28 thoughts on “The Ukraine Hysteria”

  1. This is hilarious. Trump gets the Democrats to demand to know what he said to Ukraine, and now everyone interested in politics wants to read the transcript, where those who didn’t know about the alleged Biden crimes will see it right in there.

    They really are the dumbest kids on the block.

    1. The transcript is out. The bad thing Trump did was say he thought what Biden boasted about was wrong and maybe Ukraine should look into it. Now the Democrats are trying to obstruct justice.

    2. Most people wont read the transcript and will rely on the media to filter it for them. I’ve noticed the coverage is short on quotes and includes points like Trump spoke on this subject but the very next subject was this one. Framing the call this way could be good analysis but only if there is something in the underlying conversation to support their conclusions. Since they aren’t using quotes, its all just smoke and mirrors to fool the audience and it will probably work.

  2. What we have here is impeachment kabuki not actual impeachment. It’s important for the Dems to show their base that they are doing SOMETHING about impeachment without actually doing anything.

    I liken this whole affair to the well known basketball elimination game HORSE*. Only in this case the Dems are going for the word IMPEACH while the Reps are going for the word ELECTED. Every leak popped or transcript released counts as a basket. Since the number of letters is the same seems like a fair game to me. Only one problem. The people’s business gets ignored while Congress is playing with itself.

    *https://www.wikihow.com/Play-Horse-(the-Basketball-Game)

    1. Pelosi has to know she’s winning the election for Trump. I can only wonder what she’s so scared of that she’s willing to do that.

      Or maybe she’s just too senile to keep the kids in line any more.

  3. what she’s so scared of

    The death of RBG and absolutely no way to prevent Trump from nominating the successor and the Republican Senate approving.

  4. Of course they already dealt with the release of the transcript by having Brennan get out there yesterday and asking how we really know that the transcript is a copy of the actual conversation.

    1. I heard on Howie Carr yesterday that it was Clapper. Brennan, Clapper whatever. All smells like Fried Deep State to me.

  5. This has finally convinced me that either Trump is a political genius, or he has hired someone who is (which amounts to the same thing).

    The ultimate psi-ops play, manufacture a leak accusing Trump of X, ensuring that the dem media will go all in highlighting exactly how evil said X is. Then release the evidence, no, oops, it was my political opponent that did it, not me. Sorry for the misunderstanding!

    The media then has to report the evidence, and the verdict was already decided. Anyone with half a brain can see the media’s hypocrisy.

  6. Gawd you guys all nuts twisting yourself in pretzels to defend a con man.
    First the stupidest talking point I’ve seen repeated by Rand this article and others that “The whistle-blower didn’t have direct knowledge of the communications, an official briefed on the matter told CNN” what does that have to do with anything , Linda Tripp had no Direct knowledge of shit either (yes yes the Disheveled Kaythlyn Willey coming out of the office) we got a impeachment out of her whistle blowing with information she had no direct knowledge of. Right now we haven’t seen the full whistle blower compliant either so no idea what it fully contains and how (s)he pertains to the information.

    Then we get out of the fact based community into vapid Conspiracy land of this article.
    Such as what the hell does the law firm that oversaw the contract some other time hiring Fusion GPS have to do with anything besides name checking for conspiratorial effect. Sounds like lots of law firms hire Fusion GPS to perform their investigations. OH by the way Glen Simpson also worked for Rupert Murdoch so he must be evil and any of those investigation must be suspect too and furthermore Murdoch has employed half of the current administration so …

    Then we get into “Underpant Gnome plan” of conspiracies taking about 3-4 disjointed facts and directly correlating them, being the facts
    1, Biden grifter’s son got himself a cozy gig by using his last name on Ukrainian Company Board along with a Few other American Political families zions.
    2. Said company was shady. And was already being investigated by the Brits but investigation got dropped cause the Ukranian Prosecutors at the time Failed to hand over documents (Note: Before Shokin got fired)
    3. Joe BIden was chosen by Obama to be involved with Ukranians Deal that had a condition that a “Corrupt” Prosecutor was to be fired. The Ukrainians were slow walking that part of the deal and Biden Played hard ball to get the guy fired before he finish the American commitment. That Biden would latter brag about getting the prosecutor fired. Though firing takes place 3 months later.
    4. The “Corrupt” Prosecutor was looking into the shady company. (Though I’ve seen no real facts to support this) just hearsay.

    So those 4 facts Turn into Joe Biden had a quid pro quo that Ukrainians don’t investigate his son.

    But
    1. we have no evidence to support Joe Biden wanted the prosecutor fired to stop the investigation , it not like we have a Video of Biden admitting to his son played a role in wanting the prosecutor fired.
    2. We have no evidence that Joe Biden had any involvement in choosing the fired Prosecutor successor and control over the future of the investigation.

    Then we got current deal, my first question is what exactly is Guilliani Job in the US Government? I believe he just Trump Personal Lawyer why are we having the presidents Personal Lawyer meeting with Foreign Governments to discuss investigations involving US people, is there not proper channels for that?

    2. What is going on with the Crowd Strike part of the transcript which clearly Trump ask for a Favor in return (“Quid Pro Quo”) and then it word soup … missing words and sentences in between. But Seem to be Referencing a Conspiracy theory that CrowdStrike the company that the DNC sent the hacked Email server to is majority owned by a Wealthy Ukrainian and from the Transcript the DNC Server is in Ukraine and Trump want them to investigate details about it or find it.
    3. According to the Transcript the next time Trump speaks he includes asking “What ever you can do” to look into the Biden situations and then finishes asking for investigation with the Opinion that it looks “horrible” for leading the Ukrainian President towards the desired outcome.

          1. Another fact free 1 liner So no facts ah?
            1.So Joe Biden son didn’t take money from a corrupt company .
            2. Joe Biden didn’t have a prosecutor fired
            Well I guess Trump accusations are made from whole cloth then , with nothing there there. Maybe you want to rephrase that? You allowed to use more than 255 characters.

    2. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath in a court case involving neither Kathleen Willey nor Linda Tripp. But thanks for taking time off from your day job of writing instruction manuals for Chinese consumer electronics to offer us your latest bit of risible revisionist history.

  7. Biden’s candidacy was fatally wounded by this. But it comes after almost all the other viable moderates in the primary are DOA because all the moderates had been supporting Biden, so the various reasonably sane governors never gained an ounce of traction. So that leaves Democrats with Warren, Sanders, Harris or Booker, none of whom have even a remote chance of beating Trump because they all ran too far left or otherwise flamed out.

    By finally kicking off an “official” impeachment inquiry, Nancy conceded the 2020 election in hopes of at least leaving some kind of asterisk by Trump’s name.

    1. Think a few faults with your analysis not sure I buy Biden Fatally wounded don’t see the southern Democrats primary voters abandoning Biden though that is a fairly long wait. As long as he can weather the storm in NH and Iowa his more leftist competitors will fade.

      Then there the nightmare situation as far as I am concerned you and Trump CO dismiss out of hand of Warren.

      It not clear that Trump has Electoral College advantage over her , She knows full well Hillary mistakes and she had already corrected mistakes a predecessor committed against a surprise new comer once and won , where people were expecting the same result. Then there the fact that she talks Trump Populist economics
      What States does Trump win in 2020 that he didn’t win in 2016? Only one I could remotely think of is New Hampshire since they know Warren. Trump only won Wisconsin Michigan and Pennsylvania by less than 1 %. So all three are in play and her economics and industrial policy will play well in all three and I include Ohio, Trump can’t afford to lose 3 out of those 4 even winning New Hampshire. Beating Warren over the head with Pocahontas I suspect won’t play as well as Trump thinks in the Midwest. I doubt Florida will flip, but Warren Has a chance in Iowa, North Carolina, Arizona and then there long shot at Texas. I expect Texas to be closer than Florida.
      And as Warren says:
      “””“I can’t relitigate 2016,” she said. “All we can do is learn how to go forward. In 2020, it’s not going to be about Donald Trump. I know that sounds surprising, because Donald Trump gets lots and lots of attention. But we win when we talk about what’s broken, how to fix it, and how we have the power to make real change.

      “You know who agrees with that, by the way?” Warren continued. “Steve Bannon. It just hit me as I was telling you this.” She paraphrased something that Bannon, the adviser who helped engineer Trump’s victory, had said in 2017: “If the Democrats are talking about what’s happening in the lives of working people—if they’re talking about the economics of America—they’re going to win.””””
      I shudder to think about a competent person implementing Trumpeconimics/”Industrial Policy” and a willful congress.

      1. ” Beating Warren over the head with Pocahontas I suspect won’t play as well as Trump thinks in the Midwest.”

        Where are you from?

        1. Apparently from some place where they don’t care if a white woman fraudulently claims affirmative action benefits to get privileged appointments and also don’t mind if Democrats continue pushing the “one drop rule“.

      2. I dismiss Warren’s chances for several reasons. She sounds like someone’s irritating grandmother who nobody would even suspect was the leader of a bus load of retirees in a tour group. She looks frail and her voice is weak and thready. Such voices haven’t been politically helpful since radio was invented. Worse, her voice also has an element of fingernails on a chalkboard. After many months on the campaign trail, she hasn’t even won over Bernie supporters.

        At Harvard she taught legal writing, which is like teaching library science. That’s not where law schools put future leaders (or where they put people who grew up on reservations and learned English as a second language). She has no executive experience at anything except perhaps deciding where her tour bus will go.

        Her taxing and spending plans can’t withstand scrutiny, such that even Steven Colbert tripped her up. Her threats against Wall Street and her wealth tax are causing the big money folks who usually back Democrats to back away from her. Her wealth tax, which is on capital instead of interest, will knock two or three percent off anyone’s ROI, and in some cases will make mattress stuffing or burying cash in the yard a sounder saving strategy than stocks, bonds, or real estate in Beverly Hills or Martha’s Vineyard. For the rich, her plans present a clear path to not being rich anymore; major donors and media stars hardest hit.

        In the coming weeks I expect that other candidates will start going after her, so we’ll see how she does on defense.

  8. The weirdest thing about this is National Review’s overall takes, which aren’t really different from those of the Democrat party. David French pretends to read President Trump’s mind, the same way CNN did, filling in what was not said with his own opinions. Rich Lowry was the least Democrat, with a piece on how the transcript is neither consistent with nor inconsistent with quid pro quo. And, if IIRC, one of the articles asserted that Russians having hacked the DNC servers was discovered by Crowdstrike, and confirmed by the FBI. The FBI was never allowed access to the DNC servers, and could never have confirmed nor denied whether “Russians” had hacked them. Crowdstrike is a company founded by a Ukrainian with a profound hatred of Russia and of Vladimir Putin. They have put out completely false information in the past on Russian “hacking.” But recall, Candidate Trump once joked about “maybe the Russians can find the 30,000 missing e-mails” from Hillary’s server. That led to the whole “Trump-Russia Collusion” bullshit. Perhaps the DNC prohibiting the FBI from looking at its server, but hiring an anti-Putin company that had previously set forth “conclusive” statements about Russian hacking, was no coincidence. They could establish a supposed Trump-Russian link, and by God, they did.

    1. I get the DC magazines stock and trade is the ability to influence voters for candidates, and when candidates don’t need their influence, the DC mags stock value drops. Trump doesn’t need them, so what is National Review to do? Alas, National Review learned nothing from watching the Weekly Standard dissolve.

    1. I don’t think so. Jim was smarter with his comments. However, I wonder if he is being paid to post here like Jim. Always funny how Jim disappeared the moment Hillary’s campaign ended.

Comments are closed.