It's IN THERE. He LEANED on the president of Ukraine. IT'S...IN...THERE.

[Miles Archer]

Trump's camp is spinning it as "nothing to see here, folks."

And Trump is just...fucking...LEANING on him.

He mentions Barr, Giuliani, "I'd appreciate whatever you can do..."

What part of IT'S IN THERE does not "validate the argument?"

[uponit7771]

1. Kristen Welker, " ... the areas are grey (sic) ..." WTF !?!?! MSM continually enables Trump

[Miles Archer]

2. Yeah, I heard that..."It's a grey area, which is where we find ourselves now..."

He's asking the president of Ukraine to "see what he can do" by teaming up with Barr and Giuliani.

And, as has been said on numerous occasions, there does not have to be an EXPLICIT quid pro quo..just the INTENTION...and it's IN THERE.

[uponit7771]

3. +1,I don't know WTF is wrong with some of these people, they're the height of laziness

[customerserviceguy]

6. Was it gray

when Joe Biden got the prosecutor of Hunter Biden's company fired?

This whole thing disturbs me, it puts us at the mercy of relying on Ukrainians to bail us out. As Admiral Ackbar would say, "It's a trap!"

[uponit7771]

10. That's a right wing talking point, why are you repeating that here? tia

Joe Biden didn't "get him fired" it was the policy of the US state dept and the EU to fire that prosecutor and you know it ... please don't repeat winger shit here like we don't know what's up

[customerserviceguy]

11. Read some mainstream news today

it's all over the pages of websites about Biden getting this prosecutor fired. That's why Trump did this, he wanted to sandbag Joe Biden on the way to the nomination, because that's who he fears the most.

It's a trap.

[uponit7771]

13. It's not correct that it was Biden that got the Ukrainian IG removed, it was state dept policy & EU

... policy that the IG be removed because he wasn't investigating corruption enough.

One of the investigations the IG was supposed to be doing was in a company that Hunter Biden was a board member of ... that did not stop his father from removing the IG for not investigating said company.

Biden is the one who said they'd hold funds until the IG was let go, that wasn't Biden's policy alone as suggested by the right.

[customerserviceguy]

14. It doesn't take long

to find video of Biden trying to take credit for it.

Clearly what Trump is trying to do is equate Joe and Hunter Biden with what Paul Manafort did in Ukraine enough so that mushy middle voters will simply say, "They all do it."

[uponit7771]

15. True, they'll have to muddy the water and lie about what Biden was doing

[customerserviceguy]

16. That's what Trumpsters do best

They get as many people as possible to believe that all politicians are the same, so you may as well go with the one who is best for your own pocketbook. The strong economy is the one thing that Trump's got going for him.

When auto workers feel confident enough to strike, then you know that there's a widespread feeling that things are good again.

[ecstatic]

4. Dump and Ghouliani already confessed on national TV,

multiple times.

Still, I'm intrigued that the notes released today capture the crime as well.

Makes me wonder if someone accidentally (or purposefully) released the real notes.

Maybe some pundits had early access to the doctored version and had already prepared talking points for that version?

[Hortensis]

5. Lawfare has what looks like a very complete timeline

going back to 2014 revolution and overthrow of its corrupt Russia-aligned government Ukraine's overthrow, listing the Republicans' various stagings for one of their future scandal-gates if Biden runs for president, including book writings, etc., up through the current events.

A Timeline of the Trump-Ukraine Scandal
https://www.lawfareblog.com/timeline-trump-ukraine-scandal

[rainin]

7. The truth is worse.

We know he's trying to distract with a version that is less damaging. We know how he operates. In the past, the media moves on and the story that persists in the minds of people is the one he controlled.

We have to stay on this story.

[dalton99a]

8. +1

[Politicub]

9. If there is a transcript, there should be a recording.

Unless a court reporter were in the room, there's no way someone could type up a transcript while the call was happening.

And if there was a transcriptionist in the room, then I would imagine this person has been privy to more than just this call.

I want to hear the recording. We need to hear the tone of his voice, and it's the only way to validate this document's fidelity.

[maxsolomon]

17. Last night on LO'D, Obama's transcription director explained how it works

1. There aren't any recording since Nixon.
2. 3 transcribers listen in and try to write it down verbatim.
3. Then they get together and fill in each other's gaps.
4. Then someone with specialized knowledge of the topics discussed reads it to make sure it is accurate to the policy or specifics being discussed.

There probably isn't a recording.

[Politicub]

18. Good to know.

Thank you.

So, the three transcribers could possibly be three witnesses to what was said?

[maxsolomon]

19. I dunno. I'd thnk they're like translators - held to confidentiality.

If Asshole hasn't decimated that department, I'd be shocked.

[leftstreet]

12. Did he threaten to break his legs? No? EXONERATED!