The Ukraine scandal timeline Democrats... don’t want America to see

[Starlight]

And he lays it all out with extensive backup.

I got halfway through reading his long and boring timeline and got bored and gave up. I wasn't sure what I was supposed to be looking for, because neither you nor he explained what your crazy conspiracy theory actually is. Maybe you could explain what this timeline is supposed to be demonstrating?

Also, I'm wondering CP, why you've dived off the deep end into conspiracy theories these days? I don't recall you used to be this crazy / apparently buying into every anti-democratic pro-republican idea ever invented. You seem on a trajectory towards Mountain Man's "Obama's Kenyan Muslim Birth Certificate Killed Vince Foster At Benghazi With Secret Support From All Democrats Who Were In a Pedophile Ring, confirms Breitbart" type of actual insanity. Have you changed your news sources to crazy ones?

[seanD]

I had a read of the Biden interview where he tells the story of how he got the Ukraine prosecutor fired. Biden states that he had received a commitment from Ukraine that they would take action against the prosecutor but hadn't. It's doesn't state whether that commitment was directly related to the aid.

It's said that the firing of the prosecutor was for Biden's personal benefit to protect his son Hunter from investigation. This claim is inconsistent with the facts since Biden could only benefit in the way described if the prosecutor remained.

Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt in 2015 stated that not only did the prosecutor not support investigating corruption but actually undermined legitimate corruption cases. Regarding the Burisma investigation he said:

"the U.K authorities had seized 23 million dollars in illicit assets that belonged to the Ukrainian people. Officials at the PGO's office were asked by the U.K to send documents supporting the seizure. Instead they sent letters to Zlochevsky's attorneys attesting that there was no case against him. As a result the money was freed by the U.K court and shortly thereafter the money was moved to Cyprus".

There's nothing in the timeline that seems to support the conspiracy. If I've missed it please point it out.

It's confirmed that Biden got the prosecutor fired by withholding funds, because he admits this publicly. This isn't in dispute. The dispute is that one side says he did it to stop the investigation of corruption (which is what the prosecutor himself who got fired claimed in a statement) -- the "conspiracy theorist" side -- and the other side saying he did it to move the investigation forward. It was extortion for political purposes one way or the other, so whether it was for good or bad intentions, deserves an investigation to confirm it one way or the other, much like we're seeing the impeachment investigation. Yet MSM is sweeping it underneath the rug -- "nothing to see here" -- before it's even been investigated. Just Biden's involvement alone makes a case for investigation.

Solomon lays out additional suspicious activity -- including official corespondents between parties involved -- that further makes a case for investigation.

[Watermelon]

It shows that Trump's interest in having this sketchy business investigated was well justified.

I'm sorry, I'm trying to be as objective as I can, but I can't see how you could rationally think that this provides justification for an investigation while also holding the position that this impeachment inquiry and the previous Muellar report is/was entirely baseless.

[Mountain Man]

I'm sorry, I'm trying to be as objective as I can, but I can't see how you could rationally think that this provides justification for an investigation while also holding the position that this impeachment inquiry and the previous Muellar report is/was entirely baseless.

I can only assume you're asking because you're not aware of a lot of the background information and nitty-gritty details, and to be honest, it would take too much time and effort for me to explain it all with sources. But to give you a push in the right direction, one of Peter Strzok's minions is currently under investigation for illicitly altering one of the key documents that got the ball rolling on the Russian Collusion Delusion.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...-surveillance/

That's the short version of the story. For the "deep dive" analysis, I recommend the following article:

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...a-application/

[Watermelon]

I can only assume you're asking because you're not aware of a lot of the background information and nitty-gritty details, and to be honest, it would take too much time and effort for me to explain it all with sources. But to give you a push in the right direction, one of Peter Strzok's minions is currently under investigation for illicitly altering one of the key documents that got the ball rolling on the Russian Collusion Delusion.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...-surveillance/

That's the short version of the story. For the "deep dive" analysis, I recommend the following article:

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...a-application/

I don't understand how this is better, the guy is analyzing a new york times article and claiming certain phrases really mean this or that happened. I'm not an expert but isn't this exactly what a conspiracy theory stereotype looks like?

Do you not trust Fiona Hill when said that Russia was definitely behind the election interference and this Ukraine conspiracy?

[Starlight]

I don't understand how this is better, the guy is analyzing a new york times article and claiming certain phrases really mean this or that happened. I'm not an expert but isn't this exactly what a conspiracy theory stereotype looks like?

Seems to be the crazy-right's favorite conspiracy methodology at the moment. Wasn't all that long ago they were doing the same thing with Hillary's emails and saying her staff's referencing to ordering pizza from the local pizza joint were code for running a pedophile ring out of it.

[Watermelon]

Seems to be the crazy-right's favorite conspiracy methodology at the moment. Wasn't all that long ago they were doing the same thing with Hillary's emails and saying her staff's referencing to ordering pizza from the local pizza joint were code for running a pedophile ring out of it.

[…] In particular, while Mr. Horowitz criticizes F.B.I. leadership for its handling of the highly fraught Russia investigation in some ways, he made no finding of politically biased actions by top officials Mr. Trump has vilified like the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey; Andrew G. McCabe, the former deputy who temporarily ran the bureau after the president fired Mr. Comey in 2017; and Peter Strzok, a former top counterintelligence agent.

Notice the contradiction and the parsing: “in some ways he made no finding of politically biased actions“… Some ways? So there are findings of bias, just not in all ways. Notice how they repeat a needed narrative tone, yet simultaneously contradicting their lead paragraph.

If he noticed the "," after "....some ways" then he would've saved himself from writing half the article.

[rogue06]

Finally Graham showing us he's good for something.



Though you've gotta love the MSM's de facto claim it's been "debunked" when it hasn't even been investigated yet.

The New York Times is even acting as gatekeeper savaging any journalist who dare go against party line and investigate any part of it

[firstfloor]

It shows that Trump's interest in having this sketchy business investigated was well justified.

How so? I know that you can put certain words in the same sentence, but what is the story and the facts that support it? I think there’s nothing there and you know it.

[seanD]

The New York Times is even acting as gatekeeper savaging any journalist who dare go against party line and investigate any part of it

Like I said, where's there's smoke there's fire. The relentless insistence that no one investigate and conspiracy theorists for even questioning it is suspicious. Biden claiming Graham would "regret" doing it. Very strange thing for someone innocent to say, and even sounds like a veiled threat.

[firstfloor]

The New York Times is even acting as gatekeeper savaging any journalist who dare go against party line and investigate any part of it

Russian disinformation has infected the Republican Party. Some people are trying to fight back.
If you think there is a real story there - explain it. You won’t be able to. It will run through your fingers like sand.

[seanD]

Russian disinformation has infected the Republican Party. Some people are trying to fight back.
If you think there is a real story there - explain it. You won’t be able to. It will run through your fingers like sand.

Well, apparently the senate disagrees with you. And not only is Graham no great fan of Trump, but he's also rather neutral (if not leaning more towards the establishment left side of the issue) when it comes to the red scare threat and the whole Ukraine situation, so I doubt the left will convince anyone that Graham is a Putin puppet or being influenced by your goofy Russian bot conspiracy. Guess we'll find out though.

[firstfloor]

Well, apparently the senate disagrees with you. And not only is Graham no great fan of Trump, but he's also rather neutral (if not leaning more towards the establishment left side of the issue) when it comes to the red scare threat and the whole Ukraine situation, so I doubt the left will convince anyone that Graham is a Putin puppet or being influenced by your goofy Russian bot conspiracy. Guess we'll find out though.

I DARE YOU TO EXPLAIN YOUR UKRAINE THEORY.
Put up or shut up.

[seanD]

I DARE YOU TO EXPLAIN YOUR UKRAINE THEORY.
Put up or shut up.

I can't explain something that hasn't been investigated yet. The theory that Trump colluded with Russia to get elected was a theory until it was proven bunk after the investigation. I won't go that far to propose theories that haven't been investigated. We know for a fact Biden used money and political weight to get a prosecutor fired that was supposedly investigating a Ukrainian company his son worked for. I'm not so sure that in and of itself is not a political crime. We don't know why exactly because there are two different sides to the story and will hopefully find out when it's investigated.

[firstfloor]

I can't explain something that hasn't been investigated yet. The theory that Trump colluded with Russia to get elected was a theory until it was proven bunk after the investigation. I won't go that far to propose theories that haven't been investigated. We know for a fact Biden used money and political weight to get a prosecutor fired that was supposedly investigating a Ukrainian company his son worked for. I'm not so sure that in and of itself is not a political crime. We don't know why exactly because there are two different sides to the story and will hopefully find out when it's investigated.

That is garbage. Check your facts. THIS IS RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION TO MOVE THE BLAME FOR ELECTION MEDDLING OFF THEM. It is disgraceful that Republicans are running with this.

Lindsey Graham has invited Donald Trump's personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, to testify before the Senate, citing an interest in providing a counterweight to the impeachment inquiry being run by House Democrats.

The invitation was announced Tuesday on Twitter by the South Carolina Republican, with a message in which he appears to reference unfounded allegations made by the president that Joe Biden used his clout as vice president to pressure the Ukrainian government to fire former prosecutor general Viktor Shokin.

"Given the House of Representatives' behaviour, it is time for the Senate to enquire about corruption and other improprieties involving Ukraine," Mr Graham wrote.

He continued: "Therefore I will offer to Mr Giuliani the opportunity to come before the Senate Judiciary Committee to inform the committee of his concerns."

The invitation comes on the heels of Mr Giuliani's frequent claims on national television that Mr Biden had acted inappropriately by pressuring Ukraine to fire Mr Shokin, who was then investigating a company with ties to Hunter Biden, the former vice president's son. At the time, however, Mr Biden was taking part in what was an international consensus between the Obama administration and several western allies that Mr Shokin needed to be removed because he was slowing down anti-corruption efforts.

Mr Graham's interest in interviewing Mr Giuliani was announced just after Gordon Sondland, the US ambassador to the European Union, told House investigators that he would not testify to committees investigating Mr Trump's dealings with Ukraine. Mr Sondland was reportedly instructed by Mr Trump to take a lead role in relations between the US and Ukraine, and Democrats see him as a key witness to what happened between the two countries leading up to the president's July phone call with Ukraine's leader, in which he asked for an investigation into Mr Biden.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a9147706.html