Unz: Unasked Questions About US-Ukrainian Relations

http://www.unz.com/scohen/unasked-questions-about-us-ukrainian-relations/

A professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University provides some background on US-Ukrainian relations and why it matters to Russiagate.

7 thoughts on “Unz: Unasked Questions About US-Ukrainian Relations

  1. Desperately searching the Internet looking for something, ANYTHING that will somehow make Trump’s actions justifiable.

    NONE OF WHAT YOU FIND MATTERS.

    Trump extorted Ukraine in order to get them to investigate his political opponent. That FACT is supported by irrefutable evidence provided – stupidly – by Trump himself.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. RE: “Trump extorted Ukraine in order to get them to investigate his political opponent.”

      So you say. You may even believe it. But in reality you don’t — because you can’t — know it to be true.

      Like

      1. Without getting into a debate on epistemology, the evidence supporting the fact that I asserted is compelling to anybody who is open to evidence. The summary of the call released by Trump is enough and that is without about 2/3 of the conversation being documented. (It was NOT “a word for word, comma for comma transcript” – another Trump lie).

        And every day, the evidence gets stronger as it becomes clear that promising to dig for dirt was a condition that Ukraine had to meet to discuss unblocking the vitally needed military aid approved by Congress.

        I get that you do not want to believe that your hero is a criminal scumbag, but there it is.

        Like

      2. RE: “Without getting into a debate on epistemology…”

        Agreed. It’s probably best if you don’t try.

        RE: “I get that you do not want to believe that your hero is a criminal scumbag, but there it is.”

        If you can show us some real evidence of criminality, I’ll change my thinking. As it is, all your evidence boils down to mind reading. Are you good at mind reading, Mr. Murphy? Can you prove your results as a mind reader are real?

        Just in passing I’ll mention that Hillary got a pass on prosecution over her email practices because the prosecutor didn’t think he could prove intent. Can you prove Mr. Trump’s intent with the Ukraine phone call, Mr. Murphy?

        Like

        1. Agreed. It’s probably best if you don’t try.

          Right. There is no point in trying to have such a discussion with Goofy Counterfactual Obtuseness.

          In this case, you are confusing the difficulty of proving intent in a criminal trial with what constitutes an Impeachable Offense. It matters not at all what was in Trump’s mind when he withheld vital military support, sent his minions to demand an investigation of a fabricated conspiracy theory and asked multiple times for this “favor” in the context of discussing that vital aid. It is the behavior that counts, not what was going on in his demented mind.

          And speaking of mind, there is no need to be a mind-reader. The abbreviated “transcript” provided by Trump has all the evidence needed and that is being augmented every day by records and texts from underlings.

          Like

        2. RE: “The abbreviated ‘transcript’ provided by Trump has all the evidence needed”

          And yet with “all the evidence needed” you are unable to state the crime or impeachable offence Trump has committed. You appear to be failing your own epistemological test.

          Like

          1. LOL! How many times do we have to go over this.

            With respect to a crime, under the United States code it is a crime to solicit or accept any kind of aid from a foreign person, government or organization. Never mind what is minions did – which now appears to be plenty – Trump asked the Ukraine for the political favor of investigating Biden at least seven times in that conversation and probably more – 2/3 of the conversation is not documented.

            With respect to an impeachable offense, the term High Crime and Misdemeanor is not defined. It is whatever the House says it is. In this case, Trump blocked the disbursement of money approved by Congress in order to pressure a foreign country to open an investigation into a debunked, time-warping conspiracy theory involving a political opponent. In trying to cover up his behavior he has defied subpoenas again and again.

            Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s