The editors of the Wall Street Journal are not pro-Trump. Hamiltonians to the core, they like tax cuts and deregulation, they hate tariffs, they would like an open border. Like me and unlike the editors of the New York Times or Washington Post their views are more instrumental than political.
They think that the transcript does not show what the editors of the WaPo think it does and that it’s a fizzle:
The White House on Wednesday released the transcript of President Trump’s July call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and the news is that Mr. Trump was telling the truth about it. The conversation was largely routine diplomacy, and even the reference to Joe Biden was less than promoted by the press. Good luck persuading Americans that this is an impeachable offense.
The five-page transcript shows that Mr. Trump called to congratulate Mr. Zelensky on his party’s victory in Parliament. After niceties, Mr. Trump waxes on as he often does that the U.S. “spend[s] a lot of effort and a lot of time†on Ukraine, while complaining that European countries don’t do their share. At no point does Mr. Trump threaten a withdrawal of U.S. aid to Ukraine.
Mr. Trump does ask for a “favorâ€â€”that Ukraine look at 2016 election meddling. “I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike,†he says, referring to the company that investigated the 2016 hack of the Democratic National Committee.
He also disparages former Special Counsel Robert Mueller—no surprise there—and notes that “they say a lot of it started with Ukraine.†Mr. Trump is clearly still sore about the attempt by the Hillary Clinton campaign to dig up foreign dirt on him, but there is nothing wrong with asking a foreign head of state to investigate meddling in U.S. elections.
Only after that does Mr. Zelensky mention Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, who has been publicly urging the Ukrainians to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter’s activities in Ukraine. Mr. Zelensky says he is “hoping very much†that the former New York mayor comes to Ukraine. He promises that all “investigations will be done openly and candidly.â€
Mr. Trump responds, “Good because I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that’s really unfair.†After some praise for Mr. Giuliani, Mr. Trump adds that “there’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution†of corruption in Ukraine. Mr. Trump also says that he intends to get Mr. Giuliani and Attorney General William Barr to call, and he asks that Mr. Zelensky work with them.
That’s it. No quid pro quo. The references to the Bidens are in the context of fighting corruption, not as a prerequisite of U.S. aid. Mr. Trump was unwise to mention Mr. Biden, but the tenor of the conversation is congenial. It’s amusing to hear the same critics who call Mr. Trump an oafish thug on a daily basis now say this was all a subtle masterpiece of extortion. When is Mr. Trump ever subtle?
The challenge for the House Democrats is to appear statesmanlike and convince the American people who aren’t already convinced unshakeably one way or another that Trump is the traitor and villain they think he is.
Part of the favor was asking that Biden’s son be investigated. That is a qpq request. Asking nicely means it wasn’t a request for a personal favor in return?
“Trump is the traitor and villain”
Why would this make him a traitor? I dont see that. He is just looking to use his influence over a smaller country that wants our help to obtain a benefit that will help him win his next election. If he is so concerned about corruption, why is the Biden case the only one he mentions? Nope, doesn’t pass the smell test.
So if the conversation was a “fizzle”, I wonder why the WH had this document (according to the whistleblower), “locked down” and removed from the computer system where these conversations with foreign leaders are kept and downloaded it to a more secure computer?
It is pretty easy to guess – to prevent wild leaks like what happened here.
Trump already had calls to the then PM of Australia and one other country leaked in the first two weeks of his Presidency – almost unprecedented if not unprecedented.
It’s fueled Trump’s already high distrust in the whole NSC / DNI apparatus. Which I think after 3 years the upper management of those orgs is realizing how bad it is to lose a Presidents trust. My guess is almost all sensitive calls – to Putin / Xi, possibly Merkel / Abdullah were super restricted.
Whether you like it or not; the President is assigned the power to conduct foreign relations and being able to talk to foreign head of governments without either side worrying it gets leaked into the press is a prerequisite.
For example; his gripping about Merkel and Europeans to the Ukrainians (even through he says it in public previously); is that useful to be public?
Doesn’t hurt anything to clear the air since Joe Biden has never discussed Hunter’s business dealings with him in any fashion.
Adam Schiff, the editors of the WaPo, and the editors of the NYT think it was a quid pro quo. Trump, Zelenskiy, and the editors of the Wall Street Journal think not.
What will the ordinary person think? I think we’ll find out in due course.
From a reply to CS –
On further reflection I suspect when all the dust settles this may actually be nothing more than a diversionary tactic.
– The Biden problem has been out there for a long time, and it was bound to raise its head during the campaign. So Joe could be sacrificed. Maybe had to be sacrificed.
– Joe’s silly bravado implicates Obama in coercion. “You don’t believe me, go call Obama.†Can’t have St Barack caught up in that you see………………….and
– The DNC, Leahy/Durbin/Menendez gambit is now out there. No doubt HRC was in on the dirt finding op. Time for a distraction.
If that’s not it I have to go back to plain vanilla desperation that they can’t beat Trump without dirtying him up with phony scandals. After all, its been going on for 3 years. And poor old Joe is just collateral damage. You know what they say, the best explanation is often the simplest one.
You have to admit, if Adam Schiff believes a word he said he needs therapy to deal with his hallucinations and that imaginary friend whispering in his ear.
But I don’t think he believes a word he says, and I know of know medications for bald faced liars.
As if on cue, the key quote from the article. From Politico,
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/26/trump-lockdown-transcript-1514714
“After 2017, when verbatim transcripts of his conversations with the leaders of Australian and Mexico were leaked to the press, the White House began to restrict the number of officials who had access to the transcripts. One former Trump administration official confirmed that the White House started placing transcripts into the codeword system after those leaks.”
I’ll add an off-hand comment here. Whoever manages IT for NSC should invest in upgrading their secrets management system. The leaks are people issues but it seems the principles in how the system works seems dated from 80’s or something.
“Trump, Zelenskiy, and the editors of the Wall Street Journal think not.”
We dont really know what Zelensky thinks. He is still in the position of wanting stuff from us and Trump still controls the stuff. Zelensky obviously knows how the game is played since he made a big deal of staying at a Trump hotel. (Emoluments anyone?)
“What will the ordinary person think?”
We are tribal so they will just align with their tribe. I think if you made it a comparable non political question 95% would see it as a quid pro quo since Trump asked for stuff that would specifically benefit him, not the entity (the US) he represents.
Steve
Steve
“I’ll add an off-hand comment here. Whoever manages IT for NSC should invest in upgrading their secrets management system. The leaks are people issues but it seems the principles in how the system works seems dated from 80’s or something.”
I could go on for hours about that. I tested and utilized one of the early systems that could manage and segregate everything from unlcassified up to Top Secret codeword information. It was proprietary, massively expensive, did not scale well, required a ton of contractor support, but otherwise it worked well. It certainly made my job easier.
However, those attempts were abandoned and the government decided it was much more secure and cost-effective to use cheap systems (Windows-based PC’s mainly) on segregated networks.
It’s not uncommon to have three PC’s at a desk – one for unclassified that’s connected to the internet, a secret level workstation and a Top Secret workstation. They are all running on separate air-gapped networks. The office could also have a couple of other systems specifically for special access programs. In one job I had five logins for the various systems I needed to use.
If the President has inference of corruption by a senior government official but conceals it because to reveal it would further his own political interests has he then furthered the national interest?
IOW, If Biden’s game is pay for play, I want the voters to know, And I could care less if that’s done all the time. It’s no defense.
Thank You, President Trump!
So John Solomon has released his story. Pretty much what I had previously said, but with some more:
– Official documents show Hunter Biden’s own legal team contradicts Joe Biden’s portrayal of Shokin’s firing. They say the notion that everyone thinks Shokin was corrupt was “a set up” to cover for the fact that Shokin was zeroing in on Hunter B, and so JB could get him fired. This was relayed to the new prosecutor for reasons that are not clear. I doubt they expected them to see the light of day.
– In point of fact there were 5 prosecutors involved in the HB investigation. Solomon reports that he interviewed all of them and they all relay the same story. They couldn’t understand why a total novice in Burisma’s business was getting quite lucrative payments. Apparently they just asked the obvious: “was this just a bribe to get JB’s influence?”
– And as to the matter of Ukraine attempting to provide evidence and the back story of why they wanted to notify Barr (and perhaps later Giuliani) of “irregularities” during the 2016 election? Because Ukraine wanted to make amends to Trump for backing HRC, complete with the DNC/Leahy/Dubin/Menendez shenanigans and dirt digging.
He left a teaser, as he is going to appear on TV tonight,: there are more damning stories and documents to come.
PS –
When you consider all the faux outrage about using foreigners to interfere in elections its rich beyond all comprehension that HRC and the DNC employed the Ukranians, Dem US senators were threatening Ukranians, and HRC employed a certain British spy to engage the Russians in gathering dirt and build a smear piece, er, “dossier.”
Don’t expect NBC, ABC, CBS, NYT, WaPo, NPR, Atlantic, CNN, MSNBC……………..to report any of this.
I agree with Steve that we are all tribal. However, when it comes down to power hungry politicians, looking out more for themselves than the peoples’ business, some may start changing tribes.
Frankly, I think the “average†person is sick and tired of non-stop investigations and political brinkmanship, especially the over the top stupidity demonstrated daily in the House. Just looking at Adam Schiff grandstanding triggers either the mute or off button. In fact news is no longer news. It virtually has become a guessing game trying to figure out what is based on facts or what is really a tortured version of supporting a false political narrative.
Interesting stuff, Drew, but hardly surprising. What would be shocking is if anything substantial comes from these revelations. It seems, though, the more that comes to light about how the DNC, HRC, various Democrat senators used force and manipulation to turn the tide their way, the more the Democrats spin and project wrongdoing onto the Republicans. And, with the full cooperation of the MSM, truth is lost in a cascade of falsehoods. It’s discouraging on so many levels.
I do not believe that the country is as “tribal” as steve does. I think that most people just aren’t engaged enough to be tribal. As evidence I would submit Gallup’s assessment of party affiliation:
I think that supporting someone for purely tribal reasons is probably limited to about 40% of the population (in other words not 100% of either party) and that more people feel disenfranchised than part of a tribe.
The WaPo and NYT are tribal. The WSJ is instrumental. They support Trump when he does something they agree with and criticize him when he does something they disagree with. The Aristotelian, “you’re either with us or against us” claim is a evidence of the tribalism of the speaker rather than evidence for national tribalism.
However, we will never convince one another.
It is interesting that Trump is in the middle of some intense controversy in Sept.
Sept 2016 – Access Hollywood
Sept 2017 – Alabama Senate Special
Sept 2018 – Kavanaugh
Sept 2019 – Whistleblower
Sept 2020 – Sept surprise II?
Jan
I find it all very, very odd. The story has legs only because of the clapping seals in the media, and a small but vocal group of crazed partisans. Otherwise its a nothing story. Despite tortured logic of a magnitude rarely seen, its impeachment over a policy dispute with some faceless “whistleblower.”
And for this Joe Biden is almost certainly going down. They pulled the gun out of their pants so fast they shot their…………….well, its a family blog. As I said earlier, I can only imagine they had already determined JB was a dead man walking.
Guarnari: “This was relayed to the new prosecutor for reasons that are not clear.” (The info to the new prosecutor)
Well, now its clear. Hunter Bidens legal team was trying to guide Barisma through this legal maze. And obviously, in turn for the benefit of their client. I know some will find it shocking, but incompetent people don’t get paid those sums of money for, well, nothing. Unless they have, say, a daddy in a prominent position.
As soon as the about-to-sniff-HB-out Shokin was fired they made a bee line to the new prosecutor with the same exculpating objectives. They contacted him same day. Heh.
And not to name names (steve) before someone comes along with the usual BS about how we can’t trust the Ukranians so this story is bunk, because they are trying to curry favor. The documents have come not only from the Ukranian prosecutors office, but from US State but perhaps most importantly from the American based HB legal team.
Joe got some ‘splainin’ to do.
Orange Man Bad for exposing rival’s corruption. Impeach! Impeach!
Tells me the Democratic leadership are convinced Trump will be reelected in 2020, therefore they must do anything and everything to stop him from standing for election.
The situation would be humorous if it weren’t so scary. It’s politics, not existential survival. The Democrats pols and pundits are getting way too close to uttering Henry II’s infamous outburst for my comfort. Do they really want a bloodthirsty batshit crazy and ARMED populace hunting them down? If they don’t start dialing back the rhetoric and stifling the tantrums of their infants, they might get it.
Tribalism, IMO, is more than party affiliation. People with similar mind sets, values, how they view government, and so on can form an unaffiliated alliance, having more to do with one’s wiring, guiding how thoughts, events, and actions of others are perceived and then processed. For instance, I’ve been all over the map, party-wise. At 18 I registered with no party affiliation. In my early 20’s changed over to republican, basically because of my parents. But, by 30 I registered as a democrat, staying in that lane most of my adulthood. I became disenchanted with Obama, though, and voted republican in 2012, without changing any political preference. It was only until a few months ago I returned to my roots, re-registering with no party affiliation. A conservative leaning Indy is how I view myself.
Finding fault with both major parties is why I declined to state a party preference. But, as the democrats seem far more wily
and dishonest than republicans, especially in the current anti-Trump era of political stunts, I find myself leaning over to the Rs without being one. Also, the progressive left has taken over the Democrat party, and are simply too far afield from where I am — so much so that I can’t see myself voting democrat again.
Consequently, just studying my own history, I think relying on party registration graphs for tribalism trends is an inaccurate way to view people’s fluid voting patterns, making the outcomes of elections far more unknowable.
With information that came out last night I’m currently of a mind that simplicity of explanation prevails. Protect Joe Biden. Ooops, it backfired.
But I’ve got better things to do this morning. Let this cess pool stew………
“The WaPo and NYT are tribal. The WSJ is instrumental.”
Nope. The WSJ’s tribe is rich people, especially those in the finance sector. So when there is any kind of existential issue they will always support a Republcan. Yes, they might oppose tariffs, but that won’t stop them trying to keep Trump in office.
The NYT and even more so the WaPo have a strong neocon element, so they are going to often support Republicans when it comes to ME policy, very pro-Israel and supporting adventurism in the ME. So, that could make them instrumentalists like the WSJ, but using the same argument I did above with the WSJ I dont think supporting a couple of issues is enough to get you away from tribalism.
Ortherwise, we have the hyper partisan right thinking they have caught Biden in something. Guess we will have wait and see once we have the whole story. This is still a deflection from Trump who asked for personal favors when discussing state matters like arms sales, then sent his own personal defense attorney to follow up.
Steve
CLAPPING SEALS! Love that.
I just can’t connect the dots in your last analysis, Steve, regarding the leanings of various publications. I also take issue with you repeatedly associating “rich†with “republicans.†That association may have been more valid during the old democrat party reign. However, the reformation of that party, into the social progressive left, has changed where the wealth angle lurks.
For instance, currently, the Republican Party seems more proactive in securing the futures of the working classes. They are the ones confronting some of the de-habilitating effects globalization has had on jobs and families. Wages are now more robust, with greater opportunities for upward mobility for the lower and middle classes, than experienced under the Obama years of outsourcing jobs. Small business creation and optimism has increased the last few years, after being suppressed by over-regulation in the last administration, where economic growth was described as “tepid,†at best. Also the rich wall streeters, Hollywood and Tech giants, east and west coast wealthy are mostly in the bag for the Democrats. The only turnoff for these rich Democrat supporters/donors is if their nominee becomes too predatory, coming after their assets in too big of a way. The rest of the small fry, nondescript citizens, especially in fly-over country, are called “deplorables,†for starters, with dems flaming them with other shameful labels, encouraging Antifa brutes to spit and beat them up for oftentimes no sin greater than wearing a red hat!
So, yeah, demographics have shifted within the two political parties, Steve. Yours is now the snobbish party of the elite rich, trying to lead less fortunate constituencies over the cliff into a powerful central government’s hands.