Hillary Clinton's Collusion with Ukraine
HRC's attempts to invite foreign election interference and derail Trump's campaign
The Democrats' impeachment push against President Donald Trump rests on information from a so-called "whistleblower," yet the person who made the complaint didn't have a whistle to blow in the first place.
The operative who made the complaint, that triggered the impeachment inquiry against Trump, cannot be considered a whistleblower, either by the law or due to his circumstance.
Rep. Adam Schiff's whistleblower has no firsthand knowledge of the call between President Trump and Ukraine's President Zelensky that they claim to be blowing the whistle on, nor were they even in the room when the conversation took place.
Also, a person cannot blow the whistle on a unitary executive, namely President Trump, in any case, and you can only be a whistleblower for an agency you are a member of.
So, we have a quid without a quo and a phone conversation in which President Trump did not pressure a Ukrainian leader into investigating his potential political rival, former Vice President Joe Biden.
Speaking of Joe Biden, however, he has confessed to committing such a crime, namely threatening to withhold a loan guarantee from the US Government unless the Ukrainian leader fired a prosecutor looking into a company that was paying his son, Hunter Biden - a man with no special knowledge of Ukraine or the energy industry to the firm specializes in - $600,0000 a year.
As Trump lawyer and former New York mayor Rudy Guiliani points out, the phone transcript makes Trump the whistleblower and Biden the criminal in a Ukrainian collusion saga that leads to Hillary Clinton and not Donald Trump.
The reality is, the distinction is this. What they are trying to say is, I went there for a political mission to kind of get Joe Biden in trouble.
I went there as a lawyer defending his client. I -- I have known about this for five months. I have been trying to get people to cover this for five months. So, I knew it would be very, very hard to get this out.
And what I'm talking about, this, it's Ukrainian collusion, which was large, significant, and proven with Hillary Clinton, with the Democratic National Committee, a woman named Chalupa, with the ambassador, with an FBI agent who's now been hired by George Soros who was funding a lot of it.
If you want real collusion with a real trail of evidence of people trying to do real things interfering with our elections, particularly the 2016 campaign, try Hillary Clinton’s real collusion with Ukraine to derail and besmirch Team Trump.
As Politico reported in a story that went nowhere at the time:
Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office.
They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election.
And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found.
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.
The Ukrainian efforts had an impact in the race, helping to force Manafort’s resignation and advancing the narrative that Trump’s campaign was deeply connected to Ukraine’s foe to the east, Russia.
But they were far less concerted or centrally directed than Russia’s alleged hacking and dissemination of Democratic emails.
Here you have a meeting between a DNC operative in a foreign embassy receiving materials used to defame and derail the Trump campaign.
This meeting had real consequences worse than in the case of the Donald Trump Jr. meeting which bored its participants to death.
Was anyone interested?
On MSNBC Wednesday morning, two of MSNBC’s most prominent anchors admitted they had no idea what Trump was referring to, when he tweeted out that the Clinton campaign also sought out information from foreign government officials to help boost her campaign, during the 2016 election.
After reading the tweet, Brian Williams asked Andrea Mitchell if she knew what he was talking about.
“I’m hoping you can help me decipher this,” he asked.
“It’s hard to figure out what this is about,” Andrea Mitchell quizzically responded.
It wouldn’t have been so hard if the crack investigative reporters at MSNBC and CNN had followed the facts and the named sources in the Politico report instead of unnamed sources who produce fake news about Team Trump which results in stories being retrace and reporters resigning.
As MRC/Newsbusters reported:
Trump’s tweet was referring to a seven-month old report from Politico, which found that Ukrainian officials worked with the DNC to help do opposition research on Trump in order to help Clinton’s campaign.
This research was also leaked to several American journalists, according to the report.
Politico found that a veteran DNC operative, Alexandra Chalupa, sought out information to damage the Trump campaign after media reports speculated Paul Manafort had ties to Russia.
She sought out help to do this from the Ukrainian Ambassador to the U.S. and one of his top aides, “with the DNC’s encouragement,” Politico reported.
Chalupa spoke to Politico, which recalled:
She [Chalupa] said that, when Trump’s unlikely presidential campaign began surging in late 2015, she began focusing more on the research, and expanded it to include Trump’s ties to Russia, as well. She occasionally shared her findings with officials from the DNC and Clinton’s campaign, Chalupa said.
The report went into further detail, but the long and short of it explained how Ukrainian officials admitted to “working very closely” with Chalupa, who then shared this information with the DNC.
One official, Andrii Telizhenko told Politico:
“They were coordinating an investigation with the Hillary team on Paul Manafort with Alexandra Chalupa.”
Telizhenko recalled that Chalupa told him and Shulyar that, “If we can get enough information on Paul [Manafort] or Trump’s involvement with Russia, she can get a hearing in Congress by September.”
Say what? This is what you really call “empirical evidence” of collusion with a foreign government, inviting them to interfere in the 2016 election.
Yet the media ignores it, Congressional Democrats avert their eyes, and congressional Republicans afraid of their own shadow let Democratic bottom feeders like Rep. Adam Schiff and Rep. Chuck Schumer beat up on President Trump without any meaningful response or defense.
Where are the congressional hearings on Hillary’s collusion with Ukraine?
Where are the hearings on a sitting vice president’s criminal collusion with that same foreign government?
Where are the hearings on her making it possible for Russian interests to control 20 percent of our uranium supply in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation?
Joe Biden? Lock him up.