RUSSIA/РОССИЯ THREAD—ASSANGE CHRGD W/ SPYING—DJT IMPEACHED TWICE-US TREASURY SANCTS KILIMNIK AS RUSSIAN AGNT

str8cashhomie87

All Star
Joined
Dec 20, 2016
Messages
558
Reputation
280
Daps
3,221

SearchToggle search

NATIONAL SECURITY[/paste:font]
2016 RNC Delegate: Trump Directed Change To Party Platform On Ukraine Support
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Flipboard

  • CARRIE JOHNSON


    Twitter
    gettyimages-577067306_custom-ef39262500e3fe098a5c1a58f817ae486ef74225-s1600-c85.jpg


    The formal printed 2016 Republican platform is placed on the chairs of the state delegates on the floor of the Republican National Convention on July 18, 2016, in Cleveland. One part of the platform that changed was about U.S. assistance to Ukraine.

    Jeff Swensen/Getty Images
    President Trump may have been involved with a change to the Republican Party campaign platform last year that watered down support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine, according to new information from someone who was involved.

    Diana Denman, a Republican delegate who supported arming U.S. allies in Ukraine, has told people that Trump aide J.D. Gordon said at the Republican Convention in 2016 that Trump directed him to support weakening that position in the official platform.

    Ultimately, the softer position was adopted.


    POLITICS
    Week Ahead: Trump Aims To Dismiss Russia Probe As Partisan; Can He Get His Taxes Win?

    Denman is scheduled to meet this week with the House and Senate Intelligence committees to discuss what she saw, said two sources familiar with the briefings.

    Investigators in Congress and elsewhere want to ask the San Antonio-area woman about how her proposal supporting Ukraine changed in the course of last year's convention.

    People familiar with the story described it to NPR. Robert N. Driscoll, a Washington-based lawyer for Denman at McGlinchey Stafford, declined to comment.

    The revision to the Republican platform changed the party's position on pro-Western elements in Ukraine — from supporting supplying weapons for fighters there to a more general assistance.


    POLITICS
    From 2016: How The Trump Campaign Weakened The Republican Platform On Aid To Ukraine

    The issue is of interest to investigators in Congress and the team working for Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller because the idea of arming Ukrainians in the fight against pro-Russian separatist forces was staunchly opposed by the Russian government — and, it seems, the Trump campaign as well.

    Denman has told people she spoke with Gordon, a national security aide on the Trump campaign, at the Republican convention in Cleveland last year. Gordon identified himself as a representative with the Trump campaign and informed her he had phoned "New York" about the Ukraine proposal, in Denman's account.

    She followed up by asking with whom Gordon had spoken. And, more than once, Gordon replied he had discussed the issue with Trump.

    No he didn't, Gordon said on Monday.

    "I dispute her recollection of events," he said in messages with NPR. He also denied telling Denman in Cleveland that he had discussed the Ukraine language with Trump.

    "Trump wasn't involved in the GOP Platform details. That was my job," Gordon said by text message. "Individual delegates didn't have the authority to force their positions on the campaign."


    NATIONAL SECURITY
    Mueller Removed FBI Agent From Russia Probe Over Anti-Trump Messages

    "I am not getting into a 'he said, she said' with the media about Diana Denman or anyone else," Gordon added.

    One source said Denman was skeptical about Gordon's account at the time.

    But in March 2017, CNN's Jim Acosta reported on his communications with Gordon about the issue. The CNN report said Gordon met the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislayak, and other Trump advisers, Carter Page and Walid Phares, about the matter and later communicated that they did not support arming Ukrainians.

    Gordon told NPR on Monday that Trump long had a clear position on Ukraine.

    "Trump said on the campaign trail that he didn't want World War III over Ukraine. And he wanted better relations with Russia," Gordon said. "It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that arming Ukraine isn't consistent with those two positions."


    NATIONAL SECURITY
    The Russia Investigations: After Flynn Plea Deal, Where Does Mueller Aim Next?

    The Obama administration also vowed support for pro-Western forces in Ukraine and supplied them with vehicles and other military equipment, but stopped short of weapons.

    What has since become clear is that at the time of the convention, Russia was running a broad series of "active measures" against the U.S. presidential election that included clandestine outreach by human agents and an overt information campaign on social media. That wasn't known to the public then, but Mueller and congressional investigators have begun looking into whether anyone in the Trump camp helped the Russians who were attacking the election.

    The change to the Ukraine platform in Cleveland has attracted attention because it has raised questions about whether it might have been evidence of communications between Russians and the Trump campaign, or was intended by the Trump team as some kind of a signal to the Russians about their willingness to accommodate them.

    NPR correspondent Ryan Lucas contributed to this report.

Big News
 

Oville

Pro
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
1,045
Reputation
150
Daps
2,149
Wrong. Go back to 2015. Sanders wants people to forget why the DNC punished his campaign
:stopitslime:
I don't know what went down in 2015 but if the DNC was aware that he was engaging in some shady shyt with Russia and he was going against their golden candidate Hilary Clinton who they bent over backwards for, shyt woulda been out there.
 

Oville

Pro
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
1,045
Reputation
150
Daps
2,149
This dude is so hurt that he will be punish for his actions. Hillary got away why can't I. White men don't get punish.

He's a sociopath. Don't care who he has to step on in order to survive. Him, Steve Bannon, and Roger Stone all come from the same fukked up mentality of ruining other people's lives to get ahead.
 

str8cashhomie87

All Star
Joined
Dec 20, 2016
Messages
558
Reputation
280
Daps
3,221
90

It was Jeff Sessions, in a section of his speech titled “personal observations,” who laid out the emotional and philosophical case for removing former President Bill Clinton from office on charges that included obstruction of justice. | Alex Brandon/AP

Sessions argued in Clinton impeachment that presidents can obstruct justice
Trump’s personal lawyer argued Monday that the ‘president cannot obstruct justice because he is the chief law enforcement officer … and has every right to express his view of any case.’


By KYLE CHENEY


12/04/2017 03:43 PM EST

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer argued Monday that, as the nominal head of federal law enforcement, the president is legally unable to obstruct justice. But the exact opposite view was once argued by another senior Trump lawyer: Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

In 1999, Sessions – then an Alabama senator – laid out an impassioned case for President Bill Clinton to be removed from office based on the argument that Clinton obstructed justice amid the investigation into his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.


“The facts are disturbing and compelling on the President's intent to obstruct justice,” he said, according to remarks in the congressional record.

Sessions isn’t alone. More than 40 current GOP members of Congress voted for the impeachment or removal of Clinton from office for obstruction of justice. They include Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell – who mounted his own passionate appeal to remove Clinton from office for obstruction of justice – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr, who was a House member at the time.

interview with Axios on Monday that the “president cannot obstruct justice because he is the chief law enforcement officer under [the Constitution’s Article II] and has every right to express his view of any case.”

Where Sessions argued in Clinton’s case that the president had the responsibility to “defend the law,” Dowd argued that the president’s oversight of law enforcement makes it impossible for anyone in the office to obstruct it in the first place.

The interview followed Trump’s tweet—which Dowd says he wrote—that he knew Flynn had lied to the FBI when he was fired in February.

Trump has come under scrutiny for his decision to fire former FBI director James Comey amid an intensifying investigation of Trump associates’ connections to Russia and whether any aided the Russian effort to influence the 2016 presidential election.

Comey has since testified that Trump pressured him to pull back on an investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who pleaded guilty last week to a count of lying to federal investigators about his contacts with Russian officials during the presidential transition.

Congressional Democrats have argued that Trump’s firing of Comey, now part of the special counsel investigation overseen by Robert Mueller, amounts to obstruction.

In the Senate trial that could have removed Clinton from office, Sessions delivered a 450-word analysis of the obstruction charges against Clinton.

Sessions’ argument for finding presidential obstruction concerned Clinton’s attempts defeat a civil action against him. “Since the truth would be damaging, he took steps to see that the truth concerning his relationship with Monica Lewinsky would never come out.” Sessions argued at the time. That obstruction began, he said, when Clinton lied to the courts under oath and worked to influence witnesses, including Lewinsky.

“The president coached his personal secretary twice to ensure that if she were called as a witness in the civil case she would not contradict his testimony given the day before. The president intentionally lied to aides in an effort to have them mislead the public and the grand jury,” Sessions went on. “This is to me a clear pattern of obstruction of justice.”

Grassley and McConnell at the time laid out legal arguments for obstruction that included accusing Clinton of coaching a longtime assistant who was slated to give testimony in the matter. “Then the president—in violation of the federal obstruction of justice law—fired off a string of fundamentally declarative statements to his secretary,” McConnell said.

McConnell also laid out the legal case that obstruction of justice is a “high crime” that would warrant removal from office.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Jeff Sessions




POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning — in your inbox.
 

Dameon Farrow

Superstar
Joined
Jan 19, 2014
Messages
14,857
Reputation
3,418
Daps
49,747
And that is when I had to officially wash my hands of Bernard. Iran was in full compliance but people like Sanders and pundits were pushing the idea that if the bill passed Iran would throw the whole agreement in the bushes. It did and they didn't.

Bernie's decisive agenda to play on the fringes of the democratic party until it's suitable for him to come into the yard has gotten pretty old.
And people noticed how he rolled and used his ass to disrupt this past election. It's obvious as hell.

But help is on the way....:mjgrin:
 
Top