Nov. 6, 2019
Permission to republish original opeds and cartoons granted.
Impeachment flops as Ambassador Sondland says he ‘presumed’ Ukrainian military assistance was ‘likely’ being conditioned, but nobody told him it was
U.S. Ambassador
to the European Union Gordon Sondland issued a new statement on Nov. 4 to the
House Intelligence Committee that he "presumed" military assistance
to Ukraine was “likely” being conditioned by the administration when he spoke
to a Ukrainian presidential aide on Sept. 1, but that he “did not know… when,
why, or by whom the aid was suspended…” On Aug. 28, Politico broke the story
that the U.S. had decided to pause U.S. military assistance to Ukraine, days
before a planned meeting between Vice President Mike Pence and Ukrainian
President Volodymyr Zelensky in Warsaw, which is how Ukrainian officials had
learned about it. Then the meeting in Warsaw happened, and the issuewas raised
there by both Zelensky and afterward by his aide, Andriy Yermak. But if
Sondland was “presuming” the aid was being leveraged, and told Ukrainian
presidential aide Yermak that the military assistance would “likely” not resume
until the statement had been issued, then he was guessing. Meaning, there was
no quid pro quo.
Disney’s Jeffrey Epstein cover up reveals how corrupt media is
On a hot mic,
ABC News reporter Amy Robach has alleged in a video revealed by Project
Veritas, that ABC News, which is owned by Disney, covered up the Jeffrey
Epstein story three years ago. “I've had the story for three years,” Robach
said, adding, “We would not put it on the air. Um, first of all, I was told,
'Who was Jeffrey Epstein? No one know who that is. This is a stupid story.'
Then the Palace found out that we had her whole allegations about Prince Andrew
and threatened us a million different ways.” Project Veritas' release of
footage featuring respected broadcast journalist Amy Robach describing how the
Jeffrey Epstein story was spiked by her bosses calls into question the very
concept of whether we still have a free and independent media. The severity of
the charges against those who are named by one of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged
victims are monstrous but when you realize that ABC is owned by the Disney
Corporation it becomes beyond troubling. No corporation in the world has the
same standing among children as Disney. And if Ms. Robach's claims are true,
Disney not only sheltered what may have been the worst pedophile in American
history, but through their decision to not broadcast the allegations, subjected
children to three more years of alleged torture and abuse.
Ambassador Sondland's unfounded speculation at heart of Pelosi-Schiff 'house of cards' impeachment probe
Americans for
Limited Government President Rick Manning: “The quid pro quo presumption by
Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Schiff turns out is based entirely Ambassador
Sondland's stated 'presumption' to a Ukrainian presidential aide on Sept. 1
that a pause in military assistance could be ended through a public statement
that Ukraine was looking into the origins of the Russiagate investigation in
Ukraine and an anti-corruption probe of Burisma Holdings. The fact that
Sondland testified under oath that he did not know who suspended the aid, did
not know the aid had been suspended until Politico reported it on Aug. 28, and
no one gave him any instructions on what the Ukrainian government could do to
restore the aid creates a dead end for Schiff. This conversation by Sondland to
Yermak immediately followed a face-to-face meeting between Ukrainian President
Volodymyr Zelensky and Vice President Mike Pence on Sept. 1, where Zelensky
directly asked Pence about the military aid, receiving an answer that clearly
did not convey any action that the Ukrainian government needed to take. Why else
would a Zelensky aide then query Sondland asking for clarity on this issue?
That proves there was no quid pro quo, and the Pelosi-Schiff impeachment farce
is simply relying on an out-of-the-loop ambassador reacting to news reports
about the suspended aid and speaking out of turn. This whole thing is a house
of cards. The more we learn about the Pelosi-Schiff impeachment fraud, the more
it is clear that the House Intelligence Committee is producing sound and fury,
signifying nothing.”
Breitbart.com: Volker denies quid pro quo in testimony transcripts, saying there was 'no leverage'
“Former U.S.
special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker repeatedly denied that quid pro quo took
place during the July 25 call between U.S. President Donald Trump and his
Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky, transcripts released on Tuesday
show. ‘I didn’t think’ a quid pro quo ‘was actually there,’ Volker, the first
impeachment inquiry witness, testified, referring to the call. ‘I don’t think’
Ukraine was ‘aware’ that U.S. aid was being withheld ‘at the time’ of the call,
‘so there was no leverage implied,’ he added. Volker testified that he believed
that Ukraine did not become aware of the hold on U.S. aid until Politico
published a story on the matter, based on leaked information, on August 28,
more than a month after the July 25 call.”
Impeachment flops as Ambassador Sondland says he ‘presumed’ Ukrainian military assistance was ‘likely’ being conditioned, but nobody told him it was
By Robert Romano
U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland issued a new statement on Nov. 4 to the House Intelligence Committee that he "presumed" military assistance to Ukraine was “likely” being conditioned by the administration when he spoke to a Ukrainian presidential aide on Sept. 1, but that he “did not know… when, why, or by whom the aid was suspended…”
In any sane world, this would be the end of the impeachment farce by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.). Per Sondland, there was no communication from the White House, President Donald Trump or his attorney, Rudy Giuliani, to leverage Ukraine using military assistance — the heart of the allegation against the President.
From the testimony, “I now do recall a conversation on September 1, 2019, in Warsaw with [Zelensky presidential aide Andriy] Yermak. This brief pull-aside conversation followed the larger meeting involving Vice President Pence and President Zelensky, in which President Zelensky had raised the issue of the suspension of U.S. aid to Ukraine directly with Vice President Pence. After that large meeting, I now recall speaking individually with Mr. Yermak, where I said that resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement we had been discussing for many weeks.”
But, he didn’t know. Here, Yermak says he was speculating: “I always believed that suspending aid to Ukraine was ill-advised, although I did not know (and still do not know) when, why, or by whom the aid was suspended. However, by the beginning of September 2019, and in the absence of any credible explanation for the suspension of aid, I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anti-corruption statement.”
On Aug. 28, Politico broke the story that the U.S. had decided to pause U.S. military assistance to Ukraine, days before the planned meeting, which is how Ukrainian officials had learned about it.
Then the meeting in Warsaw happened, and the issue was raised there by both Zelensky and afterward by Yermak. But if Sondland was “presuming” the aid was being leveraged, and told Ukrainian presidential aide Yermak that the military assistance would “likely” not resume until the statement had been issued, then he was guessing.
Meaning, there was no quid pro quo. Nowhere does Sondland say the White House had told him to tie military aid to any statement by Ukraine.
Of course that’s not stopping major media outlets from reporting what they want the testimony to mean. They think Sondland is their star witness.
“Sondland reverses himself on Ukraine, confirming quid pro quo,” reported Politico.
“The guy Trump cited as proof there wasn’t a quid pro quo just said there was a quid pro quo,” blared Rolling Stone.
“With revised statement, Sondland adds to testimony linking aid to Ukraine investigations that Trump sought,” the Washington Post added.
“It was a corrupt quid pro quo,” the Atlantic found.
The anti-corruption statement by Ukraine that had been sought was that they were looking at origins of the Russiagate investigation and potential corruption at Burisma Holdings, but not in exchange for military assistance but a sought-after meeting between President Donald Trump and Ukrainan President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Per Sondland’s updated testimony, in May 2019, “scheduling a White House visit for President Zelensky was conditioned upon President Zelensky’s agreement to make a public anti-corruption statement. This condition had been communicated by Rudy Giuliani, with whom President Trump directed Ambassador Volker, Secretary Perry and me, on May 23, 2019, to discuss issues related to the President’s concerns about Ukraine.”
But those conditions were dropped. Because the Sept. 1 Warsaw meeting was originally supposed to be Trump and Zelensky but an imminent hurricane had Pence traveling there instead, facilitating such a statement had already abandoned by State Department officials.
According to former United States Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations Kurt Volker’s Oct. 3 testimony, “To my knowledge, the news about a hold on security assistance did not get into Ukrainian Government circles, as indicated to me by the current foreign minister, then diplomatic adviser, until the end of August. And by the time that we had that, we had dropped the idea of even looking at a statement” in exchange for a meeting.
Further, Volker was asked about the conditioning the meeting, “Did the President ever withhold a meeting with President Zelensky... until the Ukrainians committed to investigate the allegations... concerning the 2016 election?”
To which, Volker replied, “The answer to the question is no... there was no linkage.” And we now know that because the Sept. 1 meeting in Warsaw — which again, was supposed to be Trump and Zelensky not Pence — had already been scheduled.
Now, perhaps the reason for that is Trump became satisfied by what Zelensky had told him in the July 25 phone call, where Zelensky pledged to look into both potential Ukrainian origins of the Russiagate investigation by intelligence agencies and the Justice Department falsely accusing the President and his campaign of being Russian agents, which had been debunked by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, and looking at potential corruption in Burisma Holdings.
On the Russiagate investigation, without any preconditions communicated by Trump — the President just asked nicely — Zelensky said, “Yes, it is very important for me and everything that you just mentioned earlier… I also plan to surround myself with great people and in addition to that investigation, I guarantee as the President of Ukraine that all the investigations will be done openly and candidly. That I can assure you.”
And on Burisma, again without any pressure from Trump, Zelensky said, “I understand and I’m knowledgeable about the situation… Since we have won the absolute majority in our Parliament, the next prosecutor general will be 100 percent my person, my candidate, who will be approved by the parliament and will start as new prosecutor in September. He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue. The issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue of making sure to restore the honesty so we will take care of that and work on the investigation of the case.”
As for military assistance, both Trump and Zelensky blasted Europe for not doing more, and Zelensky thanked the U.S. for everything it was doing. Trump said, “I will say that we do a lot for Ukraine. We spend a lot of effort and a lot of time. Much more than the European countries are doing and they should be helping you more than they are. Germany does almost nothing for you… A lot of the European countries are the same way so I think it’s something you want to look at…”
To which Zelensky replied, “Yes you are absolutely right. Not only 100 percent, but actually 1000 percent and I can tell you the following: I did talk to Angela Merkel and I did meet with her. I alsmo met and talked with Macron and I told them they are not doing quite as much as they need to be doing on the issues with the sanctions. They are not enforcing the sanctions. They are not working as much as they should work for Ukraine. It turns out that even though logically, the European Union should be our biggest partner but technically the United States is a much bigger partner…”
A month later, Trump was set to meet Zelensky on Sept. 1. And then a hurricane hit and so did the Politico story about military aid being paused. That’s when Trump canceled his trip and Pence went in his stead, and then Sondland says he surmised that the military assistance was tied to the statement.
But when he circled back to the White House, he found out he was wrong. In Sondland’s original testimony on Oct. 17, he said he asked Trump directly what he wanted out of Ukraine, and Trump said nothing: “On September 9, 2019, Acting Charge de Affairs/Ambassador William Taylor raised concerns about the possibility that Ukrainians could perceive a linkage between U.S. security assistance and the President’s 2020 reelection campaign. Taking the issue seriously, and given the many versions of speculation that had been circulating about the security aid, I called President Trump directly. I asked the President: ‘What do you want from Ukraine?’ The President responded, ‘Nothing. There is no quid pro quo.’ The President repeated: ‘no quid pro quo’ multiple times. This was a very short call. And I recall the President was in a bad mood.”
Two days later, on Sept. 11, the military assistance was released. On Sept. 25, Zelensky spoke with reporters at his meeting with Trump in New York saying, that “nobody pushed me.”
If there’s no victim, where’s the crime?
Sondland now says he made he “presumed” that military assistance was “likely” being conditioned directly following the Sept. 1 meeting between Vice President Pence and Zelensky where the issue of the lapse in military funding was raised. But he was wrong. Barring any other disclosures, it appears Sondland was the source of the confusion.
That will probably not be enough for Pelosi and Schiff — they are too committed at this point. But if Zelensky says there was no pressure, neither Trump nor Pence conveyed any conditions on the aid, and the only person who communicated that the military assistance was being conditioned by the administration now says he was assuming that it was, then that’s it. This is a dead end.
Robert Romano is the Vice President of Public Policy at Americans for Limited Government.
Disney’s Jeffrey Epstein cover up reveals how
corrupt media is
By Rick Manning
On a hot mic, ABC News reporter Amy Robach has alleged in a video revealed by Project Veritas, that ABC News, which is owned by Disney, covered up the Jeffrey Epstein story three years ago.
“I've had the story for three years,” Robach said, adding, “We would not put it on the air. Um, first of all, I was told, 'Who was Jeffrey Epstein? No one know who that is. This is a stupid story.' Then the Palace found out that we had her whole allegations about Prince Andrew and threatened us a million different ways.”
Project Veritas' release of footage featuring respected broadcast journalist Amy Robach describing how the Jeffrey Epstein story was spiked by her bosses calls into question the very concept of whether we still have a free and independent media.
Robach alleges that Buckingham Palace and other influential world leaders threatened access to ABC News should her story run about Epstein's pedophile island and the alleged abuses at the hands of many elites, including Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew.
“I tried for three years to get it out to no avail and now these new revelations and — I freaking had all of it," Robach said.
The severity of the charges against those who are named by one of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged victims are monstrous but when you realize that ABC is owned by the Disney Corporation it becomes beyond troubling. No corporation in the world has the same standing among children as Disney. And if Ms. Robach's claims are true, Disney not only sheltered what may have been the worst pedophile in American history, but through their decision to not broadcast the allegations, subjected children to three more years of alleged torture and abuse.
This is not the first time in the past two months that Disney's journalistic ethics have been called into question, as their cable sports network ESPN kowtowed to the communist Chinese government during the flareup with the NBA by publishing maps that dramatically expanded Chinese territory including subsuming independent Taiwan into Red China.
Our nation has a media crisis: Too few corporations own too much media. This is why Americans for Limited Government opposed the AT&T-Time Warner merger and continues to urge the Justice Department to review the approvals given to the Comcast-NBC Universal merger given almost a decade ago.
When few control what gets reported, honest journalists like Ms. Robach have very few options to get the truth out and report crimes against humanity that impact the powerful who rub elbows with media owners.
Over the last four years our nation has witnessed media collusion legitimizing intelligence officials' assessments that are purely political poppycock and theater with the goal of overturning the presidential election of 2016. Any illusion that major media is independent and trustworthy has been shattered and this latest coverup of the Jeffrey Epstein predation by Disney validates all the concerns about the level of manipulation that America is subjected to, which is unacceptable and must addressed.
Since the release of the video, Robach and ABC News have issued concurrent statements. Robach said, “As a journalist, as the Epstein story continued to unfold last summer, I was caught in a private moment of frustration. I was upset that an important interview I had conducted with Virginia Roberts didn't air because we could not obtain sufficient corroborating evidence to meet ABC's editorial standards about her allegations. My comments about Prince Andrew and her allegation that she had seen Bill Clinton on Epstein's private island were in reference to what Virginia Roberts said in that interview in 2015. I was referencing her allegations — not what ABC News had verified through our reporting. The interview itself, while I was disappointed that it didn't air, didn't meet our standards. In the years since no one ever told me or the team to stop reporting on Jeffrey Epstein, and we have continued to aggressively pursue this important story.”
As for ABC News, they said, “At the time, not all of our reporting met our standards to air, but we have never stopped investigating the story. Ever since we've had a team on this investigation and substantial resources dedicated to it. That work has led to a two-hour documentary and 6-part podcast that will air in the new year.”
In the specific case of Jeffrey Epstein, it is reasonable to ask whether victims over the past three years have a legitimate claim against Disney and if Disney could be prosecuted by the Justice Department under 18 USC section 4 for their failure to report the felonies allegedly committed by Epstein and his powerful friends.
Given the irregularities of Epstein's death and Attorney General William Barr's Aug. 12 pledge to continue the investigation — he said “We will get to the bottom of what happened and there will be accountability. But let me assure you this case will continue on against anyone who was complicit with Epstein. Any co-conspirators should not rest easy. The victims deserve justice, and they will get it…” — perhaps it is Disney executives responsible for killing the Epstein story should not be resting easy in the wake of the Robach's jaw-dropping revelations.
Rick Manning is the President of Americans for Limited Government.
Ambassador Sondland's unfounded speculation at heart of Pelosi-Schiff 'house of cards' impeachment probe
Nov. 5, 2019, Fairfax, Va.—Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning today issued the following statement in light of U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland's statement that he "presumed" military assistance to Ukraine was being conditioned by the administration but that he “did not know… when, why, or by whom the aid was suspended”:
"The quid pro quo presumption by Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Schiff turns out is based entirely Ambassador Sondland's stated 'presumption' to a Ukrainian presidential aide on Sept. 1 that a pause in military assistance could be ended through a public statement that Ukraine was looking into the origins of the Russiagate investigation in Ukraine and an anti-corruption probe of Burisma Holdings. The fact that Sondland testified under oath that he did not know who suspended the aid, did not know the aid had been suspended until Politico reported it on Aug. 28, and no one gave him any instructions on what the Ukrainian government could do to restore the aid creates a dead end for Schiff. This conversation by Sondland to Yermak immediately followed a face-to-face meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Vice President Mike Pence on Sept. 1, where Zelensky directly asked Pence about the military aid, receiving an answer that clearly did not convey any action that the Ukrainian government needed to take. Why else would a Zelensky aide then query Sondland asking for clarity on this issue? That proves there was no quid pro quo, and the Pelosi-Schiff impeachment farce is simply relying on an out-of-the-loop ambassador reacting to news reports about the suspended aid and speaking out of turn.
"This whole thing is a house of cards. The more we learn about the Pelosi-Schiff impeachment fraud, the more it is clear that the House Intelligence Committee is producing sound and fury, signifying nothing."
To view online: https://getliberty.org/2019/11/amb-sondlands-unfounded-speculation-at-heart-of-pelosi-schiff-house-of-cards-impeachment-probe/
ALG Editor’s Note: In the following featured report from Breitbart.com’s Edwin Mora, former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker says there was no pressure on Ukraine by leveraging U.S. military assistance:
Volker denies quid pro quo in testimony transcripts, saying there was 'no leverage'
By Edwin Mora
Former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker repeatedly denied that quid pro quo took place during the July 25 call between U.S. President Donald Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky, transcripts released on Tuesday show.
“I didn’t think” a quid pro quo “was actually there,” Volker, the first impeachment inquiry witness, testified, referring to the call.
“I don’t think” Ukraine was “aware” that U.S. aid was being withheld “at the time” of the call, “so there was no leverage implied,” he added.
Volker testified that he believed that Ukraine did not become aware of the hold on U.S. aid until Politico published a story on the matter, based on leaked information, on August 28, more than a month after the July 25 call.
House Democrat impeachment investigators are trying to determine if Trump abused his power by allegedly pressuring Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, and claims of tampering in the 2016 elections during the July 25 call.
Trump, Zelensky, Volker, and other impeachment probe witnesses have denied those claims.
House investigators asked Volker, “Did President Trump ever withhold a meeting with President Zelensky or delay a meeting with President Zelensky until the Ukrainians committed to investigate the allegations that you just described concerning the [2016] presidential election?”
“The answer to the question is no …. there was no linkage like that,” Volker said.
Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) explicitly asked Volker, “And in no way, shape, or form in either the readouts from the United States or Ukraine did you receive any indication whatsoever for anything that resembles a quid pro quo?”
“Correct,” he replied.
Volker’s denial irked Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the leader of the impeachment probe, who repeatedly pressured the former envoy to confirm his characterization of events suggesting a quid pro quo took place.
Schiff declared:
“Ambassador, I find it remarkable as a career diplomat that you have difficulty acknowledging that when Ukraine learned that their aid had been suspended for unknown reasons, that this wouldn’t add additional urgency to [an investigation] request by the President of the United States. I find that remarkable.”
Following weeks of Republican pressure, House Democrats pursuing the impeachment inquiry released the transcript of the Volker’s October 3 deposition.
Republicans have argued that Volker’s testimony exonerates Trump of the allegations that triggered the impeachment probe.
