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

crickets

crickets's Journal
crickets's Journal
November 2, 2019

Welp, yesterday's headlines

that impeachment charges 'might broaden beyond Ukraine' sound a bit quaint now. This is treason, plain and simple.

'Wrap it up before the holidays!' Not happening. Anyone who was hoping for pardons if they got caught was kidding themselves because that isn't going to happen either. Thank goodness a pack of buffoons were in charge of this mess. Cleaning up is going to be long and bloody.

What a nightmare.

November 2, 2019

Just the paragraph I was going to post

This a long, well written article that lays out the entire Ukraine mess very well, with pertinent Mueller investigation information included. If you wanted one article to give a great overview of the whole situation, this would be the one.

If it were necessary to pick the most important paragraph, especially given how chilling it is, that one [points up to tableturner's post] would be it.

My question is: isn't doing a hatchet job on our own intelligence services a a bit... disloyal to our country?

November 1, 2019

Yep. Brazenly out in the open in more ways than one.

VMware on White House Cybersecurity: ‘The Night’s Watch Is Very Thin’

The internal memo, which warns that “the White House is posturing itself to be electronically compromised once again,” comes after at least a dozen high-level cybersecurity officials have resigned or been pushed out of office, Axios reports.

Dimitrios Vastakis, a senior White House cybersecurity director, wrote the Oct. 17 memo, which also served as his resignation letter. He previously worked in the Office of the Chief Information Security Officer (OCISO), which the Obama administration established in 2014 following a breach of an unclassified White House network by Russian hackers.

In July, the Trump administration dissolved the OCISO and gave its tasks to the Office of the Chief Information Officer.

Axios also reports that the Trump administration is trying to force out these senior-level cybersecurity staff — especially those hired under Obama — and sources familiar with the changes said this could leave the White House vulnerable to a “network compromise.”
November 1, 2019

Sure seems like the people who wanted to 'wrap this up before the holidays'

are dragging their feet. It takes as long as it takes, and if they insist on dragging it out, fine. More time to make themselves look bad, more time to get the public informed and ready to kick them to the curb.

As frustrating as they are, the stalling tactics are going to bite Kupperman, McGahn, & co rather than help them.

October 31, 2019

Zuckerberg has so much money now, I wonder if it's just about $$ any more.

I think he gets a charge out of power. He likes being famous and important (the reasons why don't bother him at all) and he really wants to think that, as Facebook had a major role in throwing the 2016 election, if things follow precedent he therefore controls the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.

In a word, sociopath.

October 31, 2019

Data point re Robert Livingston mentioned in WaPo article

His lobbying firm, Livingston Group, represents former Ukraine prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko, as well as Association of Enterprises UKRMETALURGPROM, a steel-related trade group, and Innovative Technology & Business Consulting, a group related to Tymoshenko, both based in Ukraine.

Given that information, I just can't imagine why Livingston might have any reasons to want a nonpartisan career diplomat out of the way...

October 31, 2019

The carryover of nonpartisan State Dept staff is their strength

Of course staff stays from one president's tenure to the next. They are supposed to, in order to provide depth and continuity to policy. Of course there are those people who would have to actually care about policy depth and continuity in order to appreciate it, sigh.

https://www.npr.org/2019/10/30/774552056/read-christopher-andersons-written-testimony-in-impeachment-inquiry

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/politics/Impeachment-Inquiry-Read-State-Dept-Ukraine-Experts-Catherine-Croft-Christopher-Andersons-Opening-Statements-564093241.html

edit to add:
State Dept. officials offer new details about Trump’s shadow diplomacy with Ukraine [with good photo]
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/30/state-department-trump-shadow-diplomacy-ukraine-061641

K&R for visibility.

October 30, 2019

Take it up with the Constitution, Kenny

Along with wanting to join in on all the impeachment pooh-poohing, the real point he wanted to slip in was this:

A “conflict of interest is that the speaker of the House is guiding this process when she is third in succession,”


He's telegraphing how weak Pence's position is. He sees the downfall coming, but because he is just another 'party before country' Republican, he just. can't. stand. it.

Nobody else made the choices that led these clowns to destroy themselves. Nobody forced them to compromise themselves or their country, and anyone who currently finds themselves in a situation where they now feel forced to continue these crimes has put themselves there. Disentangling the web of criminals and their offenses is all being handled aboveboard and by the book.

One more time: if you don't like it, take it up with the Constitution, Kenny. Better yet, sit down and be quiet while the adults handle this mess.

October 30, 2019

Vindman's testimony dovetails with that of Fiona Hill

Apologies NYT is behind a paywall, but the gist is here:

OCT23 White House Aides Feared That Trump Had Another Ukraine Back Channel - Senior national security officials grew concerned about Kash Patel, a colleague who had been involved in Republicans’ efforts to undermine the Russia investigation.

Fiona Hill, the National Security Council’s former senior director for Eurasian and Russian affairs, testified to House investigators last week that she believed Mr. Patel was improperly becoming involved in Ukraine policy and was sending information to Mr. Trump, some of the people said.

Ms. Hill grew alarmed earlier this year when an aide from the White House executive secretary’s office told her that Mr. Trump wanted to talk to Mr. Patel and identified him as the National Security Council’s “Ukraine director,” a position held by one of Ms. Hill’s deputies. The aide said Mr. Trump wanted to meet with Mr. Patel about documents he had received on Ukraine.

Ms. Hill responded by asking who Mr. Patel was. While the aide from the executive secretary’s office did not state explicitly that Mr. Patel sent the Ukraine documents to Mr. Trump, Ms. Hill understood that to be the implication, according to a person familiar with her testimony.

Mr. Patel’s apparent communications with the president prompted Ms. Hill to raise concerns with her superiors, including John R. Bolton, then the national security adviser, that Mr. Patel was meddling outside his portfolio. As early as May, Ms. Hill had begun discussing with colleagues her concerns about whether Mr. Patel was running a shadow effort on Ukraine at the White House, according to four people briefed on the discussions.
[snip]

Mr. Patel joined the National Security Council in February and began getting involved in Ukraine matters in April, as Mr. Giuliani pushed the Ukrainian government to discredit evidence against Paul Manafort, Mr. Trump’s former campaign chairman. It was not clear who hired him.


It's becoming clear now that Devin Nunes is likely responsible for 'hiring' Patel.

The 'position held by one of Ms. Hill’s deputies' that Patel usurped would be that of Lt Col Vindman.

Unbelieveable. A rogue group of people just pushed the real staff out of the way and started freestyling. And we're all just supposed to be okay with this?
October 30, 2019

It's a long shot, but I agree that enough in the Senate

may come to their senses to vote to convict, depending on just how bad the public hearings are.

I have come to believe that the 'vote in secret and he'd be convicted' idea is a trap, a trial balloon for trickery. The anonymous whispers claim a near sure thing, but secrecy would give them all cover to vote away Trump's crimes without being held accountable. I do not trust it.

A lot can change once the proceedings are being televised. If Schiff & co can keep a tight but fair reign on the proceedings, it could get really bumpy, really quickly for Trump. And the fallout for Rudy and Barr, whee!

I'm on the 'wait-and-see' fence, too. We'll see.

Profile Information

Gender: Female
Hometown: Georgia
Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 25,983
Latest Discussions»crickets's Journal