Rudy Giuliani was fired-up when he appeared on Fox News to discuss the story of Joe Biden’s influence campaign toward Ukraine; and how the media are covering-up the most explosive aspects to the story.
[Background] As I’m wiping down the white-board to outline the corrupt purposes, intents and connections, suddenly it becomes obvious. The Ukraine story is Obstruction 2.0.
To assemble a quick elevator explanation of the Muh Russia obstruction construction, and to better understand the end goal of the political objective which encompassed the use of the FISA court, CTH previously said:
To get impeachment, they needed obstruction. To get obstruction, they needed an investigation. To get the investigation, they needed evidence. To change dossier from oppo-research to evidence they needed a FISA. To get a FISA they needed a target. The target was Carter Page.
While assembling the more recent deployment of Adam Schiff’s Ukraine story, I recognize something familiar:
To get impeachment Schiff needs obstruction. To get obstruction, Schiff needs an investigation. To get an investigation Schiff needs evidence. To change political innuendo into evidence, Schiff needs a ‘whistle-blower’. To use a ‘whistle-blower’ they need a report… And guess where we are?
In the 2016/2017 Muh Russia operation we notice the same general cast of characters were involved. •Embeds in the intelligence apparatus; •Lawfare allies -inside and outside government- constructing the narrative for media absorption and distribution; and •politicians working to utilize their constructs.
(more…)
Fishy… Senator Lindsay Graham, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo to discuss issues related to Iran, Ukraine and the ongoing DOJ/FBI investigation by IG Michael Horowitz.
Regarding the IG report, again Ms. Bartiromo noted congress doesn’t call Mr. Horowitz to ask questions about his report on James Comey… that specifically led to criminal referrals for the former Director of the FBI?
In what appears to be an effort to extract Ukraine from the toxic environment of American media fake political news, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko discusses the phone call between President Donald Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Minister Vadym Prystaiko was a participant in the discussions between the U.S. and Ukraine and has specific knowledge of the phone call. Minister Prystaiko says the phone call was long, friendly and covered a variety of important issues. There was no undue pressure or “coercion” from U.S. President Donald Trump. WATCH:
Earlier today President Trump delivered a series of tweet statements and videos highlighting how the media is spinning their “whistleblower” coverage to protect Sleepy Joe Biden from his corrupt endeavors to financially benefit his family.
President Donald Trump also shared a few videos to give context to the story:
(more…)
Well, well, well… the media cannot say President Trump didn’t try to warn them about throwing fake-news rakes in front of their narrative parade – then wondering why they keep getting black-eyes. Here we go, the details begin to surface.
With more reporting by John Solomon, cited and attributed to on-the-record officials in the State Department and Ukraine, a much more clear picture emerges. In reality, and unfortunately as expected, the fulsome picture is 180° divergent from the media narrative.
The government of Ukraine under both Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, and now President Volodymyr Zelensky, had been trying to deliver information about Obama officials and Democrat party officials (DNC on behalf of Hillary Clinton) requesting the government of Ukraine to interfere in the 2016 election.
Both Poroshenko and Zelensky administrations had tried, unsuccessfully, to get information to current U.S. officials. U.S. State Department officials in Ukraine were refusing to give visa’s to Ukrainian emissaries because they did not want the damaging information sent to the President Trump administration.
Failing to get help from the U.S. State Department, the Ukranians tried a workaround, and hired a respected U.S. lawyer to hand deliver the documentary evidence directly to the U.S. Department of Justice. The contracted American lawyer hand-delivered the information to the U.S. Department of Justice in New York.
(more…)
The mysterious “whistleblower” case now looks like a coordinated Democrat effort to block any investigation of presidential candidate Joe Biden for corrupt pressure on Ukraine to drop the investigation of Burisma, an energy company operating in the country, on which his son Hunter Biden was a board member.
In March 2016, then Vice-President Joe Biden warned Ukraine that $1 billion in loan guarantees would be withheld by the U.S. unless they replaced Viktor Shokin, the prosecutor general who was investigating Hunter Biden. Ukraine did remove Shokin, and the prosecution was dropped. It looks like a clear case of a quid-pro-quo.
However, as things are starting to shake out, the current obfuscation to protect Joe Biden is President Trump asking Ukraine’s new president Volodymyr Zelensky to take another look at the issues surrounding the former government’s decision to fire the Ukrainian prosecutor. This is presumably the call concerning to the whistleblower. To wit, democrats see this as Trump asking Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 election.
Washington Post – A whistleblower complaint about President Trump made by an intelligence official centers on Ukraine, according to two people familiar with the matter, which has set off a struggle between Congress and the executive branch.
John Solomon has an interesting report at The Hill documenting the special counsel attempting to leverage a Russian oligarch to deliver false testimony for their fabricated case against Donald Trump. What Solomon outlines is gross prosecutor misconduct.
The basic elements of the construct are described in the first two minutes of this radio interview video. WATCH/LISTEN:
Now that President Trump has officially designated the Declassification Memorandum we can review the specifics for process, content and timing. Our previous research led to a set of expectations for the directive. Now, that we have the directive in hand, we gain increased clarity of purpose.
♦ First, President Trump has assigned ownership of the Directive to U.S. Attorney General William Barr. This part was predictable because the purpose of declassification would be to facilitate a DOJ review of how the intelligence apparatus was used in the 2016 election.
Additionally, because the DOJ review encompasses intelligence systems potentially weaponized in 2016 for political purposes and intents, President Trump carries: (a) declassification authority; but also: (b) an inherent conflict. In this DOJ endeavor candidate Trump would have been the target of corrupt agency activity; and therefore would be considered the target/victim if weaponization were affirmed by evidence.
To avoid the conflict President Trump designates the U.S. Attorney General as arbiter and decision-maker for the purposes of declassifying evidence within the investigation:
…”The Attorney General has also been delegated full and complete authority to declassify information pertaining to this investigation, in accordance with the long-established standards for handling classified information.” (link)
Additionally, AG Bill Barr does not need to assemble the intelligence product for approval by the executive (Trump). Instead the office of the president is granting the AG full unilateral decision-making as to each product being considered for declassification.
This is a huge amount of trust from the President to the Attorney General, and a big responsibility for William Barr:
(more…)
Earlier this afternoon President Trump welcomes Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán to the White House for bilateral discussions. During an oval office press availability both leaders answered questions from the media. [Video and Transcript]