The latest Ukraine document drop is really something (h/t @15poundstogo).
For starters, Ciaramella ("Yikes") and Ambassador Pyatt ("Buckle in") were astonished that the media got wind of Biden's scheme to extort the Ukrainian president.
Someone forwarded a news article on how the Biden family were scamming the Ukraine to Ambassador Pyatt. His reaction? Blame the Russian news outlet.
PS how is it possible that Pyatt is still a **current** United States Ambassador?
Here's Pyatt spreading the lie that the Ukrainian Prosecutor (who at the time was not Shokin anyway) was responsible for thwarting Burisma case in the UK.
@ClimateAudit has written extensively on this. It was the UK authorities who dropped the ball, nothing to do with Ukraine.
These are the talking points prepared by Biden's Communications Director Kate Bedingfield for Biden to use if anyone were to ask about Hunter's Ukraine dealings.
A bunch of lies.
This is absolutely disgusting. Not only did that godawful ambassador Pyatt somehow manage not to get fired by Trump but he then used the fact that is still an ambassador to thwart Ron Johnson's Ukraine inquiry.
On November 2, 2015, the Burisma honcho wrote to Hunter demanding "deliverables", specifically to close down investigations of Burisma.
A mere 20 days later, that "deliverable" had somehow made its way into Joe Biden's Ukraine demands.
How smoking does the gun need to be?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here's something interesting. The latest State Department FOIA dump includes some highly redacted stuff from Steele's 2014 Ukraine dossier. Looks like his usual anti-Russia stuff. Interestingly, he was sharing it with Winer at State "unilaterally". Who was paying him to do this?
Check out the subject line for one of Steele's Ukraine dossier reports. The guy is a one-trick pony.
Haha, even Victoria Nuland had doubts about Steele's "reporting".
Comey
McCabe
Clinesmith
Strzok
Page
Pientka
Somma
Auten
DOJ
for a minimum of $75,000,000.00.
I'll discuss some highlights from Carter's complaint in this thread. The entire complaint can be found here: drive.google.com/file/d/1cxy88h…
The best thing a good lawyer can do, if there is an opportunity to do so, is to let your opponent make your case for you. @McAdooGordon does exactly that right off the bat. This is an extremely strong opening.
This gets right to the heart of the matter. The FBI never had probable cause to spy on @carterwpage. @McAdooGordon doesn't beat around the bush and, unlike the gaslighting media and lying Democrats, calls Steele exactly what he is: a Clinton operative.
16% Biden voters would’ve not voted for Biden had the media not covered up the fact that the Biden family is being investigated by the FBI. cdn.mrc.org/TPC-MRC+Biden+…
Half of Biden voters didn't know about the sexual assault allegations involving Tara Reade.
36% of Biden voters didn't know about Operation Warp Speed.
1/ A lot people have shared their JFK theories today so here's mine. I got interested in the assassination as a kid because of the 25 year anniversary, read the Warren Report, read dozens of investigative books, watched lots of documentaries.
2/ I wasn't sure which conspiracy theory was the right one, probably the grassy knoll one, but was absolutely certain that there was a conspiracy. There was just way too much evidence of things that didn't fit the official narrative—or so I thought.
3/ Made it a goal to travel to Dallas as soon as I was old enough and able to afford it. I finally got there a few years later and everything that I believed fell apart in about 15 minutes.
1/Here's the GA situation in a nutshell. The law says that a registrar or clerk must reject a ballot if the signature does not match. The consent decree agreed between Raffensperger and Abrams materially changed this law so that it is no longer a registrar's or clerk's decision.
2/The consent decree now requires a review. Only a majority of reviewers can reject a ballot. While this looks like a safeguard it makes the process far more cumbersome. Also, the people who reject ballots now need to be named which might create its own dynamics and incentives.
3/Judging by the huge changes in rejection rates between past elections and this one, it may be the case that clerks just didn't want to go through that process or get dragged into a difficult situation, so they just accepted ballots that they would otherwise not have accepted.