US Ambassador stalked and surveilled by Guiliani associate and Republican Congressional candidate

Ken Rank said:

The now famous dossier was faked....

Click to expand...

Not true in the slightest.

essentialsaltes said:

The chairman of the Connecticut Republican Party has called for Hyde to drop out of the race for the northwestern Connecticut House seat.

"It's not helpful to the President. It's not helpful to other Republican candidates. And it provides an opportunity for Democrats to raise money. It allows the opposition to label all Republicans with these comments," J.R. Romano told CNN on Wednesday.

Click to expand...

Can't help but notice there's no mention over it being immoral and potentially illegal here, just that it hurts the chances of Republicans to get elected / reelected. Not really surprised, but still disappointed.

Norbert L said:

It's about which narrative about the events surrounding the actions involving POTUS is the correct one. There are two narratives when condensed down, one speaks about coercion as you point out and the other speaks towards a legitimate investigation.

The topic of this thread is about "US Ambassador stalked and surveilled by Guiliani associate and Republican Congressional candidate". Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani and Lev Parnas are persons who are being discussed. Is there coercion or is there a legitimate investigation going on?

Click to expand...

Given the posts above, there sure looks to be a legitimate federal investigation into the actions of Donald's personal attorney and his associates.

I paraphrased a statement Glenn Beck made about a conversation he had with Rudy Giuliani about this topic. The video where everybody can hear the exact statement coming out of Glenn's mouth was included for clarification.

Click to expand...

That's great, but compared to the mountains of evidence the claims of someone as lacking in credibility as Beck is kind of irrelevant.

KCfromNC said:

Given the posts above, there sure looks to be a legitimate federal investigation into the actions of Donald's personal attorney and his associates.



That's great, but compared to the mountains of evidence the claims of someone as lacking in credibility as Beck is kind of irrelevant.

Click to expand...

Given the politics in the Province of Ontario Canada, it looks like Joe Biden is guilty of giving an influential job to someone who lacks partiality, his son. The Premier of that province was viewed as lacking impartiality in selecting key positions of power and he had to have those people resign. I could imagine the stink that would occur if our PM had a family relative put in an executive role within a large company that does business here. These actions just north of the border from where I'm from conclude that Joe Biden should be the one that needs investigation.

Given the amount of evidence that supports my, your or any other forum member, our credibility is less known than Glenn's. Just because he tends to be politically partizan towards Republicans mostly shows he lacks credibility with people who lean towards the Democrats.

Norbert L said:

Given the politics in the Province of Ontario Canada, it looks like Joe Biden is guilty of giving an influential job to someone who lacks partiality, his son.

Click to expand...

And we all know how terrible it is for politicians to give their children influential jobs. Donald Trump Jr says so!

hedrick said:

I'd like to think that you're right. But a substantial fraction of the American public is following. So is the Senate, and the courts are being stuffed with people with a similar orientation. It may not be a majority of Americans, but it's enough to be worrisome.

Do you think if Democrats manage to get the White House and Senate, suddenly we're going to return to normal standards (which themselves are too low, in my opinion)?

Click to expand...

I share you concern....and it's particularly troubling to see the "world's most deliberative body" succumb to the ideology that has come to dominate the Republican Party.

In 2012, political scientists Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein published their instant-classic summation of the GOP as “ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.”

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Norbert L said:

Given the politics in the Province of Ontario Canada, it looks like Joe Biden is guilty of giving an influential job to someone who lacks partiality, his son.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone has claimed that Joe Biden gave his son that job. It is entirely possible that Hunter Biden was given that job because his father is Joe Biden, but that's quite different.

hedrick said:

I'd like to think that you're right. But a substantial fraction of the American public is following. So is the Senate, and the courts are being stuffed with people with a similar orientation. It may not be a majority of Americans, but it's enough to be worrisome.

Do you think if Democrats manage to get the White House and Senate, suddenly we're going to return to normal standards (which themselves are too low, in my opinion)?

Click to expand...

Hi hedrick,

If I may throw in my 2¢ worth. I would agree that politics has always been subject to a divisive and disappointing nature for many. I think that's true of any political system. We may hear about it more in the more 'free democratic' nations because people are allowed to express their displeasure, but even in Russia, and as we've just seen in Iran, the people are often at odds with the plans and purposes of their governing institutions. That, I accept and understand. My issue with this particular administration is the posturing and super divisiveness of his rhetoric.

He constantly rails against Democrats and refers to them as some kind of sub-human beings. We've never had that before. Yes, during the ACA debates there was quite a bit of splitting between the two parties, but the name calling and the denigrating, that's just never been a part of our national politics. Democrats make up a good size of the population of this country. While one may not agree with their agenda, stooping to name calling to disparage them as people, isn't acceptable to me. This is what we are constantly hearing now in all corners of political discussions. Any one not in agreement with the great and grand vizir, has to endure such blasphemous name calling and denigration and stand in the spray of presidential spittle, that I just find it terribly sad that we as a nation seem to approve of such behavior.

Many, even among his own party, decry this 'new' method of politicking, but they seem to just be ok with it so long as they believe that they are getting something out of allowing it to continue. I'm sorry, but there are a lot of good people in this nation who can fill the position and do the job of being our national leader, that are more responsible and level headed and respectful of others. My vote will go to one of them. I'm not willing to sell my soul just to have someone make some claim that they'll work on stopping abortions, or make some law to allow prayer back in schools.

I'm pretty confident that God isn't willing to make such a barter either. Every four years, as a nation, we get to make a choice. While I've certainly enjoyed the last 3 years of market gains and a strong economy, I also enjoyed the previous eight years before them, of pretty much the same thing. I therefore know, that there are better natured people who can do the job. I'll be voting for one of them.

There are people like President Obama, President Bush, President Clinton, et.al., who are much, much better statesman who can lead our nation. As far as what we're looking for in law changes...that's the job of the legislature. So let's vote in better legislators if changing laws is what we're after.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

essentialsaltes said:

Perhaps ironically, Ukraine has opened a criminal investigation into this. This is what happens when there is evidence of a potential crime.

Ukrainian officials announced on Thursday that a criminal investigation would be launched into the alleged threats against former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.

Click to expand...

Pompeo has now promised an investigation. [Please be aware the link quotes GOP candidate Robert Hyde's uncouth comments about the ambassador.]

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Friday publicly committed to look into the possible surveillance of former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch -- more than 48 hours after the evidence of potential monitoring emerged and more than 24 hours after Ukraine announced its own investigation into the matter.

"We will do everything we need to do to evaluate whether there was something that took place there," Pompeo told conservative radio host Tony Katz.

"I suspect that much of what's been reported will ultimately prove wrong, but our obligation, my obligation as secretary of state, is to make sure that we evaluate, investigate. Any time there is someone who posits that there may have been a risk to one of our officers, we'll obviously do that," Pompeo said.

Halbhh said:

I'm not a democrat. For me, it was simply Trump's own words, accurately heard, in full context, that makes him unacceptable as a president, to me. The statement he could shoot someone though hyperbole....is nevertheless completely unacceptable to me as a person. I would feel the exact same way about a democrat or a libertarian who said that wording. If you yourself said it, I would tell you you had done wrong to say it, and the same with my family and friends, here.

Click to expand...

I appreciate that. For me, I don't really like him... he's arrogant, he says stupid things usually to get a reaction (it's a New Yorker thing), but when I look at the condition of this country, low unemployment especially among minorities, better deals with China and Canada/Mexico, conservative judge appointments, and a Reagan-esq strength in terms of standing up to tyrants... then I WAY prefer him over ANYTHING proposed by the left. But that's me... everyone is entitled to their own views.

Be blessed.
Ken

Kentonio said:

Standing up to tyrants? Are you being serious?

Click to expand...

Yep. You won't see N Korea do anything on his watch, you won't see Iran actually openly kill Americans...and you won't see him try to appease terrorists with billions in cash payoffs.

Ken Rank said:

Yep. You won't see N Korea do anything on his watch, you won't see Iran actually openly kill Americans...and you won't see him try to appease terrorists with billions in cash payoffs.

Click to expand...

You really need to start actually looking for real news, rather than listening to those who keep repeating the same partisan talking points that aren't grounded in reality.

There was no "payoff." Instead, Obama paid Iran back their own money, for jets they paid for (ordered by the Shah), that we never delivered before the Shah was deposed. More to the point, he did it before the World Court (where the case was being heard) ruled us to pay back the money -- and would have likely ordered us to pay double that amount or more. Additionally, he paid it back as a sweetener to get Iran to sign the multi-nation pact that they would not develop nuclear weapons, one that allowed us to send inspectors to ensure they were abiding by the treaty.

Trump, as we know, dropped out of that deal. And, Iran is now looking to build nuclear weapons -- and Trump, since he can't ask for inspections, has pressured (and not in a good way) our allies that didn't drop out of the treaty, to push Iran to abide by that treaty; again pointing to the fact that Trump has not been able to make any type of deal with Iran.

As for Iran not openly killing Americans, then why did we kill Soleimani -- Iran has had no issue launching attacks against the US, even if they were hidden as terror attacks. Additionally, Iran did openly bomb one of our bases, attempting to kill US military personnel. While they were unable to kill any, they did wound some, and they did attempt to do it openly. In fact, you could claim it was Trump that "backed down" since he did not respond to the missile attack.

As for North Korea, Trump most definitely did "pay them off." Kim has been wanting a photo op for with a US president since he took over from his father -- no president has been willing to give him that photo op without a solid agreement being made. Trump not only made no real agreement, much less a solid one, he actually gave things up (such as the annual joint military exercises between US and South Korean forces) without getting anything of substance in return.

North Korea has not stopped working on developing new missiles and nuclear weapons. Yes, they did have a setback that is unrelated to Trump and the US -- an explosion at their primary nuclear weapons research facility. But that only slowed the North Koreans down, they did not stop their work.

As for the missiles, yes, they quit doing range testing on one of their missiles. Again, the reason has little to do with Trump, instead it is because they are now working on a longer range missile -- one that could threaten much of the US. So they quit launching their old missiles, have been taking down those launch pads, and are rebuilding them to fit the new missiles that appear to be close to ready for testing.

SimplyMe said:

You really need to start actually looking for real news, rather than listening to those who keep repeating the same partisan talking points that aren't grounded in reality.

Click to expand...

You know exactly zero about me other than what little I have shared. You don't need what I read, what my background is, who I am close to, etc. Don't ever make an assumption and then write the first chapter of a book trying to correct somebody else. I do appreciate your time though.

Ken Rank said:

You know exactly zero about me other than what little I have shared. You don't need what I read, what my background is, who I am close to, etc. Don't ever make an assumption and then write the first chapter of a book trying to correct somebody else. I do appreciate your time though.

Click to expand...

You are right, I know absolutely nothing about you. But forgive me for trying to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you weren't intentionally lying about the topic and not just uninformed, working off of Republican spin on the topic.

Ken Rank said:

You know exactly zero about me other than what little I have shared. You don't need what I read, what my background is, who I am close to, etc. Don't ever make an assumption and then write the first chapter of a book trying to correct somebody else. I do appreciate your time though.

Click to expand...

Nice attempt to avoid the point...

Ken Rank said:

You know exactly zero about me other than what little I have shared. You don't need what I read, what my background is, who I am close to, etc. Don't ever make an assumption and then write the first chapter of a book trying to correct somebody else. I do appreciate your time though.

Click to expand...

“What little you have shared” suggests some pretty significant misunderstandings on your part.

Ken Rank said:

but when I look at the condition of this country, low unemployment especially among minorities

Click to expand...

When I see claims like this, I can't help but think of the Republican Senate's conclusion about 2016 election interference :

Senate Report: Russians Used Social Media Mostly To Target Race In 2016