Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

skip fox

(19,357 posts)
Mon Sep 30, 2019, 04:49 PM Sep 2019

We need the full word-for-word transcript of the Ukranian call. It will PROVE the quid pro quo.

Toward the bottom of page three of the whistle-blower's complaint he or she writes:

"In the days following the phone call, I learned from multiple U.S. officials that senior White House officials had intervened to 'lock down' all records of the phone call, especially the official word-for-word transcript of the call that was produced—as is customary—by the White House Situation Room."

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/09/26/us/politics/whistle-blower-complaint.html

Since we have the shortened version, can't we force the WH to turn over the full version, one that likely refers to Trump's favor 8 times and is likely more explicit about Trump's quid pro quo which is signaled by the ease with which the WH released the shorter memo-transcript.

The word-for-word transcript may also have Pompeo on it if the Wall Street Journal is right:

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo took part in the Trump phone call with Ukraine's leader, a senior State Department official said https://on.wsj.com/2neDNno

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
We need the full word-for-word transcript of the Ukranian call. It will PROVE the quid pro quo. (Original Post) skip fox Sep 2019 OP
United States v. Nixon 1974 me_not_you Sep 2019 #1
If Dems get the contents of that server, I think it'll be game over. Garrett78 Sep 2019 #2
agreed but, me_not_you Sep 2019 #3
I'm sure Schiff is aware of this. At least I hope so. skip fox Sep 2019 #4
Yep. They gave us 11 minutes of a 30 minute conversation. ElementaryPenguin Sep 2019 #5
 

me_not_you

(75 posts)
1. United States v. Nixon 1974
Mon Sep 30, 2019, 04:53 PM
Sep 2019

"In a unanimous decision, the Court ruled in favor of the United States and against President Nixon. Chief Justice Burger, wrote the opinion for the Court, which concluded that presidents do enjoy a constitutionally protected executive privilege, but that the privilege was not absolute. The Court decided that in this case, the President’s interest in keeping his communications secret was outweighed by the interests of the judiciary in providing a fair trial with full factual disclosure."

https://www.landmarkcases.org/united-states-v-nixon/us-v-nixon-summary-of-the-decision

Given the Nixon case it would be up to SCOTUS.

 

me_not_you

(75 posts)
3. agreed but,
Mon Sep 30, 2019, 06:15 PM
Sep 2019

How that would shake out is unknown. I served in the military and had a working need to access classified information. What is most damning about this Ukraine Scandal is the memo of the call was classified SECERT//ORCON//NOFORN which in the grand scheme of things is a fairly low classification. In contrast the document the Intercept published was TOP SECERT//SI//ORCON/RE.

The system to store this document was even outside of the "Top Secret" (JWICS) network. It makes no sense to store information of a lower lever classification on such a specialized system. Unless....you are trying to cover that stuff up.


White House Presser:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

The Intercept:
https://theintercept.com/2017/06/05/top-secret-nsa-report-details-russian-hacking-effort-days-before-2016-election/

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»We need the full word-for...