You have to listen closely, but Giuliani explains the connection succinctly, beginning shortly after the 6:30 mark:
Giuliani traces this back to 2016 when, he states, Obama told the Ukrainians to gather dirt on Trump. Biden was Obama's "tsar" for Ukraine. Biden got the Ukrainian prosecutor fired who was investigating his son's corrupt connections--the prosecutor wouldn't play ball. He wanted to attack corruption on behalf of a sovereign Ukraine. Biden then appointed a prosecutor for Ukraine--there's no other way to put it. That prosecutor was one who would play ball with the Obama administration. The prosecutor then went to work doing the work of the Obama administration. That work was to arrange a successor administration to Obama's, headed by Hillary Clinton. To that end the prosecutor started by dismissing a case against an organization (funded by George Soros) that was manufacturing "information" about Trump and Paul Manafort and feeding it to the DNC, through the instrumentality of an FBI agent who now works for Soros.
Laura challenged Giuliani: Why are you doing this investigating instead of the FBI and DoJ? Rudy's response is telling. He directly attacks the FBI but stays away from DoJ and Barr:
Rudy: "We've lost the FBI and who knows what else."
Laura: "We can't lose the FBI. We have Bill Barr over at Justice. No way we're losing the FBI under Barr."
Rudy: "Their inability to investigate this is astounding. You know how this first came to me? It came to me from this very prominent investigator telling me, for one year they were trying to get this information [Ukraine collusion]. You ask me why I'm doing this? Because the FBI didn't do their job! ... I will show you the statements of five Ukrainians who will tell you, We desperately tried to get the information to the FBI and we were blocked by the [US] ambassador [to Ukraine] who eventually got fired."
This confirms to me that the Barr/Durham investigation is involved in this investigation in a major way, as commenter Unknown has also been maintaining.
I just read the phone call transcript- it really is as Trump described it. There was no pressure of any kind put on Zelensky, and all Trump asked of Zelensky was that he help Barr get to the bottom of the Russia Hoax scandal- an entirely appropriate request given the reality of the Mueller Report part 1. In addition, he pointed out to Zelensky that the Ukranians might be in a better position to answer some of the questions Mueller never answered about the e-mail hack of the DNC since some of the key servers are in the Ukraine (Trump mentions Crowdstrike and their so-called report). Also, he simply points out that Giuliani is a person to get in contact with along with Bill Barr.ReplyDelete
On Joe Biden, Trump simply points out to Zelensky that Biden has been going around bragging about how he got the Poroshenko government to fire a public prosecutor- points out how corrupt this is and that the Ukraine president shouldn't be allowing such things- this is the key point in the conversation in my opinion- it is telling Zelensky that such coercion is corrupt and any reasonable person would have interpreted this as a pure anti- quid pro quo.
But I hafta take another victory lap--it's not only the way Trump described it, it's also the way I described it. Right down to the repeated mentions of Barr, which you point out. This is a total own goal for the Dems.Delete
Robert high fives Mark!!!Delete
Does Giuliani's observations about the FBI suggest that Chris Wray's tenure is, shall we say, I doubt...ReplyDelete
I believe it tells us that Wray is being kept on a very short leash.Delete
I just read the transcript, and the one thing that jumped out at me (besides it being just what Trump said it would be) is the mention of Hillary's server possibly being in the possession of someone in Ukraine. I immediately thought this could be as much about protecting Hillary (and possibly others) as about attacking Trump. Of course, there's the diversion/distraction value as well, but what happens if the server is recovered? Someone with the right skills can sometimes recover data from disk drives that have been "wiped" if the wiping wasn't quite as intensive as it should have been; the magnetic properties of each "bit" are not completely reset after one or two attempts. Residual differences, which can be detected with the proper equipment, can be used to reconstruct the drive's contents. I'd love to see the contents of that drive.ReplyDelete
"I'd love to see the contents of that drive."Delete
And obviously Barr would love to, as well.
Minor correction--they're talking about the DNC server, but it would surely contain reams of Hillary info.
I just happened to walk by a television that was showing CNN News. The scroll bar on the bottom declared that the transcript of the telephone conversation was just a "rough transcript".ReplyDelete
LOL! That means they're already trying to downplay it, knowing that it's an own goal. The transcript is based on note taking, rather than a recording, so it may not be EXACTLY verbatim. However, the note takers will surely be highly skilled, and the transcript will be far from "rough."Delete
Unless there is a standard protocol that such head of state phone calls are not recorded, then there is a recording of this, and this is the transcript of that call. Indeed, the language Trump uses is exactly how the man speaks, while Zelensky's speech sounds like an English translation from Ukrainian- the English is both too precise and too unnatural to have come from Zelensky speaking English himself.ReplyDelete
This could be the construction from notes- I can't discount it, but my suspicion is that the recording is being held back just so that the media and the Democrats can once again go out on a limb and get it sawed off by Trump when he releases the actual recording (or the notes themselves).
Part me suspects the "8 times pressing on Biden" might be counting the four way translations by the interpreters from both sides (Trump to US interpreter into Ukrainian- US interpreter to Ukrainian President- along with the same dynamic with the Ukrainian president's English to Ukrainian interpreter).
I'm sure that's correct--a recording surely exists. Why the WH works this way I have no idea.Delete
I had missed the disclaimer at the bottom of the memo- it does say this is based on the notes taken by the White House Situation Room (probably the collaboration of multiple people).ReplyDelete
So, there may not be a recording at all. In any, case, the problem with the theory that things were left out is laughable- the notes still exist.
Of course it's laughable, but I in the nature of modern tech I hafta believe there's a recording. Also, in the interests of absolute accuracy in case any dispute between heads of state arise from these phone calls. Why they operate with these--admittedly highly accurate--notes .. I'm sure there's a good reason.Delete
By the way, am watching the Bilateral talk between Zelensky and Trump as I write- Zelensky does speak English fairly well, but his speech is definitely stylistically different and not as deep in detail and meaning as was in the memorandum, so I think the phone call was probably largely conducted through interpreters.ReplyDelete
Again, in the interests of accuracy and mutual understanding, I'd have to expect each to use the language they're most confident in.Delete
As I was writing above, I started to remember who Alexander Butterfield was- no excuse for forgetting. There well be no recording devices allowed in the White House allowed for good reasons.ReplyDelete
Also, what are the odds the White House Situation Room staff includes actual stenographers? I would bet the odds are close to 100% if there aren't recordings allowed.ReplyDelete
On a scale of 1-10, that one goes to 11.Delete
The shamelessness of media reporting (here and elsewhere) is why my older brother says the prime time cable "news" programs are the best comedy on TV.ReplyDelete
They keep reporting "gotcha" and it keeps coming up snake eyes, time after time after time.
The Babylon Bee contains more accuracy...
The big question is, can the Dems somehow back away from the cliff's edge?Delete
No. They can't. Are you aware that one grabs a live electrical wire, often he can't let go? The muscles contract. Its' the same with the Dems. They're terrified of being exposed for whom they are and what they are.Delete
Pelosi's best strategy at this point is to simply put a motion before the entire House for a formal vote on opening formal impeachment proceedings. She might still have a majority for denying such a formal inquiry, but she can longer run the fake inquiry- she blundered yesterday with that public statement and the media ran with calling it a formal impeachment inquiry, and the only way to get off the cliff is to have it voted down in House.ReplyDelete
I agree. There's no way to do it gracefully, without looking like the clowns that they are.Delete
That's why I don't think they will, bow out that is. With half the Dem base ready to go full People's Revolutionary Guard on them they have no choice but to keep their foot on gas and hope for an exit ramp before they run out of roadway.Delete
Yet if they lose their "moderates" they lose the House. No good options. They got themselves in this position and serves 'em right.Delete
Rudy seemed really confident on this interview. He and Ingraham must be pretty tight because he ran roughshod over her despite her best efforts. She even seemed somewhat annoyed, even though she probably loved what he was saying.ReplyDelete
Knowing Donald and Rudy, they probably did spring a trap on them. Pelosi must be wishing she allowed the Squad to depose her as the return Speaker. Not that I have one iota of sympathy for her.
Also, Durbin, Leahy, Murphy and another stooge wrote Ukraine last year asking them to investigate the President. These people have no, I repeat, no shame.