Saturday, September 21, 2019

UPDATED: The State Of The "Whistleblower" Foofaraw

I've been occupied today. Here is a response I just wrote to commenter Cassander:

It appears that the big issue is that the Obama appointed ambassador to Ukraine was refusing to do her job and was blocking Ukraine officials from entering the US (2018) to discuss this matter--the Biden investigation--with US officials.

Paul Mirengoff, citing Never Trump and one week presidential candidate David French, finds something improper about Trump's personal lawyer, Giuliani, getting involved, supposedly at the request of the State Dept:

However, John Solomon--who has spoken with persons who were personally involved--says that Giuliani's involvement was more complicated than people like David French think.

The Ambassador to Ukraine was yanked ahead of schedule (5/2019), apparently after stepping in in a big way in the Ukraine elections--demanding that the Ukraine anti-corruption prosecutor be fired.

So it seems that normal State Dept. functioning wasn't happening, due to Obama holdovers, and that may explain Ukraine reaching out to people who could communicate with the US government for them, since normal channels were being blocked.

ADDENDUM: This illustrates that ever since the US sponsored coup in Ukraine (2014) our relations with that country have been anything but normal, beginning with the Obama/Clinton use of Ukraine to try to smear Trump. The abnormal relations continued after the election with the Obama appointed ambassador's very unusual--even very suspicious--actitivies.

The bottom line appears to be that Trump will emerge pretty much unscathed, but that Biden won't. And that once again we have received confirmation that Ukraine is at the center of the Russia Hoax.

UPDATE: Not so much an update as an addendum. Don Surber let's loose in enjoyable fashion: Democrats have impeached themselves. Here's how he starts off--but he keeps going:

The Democrat Party began the week by demanding the impeachment of Justice Brett Kavanaugh over an incident 30 years ago that the alleged victim does not recall. The Democrat Party ended the week by demanding the impeachment of President Donald John Trump because he may have said something to a foreign leader that was heard third-hand by a "whistle blower." 
In 1972, Democrats lost the presidency in a 49-state landslide because they called for taxing everything. 
They still do, but now they also want to impeach everyone and anyone who disagrees with them. The Queen of Hearts in Alice's Adventures in Wonderland shouted "Off With His Head" about someone every minute or so. She would be part of the Democrat Party's moderate wing today.


  1. Paul Mirengoff is the nasty in the punch bowl over at PJ Media. He has never liked/approved of/supported PDJT, and never fails to try to undermine him. His consistency makes him stick out like a sore thumb. The others - especially John Hinderaker - are pretty interesting at times. Mirengoff is just a dull resister… (Surber is a gem.)

    1. I'm doing final editing on a post re Mirengoff's attacks on Trump. Should be done soon.

    2. I respectfully disagree with Bebe. I read Powerline everyday and I would not call him a NeverTrumper. I think Mirengoff tries to call balls and strikes. That doesn't mean that I agree with his strike zone. But he has supported the President many times. Unlike, say, David French and Kevin Williamson.

      John Hinderaker, Scott Johnson and Steve Hayward are generally favorably disposed to DJT but they criticize him, too.

    3. My recollection is that he was certainly NeverTrumpish for most of the campaign. I agree that he does try to be fair, but his rather uncritical use of David French in this context is IMO pretty questionable and reveals a definite bias to the view that Trump is basically a yahoo. My own view is that Trump in person is a lot more sophisticated than most people imagine.

    4. I agree with your thoughts about DJT being more sophisticated than most people imagine.

  2. The problem when reacting to all stories about "alleged" Trump conduct is that they are reported omitting crucial information, i.e. specific details, background, in order that the story reflects Trump in the worst possible light. Facts inconvenient to The Narrative will always be ignored.

    It's as if these stories are told in reverse.
    --Trump reportedly said something nefarious, says whistleblower.
    --Congress wants tapes/transcript.
    --WH says no.
    --Whoa! Must be scandal. WH in full non-cooperate with Congressional investigators.
    --Conversation was about aiding Ukraine investigate a matter.
    --Whoa! Must've been quid pro quo. WH malfeasance!
    --Nope. Nothing promised in return.
    --Actually, asking Ukraine for cooperation re Biden.
    --Whoa! Investigating a political rival is verboten!
    --Nope. Ukraine reached out to State Dept.

    And on it goes, like peeling an onion, layer after layer, all while the knife lies ready to cut through the whole mess.

    1. The media relies on the readers’ not going far beyond the headline, so they put the worst in a clickbait headline. They know the public well enough to know that many will stop there, or read maybe one paragraph or so, so any details that might provide background, context, or tend to counter the headline are buried way, way down - or omitted entirely.

      Updates, corrections, etc., etc., show up later - if ever - in the inside pages. No big headlines.

      They know exactly what they are doing.

    2. But it seems the public has caught on to some extent and increasingly assumes it's all fake.