “The committee does require Mr. McGahn to come in and testify so they can have a live witness come in and test his credibility [and] talk to them about the president’s attempts to discredit him and judge for themselves.”

Justice Department attorneys have asserted, as they have under previous administrations, that senior White House advisers like McGahn can essentially ignore subpoenas related to their official duties.

There is no binding legal precedent on the point, but in a dispute a decade ago about President George W. Bush’s firing of U.S. attorneys, a District Court judge rejected the White House’s claims of absolute immunity for one of his White House counsels, Harriet Miers. The case was settled in 2009 and never ruled on by an appeals court.

During discussion of that prior ruling, Jackson seemed to signal that she was inclined to follow that decision unless the Justice Department could find some distinction.

“I am not analyzing this on a blank slate,” Jackson said as Burnham began his argument. “We do have prior precedents from this very jurisdiction. … I’ve been really grappling with this: how today’s case differs from, let’s say, Miers.”

Jackson also expressed discomfort with the Justice Department’s claim that McGahn and other former senior officials were entirely immune from a congressional subpoena, even though many such individuals regularly speak out in public.

“I see all day, many of us do, all kinds of former executive branch officials giving information to the media,” Jackson said. “We understand that people do that even under circumstances in which they could not have done so, perhaps, if they were still in the White House.”

Burnham eventually said he was not arguing that such disclosures are legal, nor ruling out any effort to stop them.

“We have not taken a position on that, Your Honor. I am definitely not disclaiming that,” the Justice Department attorney said.

For their part, the House lawyers urged Jackson to dismiss the Trump administration’s arguments.

“This is what they wish the law were. It’s not what the law is,” said Doug Letter, the House counsel. Later, he added: “At no point in our history have we had absolute immunity.”

While the McGahn case focuses on disclosures in the Mueller report, which was released in April, the resolution of the suit could affect a series of similar standoffs spurred by the current focus of House Democrats’ impeachment efforts: claims that Trump sought to trade U.S. security aid to Ukraine for announcement of an investigation that could embarrass a top Democratic presidential candidate, former Vice President Joe Biden.

One witness sought by the House Intelligence Committee for its Ukraine investigation, former deputy national security adviser Charles Kupperman, filed suit last week asking the courts to tell him whether to comply with the House’s subpoena or to abide by Trump’s direction to ignore it. As the No. 2 man at the National Security Council throughout 2019, Kupperman was a firsthand witness to the pressure campaign on Ukraine.

Kupperman’s suit is before another District Court judge in Washington, Richard Leon, who held the first hearing in that case in a courtroom just down the hall as the arguments before Jackson were playing out. Leon, an appointee of President George W. Bush, is not obliged to follow any decision Jackson issues, but would likely explain any disagreement.

Leon set a hearing in that case for Dec. 10, leaving Kupperman’s subpoena up in the air until the House impeachment hearings are well along or perhaps even complete.

Other Ukraine-related witnesses have also declined to appear and may look to whatever ruling Jackson issues.

At the close of Thursday’s three-and-a-half-hour hearing, the judge said she was well aware of the interest in her opinion.

“You can rest assured I do understand the significance of all of this. I’ll do my best to turn it around as quickly as possible,” she said, explaining that she was about to embark on a two-week trial that would limit her time.

Jackson added that she’d be open to issuing an oral opinion from the bench, followed by a written decision, if the attorneys asked for an expedited step.

McGahn never testified before the Mueller grand jury, but he still served as a star witness for the special counsel’s investigators. His name is one of the most prominent of any current or former Trump staffer in the final 448-page Mueller report, which recounts episodes when the president might have obstructed justice as he tried to disrupt or outright stop the Russia probe. The information came via five voluntary interviews McGahn did with Mueller staffers, lasting more than 30 hours.

House Democrats have been pressing for McGahn’s testimony dating back to the start of 2019. He was among the more than 80 people and organizations in the president’s orbit who got letters demanding documents from the Judiciary Committee in March. By April, with the Mueller report public, Democrats issued a subpoena for materials from McGahn covering 30 different topics. They also demanded his appearance in May for a public hearing.

Trump’s White House undercut Democrats’ plans to speak with McGahn by requesting a Justice Department legal opinion that found McGahn didn’t need to comply with the subpoena.

White House and Democratic committee attorneys tried to reach a deal over the summer to get McGahn in, but neither side budged. Democrats rejected offers to let McGahn answer questions in writing or sit for a deposition only after getting a peak at what he’d be asked about.

“We believed that the private interview format would satisfy the committee’s stated desire to obtain information from Mr. McGahn,” Michael Purpura, a top White House lawyer, told the court earlier this month in a declaration submitted as part of the case.

Democrats filed their lawsuit seeking enforcement of the McGahn subpoena in August. It was met by motions from McGahn and the Justice Department for an immediate dismissal, saying the courts should stay out of a dispute between the other two branches of government.

“Judicial resolution of disputes directly between the Executive Branch and Congress has been virtually unknown in American history, and is inconsistent with the Constitution’s fundamental principle that the surest safeguard for liberty was to separately equip co-equal Branches with ‘the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the other,’” attorneys for the Justice Department and McGahn argued, citing James Madison’s essay No. 51 from the Federalist Papers.

twitter:

DavidMDrucker twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 02:17:40 NEWS: A defiant @realDonaldTrump signaled he's disinclined to cooperate with House Dems in impeachment proceedings, while suggesting he might read transcript of Zelensky call aloud to nation in "fireside chat." https://t.co/L4eUpXjKJi me & @robcrilly from the Oval. @dcexaminer reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 04:42 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Die tactiek gaat in dit stadium niet meer werken, het gaat nu alleen nog maar om het overtuigen van de bevolking, degene die de publieke opinie aan z'n zijde weet te krijgen wint dit spelletje.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 05:18 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

60%-70% is nu toch vóór het houden van een impeachmentonderzoek?

Ik noem niet aan dat je dat bent als je de resultaten wil negeren.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 05:17 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

DavidMDrucker twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 02:17:40 NEWS: A defiant @:realDonaldTrump signaled he's disinclined to cooperate with House Dems in impeachment proceedings, while suggesting he might read transcript of Zelensky call aloud to nation in "fireside chat." https://t.co/L4eUpXjKJi me & @:robcrilly from the Oval. @:dcexaminer reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 05:18 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

60%-70% is nu toch vóór het houden van een impeachmentonderzoek?

Ik noem niet aan dat je dat bent als je de resultaten wil negeren.

quote:

The identical twin brother of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a National Security Council official who shared before House committees this week his concerns about President Trump’s July phone call with his Ukrainian counterpart, may also be called to testify.

Col. Vindman allegedly told impeachment investigators that his sibling, Army Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman, an NSC lawyer handling ethics issues, had witnessed the decision to move the call’s transcript to a top secret server. House committees have contacted his lawyer, although no decision has been made, according to a person briefed on the outreach.

Col. Yevgeny Vindman didn’t listen in on the call, during which Mr. Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Democratic front-runner Joe Biden and other matters, according to a person familiar with his brother’s testimony. However, Col. Yevgeny Vindman was allegedly present when his brother, at the direction of superiors, reported the call to the NSC’s general counsel, John Eisenberg, according to a person familiar with Col. Alexander Vindman’s testimony.

He allegedly reported his concerns to Mr. Eisenberg in person at the NSC shortly after the Trump-Zelensky phone call took place. During that meeting, Col. Alexander Vindman read the notes he took while listening in on the leaders’ call in his capacity as director of Ukraine policy and expressed his concern.

On Tuesday he told House investigators of asking his brother to join in his capacity as an NSC ethics lawyer, according to the person familiar with Col. Vindman’s testimony. During the meeting, Mr. Eisenberg listened to his concerns, jotting down notes on a yellow legal pad. Mr. Eisenberg’s deputy, Michael Ellis, entered the room toward the end of the meeting and Messrs. Eisenberg and Ellis then allegedly began discussing what to do with the transcript, given its “sensitive” nature, this person said.

Mr. Eisenberg then made the suggestion to store the transcript on the top secret server, according to this person.

Gordon Lang, Col. Yevgeny Vindman’s attorney, declined to comment.

White House deputy press secretary Hogan Gidley said in a statement that the White House “will not discuss the internal deliberations of the White House Counsel’s Office.”

The White House said in September that the record of the Trump-Zelensky call was added to the highly secure server at the direction of National Security Council lawyers. According to the whistleblower complaint that initiated the impeachment inquiry, White House officials were “directed” to remove the electronic records from the computer system where such documents are normally stored “for coordination, finalization and distribution to Cabinet-level officials.”

[..]

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 05:17 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

DavidMDrucker twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 02:17:40 NEWS: A defiant @:realDonaldTrump signaled he's disinclined to cooperate with House Dems in impeachment proceedings, while suggesting he might read transcript of Zelensky call aloud to nation in "fireside chat." https://t.co/L4eUpXjKJi me & @:robcrilly from the Oval. @:dcexaminer reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 07:04 schreef Lord_Vetinari het volgende:
[ [url= https://www.google.com/im(...)QSjXc-qEM]afbeelding[/url] ]

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 05:39 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

Minder, bovendien is minder dan de helft momenteel voor afzetting. Vooral dat laatste cijfer moet veel hoger wil McConnell Trump laten vallen.

Maar we zullen zien.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 07:15 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

Neh, dat gaat zo niet.

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 08:07 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Er moet heel wat gebeuren wil de GOP Trump daadwerkelijk laten vallen. Het zal wel blijven bij heel wat rookgordijnen opwerpen, karaktermoord op getuigen een enkele dappere senator die zal zeggen dat het toch allemaal niet zo netjes is van Trump om daaraan toe te voegen dat het verder niet zwaar genoeg is voor impeachment en ga zo maar door.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 08:07 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Er moet heel wat gebeuren wil de GOP Trump daadwerkelijk laten vallen. Het zal wel blijven bij heel wat rookgordijnen opwerpen, karaktermoord op getuigen een enkele dappere senator die zal zeggen dat het toch allemaal niet zo netjes is van Trump om daaraan toe te voegen dat het verder niet zwaar genoeg is voor impeachment en ga zo maar door.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 09:02 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Dan moet hij zich wel persoonlijk onthouden van elke inmenging in die procedure. Iedere actie van Trump om die procedure te verstoren is not done, dat heeft McConnell hem blijkbaar geprobeerd uit te leggen, blijf afzijdig.. Bij Trump twijfel ik of hij daadwerkelijk aan de verleiding kan weerstaan om "toch iets te proberen"

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 09:20 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Dat heeft hij tot dusver nooit gedaan en heeft de GOP ook nooit problematisch gevonden.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 09:32 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Trump is vrij onconventioneel, dat hebben we de afgelopen 3 jaar wel gezien. Een kat in het nauw kan rare sprongen maken, het is maar net wat er in zijn hoofd speelt. We zullen het zien.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 09:14 schreef PippenScottie het volgende:

[..]

Precies.
Ik zie het niet gebeuren. Republikeinen houden de rijen gesloten. Party over country enzovoort

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 09:33 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

We hebben het echter niet over Trump, maar over de GOP.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 09:53 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

De GOP is de afgelopen 3 jaar de speelbal van Trump geweest. Die moeten dit zo langzamerhand zat worden. De GOP heeft natuurlijk ook 2020 in het hoofd. Met Trump hebben ze de kans dat swingstates (die ze bitter nodig hebben) in 2020 richting Dems gaan. Trump toverde in 2016 een truukje uit zijn hoed, maar vooralsnog zie ik dit niet gebeuren. Daar komt nog bij dat de gevolgen van zijn beleid pijn begint te doen.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 10:00 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Ik denk dat de GOP zo machtsgeil is en omdat ze democratie toch al vervelend vinden, ze geen enkel probleem hebben met een figuur als Trump

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 10:27 schreef Jojoke het volgende:
De Democraten hebben de jongeren nodig om in 2020 te winnen. Ongeacht of Trump uiteindelijk wel of niet wordt afgezet, helpt het proces vermoedelijk wel om de jongeren op de been te brengen en te zorgen dat ze stemmen in 2020.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 10:34 schreef AnneX het volgende:
Goh, logisch toch. Waarom...daarom.
Bedenkt de man dat zelf?

https://www.cbsnews.com/n(...)ork-city-to-florida/
Quote:
“New York Governor Andrew Cuomo tweeted "Good riddance. It's not like @:realDonaldTrump paid taxes here anyway."

Wat ik never zal begrijpen, als iemand zó slim en bijdehand en stinkend rijk is / zou zijn...Investeer dan in de mensen én de wereld om het beter te krijgen.
Of doet bijv. Gates met goede doelen industrie het ook voor zelfverrijking.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 10:32 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

En vrouwen en gekleurde stemmers. Gaan ze allemaal stemmen, dan is het over en uit met de meerderheid van de GOP in het Congres.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 10:38 schreef Jojoke het volgende:

[..]

Dan kan de GOP inderdaad hun koffers wel pakken

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 11:07 schreef Whiskers2009 het volgende:
Man, man, man... Bedankt Trump...
https://www.nu.nl/buitenl(...)nse-pijpleiding.html

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 11:13 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

Oeps, is nog een red state ook volgens mij.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 10:48 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Na het tijdperk Trump zal de GOP zichzelf moeten heruitvinden. Dat staat vast.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 11:23 schreef PippenScottie het volgende:

[..]

Dat is geen enkel probleem hoor.
Zodra er een democratische president is, zijn begrotingstekorten, obstructie van rechtsgang, belangenverstrengeling, corruptie, echtscheiding, vreemdgaan, opstappende kabinetsleden, gebrek aan transparantie, golf spelen, rijke donoren, familieleden met baantjes, sluitende kolenfabrieken, failliete boeren, een niet gebouwd grenshek enz enz opeens weer superbelangrijk. En impeachment waardig.

twitter:

NYGovCuomo twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 01:13:10 Good riddance.It’s not like @realDonaldTrump paid taxes here anyway... He’s all yours, Florida. https://t.co/9AX0q1aBkQ reageer retweet

twitter:

NYCMayor twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 05:07:16 Our deepest condolences to the good people of Florida as Trump attempts to outrun his past (and near future). https://t.co/QFqeYO7xTq reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 11:51 schreef pullup het volgende:
Twee wat agressievere reacties vn New Yorkers op het vertrek van Trump dan we van de deocratische presidentskandidaten gewend zijn. Die zijn veel suffer over het algemeen

twitter:

NYGovCuomo twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 01:13:10 Good riddance.It’s not like @:realDonaldTrump paid taxes here anyway... He’s all yours, Florida. https://t.co/9AX0q1aBkQ reageer retweet

twitter:

NYCMayor twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 05:07:16 Our deepest condolences to the good people of Florida as Trump attempts to outrun his past (and near future). https://t.co/QFqeYO7xTq reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 11:57 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Ik kan me voorstellen dat Trump naar Florida wil. Hij heeft in principe het Witte Huis al opgegeven. New York is besmet terrein geworden en die duiken nu diep in zijn lokale belastingpapieren. In Florida zitten nog genoeg schatrijke bejaarden die hij geld kan aftroggelen in Trump casino's of golfclubs.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 12:00:00 Fox News' Judge Andrew Napolitano: Proof of Trump's impeachable offenses plain to see.https://t.co/1TPmA0BtXm reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 12:16 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

Neh, tax rates in NY zijn 9%, in FL slechts 4%.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 12:16 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 12:00:00 Fox News' Judge Andrew Napolitano: Proof of Trump's impeachable offenses plain to see.https://t.co/1TPmA0BtXm reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 12:48 schreef De_Hertog het volgende:
Napolitano is wel vaker kritisch over Trump en heeft al eerder gezegd dat wat Trump tot nu toe zelf heeft toegegeven over het telefoongesprek een misdaad is: https://www.foxnews.com/o(...)p-attacks-presidency

Alsnog goed dat dit op Fox ook langs kan komen, natuurlijk.

twitter:

Acosta twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 01:50:33 Key moment in Morrison testimony today. Morrison was asked whether Trump was above the law. Morrison refused to say Trump was above the law and responded that Trump was “not above the constitution,” according a source familiar with the testimony. reageer retweet

twitter:

ABCPolitics twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 16:27:06 Pres. Trump's approval rating is 38% in the new @ABC News/WaPo poll.Among Republicans, he's at a career low of 74%—down steeply from a career-high 87% in July. https://t.co/Gah1sQlrMF reageer retweet

twitter:

MoveOn twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 17:00:06 @cathymcmorris @repgregwalden @RepLarryBucshon @RepBuddyCarter @repdonyoung .@RepRobBishop (R-UT) invokes Will Smith and Aladdin in his failed attempt to answer the yes-or-no question of whether it’s acceptable for a president to pressure a foreign government to interfere with our elections. https://t.co/2ZqQt3pKo2 reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 10:27 schreef Jojoke het volgende:
De Democraten hebben de jongeren nodig om in 2020 te winnen. Ongeacht of Trump uiteindelijk wel of niet wordt afgezet, helpt het proces vermoedelijk wel om de jongeren op de been te brengen en te zorgen dat ze stemmen in 2020.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 12:48 schreef De_Hertog het volgende:
Napolitano is wel vaker kritisch over Trump en heeft al eerder gezegd dat wat Trump tot nu toe zelf heeft toegegeven over het telefoongesprek een misdaad is: https://www.foxnews.com/o(...)p-attacks-presidency

Alsnog goed dat dit op Fox ook langs kan komen, natuurlijk.

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 19:57:34 NEW: Days after White House lawyer John Eisenberg moved record of Trump call Zelensky into top secret system, he instructed Lt. Col. Vindman—who listened to the call & raised alarms—not to tell anyone what had happened on the call, Vindman testified. https://t.co/0CDgno3nNc reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 22:38 schreef trein2000 het volgende:
Beto out https://www.bbc.co.uk/new(...)tter_impression=true

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 23:20 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Jammer -Een Harris/O’Rourke ticket had me wel wat geleken. Ik verwacht dat Harris binnenkort ook stopt.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 23:20 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Jammer -Een Harris/O’Rourke ticket had me wel wat geleken. Ik verwacht dat Harris binnenkort ook stopt.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 22:38 schreef trein2000 het volgende:
Beto out https://www.bbc.co.uk/new(...)tter_impression=true

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 november 2019 23:20 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Jammer -Een Harris/O’Rourke ticket had me wel wat geleken. Ik verwacht dat Harris binnenkort ook stopt.

quote:

Federal prosecutors seeking to bolster their defense of the investigation into former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn took an unusual step Friday: releasing the handwritten notes of two FBI agents who conducted a fateful January 2017 White House interview during which he allegedly lied about his dealings with Russia.

The disclosure came as a new defense team led by a prominent critic of former special counsel Robert Mueller’s office, Sidney Powell, has mounted an extraordinarily broad attack on Mueller’s team and the FBI, accusing them of altering key evidence in the case and essentially tricking Flynn into the guilty plea he offered in December 2017 and reaffirmed a year later.

In a court filing Friday that included the notes and other records, prosecutors roundly rejected the defense’s new tack.

“The defendant’s protestations of innocence and being misled into a guilty plea are demonstrably false,” wrote prosecutor Brandon Van Grack, who handled Flynn’s case for Mueller and is now the lead prosecutor on it for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington.

Van Grack also dismissed Flynn’s lawyers’ claims that the FBI agents changed the report on the interview in any significant way as it went through several drafts.

“Both interviewing agents’ notes are clear that the defendant maintained he had ‘[n]o recollection’ of speaking with the Russian Ambassador about U.S. Sanctions, and that the defendant did not have a ‘long drawn out’ conversation with the Russian Ambassador about ‘don’t do something,’” the prosecutor wrote.

Van Grack said the conduct of the FBI in the pivotal Jan. 24, 2017, interview at Flynn’s West Wing office was proper and that agents even offered up extra details when he claimed not to remember some of the interactions they were questioning him about.

“When the defendant lied in his interview, the FBI was engaged in a legitimate and significant investigation into whether individuals associated with the campaign of then-candidate Donald J. Trump were coordinating with the Russian government in its activities to interfere with the 2016 presidential election,” the prosecutor wrote. “The defendant was not ‘ambushed’ at the interview, and the interviewing agents certainly did not engage in ‘outrageous’ conduct that undermines the fact that he lied.”

Prosecutors stressed they had no duty to provide any evidence to Flynn before charging him, but that they did share a number of potential weaknesses in the investigation with him. That included the fact that one of the FBI agents who interviewed him, Peter Strzok, had sent text messages that showed a preference for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and that both agents’ initial read on their exchange with Flynn was that he was being candid with them.

[..]

quote:

A federal judge on Thursday dismissed right-wing conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi’s lawsuit against Robert Mueller, ruling that Corsi lacked standing, that the lawsuit was never properly served, and the complaint failed to state any valid claims against the former special counsel.

The lawsuit, initially filed late last year, claimed that Mueller and several other government actors unlawfully pressured Corsi to perjure himself, alleging that the government coerced him to lie that he acted as a conduit between longtime Trump confidant Roger Stone and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

In a 42-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Ellen Huvelle, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, meticulously dismantled each of Corsi’s proposed causes of action and highlighted the fact that his attorney’s service of the lawsuit was insufficient, as it was delivered more than a month after the date required by law.

As a threshold matter, Huvelle ruled that the complaint did not allege sufficient facts to establish proper standing, stating that Corsi failed to plead an actual or imminent injury because the claim that he was unlawfully surveilled by the government “relie[d] on a highly attenuated chain of possibilities.”

SPOILER

Huvelle then turned her sights to Corsi’s lawyer Larry Klayman, castigating the attorney for persistently disregarding the Court’s previous rulings on claims of illegal surveillance.

“Despite the fact that his prior claims of illegal surveillance under PRISM have consistently been rejected, plaintiff’s counsel persists with an even more deficient allegation here—that Corsi ‘routinely speaks with persons located overseas in regions that are surveilled under PRISM.’” Huvelle wrote. “This type of claim has been rejected by the Supreme Court in Clapper and in the three cases that plaintiff’s counsel has brought in this Court. Accordingly, there is no basis for the Court to find standing in this case.”

Huvelle was similarly unkind to the fact that Corsi buttressed his allegation that Mueller unlawfully leaked secret grand jury material to the press with citations to news articles from ABC News and The Daily Caller — neither of which supported the claim.

“The ABC News article merely suggests a reason for Mueller’s interest in Corsi and asserts that he has evidence that may prove a fact but does not reveal what that evidence is,” she wrote. “The article explicitly references Mueller’s ‘case,’ indicating that the information relates to his investigation and not to the grand jury’s investigation. Moreover, the article does not attribute any information to Mueller or anyone else associated with the grand jury investigation.”

Her analysis of the Daily Caller article was even more critical.

“Corsi alleges that the Daily Caller Article contains information on matters occurring before the grand jury because it ‘report[s] . . . that a physician known as Dr. Mendelsohn and others who received cancer treatment by him . . . were subpoenaed to appear before the Mueller grand jury.’ But this allegation is flatly contradicted by the article, which names only Corsi, and no one else, as having been subpoenaed by the grand jury. And the article identifies Corsi, not Mueller or his staff, as the source of that information.”

In an email to The Hill, Klayman said he plans on appealing the ruling.

“Judge Huvelle’s ruling was largely politically influenced and sadly comes as no surprise,” he said. “In today’s world, the elite establishment club in Washington, D.C., are ‘protected species,’ who are above the law. The American people are beginning to understand and it is a dangerous situation when the judiciary provides cover for the elite and powerful.”

twitter:

GusMoot twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 05:22:04 @ddale8 Did he not also say at one point in the rally;"I withheld the money". ??? reageer retweet

twitter:

KevinlyFather twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 06:28:52 @GusMoot @ddale8 https://t.co/rWaC6GPlWC reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 09:00 schreef AnneX het volgende:
Vaak vrees ik dat er nog 4 jaren gaan volgen.
Gelukkig heeft iemand gerekend.

https://mobile.twitter.com/billkristol/status/1190246881760366593

Only 74% of Republicans now approve of Trump's job performance, lowest ever in Post-ABC poll, down eight points from September.

(George Conway:...” But the great and unmatched wisdom of our stable genius president says he is at 95%!”)

Ergens daaronder als comment:
“ there are about 158 million registered voters. 26% identify as Rs, or a little over 48 million. Today's polling shows approval at 74% with Rs, or 35.5 million approving - 27 million less than his 2016 vote total. And he's bragging?”

Zou de berekening (waar zijn?).
Wat een gegoochel met cijfers, getallen en %%.
Blijkbaar gaat het om (voorlopig ! ) 74% van 23% van de voters...

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 12:57 schreef Ulx het volgende:

they are basically asking, in quite robust terms, for help in doing a hatchet job on their own intelligence services

l

De Britten willen het spelletje van Bart niet meespelen.

twitter:

seungminkim twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 23:59:33 After Trump announces that Chad Wolf is the acting DHS secretary, DHS spox says McAleenan is the acting secretary. #happyfriday reageer retweet

twitter:

RudyGiuliani twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 20:41:28 You have to wonder why the media is all of a sudden hell-bent on slandering me. I’ve got the evidence, extending high and wide! https://t.co/r3CfuE4FNu reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 23:48:59 You can’t Impeach someone who hasn’t done anything wrong! reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 13:41 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op vrijdag 01-11-2019 om 23:48:59 You can’t Impeach someone who hasn’t done anything wrong! reageer retweet

Helemaal mee eens. Trump heeft gelijk. Hij zegt waar het op staat. Klare.taal.


Overigens heeft Trump natuurlijk wèl dingen geflikt waarvoor hij kan worden afgezet.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 13:45 schreef AnneX het volgende:

[..]

Potus - in het belang van alle mensen - heeft niks gedaan.
Hij zet anderen aan tot rare dingen als vergiftigen water, mijnen openhouden, farmers tekort doen, pijpleidingen hier en daar etc. etc.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 14:15:04 Smuggling gangs in Mexico have repeatedly sawed through new sections of Trump's border wall in recent months by using commercially available power tools, opening gaps large enough for people and drug loads to pass through, WaPo reports. https://t.co/beqYxA9FWs reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 15:12 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]
creepy...

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 15:15 schreef ATuin-hek het volgende:

[..]

What the hell?

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 15:15 schreef ATuin-hek het volgende:

[..]

What the hell?

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 15:12 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]
creepy...

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 15:12 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]
creepy...

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 17:22 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Die is opgeheven.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 17:22 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Die is opgeheven.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 17:20 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Het ‘Er was geen Quid Pro Quo’ argument wordt van tafel gehaald. De GOP gaat toch maar voor het ‘Trump mag dit want het was om corruptie tegen te gaan’ smoesje. Ik denk niet dat dit gaat werken.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 17:27 schreef Ulx het volgende:
De GOP was niet zo blij met het plunderen van het defensiebudget voor iets stompzinnigs als die muur.

twitter:

MikeDelMoro twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 17:27:19 Bannon to Kushner talking about Paul Manafort three days before the 2016 election: “they are going to try and say the Russians worked with wiki leaks to give this victory to us... can’t let word get out he is advising us.” https://t.co/b3xDxTBZ63 https://t.co/vhlapGmrsQ reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 17:38 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

Maar doet er niets aan. Zoals gewoonlijk.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 17:45 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

MikeDelMoro twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 17:27:19 Bannon to Kushner talking about Paul Manafort three days before the 2016 election: “they are going to try and say the Russians worked with wiki leaks to give this victory to us... can’t let word get out he is advising us.” https://t.co/b3xDxTBZ63 https://t.co/vhlapGmrsQ reageer retweet

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 18:05 schreef Jojoke het volgende:

[..]

Er lekken mails van het Rusland onderzoek? Oh wacht, ik zie het al. Het is vanwege de gewonnen rechtszaak.

twitter:

colincampbell twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 16:33:44 Children were told to ‘build the wall’ at White House Halloween party https://t.co/78ajqcH9pk https://t.co/PhvQUEuiII reageer retweet

quote:

Kids dressed as superheroes and ninjas were given brick-colored paper cards and told to write their name with a marker and tape them to the wall.

twitter:

ABCPolitics twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 19:13:25 Pres. Trump, a lifetime New Yorker, changes his official residence from Manhattan to Palm Beach, Florida. https://t.co/afQj4nikp3 reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 15:46 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:
Marlon Brando had Trump goed kunnen spelen, maar dat gaat niet meer.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 18:28 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:

twitter:

colincampbell twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 16:33:44 Children were told to ‘build the wall’ at White House Halloween party https://t.co/78ajqcH9pk https://t.co/PhvQUEuiII reageer retweet

[..]

[ afbeelding ]
https://news.yahoo.com/ch(...)20.html?guccounter=1

quote:

As the summer wore on, and President Donald Trump would not budge on his decision to withhold almost $400 million in military aid for Ukraine, the Pentagon warned the White House: If its portion of the money wasn’t released quickly, the Defense Department would not be able to spend it before the fiscal year ended on September 30.

The Pentagon even gave the White House a deadline. In late July, as panic spread within the administration over the president’s worrisome decision, the National Security Council led a series of interagency meetings to discuss what to do about the military assistance to Ukraine. At one of these meetings, Defense Department officials told the White House that if the $250 million in security assistance was not released by August 6, it would not be able to spend it all by the end of the fiscal year, according to two sources familiar with the deliberations.

The Defense Department’s message was clear: If the White House didn’t act, the Pentagon would be left with unobligated funds — money that would return to the U.S. Treasury and never make its way to Ukraine. And the Pentagon was also clear that providing Ukraine the security assistance was in the national security interests of the United States, on that point Trump’s Cabinet agreed.

In late July, the Pentagon also alerted the White House that if the funding wasn’t released in time, the Pentagon would be at risk of violating the Impoundment Control Act, which punishes the executive branch when it doesn’t spend money that Congress has appropriated, the sources said.

But, the White House did not heed the Pentagon’s warnings. It continued to withhold the money through August and into September.

In the end, it’s clear that the Pentagon’s warning to the White House over the summer went ignored, revealing just how much the White House was willing to risk with its Ukraine pressure campaign.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 20:48 schreef De_Hertog het volgende:

[..]

Ik weet niet precies wat het idee achter deze post is, maar dat ze bij the White House een bestaand en bekend beleid op een speelse manier aan kinderen proberen uit te leggen vind ik niet zo vreemd. Dit uiteraard los van de idioterie van dat beleid op zichzelf

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 19:41 schreef Beathoven het volgende:

[..]

Baldwin zet 'm heel erg goed neer. Helaas is de rest van de cast totaal niet treffend of leuk.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 21:57:58 The Whistleblower has disappeared. Where is the Whistleblower? reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 23:04 schreef Ulx het volgende:
...
Elke seconde van de dag vreet het aan hem. Helemaal paranoïde struint hij ‘s nachts door de gangen van het Witte Huis, af en toe tirades houdend tegen de schilderijen...

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 18:05 schreef Jojoke het volgende:

[..]

Er lekken mails van het Rusland onderzoek? Oh wacht, ik zie het al. Het is vanwege de gewonnen rechtszaak.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 18:16 schreef AnneX het volgende:

[..]

Niet gelekt.
Buzzfeed:
The Mueller Report’s Secret Memos
BuzzFeed News sued the US government for the right to see all the work that Mueller’s team kept secret. Today we are publishing the first installment.

https://www.buzzfeednews.(...)eport-secret-memos-1
Ademloos. Brutaal. Arrogant.

quote:

In response to a court order, the Justice Department released the first installment of documents: hundreds of pages of summaries of FBI interviews with witnesses, available here for the first time. Another installment will be released every month for at least the next eight years.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 23:45 schreef Hyperdude het volgende:

[..]

Ik waardeer je frequente posts hier, maar ik heb ergens een vaag vermoeden dat Trump niet de enige is in dit topic met een obsessie.

twitter:

rgoodlaw twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 22:10:30 Coincidence?“Sweeping changes to Ukraine’s top law enforcement agency ordered by President Volodymyr Zelenskiy are set to derail a series of long-running criminal investigations, including two related to...Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort”https://t.co/mdi5MzX4On reageer retweet

quote:

Sweeping changes to Ukraine’s top law enforcement agency ordered by President Volodymyr Zelenskiy are set to derail a series of long-running criminal investigations, including two related to U.S. President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, three current and former Ukrainian prosecutors told Reuters.

The reorganization, which includes fresh leadership for the agency and mandatory skills testing for prosecutors, represents an upheaval of Ukraine’s General Prosecutor’s Office (GPO), one of the most powerful bodies in the country, and one that has long been the target of criticism.

Zelenskiy, who came to power in May, has said the makeover is essential because the office is widely distrusted by Ukrainians and has been seen as a political tool for the well-connected to punish their enemies.

The overhaul, which began in October, comes amid widespread scrutiny of the agency following efforts by Trump and his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, to get Ukraine to open an investigation into the Republican president’s political rival - Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden - and his son Hunter, who served on the board of a Ukrainian gas company.

Plans to shake up the GPO played a role in a July 25 phone call between Zelenskiy and Trump that is now at the heart of the impeachment inquiry into the U.S. president. On that call, Zelenskiy told Trump he was installing a new head at the agency who would be “100% my person, my candidate” and who “will look into the situation” regarding the Bidens.

SPOILER

New Prosecutor General Ruslan Ryaboshapka took office at the end of August. Under his leadership, the GPO is preparing to transfer all existing investigations to other law enforcement agencies, a process the GPO told Reuters would begin Nov. 20.

Ryaboshapka, who previously headed an anti-corruption agency and briefly served as Zelenskiy’s deputy chief of staff, also has imposed a written legal exam for all the GPO’s prosecutors, a move many of those staffers view as insulting and an unfair test of their skills and experience. More than 200 have already been fired for refusing to take the exam, according to the prosecutor’s office.

During a press conference in October, Zelenskiy said what he meant in his comments to Trump was that Ryaboshapka would be an honest prosecutor. Ryaboshapka declined to be interviewed by Reuters and has not responded directly to questions sent by Reuters about the criticism of his reforms. But his office defended them and the exam process. “The purpose of the reform is to create a renewed, professional, efficient prosecutor’s office that will be trusted by the public,” it said in a statement on Oct. 25.

Among those who have been fired are 13 prosecutors from the Special Investigations Unit, which was overseeing corruption cases from the period of former President Viktor Yanukovich. Manafort, who worked as a political consultant in Ukraine for years, was implicated in two of those probes, one linked to a dossier of off-the-books payments made by a Ukrainian political party, and another looking at the alleged illicit use of state funds by Yanukovich’s government.

Manafort’s attorney did not respond to requests for comment, but Manafort previously has maintained his innocence.

Serhii Horbatiuk, the former head of the Special Investigations Unit, who was fired for refusing to take the new test, said he believed Zelenskiy’s overhaul was aimed at concentrating power in the hands of loyalists who could exercise more control over sensitive cases, including the probes linked to Manafort.

“This entire reform is being done in order to take control of the General Prosecutor’s Office... and have the guarantee that there will be no dissent,” Horbatiuk said in an interview with Reuters conducted in his office on Oct. 22, the day before he was fired.

He and two other prosecutors in his former unit said the transfer of long-running investigations out of the GPO, along with the dismissal of seasoned investigators working on those cases, would result in a massive backlog – and the de facto demise - of the probes.

“In the fog of this reform you can create such a pile of cases…which will lead to an absence of results,” Horbatiuk said.

Those fears are overblown, according to Andriy Smirnov, the deputy chief of staff of Zelenskiy’s administration responsible for handling judicial reform. He said no critical knowledge would be lost if the cases moved to other departments, including the probes related to Manafort.

“All of this is easy and happens quickly. With no harm to the investigation,” Smirnov told Reuters. “The problem being described to you does not exist.”

Smirnov said the overhaul was in no way designed to allow the government to influence politically sensitive cases. He described the allegations made by Horbatiuk and two other senior members of his former unit as a “paranoid” response to new leadership.

In comments to journalists on Oct. 30, Ryaboshapka described the work of Horbatiuk and his team as “ineffective”.

‘BLACK LEDGER’ CASE

Three members of the Special Investigations Unit told Reuters the loss of key personnel and reshuffling of responsibilities would effectively sabotage five years’ worth of investigations into alleged corruption during the pro-Kremlin presidency of Yanukovich, who was in office from 2010 until he was driven from power in a popular revolt in 2014. Manafort worked as a consultant for Yanukovich’s political party for over a decade.

“At least 50% of the information… is in the investigator’s head, it doesn’t fit into the official paperwork,” said Andriy Rodionov, a senior investigator in the unit who is still on staff after passing the mandatory exam. “Any handing over of these cases is an automatic burial of them.”

Manafort was Trump’s campaign chairman from May to August of 2016. He stepped down after a Ukrainian lawmaker divulged details contained in a so-called “black ledger” of alleged off-the-books payments made by Yanukovich’s Party of the Regions. Manafort, who earned millions for his consultancy work in Ukraine, was among the recipients listed in the ledger, which was corroborated at the time by anti-corruption investigators and which prosecutors told Reuters has long been the subject of a GPO probe.

Following Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election, Manafort was convicted of bank fraud and filing false tax returns and sentenced to 7.5 years in U.S. prison. In building their case against Manafort, U.S prosecutors accused him of concealing the payments he received from Ukraine.

In Ukraine, senior investigator Rodionov said prosecutorial firepower was sputtering when it came to the probes involving Manafort. He said he has already lost three members of his team as part of Zelenskiy’s restructuring; two refused to take the test and another failed it, he said. Overall, the Special Investigations Unit has lost around a third of its staff, Rodionov said, with the number likely to rise as more prosecutors either refuse to participate in further rounds of assessment or fail to pass them.

Giuliani has called the black ledger a fraudulent document used to unfairly malign Manafort and damage Trump. He has urged Ukraine to investigate whether Ukrainian officials conspired to meddle in the 2016 U.S. presidential election on behalf of Democrat Hillary Clinton, a conspiracy theory that has been widely debunked.

Giuliani did not respond to requests to comment for this story. He told Reuters in a recent interview that “some” Ukrainians say the black ledger is forged. Earlier this year he said that Manafort had communicated to him through an attorney that the ledger’s “entries about me are false.”

Rodionov said his team had been “within weeks” of announcing official suspects in the second probe linked to Manafort, which involves allegations that Yanukovich’s administration illegally used state funds to pay a prominent New York law firm to write a report justifying the imprisonment of one of Yanukovich’s political rivals. Manafort helped the Ukrainian government commission that report, and he promoted its conclusions to reporters and others in the United States.

“We were ready…to formally announce indictments of both Ukrainian and American citizens,” Rodionov said. “I spent three years trying to put it all together and now they will crumple it up and stuff it all in a box and hand the box away.”

A quiet end to Ukraine’s investigations into Manafort would likely play well in the White House. Trump and his backers have worked for years to discredit Mueller’s Russia investigation, and Trump has previously talked about pardoning Manafort.

A recent survey by Rating Group Ukraine, an independent polling firm, found that almost two-thirds of Ukrainians don’t trust the GPO. Critics say that, under previous presidents, the office was used to go after political opponents, squeeze businesses or shield corrupt officials.

Since Ukraine gained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, the country has had more than 20 prosecutors general. Not one has completed the designated five-year term, which was extended to six years in 2017.

Yuriy Bezshastniy, another Special Investigations Unit prosecutor who was fired for refusing to take the law exam, said the reorganization was harming the ability of the nation to hold powerful wrongdoers accountable. He said he found it difficult to understand why the reforms had been introduced or who had come up with them.

“I’m seeing all sorts of nonsense,” he said. “Was it politicians or businessmen or clowns or lawyers? What’s going on is an absolute nightmare,” said Bezshastniy, who had served in the prosecutor’s office since 2001.

Asked what would happen to Yanukovich-era cases, he replied: “It’s an end to them. They’re killing two birds with one stone — kicking out people who were actually doing something... and messing up all the cases with one stroke of a pen.”

twitter:

agearan twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 02:17:54 Trump complaining he isn't getting the kind of credit for al-Baghdadi that Obama did. "Conan, the dog, got more publicity than me," Trump says. reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 3 november 2019 00:14 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

agearan twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 02:17:54 Trump complaining he isn't getting the kind of credit for al-Baghdadi that Obama did. "Conan, the dog, got more publicity than me," Trump says. reageer retweet

De man is compleet krankjorum. Echt alles moet en zal om hem draaien.

twitter:

washingtonpost twitterde op donderdag 01-11-2018 om 00:35:04 Trump focuses on himself in tweets after returning from Pittsburgh synagogue https://t.co/w0LIo8fvuB reageer retweet

twitter:

WSJ twitterde op zondag 03-11-2019 om 03:13:23 A judge has blocked the Trump administration from implementing a policy requiring new immigrants to show show proof of health insurance or the means to afford it https://t.co/lTJZsqEpI8 reageer retweet

quote:

A federal court has blocked the Trump administration from implementing a policy that would require new immigrants to demonstrate they have health care or are able to afford it.

The order, issued Saturday afternoon by U.S. District Judge Michael Simon in Oregon, temporarily bars the administration from applying the new policy for 28 days. Another hearing is scheduled for Nov. 22.

The new health-care requirement, first reported by The Wall Street Journal, was slated to take effect Monday. It would primarily affect new immigrants looking to join family members in the U.S.—a phenomenon President Trump has called “chain migration.”

When it issued the new policy last month, the White House said it was taking the step to safeguard the health-care system for Americans by preventing immigrants from enrolling in Medicaid or going to emergency rooms with no insurance.

The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment on the judge’s order.

[..]

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 22:01:44 Schiff will change the transcripts just like he fraudulently made up the phone call. He is a corrupt politician! https://t.co/b12GFXv6tE reageer retweet

twitter:

nytimes twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 20:20:02 Paula White, a Florida televangelist, is being brought into the Trump administration to help shore up his evangelical base. Among Christians, her association with the "prosperity gospel" has made her a divisive figure.https://t.co/SetBa8y5Kp reageer retweet

quote:

"[Rick] Gates recalled a time on the campaign aircraft when candidate Trump said, 'get the emails.' [Michael] Flynn said he could use his intelligence sources to obtain the emails," investigators wrote in a summary of Gates' April 2018 interview with Mueller's team. Flynn was a foreign policy adviser on the campaign and became Trump's first national security adviser.
"Flynn had the most Russia contacts of anyone on the campaign and was in the best position to ask for the emails if they were out there," the investigators also wrote about Gates' interview.
Gates described in an interview with Mueller investigators last year how several close advisers to Trump, Trump's family members and Trump himself considered how to get the stolen documents and pushed the effort, according to investigators' summary.
"Gates said Donald Trump Jr. would ask where the emails were in family meetings. Michael Flynn, [Jared] Kushner, [Paul] Manafort, [Redacted] [Corey] Lewandowski, Jeff Sessions, and Sam Clovis expressed interest in obtaining the emails as well. Gates said the priority focuses of the Trump campaign opposition research team were Clinton's emails and contributions to the Clinton Foundation. Flynn, [Redacted] [Jeff] Sessions, Kushner, and [Donald] Trump Jr. were all focused on opposition topics," Gates told investigators, according to the interview summary.

twitter:

ZoeTillman twitterde op zaterdag 02-11-2019 om 23:48:24 Latest from @a_cormier_ and @JasonLeopold on the Mueller Memos: Cohen Told Investigators False Congressional Statement Was “Not His Idea” https://t.co/gv71URalk9 reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 19:41 schreef Beathoven het volgende:

[..]

Baldwin zet 'm heel erg goed neer. Helaas is de rest van de cast totaal niet treffend of leuk.

Make Canada America Again: 'The President' comes to Montreal

quote:

Op zondag 3 november 2019 09:16 schreef Hyperdude het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

Gunz and God

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 november 2019 23:45 schreef Hyperdude het volgende:

[..]

Ik waardeer je frequente posts hier, maar ik heb ergens een vaag vermoeden dat Trump niet de enige is in dit topic met een obsessie.

twitter:

PGKroeger twitterde op zondag 03-11-2019 om 18:39:49 Zelfs Hillary..... En Fox meldt dit. https://t.co/nsORoPAAkW reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 3 november 2019 19:43 schreef Mike het volgende:
Je hebt alleen weinig aan zo'n landelijk cijfer aangezien het toch maar weer in een paar staten uitgevochten wordt.

quote:

Op zondag 3 november 2019 19:42 schreef Bluesdude het volgende:

twitter:

PGKroeger twitterde op zondag 03-11-2019 om 18:39:49 Zelfs Hillary..... En Fox meldt dit. https://t.co/nsORoPAAkW[ afbeelding ] reageer retweet

twitter:

BillKristol twitterde op zondag 03-11-2019 om 17:22:35 How large is Trump's base? Well, take a look at the cross tabs at pages 43-44. 41% of registered voters are against impeachment. Of those, 57% say no new evidence could cause them to change their minds. That would put Trump's hardcore base at around 25%.https://t.co/jPubjzpZEA reageer retweet

twitter:

FridaGhitis twitterde op zondag 03-11-2019 om 16:30:24 Inside the poll numbers: the anti-Trump sentiment among those who disapprove of Trump is much stronger than the pro-Trump sentiment among those who approve. The share who feel "strongly" is much higher among those who disapprove. (Fox News Poll) https://t.co/EEax0OhyXd reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 3 november 2019 19:50 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

Een verschil van 10% maak je niet goed.

quote:

Op zondag 3 november 2019 23:15 schreef Arcee het volgende:

[..]

Remember Hillary?

quote:

Op zondag 3 november 2019 23:16 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

Dat verschil was geen 10% maar 2%.

quote:

Op zondag 3 november 2019 23:20 schreef Arcee het volgende:

[..]

Ik dacht dat je op de peiling doelde.

twitter:

atrupar twitterde op zondag 03-11-2019 om 19:20:44 "Why are all of these people listening to this absolutely, totally appropriate call, why didn't they come forward?" -- Trump's new talking point is that if his call with the Ukrainian president was so bad, then why didn't everybody who listened in on it become a whistleblower? https://t.co/JVYWbtWXyg reageer retweet

quote:

Op maandag 4 november 2019 00:02 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Trumps laatste kutsmoes, "it's a scam between the Democrats and the fake news media". Filmpje staat in de tweet.

Hij zei ook nog dat de Democraten voor de media werken maar dat zit helaas niet in dit clipje, heb daar keihard om gelachen! Het is ook zo fucking absurd allemaal.

twitter:

atrupar twitterde op zondag 03-11-2019 om 19:20:44 "Why are all of these people listening to this absolutely, totally appropriate call, why didn't they come forward?" -- Trump's new talking point is that if his call with the Ukrainian president was so bad, then why didn't everybody who listened in on it become a whistleblower? https://t.co/JVYWbtWXyg reageer retweet

Dit is een interessante site: https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/hamilton-dashboard/ kun je de activiteiten zien van de Russische bots.

quote:

According to Cockburn’s source about the seven whistleblowers, there’s more. It is that Kushner (allegedly) gave the green light to MBS to arrest the dissident journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, who was later murdered and dismembered in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. A second source tells Cockburn that this is true and adds a crucial twist to the story. This source claims that Turkish intelligence obtained an intercept of the call between Kushner and MBS. And President Erdogan used it to get Trump to roll over and pull American troops out of northern Syria before the Turks invaded. Cockburn hears that investigators for the House Intelligence Committee know this whole tale and the identities of some of the people telling it. Whether any of is true is another matter but Adam Schiff certainly seems to be smiling a lot these days.

Bron: Spectator

quote:

Op maandag 4 november 2019 09:01 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:

[..]

Wow.

quote:

Op maandag 4 november 2019 09:01 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:

[..]

Wow.

quote:

Op maandag 4 november 2019 09:01 schreef DustPuppy het volgende:

[..]

Wow.

quote:

Op maandag 4 november 2019 09:35 schreef icecreamfarmer_NL het volgende:
Dit kan niet waar zijn.