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

[OKTexas]

I'm asking you to provide where the missiles are part of the package....financially.

What "package"? My understanding is that it was MONEY appropriated by Congress. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky mentioned in the transcript that he was about ready to buy Javelin missiles - then Trump reminded him that a "favor" was required, "though".

Just where did you get your understanding.....I keep coming back to that. The wording from Trump was NOT that a favor was "REQUIRED".

It's called quid pro quo. It will all be spelled out clearly in the articles of impeachment. Stay tuned...

It would be untrue
There will be no impeachment
There are not 217 votes to move forward
That's what we call a fact.

It's actually 218 - and last I heard they have at least 225.

For an inquiry, not impeachment.

.

 

[Lakhota]

Read the transcript of Trump's call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

I'm asking you to provide where the missiles are part of the package....financially.

What "package"? My understanding is that it was MONEY appropriated by Congress. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky mentioned in the transcript that he was about ready to buy Javelin missiles - then Trump reminded him that a "favor" was required, "though".

Just where did you get your understanding.....I keep coming back to that. The wording from Trump was NOT that a favor was "REQUIRED".

It's called quid pro quo. It will all be spelled out clearly in the articles of impeachment. Stay tuned...

Damn, I didn't think they would allow shits parity into the articles of impeachment. Am I wrong?

.

I just recently took you off ignore - but I'm reconsidering. Try to show some degree of respect for the thread topic.

 

[Billiejeens]

Read the transcript of Trump's call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

I'm asking you to provide where the missiles are part of the package....financially.

What "package"? My understanding is that it was MONEY appropriated by Congress. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky mentioned in the transcript that he was about ready to buy Javelin missiles - then Trump reminded him that a "favor" was required, "though".

Just where did you get your understanding.....I keep coming back to that. The wording from Trump was NOT that a favor was "REQUIRED".

It's called quid pro quo. It will all be spelled out clearly in the articles of impeachment. Stay tuned...

Damn, I didn't think they would allow shits parity into the articles of impeachment. Am I wrong?

.

HA!
there are no articles
They do not have the votes

 

[Care4all]

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?

Are you sure about that? They threatened Ukraine? Did they withhold money? Dangle the promise of a state visit?

Trump said they threatened. And in this hyperpartisan age, Trump plays by different rules and is judged by different rules apparently.

Instead of relying on Town Hall’s interpretation, here is the actual letter: https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/5-4-18 Menendez joint letter to General Prosecutor of Ukraine on Mueller investigation.pdf

And the context: a request to provide an explanation as to why Ukraine was impeding investigations related to the Mueller probe.

Was this a legitimate and legal investigation? Yes.

Was it for personal political benefit? No.

Were any threats made or delivered? No.

So how is this comparable to what we know so far regarding Trump’s actions with Ukraine, and, apparently, he is now flailing at China, to pressure them to investigate his political rival?

Here are some key points. Trump has plenty of legal and transparent channels he can use to conduct a legitimate investigation into corruption. He opted not to, and instead used his personal lawyer, recalled a career diplomat abruptly from Ukraine, and worked through people with a personal loyalty to him rather than the nation. Worse, attempting to suppress whistle blowers, threatening to expose them...and muse about the good old days of executing “traitors”.

It isn’t hyperpartisan to say this is very concerning, and it isn’t hyperpartisan to say that comparing this the what senators wrote on behalf of the Mueller investigation is a false equivalency.

The key points in the TownHall article are in the very first paragraph of that archived letter at senate.gov.. MASSIVE blatant threats in exchange for partisan political gain...

Trump does need to off Biden right now... I don't Dems often think deep enough about effective strategery.. If Trump was interested in the POLITICAL value of Biden's misdeeds with Ukraine, he would HOLD that arrow in the quiver until the party NOMINATES HIM... And then smash him with it... And THAT would be the end of that election.... No way is there equal value to making it an issue now other than pointing out the hypocrisy and corruption.....

But how was it for partisan political gain? It was for the Mueller investigation, Manafort had not been part of the Trump campaign for years and whatever they shared with Mueller's special counsel, was kept mum, from the public and congress critters....

And why do you think Trump asking the Ukraine president to work with Giuliani, his personal ala Michael Cohen fixer, to get political dirt on a political rival and his son, who were NOT under an official investigation by the USA, while holding back Congressional backed aid to fight off Russian aggression... until the Ukraine made a public announcement that they were investigating hunter biden is anyway near the same type of acts? And in addition the Ukraine proposed announcement letter was written by Ambassador Volker and others from Trump's group working with Giuliani...

THERE IS NO comparison in the two very different scenarios

one is legitimate

the other crooked

 

[Crepitus]

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?

He confessed.

You remain the least informed person in the group
Others are trying
You are still winning

You haven't seen the "transcript"(that isn't actually a transcript) or heard him say he did it on tv?

 

[Oddball]

Please supply that link and thank you in advance

Read the transcript of Trump's call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

I'm asking you to provide where the missiles are part of the package....financially.

What "package"? My understanding is that it was MONEY appropriated by Congress. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky mentioned in the transcript that he was about ready to buy Javelin missiles - then Trump reminded him that a "favor" was required, "though".

Just where did you get your understanding.....I keep coming back to that. The wording from Trump was NOT that a favor was "REQUIRED".

When you are in a position of power, speaking to one of lesser power who needs something from you, arguing whether or not the word “required” is explicitly used is irrelevant imo. You ask for a favor...it assumes a whole different meaning. If you have already frozen what that person needs from you...to back up your request, it assumes a different meaning. And if you also make a promise of an Oval Office visit...contingent on a favor...

It does not look kosher at all.

psssst....Tell Vlad that I'll have more flexibility after the election.

 

[Billiejeens]

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?

He confessed.

You remain the least informed person in the group
Others are trying
You are still winning

You haven't seen the "transcript"(that isn't actually a transcript) or heard him say he did it on tv?

I am completely informed
He did not do it.

 

[OKTexas]

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.

What aid was withheld? They weren't discussing aid, they were discussing a purchase of military hardware. Read the transcripts.

.

Duh, it takes money to buy military hardware.

Are you claiming Ukraine doesn't have any money except what we give them?

.

That's actually irrelevant - because Trumped tied the sale of Javelins to a "favor".

Did he, the sale has already gone through, can you prove some investigation in Ukraine has already began?

.

I'll take that funny face as a no. Good job commie. LMAO

.

 

[Lakhota]

Looking forward to more whistleblowers coming forward.

 

[Crepitus]

Read the transcript of Trump's call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

I'm asking you to provide where the missiles are part of the package....financially.

What "package"? My understanding is that it was MONEY appropriated by Congress. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky mentioned in the transcript that he was about ready to buy Javelin missiles - then Trump reminded him that a "favor" was required, "though".

Just where did you get your understanding.....I keep coming back to that. The wording from Trump was NOT that a favor was "REQUIRED".

When you are in a position of power, speaking to one of lesser power who needs something from you, arguing whether or not the word “required” is explicitly used is irrelevant imo. You ask for a favor...it assumes a whole different meaning. If you have already frozen what that person needs from you...to back up your request, it assumes a different meaning. And if you also make a promise of an Oval Office visit...contingent on a favor...

It does not look kosher at all.

psssst....Tell Vlad that I'll have more flexibility after the election.

Not quite the same kinda thing there.

False equivalencies are fun though.

 

[Coyote]

FYI...
your getting a very biased account by Townhall imo

read the ACTUAL letter sent by the congress critters, it seems NOTHING like your article describes!!! Official business on behalf of the USA vs. Giuliani

https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/5-4-18 Menendez joint letter to General Prosecutor of Ukraine on Mueller investigation.pdf

Oh HELL no... I was forced to take time out of my day this week to go FETCH the ACTUAL menendez et al letter and the townhall quotes I bolded are COMPLETELY accurate as is their analysis...

Was there an official investigation by the USA going on in the Ukraine by our government on Hunter Biden, as there was one on Paul Manafort, even previous to him being caught up in Trump;s campaign????

i'm sorry, there is NO comparison in the article's examples

THERE SHOULD BE!!! Unless you only care about "mafia style" (CNN language) shakedowns of foreign govts for personal or political advantage... Biden BRAGGED about this sorry ass move to the CFR on video..

And how it got the Ukraine to fire the prosecutor.. You think he just asked??? And that Senate letter is the same deal.. FIRST PARAGRAPH is a DEMAND for cooperating in a political witchhunt...

Congrats -- you got Manafort in solitary.. But Mad Mouth Waters won't get Trump in solitary as she wants to over something that is just pure "swamp style" abuse of power that has NO LAW to stop it....

Strong-arming a foreign leader into investigating a political rival and using your office to withhold aid and dangling the promise of an Oval Office visit to soften it is corruption plain and simple, and if it proves true, it is serious.

Where did Trump do any blatant strong-arming? Those javelin missiles have been dicked around with a couple years now.. And Ukraine can't get ENOUGH of them to assure that Russian tanks won't take the REST of their country on a whim...

The corruption in Ukraine is legendary.. Just today we find that Nancy Pelosi son was also in a sweet deal with them while the Ukraine had a "pro Russian" govt under Obama... And they've CONVICTED 2 top officials for HELPING THE FUCKING DNC get Manafort fired...

Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire

A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation.

Not only that, but the background you MAY BE missing here is that Manafort was competing with the Podesta Group (competing is not completely accurate since they also cooperated) who was ALSO directly pillaging the Ukrainians and getting favors and kickbacks... So -- there was bad blood over plans to EXPLOIT a corrupt Ukrainian govt to make a LOT of politically connected people rich...

Don't you want to know why the family members of Congress are suddenly UBER RICH after a decade or so in office?????

I read the letter.

What threat? Did they withhold 391M in aid? Promise a state visit?

And yes, corruption is a huge issue in Ukraine. That is why the prosecutor was fired. All you have on Biden and now Pelosi’s son (how convenient) is a bunch of unsubstantiated allegations. Well, he could have used legal and transparent means to investigate it IF there was sufficient evidence, but he did not did he? And they hid the records of the conversation. Why? That kind of tells me they were concerned that the president may have crossed a line.

I will state this again in case you missed it: the President could have used normal and legal channels to push for an investigation. But he didn’t.

 

[Oddball]

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.

 

[Crepitus]

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?

He confessed.

You remain the least informed person in the group
Others are trying
You are still winning

You haven't seen the "transcript"(that isn't actually a transcript) or heard him say he did it on tv?

I am completely informed

Not if you can say that with a straight face.

 

[Billiejeens]

Oh HELL no... I was forced to take time out of my day this week to go FETCH the ACTUAL menendez et al letter and the townhall quotes I bolded are COMPLETELY accurate as is their analysis...

Was there an official investigation by the USA going on in the Ukraine by our government on Hunter Biden, as there was one on Paul Manafort, even previous to him being caught up in Trump;s campaign????

i'm sorry, there is NO comparison in the article's examples

THERE SHOULD BE!!! Unless you only care about "mafia style" (CNN language) shakedowns of foreign govts for personal or political advantage... Biden BRAGGED about this sorry ass move to the CFR on video..

And how it got the Ukraine to fire the prosecutor.. You think he just asked??? And that Senate letter is the same deal.. FIRST PARAGRAPH is a DEMAND for cooperating in a political witchhunt...

Congrats -- you got Manafort in solitary.. But Mad Mouth Waters won't get Trump in solitary as she wants to over something that is just pure "swamp style" abuse of power that has NO LAW to stop it....

Strong-arming a foreign leader into investigating a political rival and using your office to withhold aid and dangling the promise of an Oval Office visit to soften it is corruption plain and simple, and if it proves true, it is serious.

I will give you credit
You do not let facts slow your wrong headed ways down
At all.

That presumes you have a clue what “facts” are. I have to keep reminding myself that we are dealing in the world of “alternative facts” here.

Why would you need to remind yourself, it's your total M.O.

 

[Billiejeens]

Never happened
What else ya got?

He confessed.

You remain the least informed person in the group
Others are trying
You are still winning

You haven't seen the "transcript"(that isn't actually a transcript) or heard him say he did it on tv?

I am completely informed

Not if you can say that with a straight face.

Remember -
You are the least informed person in the group.

 

[Lakhota]

We must stop the corruption by the Trump mafia!

 

[OKTexas]

I'm asking you to provide where the missiles are part of the package....financially.

What "package"? My understanding is that it was MONEY appropriated by Congress. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky mentioned in the transcript that he was about ready to buy Javelin missiles - then Trump reminded him that a "favor" was required, "though".

Just where did you get your understanding.....I keep coming back to that. The wording from Trump was NOT that a favor was "REQUIRED".

It's called quid pro quo. It will all be spelled out clearly in the articles of impeachment. Stay tuned...

Damn, I didn't think they would allow shits parity into the articles of impeachment. Am I wrong?

.

I just recently took you off ignore - but I'm reconsidering. Try to show some degree of respect for the thread topic.

Only pussies use ignore, I've never used it, never will. Why do you ignore Zelensky saying there was no "pushing him" and Volker backing up that statement. There was no pressure in the call, as demonstrated in the transcript, you folks can cry implications all day long, that's an opinion, not a fact.

.

 

[Coyote]

Enough with the off topic flaming, discuss the topic please.

 

[Mike473]

We must stop the corruption by the Trump mafia!

I think you are on to something. Why would any company pay someone like Hunter Biden $60K per month? Even Whitey Bulgers nephew appears able to get in on these deals. We need to figure out what happened fast!

 

[OKTexas]

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?

Are you sure about that? They threatened Ukraine? Did they withhold money? Dangle the promise of a state visit?

Trump said they threatened. And in this hyperpartisan age, Trump plays by different rules and is judged by different rules apparently.

Instead of relying on Town Hall’s interpretation, here is the actual letter: https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/5-4-18 Menendez joint letter to General Prosecutor of Ukraine on Mueller investigation.pdf

And the context: a request to provide an explanation as to why Ukraine was impeding investigations related to the Mueller probe.

Was this a legitimate and legal investigation? Yes.

Was it for personal political benefit? No.

Were any threats made or delivered? No.

So how is this comparable to what we know so far regarding Trump’s actions with Ukraine, and, apparently, he is now flailing at China, to pressure them to investigate his political rival?

Here are some key points. Trump has plenty of legal and transparent channels he can use to conduct a legitimate investigation into corruption. He opted not to, and instead used his personal lawyer, recalled a career diplomat abruptly from Ukraine, and worked through people with a personal loyalty to him rather than the nation. Worse, attempting to suppress whistle blowers, threatening to expose them...and muse about the good old days of executing “traitors”.

It isn’t hyperpartisan to say this is very concerning, and it isn’t hyperpartisan to say that comparing this the what senators wrote on behalf of the Mueller investigation is a false equivalency.

The key points in the TownHall article are in the very first paragraph of that archived letter at senate.gov.. MASSIVE blatant threats in exchange for partisan political gain...

Trump does need to off Biden right now... I don't Dems often think deep enough about effective strategery.. If Trump was interested in the POLITICAL value of Biden's misdeeds with Ukraine, he would HOLD that arrow in the quiver until the party NOMINATES HIM... And then smash him with it... And THAT would be the end of that election.... No way is there equal value to making it an issue now other than pointing out the hypocrisy and corruption.....

But how was it for partisan political gain? It was for the Mueller investigation, Manafort had not been part of the Trump campaign for years and whatever they shared with Mueller's special counsel, was kept mum, from the public and congress critters....

And why do you think Trump asking the Ukraine president to work with Giuliani, his personal ala Michael Cohen fixer, to get political dirt on a political rival and his son, who were NOT under an official investigation by the USA, while holding back Congressional backed aid to fight off Russian aggression... until the Ukraine made a public announcement that they were investigating hunter biden is anyway near the same type of acts? And in addition the Ukraine proposed announcement letter was written by Ambassador Volker and others from Trump's group working with Giuliani...

THERE IS NO comparison in the two very different scenarios

one is legitimate

the other crooked

Wow, you really don't know what happened. Giuliani was working in Ukraine before the Mueller investigation wrapped up, he was investigating the genesis of the collusion delusion, the Bidens were brought up to him, he wasn't even looking at it. Biden wasn't even a candidate then.

.