Die waren inderdaad soms overdreven, net als de Nobel-prijs. Maar dat vergelijken met de cult van Trump is echt absurd. Alleen al omdat wat jij beschrijft meer een effect was van het einde van Bush. Obama's tweede termijn was echt niet zo.quote:Op maandag 18 november 2019 16:49 schreef Toby56 het volgende:
[..]
Aan Obama zelf heb ik me trouwens nauwelijks geërgerd, aan die Messias-achtige reacties op 's mans persoonlijkheid, verschijning, speeches en plannen echter wel.
Yep.quote:Op maandag 18 november 2019 15:52 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:
[..]
Nixon was in elk geval nog een politicus. Hij had voor hij president werd al een staat van dienst als politicus opgebouwd. Je kunt niet zeggen dat hij onbekwaam was, politiek geschonden, maar niet onbekwaam.
Welnu, Trumps 2e termijn moet nog komen, dus geef die Trump-Cult, net als bij Obama, een 2e kans.quote:Op maandag 18 november 2019 16:55 schreef Fir3fly het volgende:
[..]
Die waren inderdaad soms overdreven, net als de Nobel-prijs. Maar dat vergelijken met de cult van Trump is echt absurd. Alleen al omdat wat jij beschrijft meer een effect was van het einde van Bush. Obama's tweede termijn was echt niet zo.
Chart: Side-by-Side Comparison of Kurt Volker’s vs Other Witnesses’ Testimony in Impeachment Inquirytwitter:rgoodlaw twitterde op maandag 18-11-2019 om 14:56:47 I just published this 50-page Chart.Kurt Volker appears to have lied to Congress. Full stop.The Chart compares what Volker said to what ELEVEN current and former officials have apparently truthfully told Congress in #ImpeachmentInquiry.https://t.co/O8UvNu3LdF reageer retweet
quote:Ambassador Kurt Volker faces a serious credibility problem for having denied knowledge or involvement in President Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani’s efforts to press Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden. He also appears to have lied about a crucial July 10 meeting at the White House and other related matters. Volker faces a serious legal liability problem too. He made these apparent false statements to Congress in his deposition under penalty of law. The Chart below presents detailed information comparing Volker’s testimony to the testimony of at least eleven other current and former U.S. officials whose statements contradict what Volker told Congress.
Volker was included in Ranking Member Devin Nunes’ (R-Ca) final list of minority witnesses for the public hearings on impeachment. He is scheduled to appear on Tuesday afternoon.
On the morning of Oct. 3, Volker was the very first witness to testify in closed session before the three House Committees conducting the impeachment inquiry. Volker would have no way of knowing exactly which of his colleagues would later testify and what they might say. Within hours of the Committees’ announcing a subpoena for Volker, he publicly resigned from his position as Special Envoy to Ukraine. He thus had greater latitude to speak with Congress. Several of his colleagues — including David Holmes, George Kent, Ambassador Gordon Sondland, Ambassador Bill Taylor, and Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman — did not resign.
Now all of their deposition transcripts and others’ testimony as well is publicly available.
Volker’s testimony was unfavorable to the President and Giuliani in many respects. However in other important instances, Volker denied allegations about his own wrongdoing and the existence of the alleged pressure campaign against Ukraine. Sondland’s original testimony (on Oct. 17) was more closely aligned with Volker’s accounts, until Sondland broke from that message and issued a supplemental deposition nearly three weeks later (on Nov. 4).
Comparing Volker’s testimony to other witnesses raises very serious concerns about Volker’s truthfulness before Congress. To be more specific, it appears that Mr. Volker lied to Congress in violation of federal criminal law (18 USC 1001). The most serious instances include his flat denial that the Ukraine “investigations” were discussed in a July 10 meeting at the White House, his denial of his own knowledge or involvement in efforts to urge Ukraine to investigate Biden, his denial of his own knowledge or involvement in a quid pro quo scheme, and his claim that efforts to get Ukraine to make a public statement about the investigations ended in mid-to-late August.
Volker now has a choice to make before he appears before Congress and the public on Tuesday. He might be best advised to invoke his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. Alternatively, he may want to issue a supplemental declaration of his own. Or he could include a “clarification” related to his prior statements during his prepared opening remarks at the Tuesday afternoon hearing.
None of this necessarily casts blame on Volker for his actions on behalf of the United States. It appears he was caught in the middle of a complex problem not of his own making. As a seasoned diplomat he tried to steer the situation toward an endpoint in which Ukraine could meet the demands of the President to maintain U.S. support. As Volker said in his prepared remarks last month, “I therefore faced a choice: do nothing, and allow this situation to fester; or try to fix it. I tried to fix it.” With Congress now in a full blown impeachment inquiry, Volker has a second opportunity to explain with complete candor what really happened over the course of the past several months.
I believe any fair-minded assessment of the record will reach a similar conclusion about Volker’s credibility and legal liability problems. The data presenting the competing testimony of witnesses are provided in the Chart below. It identifies thirteen topics of concern. Please contact us if you think the Chart is missing any significant information favorable or unfavorable to Mr. Volker.
The 60-page Chart is available in two formats as a PDF (here) and as a Scribd file (below).
Chart Side-By-side Comparison of Ambassador Kurt Volker vs Other Witnesses Testimony Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Just Security Final
Joyce Vance trapt elke verdediging vAn Trump onderuit in dit artikel in Time.twitter:JoyceWhiteVance twitterde op maandag 18-11-2019 om 14:25:31 Reupping this. The GOP IS somewhere around the Rudy & the 3 amigos went rogue defense. But ultimately, all Trump will have left is saying even if he did it it’s not impeachable & we know it is. The founding fathers even put bribery in the Constitution. https://t.co/nfjXDK6ynA reageer retweet
Die heb ik niet gezienquote:Op maandag 18 november 2019 16:41 schreef Fir3fly het volgende:
[..]
Net gedaan.
Er zit wel een grammaticale fout in ergens .
Hoppekee!twitter:CBSThisMorning twitterde op maandag 18-11-2019 om 15:09:49 Emails obtained by @CBSNews show that President Trump's nominee for ambassador to the Bahamas was asked by the RNC to donate half a million dollars as his confirmation in the Senate hung in the balance. https://t.co/1m4lHEuX0w https://t.co/xmFvBXCFhD reageer retweet
Geen probleem, even snel in een paar minuten getikt dus je aanpassingen zijn welkom.quote:Op maandag 18 november 2019 17:12 schreef heywoodu het volgende:
[..]
Die heb ik niet gezien
Een paar zinnen heel iets aangepast (de inhoud uiteraard niet), dat Engels (hopelijk goed genoeg) vertaald en nog een zinnetje erbij gezet wat ik in de altijd gezellige Pyongyang Times las. Bedankt weer
Dat komt dan in verkiezingstijd wel heel hard terug, allemaal munitie voor de opponent.quote:Op maandag 18 november 2019 17:21 schreef De_Hertog het volgende:
Zou de nieuwe tactiek zijn om gewoon continue 'impeachable offences' te blijven lekken zodat het onderzoek steeds weer uitgebreid moet worden en nooit af komt?
Ik ben benieuwd hoe lang hij nog meegaat. Zijn departement kotst hem ook uit wegens gebrek aan steun aan zijn eigen officials.quote:Op maandag 18 november 2019 17:16 schreef AnneX het volgende:
..” Trump has fumed for weeks that Mike Pompeo is responsible for hiring officials whose testimony threatens to bring down his presidency. Trump confronted Pompeo last month about what he believed was a lackluster effort by Pompeo to block their testimony...”
https://mobile.twitter.co(...)/1196446726665752577
Narcisten en psychopaten geven toch altijd de schuld aan een ander?
quote:Criticism of Pompeo inside the State Department escalated when he refused to publicly defend Yovanovitch after a reconstructed transcript of the July 25 call revealed Trump disparaged Yovanovitch to Zelenskiy, administration officials have said. Pompeo’s closest aide, Ambassador Mike McKinley, resigned over the secretary’s refusal to defend Yovanovitch.
Testimony from Taylor and others show Pompeo was keenly aware of the concerns his top officials had about Giuliani’s efforts and his handling of Yovanovitch.
“Pompeo is hated by his building,” a person close to the secretary said, adding that he “feels the heat a great deal and feels it’s personal at state.”
President Trump is Damaging Our Military: War Crimes Cases are the Latest Exampletwitter:rgoodlaw twitterde op maandag 18-11-2019 om 17:03:12 As a former special counsel @DeptofDefense, I'm especially grateful for this powerful, sobering pieceAuthor: Colonel @DaveLapanDC(former deputy secretary DHS, senior PA DoD)"President Trump is Damaging Our Military—War Crimes Cases are Latest Example"https://t.co/MwXlYnXgcz reageer retweet
quote:President Donald Trump has once again intervened in military justice cases involving service members convicted or accused of war crimes. His actions, while legally permissible, will undermine command authority, good order and discipline, the military justice system, and relations with U.S. allies and partners. Unfortunately, this is no isolated event or confined only to the military justice system. It continues a pattern of the president taking actions that weaken or damage our military.
By our Constitution, the president serves as commander-in-chief of the armed forces and has wide latitude in his authority to make decisions and order their actions. As long as his orders are legal, that fact is indisputable. However legal his orders may be, one must also consider the consequences of those actions — on our military, our country, and our partnerships and alliances.
The U.S. military is known around the world for its adherence to the Law of War (or Armed Conflict) and for our efforts to hold accountable those who are proven to have violated it. Pardoning or commuting the sentences of those convicted of war crimes, or halting judicial proceedings before they are completed, rightfully raises questions as to our continued respect for, and adherence to, those laws. If the United States can no longer claim to use its own military and civilian courts to adjudicate allegations of war crimes — or other serious offenses — committed by U.S. servicemembers serving in other countries, those governments will likely seek to detain, try and imprison our men and women through their own criminal justice and penal systems. Significantly elevating the risk of such an outcome could have a devastating impact on our military and relations with foreign partners.
While the president’s past and present intervention in war crimes cases poses the most serious threat to the military he professes to love and support, there is a litany of actions he has taken that can collectively hurt the military as an institution as well as those who serve in uniform, and their families. Despite the president’s repeated boasts about how well he treats and supports the military, many of his actions and directives risk causing short- and long-term harm.
Here’s a sample of them.SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.“The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”— Bertrand Russell
Ik zei het al eerder, eens hij zag dat NK hem geen Nobel prijs zou opleveren, gebruikte hij hen om Z Korea af te persen. Hij eist dat ze volgend jaar $4.7 miljard betalen, een verhoging van 400%, voor de VS troepen in Z Korea.quote:Op maandag 18 november 2019 16:20 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
[..]
Zoals iedereen met een beetje verstand al van mijlenver zag aankomen, wordt Trump effe keihard te kakken gezet door Kim.
Bijna twee jaar lang heeft Trump lopen verkondigen hoe geweldig Kim is en hoe beide mannen 'verliefd' werden. Het ging zelfs zover dat Trump een streep zette door de oefeningen met bondgenoot Zuid-Korea.
En wat krijgt hij er voor terug? Een dikke middelvinger van Kim. Man, wat een gigantische afgang.
Of Zuid Korea betaald niet en negeert Trump verder gewoon en de relaties worden genormaliseerd onder zijn opvolger.quote:Op maandag 18 november 2019 18:01 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:
[..]
Ik zei het al eerder, eens hij zag dat NK hem geen Nobel prijs zou opleveren, gebruikte hij hen om Z Korea af te persen. Hij eist dat ze volgend jaar $4.7 miljard betalen, een verhoging van 400%, voor de VS troepen in Z Korea.
Hij hoopte waarschijnlijk dat Kim het spel zou meespelen, niet dus..
Maar Trump heeft opties, hij kan het negeren, of hij kan switchen, zich plots zeer hard opstellen.
De 7th fleet laten patrouilleren om de sancties te enforcen bvb. Er wordt zonder twijfel nog steeds gesmokkeld, bvb door op zee goederen over te laden naar Koreaanse schepen.
In dit geval is nadat het witte huis op de hoogte is gesteld de nominatie ingetrokken. Schimmig van de RNC en deze donateur uiteraard, maar het witte huis wordt hier niet geimpliceerd als ik het artikel goed lees.quote:Op maandag 18 november 2019 17:21 schreef De_Hertog het volgende:
Zou de nieuwe tactiek zijn om gewoon continue 'impeachable offences' te blijven lekken zodat het onderzoek steeds weer uitgebreid moet worden en nooit af komt?
twitter:jeremyherb twitterde op maandag 18-11-2019 om 14:10:10 In a letter to Sen. Johnson, Reps. Jordan and Nunes "reluctantly write to request any firsthand information you have about President Trump’s actions toward Ukraine between April and September 2019." https://t.co/ge93iaul5X reageer retweet
Ik niet. Kan zijn stem niet meer aanhoren Lees het naderhand wel.quote:Op maandag 18 november 2019 16:42 schreef heywoodu het volgende:
[..]
Inderdaad, maar stel dat hij daar wél komt zitten. 10/10 zou kijken
QFT.quote:Op maandag 18 november 2019 16:44 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
[..]
Dan lult hij zichzelf letterlijk de bak in. De man is een pathologische leugenaar, die nog geen drie zinnen kan uitbraken zonder minimaal vier leugens te uiten.
Lol. Hoe vaak staat er "impeachment inquiry" tussen quotes? Stelletje passief agressieve kleuters zijn t ook.quote:Op maandag 18 november 2019 18:33 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Was deze al voorbij gekomen?twitter:jeremyherb twitterde op maandag 18-11-2019 om 14:10:10 In a letter to Sen. Johnson, Reps. Jordan and Nunes "reluctantly write to request any firsthand information you have about President Trump’s actions toward Ukraine between April and September 2019." https://t.co/ge93iaul5X reageer retweet
Forum Opties | |
---|---|
Forumhop: | |
Hop naar: |