CIA's top lawyer made 'criminal referral' on complaint about Trump Ukraine call

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Apr 17, 2009
112,910
38,374
2,250
Canis Latrans
Barr is part of the corruption. The DoJ is broken. The State Department is broken. :( This administration has a record number of temporary appointees, unconfirmed by a Congress, taken no oath of office, and loyal to Trump personally, not the office of the presidency, the Constitution or the country. Career diplomats suddenly recalled for no reason and replaced by idiots. What is happening now is the tip of the iceberg.


CIA's top lawyer made 'criminal referral' on complaint about Trump Ukraine call


WASHINGTON — Weeks before the whistleblower's complaint became public, the CIA's top lawyer made what she considered to be a criminal referral to the Justice Department about the whistleblower's allegations that President Donald Trump abused his office in pressuring the Ukrainian president, U.S. officials familiar with the matter tell NBC News.

The move by the CIA's general counsel, Trump appointee Courtney Simmons Elwood, meant she and other senior officials had concluded a potential crime had been committed, raising more questions about why the Justice Department later declined to open an investigation.

The phone call that Elwood considered to be a criminal referral is in addition to the referral later received as a letter from the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community regarding the whistleblower complaint.

Justice Department officials said they were unclear whether Elwood was making a criminal referral and followed up with her later to seek clarification but she remained vague.

In the days since the anonymous whistleblower complaint was made public accusing him of wrongdoing, Trump has lashed out at his accuser and other insiders who provided the accuser with information, suggesting they were improperly spying on what was a "perfect" call between him and the Ukrainian president.

Read the rest of the article using the link
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Barr is part of the corruption. The DoJ is broken. The State Department is broken. :( This administration has a record number of temporary appointees, unconfirmed by a Congress, taken no oath of office, and loyal to Trump personally, not the office of the presidency, the Constitution or the country. Career diplomats suddenly recalled for no reason and replaced by idiots. What is happening now is the tip of the iceberg.


CIA's top lawyer made 'criminal referral' on complaint about Trump Ukraine call


WASHINGTON — Weeks before the whistleblower's complaint became public, the CIA's top lawyer made what she considered to be a criminal referral to the Justice Department about the whistleblower's allegations that President Donald Trump abused his office in pressuring the Ukrainian president, U.S. officials familiar with the matter tell NBC News.

The move by the CIA's general counsel, Trump appointee Courtney Simmons Elwood, meant she and other senior officials had concluded a potential crime had been committed, raising more questions about why the Justice Department later declined to open an investigation.

The phone call that Elwood considered to be a criminal referral is in addition to the referral later received as a letter from the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community regarding the whistleblower complaint.

Justice Department officials said they were unclear whether Elwood was making a criminal referral and followed up with her later to seek clarification but she remained vague.

In the days since the anonymous whistleblower complaint was made public accusing him of wrongdoing, Trump has lashed out at his accuser and other insiders who provided the accuser with information, suggesting they were improperly spying on what was a "perfect" call between him and the Ukrainian president.

But a timeline provided by U.S. officials familiar with the matter shows that multiple senior government officials appointed by Trump found the whistleblower's complaints credible, troubling and worthy of further inquiry starting soon after the president's July phone call.

While that timeline and the CIA general counsel's contact with the Justice Department has been previously disclosed, it has not been reported that the CIA's top lawyer intended her call to be a criminal referral about the president's conduct, acting under rules set forth in a memo governing how intelligence agencies should report allegations of federal crimes.

The fact that she and other top Trump administration political appointees saw potential misconduct in the whistleblower's early account of alleged presidential abuses puts a new spotlight on the Justice Department's later decision to decline to open a criminal investigation — a decision that the Justice Department said publicly was based purely on an analysis of whether the president committed a campaign finance law violation.

"They didn't do any of the sort of bread-and-butter type investigatory steps that would flush out what potential crimes may have been committed," said Berit Berger, a former federal prosecutor who heads the Center for the Advancement of Public Integrity at Columbia Law School. "I
While that timeline and the CIA general counsel's contact with the Justice Department has been previously disclosed, it has not been reported that the CIA's top lawyer intended her call to be a criminal referral about the president's conduct, acting under rules set forth in a memo governing how intelligence agencies should report allegations of federal crimes.

The fact that she and other top Trump administration political appointees saw potential misconduct in the whistleblower's early account of alleged presidential abuses puts a new spotlight on the Justice Department's later decision to decline to open a criminal investigation — a decision that the Justice Department said publicly was based purely on an analysis of whether the president committed a campaign finance law violation.

"They didn't do any of the sort of bread-and-butter type investigatory steps that would flush out what potential crimes may have been committed," said Berit Berger, a former federal prosecutor who heads the Center for the Advancement of Public Integrity at Columbia Law School. "I don't understand the rationale for that and it's just so contrary to how normal prosecutors work. We have started investigations on far less."

Great article.. So what was "the crime"?? Apparently even BLATANT strong arming of foreign power for favors can be done by just about ANY Congress critter.. Need examples???

I need a crime to give a hoot. Not just some gossip from NBC news...
 
AnyDayMadcow.png
 
24/7

Impeach
Impeach
Impeach

Result

Highest approval ratings to date.

Please keep it up for 5 more years.
 
This just in -

CIA is against being investigated for corruption within the CIA.





Shock!
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #8
Barr is part of the corruption. The DoJ is broken. The State Department is broken. :( This administration has a record number of temporary appointees, unconfirmed by a Congress, taken no oath of office, and loyal to Trump personally, not the office of the presidency, the Constitution or the country. Career diplomats suddenly recalled for no reason and replaced by idiots. What is happening now is the tip of the iceberg.


CIA's top lawyer made 'criminal referral' on complaint about Trump Ukraine call


WASHINGTON — Weeks before the whistleblower's complaint became public, the CIA's top lawyer made what she considered to be a criminal referral to the Justice Department about the whistleblower's allegations that President Donald Trump abused his office in pressuring the Ukrainian president, U.S. officials familiar with the matter tell NBC News.

The move by the CIA's general counsel, Trump appointee Courtney Simmons Elwood, meant she and other senior officials had concluded a potential crime had been committed, raising more questions about why the Justice Department later declined to open an investigation.

The phone call that Elwood considered to be a criminal referral is in addition to the referral later received as a letter from the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community regarding the whistleblower complaint.

Justice Department officials said they were unclear whether Elwood was making a criminal referral and followed up with her later to seek clarification but she remained vague.

In the days since the anonymous whistleblower complaint was made public accusing him of wrongdoing, Trump has lashed out at his accuser and other insiders who provided the accuser with information, suggesting they were improperly spying on what was a "perfect" call between him and the Ukrainian president.

But a timeline provided by U.S. officials familiar with the matter shows that multiple senior government officials appointed by Trump found the whistleblower's complaints credible, troubling and worthy of further inquiry starting soon after the president's July phone call.

While that timeline and the CIA general counsel's contact with the Justice Department has been previously disclosed, it has not been reported that the CIA's top lawyer intended her call to be a criminal referral about the president's conduct, acting under rules set forth in a memo governing how intelligence agencies should report allegations of federal crimes.

The fact that she and other top Trump administration political appointees saw potential misconduct in the whistleblower's early account of alleged presidential abuses puts a new spotlight on the Justice Department's later decision to decline to open a criminal investigation — a decision that the Justice Department said publicly was based purely on an analysis of whether the president committed a campaign finance law violation.

"They didn't do any of the sort of bread-and-butter type investigatory steps that would flush out what potential crimes may have been committed," said Berit Berger, a former federal prosecutor who heads the Center for the Advancement of Public Integrity at Columbia Law School. "I
While that timeline and the CIA general counsel's contact with the Justice Department has been previously disclosed, it has not been reported that the CIA's top lawyer intended her call to be a criminal referral about the president's conduct, acting under rules set forth in a memo governing how intelligence agencies should report allegations of federal crimes.

The fact that she and other top Trump administration political appointees saw potential misconduct in the whistleblower's early account of alleged presidential abuses puts a new spotlight on the Justice Department's later decision to decline to open a criminal investigation — a decision that the Justice Department said publicly was based purely on an analysis of whether the president committed a campaign finance law violation.

"They didn't do any of the sort of bread-and-butter type investigatory steps that would flush out what potential crimes may have been committed," said Berit Berger, a former federal prosecutor who heads the Center for the Advancement of Public Integrity at Columbia Law School. "I don't understand the rationale for that and it's just so contrary to how normal prosecutors work. We have started investigations on far less."

Great article.. So what was "the crime"?? Apparently even BLATANT strong arming of foreign power for favors can be done by just about ANY Congress critter.. Need examples???

I need a crime to give a hoot. Not just some gossip from NBC news...

What was his crime? Haven’t said there was one, yet. That is why it needs to be investigated. And, imo, with holding promised aid in exchange for an investigation into a political rival and the promise of an Oval Office date is as blatant as it gets in strong arming.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #10
Wait a sec....

What is the CIA doing spying domestically?

Why are the liberoids cheerleading for CIA spies and spooks who are clearly operating far outside their designated box?

What in the name of Sam Hill (who was a real person) ever happened to the civil libertarians on the left?
Maybe they are wondering why Trump keeps getting free passes.
 
Wait a sec....

What is the CIA doing spying domestically?

Why are the liberoids cheerleading for CIA spies and spooks who are clearly operating far outside their designated box?

What in the name of Sam Hill (who was a real person) ever happened to the civil libertarians on the left?
Maybe they are wondering why Trump keeps getting free passes.
Or maybe you're intellectually dishonest frauds.....A more likely explanation.
 
Here's your example of hyper partisan hypocrisy in action below for you.. That letter is actually in the Senate.gov archives with the 3 Dem Congress critters signatures on it.. APPARENTLY -- you want to refer them for prosecution as well... AMIRITE???

Here's the Independent "I don't give a flying fuck about Dems or Reps" view on all this.. There are HUNDREDS of things that are highly unethical and seditious that are NOT codified into "House or Senate or Prez Ethics"... And BOTH parties are so severely compromised by playing the loopholes, that NEITHER of them has a leg to stand on with "indignation"... They've been going at this power abuse thingy for so long now -- that EITHER OF THEM can away with anything short of murder. And I wouldn't be surprised if they crossed that bridge in the near future....

Hypocrites: Senate Dems Sent Letter Pressuring Ukraine To Investigate Trump In May 2018


Yes, the very same Democrats who are now supposedly aghast that President Trump asked the president of Ukraine to look into Joe Biden's family corruption, actually sent Ukraine a letter saying "U.S. assistance" was at stake unless the Ukrainian government complied with the bogus special counsel Robert Mueller investigation and conducted their own investigation into the president and his former aid Paul Manafort. Marc Theissen of the Washington Post brought this up yesterday, and after seeing what the president actually said to his call to the newly elected president Volodymyr Zelensky, it looks like the Democrats have nothing but egg on their face.

Here's what Theissen reported Tuesday:

It got almost no attention, but in May, CNN reported that Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) wrote a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe. In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake. Describing themselves as “strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine,” the Democratic senators declared, “We have supported [the] capacity-building process and are disappointed that some in Kyiv appear to have cast aside these [democratic] principles to avoid the ire of President Trump,” before demanding Lutsenko “reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation.”

So, it’s okay for Democratic senators to encourage Ukraine to investigate Trump, but it’s not okay for the president to allegedly encourage Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden?
 
It is an interesting article, but there is no there there. It was NOT a criminal referral, period. They speculate about whether the original communicator considered it a criminal referral? This is bullshit. YOu are talking about a lawyer here. If she intended to start a criminal investigation, she would have been quite clear on the subject.

Her "take" appears to be based on the report of the whistleblower, who took outrageous liberties with the motivations and intentions of President Trump, all of which are categorically denied by the person to whom the President was speaking.

But what would his opinion be worth?

You fucking people are insane. As with Kavanaugh, I'm beginning to think it's all about abortion. Nothing else matters. Any lies, distortion, ethical lapses are justified, because it's all about abortion.
 
Wait a sec....

What is the CIA doing spying domestically?

Why are the liberoids cheerleading for CIA spies and spooks who are clearly operating far outside their designated box?

What in the name of Sam Hill (who was a real person) ever happened to the civil libertarians on the left?

Is it because they are operating illegally in pursuit of a coup?
Yeah, that's it.
 
Here's your example of hyper partisan hypocrisy in action below for you.. That letter is actually in the Senate.gov archives with the 3 Dem Congress critters signatures on it.. APPARENTLY -- you want to refer them for prosecution as well... AMIRITE???

Here's the Independent "I don't give a flying fuck about Dems or Reps" view on all this.. There are HUNDREDS of things that are highly unethical and seditious that are NOT codified into "House or Senate or Prez Ethics"... And BOTH parties are so severely compromised by playing the loopholes, that NEITHER of them has a leg to stand on with "indignation"... They've been going at this power abuse thingy for so long now -- that EITHER OF THEM can away with anything short of murder. And I wouldn't be surprised if they crossed that bridge in the near future....

Hypocrites: Senate Dems Sent Letter Pressuring Ukraine To Investigate Trump In May 2018


Yes, the very same Democrats who are now supposedly aghast that President Trump asked the president of Ukraine to look into Joe Biden's family corruption, actually sent Ukraine a letter saying "U.S. assistance" was at stake unless the Ukrainian government complied with the bogus special counsel Robert Mueller investigation and conducted their own investigation into the president and his former aid Paul Manafort. Marc Theissen of the Washington Post brought this up yesterday, and after seeing what the president actually said to his call to the newly elected president Volodymyr Zelensky, it looks like the Democrats have nothing but egg on their face.

Here's what Theissen reported Tuesday:

It got almost no attention, but in May, CNN reported that Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) wrote a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe. In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake. Describing themselves as “strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine,” the Democratic senators declared, “We have supported [the] capacity-building process and are disappointed that some in Kyiv appear to have cast aside these [democratic] principles to avoid the ire of President Trump,” before demanding Lutsenko “reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation.”

So, it’s okay for Democratic senators to encourage Ukraine to investigate Trump, but it’s not okay for the president to allegedly encourage Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden?
It's always (D)ifferent when their team does it.
 
Barr is part of the corruption. The DoJ is broken. The State Department is broken. :( This administration has a record number of temporary appointees, unconfirmed by a Congress, taken no oath of office, and loyal to Trump personally, not the office of the presidency, the Constitution or the country. Career diplomats suddenly recalled for no reason and replaced by idiots. What is happening now is the tip of the iceberg.


CIA's top lawyer made 'criminal referral' on complaint about Trump Ukraine call


WASHINGTON — Weeks before the whistleblower's complaint became public, the CIA's top lawyer made what she considered to be a criminal referral to the Justice Department about the whistleblower's allegations that President Donald Trump abused his office in pressuring the Ukrainian president, U.S. officials familiar with the matter tell NBC News.

The move by the CIA's general counsel, Trump appointee Courtney Simmons Elwood, meant she and other senior officials had concluded a potential crime had been committed, raising more questions about why the Justice Department later declined to open an investigation.

The phone call that Elwood considered to be a criminal referral is in addition to the referral later received as a letter from the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community regarding the whistleblower complaint.

Justice Department officials said they were unclear whether Elwood was making a criminal referral and followed up with her later to seek clarification but she remained vague.

In the days since the anonymous whistleblower complaint was made public accusing him of wrongdoing, Trump has lashed out at his accuser and other insiders who provided the accuser with information, suggesting they were improperly spying on what was a "perfect" call between him and the Ukrainian president.

But a timeline provided by U.S. officials familiar with the matter shows that multiple senior government officials appointed by Trump found the whistleblower's complaints credible, troubling and worthy of further inquiry starting soon after the president's July phone call.

While that timeline and the CIA general counsel's contact with the Justice Department has been previously disclosed, it has not been reported that the CIA's top lawyer intended her call to be a criminal referral about the president's conduct, acting under rules set forth in a memo governing how intelligence agencies should report allegations of federal crimes.

The fact that she and other top Trump administration political appointees saw potential misconduct in the whistleblower's early account of alleged presidential abuses puts a new spotlight on the Justice Department's later decision to decline to open a criminal investigation — a decision that the Justice Department said publicly was based purely on an analysis of whether the president committed a campaign finance law violation.

"They didn't do any of the sort of bread-and-butter type investigatory steps that would flush out what potential crimes may have been committed," said Berit Berger, a former federal prosecutor who heads the Center for the Advancement of Public Integrity at Columbia Law School. "I
While that timeline and the CIA general counsel's contact with the Justice Department has been previously disclosed, it has not been reported that the CIA's top lawyer intended her call to be a criminal referral about the president's conduct, acting under rules set forth in a memo governing how intelligence agencies should report allegations of federal crimes.

The fact that she and other top Trump administration political appointees saw potential misconduct in the whistleblower's early account of alleged presidential abuses puts a new spotlight on the Justice Department's later decision to decline to open a criminal investigation — a decision that the Justice Department said publicly was based purely on an analysis of whether the president committed a campaign finance law violation.

"They didn't do any of the sort of bread-and-butter type investigatory steps that would flush out what potential crimes may have been committed," said Berit Berger, a former federal prosecutor who heads the Center for the Advancement of Public Integrity at Columbia Law School. "I don't understand the rationale for that and it's just so contrary to how normal prosecutors work. We have started investigations on far less."

Great article.. So what was "the crime"?? Apparently even BLATANT strong arming of foreign power for favors can be done by just about ANY Congress critter.. Need examples???

I need a crime to give a hoot. Not just some gossip from NBC news...

What was his crime? Haven’t said there was one, yet. That is why it needs to be investigated. And, imo, with holding promised aid in exchange for an investigation into a political rival and the promise of an Oval Office date is as blatant as it gets in strong arming.


Got to investigate it in order to find a crime!

Like Pelosi deliriously screeching they had to pass the health care crap so they could find out what's in it.

Democrats are always doing things backwards.
 
Barr is part of the corruption. The DoJ is broken. The State Department is broken. :( This administration has a record number of temporary appointees, unconfirmed by a Congress, taken no oath of office, and loyal to Trump personally, not the office of the presidency, the Constitution or the country. Career diplomats suddenly recalled for no reason and replaced by idiots. What is happening now is the tip of the iceberg.


CIA's top lawyer made 'criminal referral' on complaint about Trump Ukraine call


WASHINGTON — Weeks before the whistleblower's complaint became public, the CIA's top lawyer made what she considered to be a criminal referral to the Justice Department about the whistleblower's allegations that President Donald Trump abused his office in pressuring the Ukrainian president, U.S. officials familiar with the matter tell NBC News.

The move by the CIA's general counsel, Trump appointee Courtney Simmons Elwood, meant she and other senior officials had concluded a potential crime had been committed, raising more questions about why the Justice Department later declined to open an investigation.

The phone call that Elwood considered to be a criminal referral is in addition to the referral later received as a letter from the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community regarding the whistleblower complaint.

Justice Department officials said they were unclear whether Elwood was making a criminal referral and followed up with her later to seek clarification but she remained vague.

In the days since the anonymous whistleblower complaint was made public accusing him of wrongdoing, Trump has lashed out at his accuser and other insiders who provided the accuser with information, suggesting they were improperly spying on what was a "perfect" call between him and the Ukrainian president.

But a timeline provided by U.S. officials familiar with the matter shows that multiple senior government officials appointed by Trump found the whistleblower's complaints credible, troubling and worthy of further inquiry starting soon after the president's July phone call.

While that timeline and the CIA general counsel's contact with the Justice Department has been previously disclosed, it has not been reported that the CIA's top lawyer intended her call to be a criminal referral about the president's conduct, acting under rules set forth in a memo governing how intelligence agencies should report allegations of federal crimes.

The fact that she and other top Trump administration political appointees saw potential misconduct in the whistleblower's early account of alleged presidential abuses puts a new spotlight on the Justice Department's later decision to decline to open a criminal investigation — a decision that the Justice Department said publicly was based purely on an analysis of whether the president committed a campaign finance law violation.

"They didn't do any of the sort of bread-and-butter type investigatory steps that would flush out what potential crimes may have been committed," said Berit Berger, a former federal prosecutor who heads the Center for the Advancement of Public Integrity at Columbia Law School. "I
While that timeline and the CIA general counsel's contact with the Justice Department has been previously disclosed, it has not been reported that the CIA's top lawyer intended her call to be a criminal referral about the president's conduct, acting under rules set forth in a memo governing how intelligence agencies should report allegations of federal crimes.

The fact that she and other top Trump administration political appointees saw potential misconduct in the whistleblower's early account of alleged presidential abuses puts a new spotlight on the Justice Department's later decision to decline to open a criminal investigation — a decision that the Justice Department said publicly was based purely on an analysis of whether the president committed a campaign finance law violation.

"They didn't do any of the sort of bread-and-butter type investigatory steps that would flush out what potential crimes may have been committed," said Berit Berger, a former federal prosecutor who heads the Center for the Advancement of Public Integrity at Columbia Law School. "I don't understand the rationale for that and it's just so contrary to how normal prosecutors work. We have started investigations on far less."

Great article.. So what was "the crime"?? Apparently even BLATANT strong arming of foreign power for favors can be done by just about ANY Congress critter.. Need examples???

I need a crime to give a hoot. Not just some gossip from NBC news...

What was his crime? Haven’t said there was one, yet. That is why it needs to be investigated. And, imo, with holding promised aid in exchange for an investigation into a political rival and the promise of an Oval Office date is as blatant as it gets in strong arming.

Never happened
What else ya got?
 

Forum List

Back
Top