Tag: conspiracytheories

Week 148 in Trump – Impeachment News

Posted on November 28, 2019 in Impeachment, Trump

It’s a huge week for testimony in the impeachment hearings, but Fiona Hill was the coup de gras. Here’s an excerpt from her incredibly forthright testimony:


Based on questions and statements I have heard, some of you on this committee appear to believe that Russia and its security services did not conduct a campaign against our country and that perhaps, somehow, for some reason, Ukraine did. This is a fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services themselves.”

Also, this is the week where I’ve become officially pissed off because I have to create a huge factcheck on stupid conspiracy theories that our elected officials have decided is their hill to die on.

Here’s what happened on the impeachment front for the week ending November 24…

General Happenings:

  1. American Oversight publishes State Department documents obtained through a FOIA request showing that Rudy Giuliani was corresponding with Mike Pompeo one month prior to Marie Yovanovitch being recalled from her post in Ukraine.
    • This backs up David Hale’s testimony and Gordon Sondland’s.
    • The documents tie Pompeo to efforts by Giuliani and Trump to get Ukraine officials to open investigations into the Bidens and 2016 elections and to smear Pompeo’s own employee, Marie Yovanovitch.
    • American Oversight says that this is just the first in a series of releases of documentation covered by the FOIA request.
    • The documents also include letters from former U.S. ambassadors to Ukraine and members of Congress expressing concern over the smear against Yovanovitch.
    • Meanwhile, Pompeo continues to refuse to hand over the material requested by the House.
  1. The White House Counsel’s Office turns up hundreds of documents and emails showing how extensive the effort was to come up with a justification after the fact for the delay in aid to Ukraine. The emails show that Trump made the decision without an assessment of the legality or the reasons for withholding aid.
  2. Devin Nunes really tries to turn John Bolton’s words back on the Democrats, calling the impeachment hearings a “drug deal” they’re trying to “cook up.” If you’ll remember, Bolton said he didn’t want to be part of any drug deal Mulvaney and Giuliani were cooking up in Ukraine.
  3. Indicted Giuliani associate Lev Parnas says that he helped arrange meetings between Nunes and former Ukraine officials in 2018 and that Nunes met with former general prosecutor Shokin.
    • Nunes’ travel timeline matches up with what Parnas says.
    • Nunes aide Derek Harvey was also involved in the meetings.
    • Nunes denies the allegations and threatens to sue the media outlets that reported on it.
    • Nunes has threatened to sue news outlets previously but always drops the suits.
  1. Parnas also turns over audio and video documentation to the House Intelligence COmmittee regarding Trump and Giuliani, but the contents hasn’t been made public yet.
  2. Lt. Col. Vindman requests a security assessment from the Army, which is now prepared to move him to a secure location if needed.
  3. Vindman’s lawyer sends Fox News a letter asking that they retract a story where they alleged that Vindman committed espionage. Fox has consistently questioned Vindman’s loyalty.
  4. U.S. officials at the embassy in Kyiv were made aware of the pressure Ukrainian officials felt they were under from the Trump administration in May, specifically the pressure to investigation Biden. This contradicts Zelensky, who said there was no pressure. Of course, he said that in front of Trump, so there’s that.
  5. Trump blames Mike Pompeo for hiring officials who would testify against him.
  6. The FBI asked to interview the whistleblower last month. They’re negotiating the request.
  7. House Republicans make fun of Adam Schiff using the word “bribery” now instead of “quid pro quo.” Just a little grammar lesson: bribery and extortion are both forms of quid pro quo. Also, constitutional bribery has a broader definition than the federal bribery statute.
  8. In an interview on Fox News, former special prosecutor Ken Starr says there was a quid pro quo between Trump’s administration and Zelensky’s government. He says this is bribery. He also indicates that it might not be impeachable.
  9. Nunes, the top Republican on the intelligence committee, says the testimony of the witnesses was “typically based on second-hand, third-hand, and even fourth-hand rumors and innuendo.” Except for the ones who were actually on the call, I guess. Or who were part of the diplomatic efforts with Ukraine, whether the regular or irregular channel.
  10. Nunes says the witnesses (State Department and White House officials) are “remarkably uninformed” about the conspiracy theory that it was Ukraine and not Russia who meddled in our 2016 elections. He thinks that’s why Giuliani had good reason to go investigate it. Here’s more info.
  11. The Trump administration discusses removing some of the witnesses in the impeachment hearings from their White House positions before their term is up. Advisers warn this could be construed as retaliation.
  12. One of Trump’s complaints about Ambassador Yovanovitch is that she refused to hang his picture at the embassy when he was elected. In reality, the embassy hung the pictures of Trump, Pence, and Secretary of State Tillerson as soon as the pictures arrived in Ukraine.
  13. Ukrainian officials are doing their best to stay out of the impeachment issue at this point.
  14. There’s bipartisan support in the Senate for a full trial should the House vote to impeach Trump.
  15. Giuliani says he has files on the Bidens that will be released if anything happens to him. So gangster. He’s previously said the same about Trump. Giuliani accuses the Biden family of monetizing Biden’s office for four decades.
  16. The House impeachment committee is looking into whether Kurt Volker, at the direction of Trump, pressured Zelensky to drop an investigation into former Urkaine President Poroshenko.

Alexander Vindman and Jennifer Williams Testimony:

  1. Vindman and Williams testify together. They are the first to testify who were actually listening in on the phone call between Trump and Zelensky. Vindman is a Lt. Col. in the Army and is the director of European Affairs at the NSC. Williams is a special adviser to Mike Pence on European and Russian affairs.
  2. Williams says she thought Trump’s phone call with Zelensky was unusual because of the focus on domestic policy. Other Mike Pence aides (not under oath) step up to defend the call. Trump calls her a Never Trumper after her testimony (he does that to a lot of witnesses).
  3. After Vindman’s testimony, The White House Twitter account posts that Tim Morrison, Vindman’s boss, had concerns about Vindman’s judgment. Fiona Hill clears that up in her testimony quite well (documented in her section below).
  4. Vindman defends himself by reading from his performance review authored by Hill. It gives him high praise.
  5. Republicans question Vindman’s loyalty to the U.S. (he’s a decorated Lt. Col.). Giving into xenophobia, they ask whether a Ukraine official who offered Vindman a job spoke in Ukrainian when he offered it.
  6. Republicans make fun of Vindman for wearing full Army dress uniform. Military members are supposed to do so when fulfilling official roles.
  7. Vindman reported the call to the NSC’s top lawyer because he was so concerned about it. He was shocked to hear Trump say that he thought Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in our elections.
  8. Both Vindman and Williams say not a single national security official supported withholding aid to Ukraine. Both also say that withholding aid was damaging our relationship with Ukraine.
  9. Both say they were not aware of any evidence that Biden committed any misconduct around Ukraine.
  10. Both say that they wouldn’t describe themselves as “Never Trumpers.”
  11. Republicans on the House committee continue to push questions that could out the identity of the whistleblower, but Vindman refuses to answer those questions.
  12. Williams says Zelensky told Mike Pence that holding up the aid would give Russia the impression that U.S. support for Ukraine is wavering.
  13. Williams says that Mike Pence had a phone call with Zelensky on September, 18, which she listened in on but can’t talk about because she was told it was classified.

Kurt Volker and Tim Morrison Testimony:

  1. Volker and Morrison testify together. These two were called by Republicans on the committee. Volker is a former special envoy to Ukraine, and Morrison is the former senior director for Europe and Ukraine at the NSC.
  2. Both say that the conspiracy theories around Ukraine were getting in the way of foreign policy and detracted from our national security. By conspiracy theories, they specifically point to 2016 election meddling and the Bidens.
  3. Morrison continues to maintain that he didn’t think the call was inherently wrong or illegal, but that it would cause a political storm were it to become public. He’s the guy who went to the NSC lawyer to say the call needed to be kept secret.
  4. Volker maintains that in all the time he spent working on this, he didn’t realize until much later that Burisma was related to the Bidens. Again, a simple Google search would’ve fixed that.
  5. Volker’s testimony confirms that there were two different policies at work in Ukraine. The official policy of the State Department was to get the military aid released and to have the two presidents meet. The unofficial policy was holding up the military aid and the meeting until Zelensky announced the investigations.
  6. Volker and Hill differ in their recollection of a July 10 meeting, after which Bolton instructed Hill to go to the NSC lawyers. Both testify that at the close of the meeting, Sondland brought up the investigations and that’s when Bolton shut it down. While the others went outside for a photo op, Bolton held Hill behind to talk about that “drug deal.”
    • This is a change for Volker from his deposition. He had previously said that Sondland didn’t bring it up.
  1. Earlier, Republicans accuse Vindman of skipping the chain of command and instead going straight to the lawyers. Now, Morrison gets the same treatment. It turns out he didn’t go to his boss, deputy National Security Advisor Charles Kupperman. Instead, he went straight to legal counsel to make sure they were aware of the call and that they locked down the transcript. He was concerned about the political fallout.
  2. Volker insists he isn’t part of some shadow foreign policy, despite his coordination with Gordon Sondland and Rick Perry.
  3. Morrison says that Gordon Sondland was working at Trump’s behest and that Sondland actually did talk to a top Ukrainian official about getting military aid in exchange for political investigations.
  4. Morrison says Trump and Sondland spoke at least a half dozen times, but Trump now says he barely knows Sondland.
  5. Volker says that the allegations against Biden and Yovanovitch are self-serving and are not credible.
  6. He says a change in power in Ukraine means a change in prosecutor, and the outgoing government was afraid of possible prosecution of themselves. He also says that Lutsenko, who was the source of many of these rumors, was trying to make the U.S. see him as an important and influential player so he was telling Giuliani what Giuliani wanted to hear.
  7. Volker and Morrison agree that it would be wrong for a president to withhold aid until a foreign government opens an investigation into a potential political opponent.
  8. Both Volker and Morrison say they weren’t aware of the Biden issue or that Burisma was related to Biden. Volker says a lot of things have come to light that he wasn’t aware of.
  9. Opinion alert: I’m feeling that these guys aren’t being fully honest. I think they knew Trump wanted to investigate the Bidens and that they’re just parsing their words when they say that they didn’t know Burisma meant the Bidens. They’re trying to create a way out, which could possibly be a way out for Trump as well. These are just my thoughts, based on the testimony so far.
  10. Fiona Hill told Morrison it would be safest to steer clear of Sondland, but Morrison wanted to keep an eye on him and know what he was up to.
  11. At one point, Trump told Volker that he thought Ukraine was trying to take him down.
  12. Volker defends Biden as being an honorable man.

Gordon Sondland Testimony:

  1. Gordon Sondland is the Ambassador to the EU. Sondland seems to contradict Morrison’s testimony, saying he didn’t work that closely with the president.
  2. Trump distances himself from Sondland during his testimony, saying “I don’t know him very well.”
  3. Sondland testifies that yes, there was a quid pro quo, at least with regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting.
  4. He says he was acting on orders directly from Trump when he asked Ukraine officials to announce an investigations into Burisma and the Bidens. Sondland also says that it didn’t matter whether Ukraine actually carried out the investigations; Trump just wanted the public announcements.
  5. Sondland says that he, Rick Perry, and other senior officials were following the express direction of Trump to work with Giuliani on the pressure campaign for the investigations.
  6. Sondland testifies that everyone was in the loop—Pence, Pompeo, Mulvaney, and Bolton.
  7. He says that he told Pence that he was concerned that the aid holdup had become linked to the requested investigations. He told Pence this before Pence met with Zelensky on September 1.
  8. He also says he kept Mike Pompeo informed about any developments in regard to the aid and investigations.
  9. Sondland says that Trump said he didn’t want anything from Ukraine, but then Trump went on to tell him he wanted investigations into the Bidens and 2016 election meddling.
  10. He agrees that Trump demanded something of personal value and in exchange, Trump would host a White House meeting in his official capacity (and as Sondland later learned, Trump would then release the military aid). The thing of value Trump demanded was investigations into political rivals from 2016 and now.
  11. Sondland doesn’t recall Trump ever talking to him about military aid.
  12. Funny story about Sondland. He was critical of candidate Trump, but then he bundled together a million dollars to donate to Trump’s inaugural fund—one of many wealthy donors eager to get back into Trump’s good graces after he was elected. Sondland kept pushing for the ambassador post for a year until they finally gave in.

Laura Cooper and David Hale Testimony:

  1. Cooper and Hale testify together in front of the House Intelligence Committee. They provide largely technical and procedural information.
  2. Cooper is a Russia and Ukraine expert at DoD. She says she thought military aid to Ukraine was crucial. She didn’t understand why it was held up, because Congress had authorized the money and a DoD review found that Ukraine was eligible.
  3. Cooper says Ukraine officials reached out to her staff on July 25 (the same day as the call with Zelensky) to find out what was going on with the military aid. She says Ukraine likely knew aid was being held up a few days prior.
  4. This contradicts previous witnesses, who said Ukraine officials found out about the aid being withheld from a Politico article in August.
  5. Hale is the undersecretary of state for political affairs. He thinks Yovanovitch was doing excellent work and should’ve been allowed to fulfill her term.
  6. Hale thinks that it’s unusual and wrong to place a hold on approved aid to use it as leverage against a foreign country to get them to investigate a political rival.
  7. Hale confirms that the Office of Management and Budget said Trump ordered the hold on the aid.

Fiona Hill and David Holmes Testimony:

  1. Hill and Holmes’ testify before the House Intelligence Committee together. Hill is the former NSC senior director for Europe and Russia, and Holmes is an official at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine.
  2. This was, to me at least, riveting testimony. Not only does Fiona Hill go out of her way to dismiss the conspiracy theories about Ukraine meddling in our elections as a “fictional narrative,” but she later defends Trump against the harsh criticism he received before his presidency even began.
  3. Hill chides members of congress for spreading conspiracy theories and giving Putin fodder to use against us in 2020. Several Republican Members of Congress, in turn, acknowledge that all GOP members in the room believe that the Russian interference happened. But then they continue to bring up the debunked Ukraine theories.
  4. Hill testifies that a former staffer to Devin Nunes, Kash Patel, became White House staff and gave Trump information about Ukraine. He gave Trump so much information that Trump didn’t even know that his actual NSC Ukraine expert was Alexander Vindman and not Patel. This lends credence to Vindman’s testimony that he was told not to attend a Ukraine meeting because it would confuse Trump.
  5. Hill says that Russia’s goal is to delegitimize the president, and they would’ve tried to cast a cloud over the presidency no matter who was elected.
  6. During Hill’s and Holmes’ testimony, Devin Nunes tries to push the narrative that the Steele dossier was funded by the DNC and Clinton campaign. Neither are experts, but neither knows of the Clinton campaign funding it. Remember that the initial funding that led to the Steele dossier came from Republican primary opponents to Trump.
  7. One interesting piece of Hill’s testimony came when she was questioned about Gordon Sondland saying that they had a disagreement where she became emotional and shaky. She said that yes, she was angry; and sometime when women get angry it’s taken differently than when men get angry. And then she says that in hindsight, now that she sees what was actually going on, she was working on official national security policy, Sondland was working on a domestic political errand from Trump, and those policies had just diverged. She was angry because she thought Sondland wasn’t cooperating with what she understood to be official policy.
  8. When Hill was annoyed with Sondland because they didn’t seem to be coordinating, she said to him “Ambassador Sondland — Gordon — I think this is all going to blow up.” She adds to her testimony, “And here we are.”
  9. Holmes repeated his testimony from his deposition about overhearing the telephone conversation between Sondland and Trump at a public lunch (I covered this last week). During Holmes’ testimony, Trump tweets that his own hearing is great and that there’s no way you can hear or understand a conversation if it isn’t on speakerphone.
  10. Holmes also says that he concluded in August that the reason the military aid was being held up was for some kind of agreement on investigations. He also says that Ukraine officials likely would’ve drawn the same conclusion.
  11. Devin Nunes is surprised when he questions Holmes on whether the “black ledger” is credible and Holmes replies that yes, it is. The black ledger is the book that showed potentially illicit payments to Paul Manafort from Ukraine officials, which also led to Manafort resigning from Trump’s campaign. Holmes says he thinks that the purpose of publishing the ledger was to expose corruption in Ukraine, not to expose Manafort.
    • I have another opinion here. Nunes’ shocked expression tells me that either he’s a fabulous actor or he really does believe the conspiracies he’s peddling. I’m not sure which is worse.
  1. One reason Trump has given for not supplying Ukraine with the needed aid is that the EU wasn’t sharing the burden. But the review that gave that impression came out AFTER the aid to Ukraine was suspended. On top of that, since 2014 the U.S. has provided just over $3 billion to Ukraine, in loan guarantees that get paid back. In that same time period, the EU has provided $12 billion.
  2. Hill defends Vindman, saying she’s not sure where Morrison got the idea that Vindman wasn’t reliable. Hill has the utmost respect for Vindman and his work but thought his military bent might make him unprepared for political positions up the ladder.
  3. Hill says that Ukraine’s actions around the 2016 elections are simply not comparable to what Russia did and that the actions of Ukraine officials were similar to officials in other countries who assumed Clinton would win.
  4. Holmes says that the Ukraine issue isn’t over just because Trump released the aid. Ukrainian officials still feel the need to take steps to ingratiate themselves with Trump. They still haven’t gotten their White House meeting, and Trump hasn’t gotten his investigations.
  5. It’s key that Russia understands U.S. support for Ukraine is not wavering.
  6. Holmes and Hill agreed that Burisma is basically code-word for Biden.

Mark Sandy Deposition:

  1. Mark Sandy is the first official from the Office of Management and Budget to be deposed.
  2. Devin Nunes says that we’ll never see Mark Sandy’s deposition, which was given behind closed doors. Schiff says that the transcript is being reviewed and that we’ll get the transcript later.
  3. Nunes also implies that Sandy is the top official at OMB. He is not. He’s the associate director for national security programs. The top OMB officials have refused to testify.
  4. Sandy was told to sign the first in a series of apportionment letters freezing Ukraine aid. Other witnesses have testified that this letter was dated July 25, the same day as the call to Zelensky.
  5. Later, Sandy’s boss, Michael Duffey, told him he wanted to learn more about the process and then Duffey himself signed the subsequent letters.
  6. Sandy testified that he’d never seen a senior political OMB official take control of a portfolio like that.
  7. His transcript isn’t released by the end of the week but is expected to be released by Thanksgiving.

Week 148 in Trump – Ukraine Conspiracies

Posted on November 28, 2019 in Impeachment, Trump

Here’s a brief fact check on all those conspiracy theories being floated to take the focus off of:

  1. Russia’s interference in our elections.
  2. Trump’s extortion of Ukraine.
  3. Damning witness testimony.

What About All Those Conspiracy Theories?

  1. Throughout the proceedings, Republican questioners have repeatedly tried to shift the focus of the investigations to their theories that Ukraine meddled in the elections (calling the idea that Russia meddled in the election the “Russia hoax”). Specifically, Representative Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Representative Devin Nunes (R-CA) have been the biggest proponents of these theories.
    • During Vindman’s and William’s testimony, Nunes tries to make the Bidens the focus instead of Trump. He asserts without evidence that Biden interfered in Ukraine’s domestic affairs to benefit his son, Hunter.
    • During Volker and Morrison’s testimony, Jim Jordan pushes the narrative that Ukraine was engaged in election meddling in 2016. He cites tweets against Trump and Ukraine officials speaking against Trump.
      • He also says that because of Volker and Morrison, Zelensky was able to get reform passed through the parliament that allows politicians to be charged with a crime. This is important because oligarchs liked to become politicians so they couldn’t be indicted. (But I don’t know how much Volker or Morrison had to do with passing the law.)
    • Republican questioners also keep bringing up Alexandra Chalupa.
    • And finally, there’s the conspiracy theory about the DNC server being held somewhere in Ukraine so the FBI can’t get to it.
  1. Trump’s own staff, including his first head of Homeland Security Thomas Bossert, repeatedly warned him that the Ukraine conspiracy was completely debunked.

Did Ukraine Meddle in Our Elections?

No more so than any other foreign country who feared a Trump presidency. Compare what Ukraine is accused of doing with what our intelligence agencies say we know Russia did: 

    • Putin ordered Russia’s interference, and it involved both Russia’s intelligence agencies and their military.
    • Russia focused on spreading a pro-Trump message and spreading unflattering stories about Clinton.
    • Russia also executed repeated cyberattacks on our election system.
    • There is no clear evidence connecting the Clinton campaign to a foreign government, nor of them seeking illegally obtained information from one. These very things were outlined, however, in Mueller’s report between the Trump campaign and Russia.
    • I shouldn’t have to remind anybody that eight people under investigation by Mueller either pleaded guilty or were convicted.
  1. So here’s what is being used as proof of Ukraine meddling: The black ledger; an op-ed and flurry of social media posts criticizing Trump’s comments during an August 1, 2016, interview with George Stephanopoulos; Alexandra Chalupa’s research; and CrowdStrike.
  2. The Politico story that seems to have started or at least fueled this theory says that Putin personally directed Russia’s effort, and it was a focused effort involving military and foreign intelligence services. The Ukraine effort, if there was one, was scattershot. Former President Poroshenko maintains there was no effort to meddle in our elections. Ukraine did fear a Trump presidency, though, because he was more friendly to Russia than to Ukraine.
  3. The op-ed and social media posts from Ukraine officials that Republicans are citing as evidence of a concerted effort against Trump were in response to an interview candidate Trump did with George Stephanopoulos. During the interview, Trump said that Putin is “not going into Ukraine, just so you understand. He’s not going to go to Ukraine.” In reality, Putin seized Crimea from Ukraine two years prior in 2014, and they’ve been fighting ever since.
    • Trump went on to say the whole area is a mess under Obama, and that the people of Crimea might be happier under Russian rule. Trump only made it worse when he tried to clarify his statements. The reaction from Ukraine officials is understandable. And no wonder they were scared of a Trump presidency.
  1. Several of the social media posts reportedly came from US-born Ukrainians. The only social media posts I can find evidence of have been deleted, and were from a retired Ukrainian diplomat and from Ukraines Minister of Internal Affairs.
    • They called Trump a clown and a danger, and one harshly criticized Trump for saying Putin hadn’t attacked Ukraine. They also criticized Paul Manafort.
  1. At the Republican National Convention in July, they changed their platform to remove references to arming Ukraine against Russia, so Ukraine again had reason to be concerned about a Trump presidency.
  2. The Politico article and its author say that nothing done by the Ukrainians comes even close to what Russia did.
  3. The Hill and Politico both reported that a spokesperson for Russia’s Foreign Ministry started the narrative that Ukraine meddled in our elections. Marie Zakharova said that Ukraine “seriously complicated” Trump’s election campaign when they “planted” information about Paul Manafort (the black ledger conspiracy theory). If you remember, Manafort is in prison, convicted of multiple charges and having pleaded guilty to multiple others.
  4. An anti-corruption politician and investigative reporter, Sergei Leshchenko, found the black ledger. He also lost his job when Giuliani complained about him.

Who is Alexandra Chalupa?

  1. Alexandra Chalupa worked for the Clinton administration and then was a consultant for the DNC. She was still consulting for the DNC, along with other clients, in 2016.
  2. Chalupa is the daughter of Ukrainian immigrants, and is an American citizen.
  3. In 2014, she was doing pro bono work for another client regarding the Ukrainian crisis when Manafort’s work for a former pro-Russian Ukrainian president caught her attention.
  4. Chalupa was suspicious of a Russia connection with Trump campaign, so she began researching it. She occasionally shared her findings with the Clinton campaign and the DNC, but was not working for either. She was doing this as a private citizen.
  5. While Chalupa shared her information with the DNC, the DNC didn’t include any of the information she shared in their dossiers. They also didn’t publicize any of it. She stopped consulting for the DNC after the party convention in July.
  6. She spoke with Ukraine’s ambassador to the U.S., who shared her concerns but didn’t think Trump would win anyway. But then Trump hired Manafort, and all of the sudden Chalupa was in high demand for the information she had found.
  7. Within a few weeks of her meeting with the ambassador, the administrators of her private email account started warning her about attempts by “state-sponsored actors” to break into her email account.
    • WikiLeaks eventually hacked into and released some of her emails.
  1. Her family cars were broken into and ransacked, and someone tried to break into her home. She felt these were intimidation tactics, and she later started receiving death threats.

So What About the Bidens?

  1. Hunter Biden took a position on the board of Ukrainian company Burisma during a time when his father, Joe Biden, was working on getting the Ukraine government to get rid of their corrupt prosecutor general.
  2. Ukraine officials say there’s no evidence either Joe or his son Hunter did anything wrong, and that they wouldn’t even know what they should be investigating should they open an investigation.
  3. Joe Biden did his work with Ukraine out in the open, in accordance with U.S. foreign policy, and with both presidential and bipartisan congressional approval.
  4. At worst, having Hunter on Burisma’s board was ethically questionable. Legal experts say that it wasn’t illegal, though.
  5. Many of our foreign allies backed Joe Biden’s push to have Ukraine’s prosecutor removed. It also made it more likely that Burisma would be investigated, not less likely.
  6. Hunter joined the board after the corrupt owner was forced out of his government office in 2014, along with the pro-Russian president.
  7. On the board of Burisma, Hunter “provided advice on legal issues, corporate finance, and strategy during a five-year term on the board.”
  8. Board meetings were held two times a year, and there were multiple calls, constant dialog, and sharing of advice throughout the year.
  9. Three people say Hunter never visited Ukraine.
  10. People interviewed say Hunter’s presence on the board didn’t protect the company from multiple investigations. During his time there, several investigations were opened into the owner (over tax violations, money-laundering, and licenses given to Burisma during the period when Zlochevsky, the owner, was a government minister).
  11. Burisma started bringing in high-profile directors to its board, and that included both Biden and his associate Devon Archer. The company’s reason for the additions to the board was to strengthen corporate governance. Burisma was also looking to expand, and Hunter helped with that.
  12. Here are Biden’s bona fides: he’s a trained lawyer, he had served on a previous board in the U.S., and he created an investment company with two people who graduated from Yale with him.

Does Ukraine Have The DNC Server?

No, no they don’t. This brings us to CrowdStrike.

  1. Apparently, Trump believes that CrowdStrike was the vehicle used by Ukraine to infiltrate the U.S. elections. Trump’s theory goes that CrowdStrike’s owner is Ukrainian so they’re hiding the DNC server in Ukraine. In reality, one is American and one was born in RUSSIA (and is now a U.S. citizen).
  2. Also, according to the conspiracy, Ukraine has “the server” that the “FBI can’t find” and that the DNC is trying to hide from the FBI.
    • In reality, there is no physical server. I’m beating this one like the dead horse it is. EVERYTHING is stored in the cloud. If anyone has a physical server, it’s the company providing cloud services, whoever that might be.
    • The FBI examined the image of the server. CrowdStrike examined the image of the server. That’s how it works in these modern times.

A Little Background on CrowdStrike

Posted on October 2, 2019 in Impeachment, Trump

Background on CrowdStrike and the Ukraine Conspiracy Theory

There’s been an ongoing far-right conspiracy theory that CrowdStrike is based in Ukraine, that they were behind the hacks and leaks in the 2016 election, and that they framed Russia for it all.

  1. CrowdStrike is a cybersecurity company that investigated the hack of the Democratic Party’s servers in the 2016 election. So it became the focus of conspiracy theories.
  2. The company is based in Irvine, CA, but Trump apparently believes it operates from Ukraine.
  3. Trump and his fellow Ukraine conspiracy theorists believe that there’s a “missing” DNC server sitting somewhere in a Ukraine basement. They also think this server is the key to the truth of what happened in 2016.
    • Tip: There is no missing DNC server. The FBI didn’t “take” the computer because they took an image of it. That’s how investigations are handled. Investigators don’t confiscate a victim’s computer.
  1. They believe that CrowdStrike is part of an anti-Trump conspiracy and that they falsified their findings that Russia was behind the hack.
  2. CrowdStrike made public certain evidence that definitively points to Russia.
  3. CrowdStrike is also likely a target because they’ve been working with the Ukraine government to fight off Russia’s sustained cyberwarfare against the country.
  4. Trump’s own staff has repeatedly warned him that the Ukraine conspiracy theory he and Giuliani (and apparently Attorney General William Barr and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo) are pursuing is “completely debunked.”
  5. Trump’s first Homeland Security Advisor, Thom Bossert, says he told Trump there was no basis to the theory that Ukraine meddled in our 2016 elections to help Democrats, that Russia is the party that intervened in our elections.
  6. The conspiracy theory also claims that the DNC hack was an inside job, which is how Seth Rich and his family got dragged through the mud after Seth’s murder. Seth’s family has a lawsuit against Fox News for propagating that particular aspect of this conspiracy theory.