President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine at a military training center near the village of Stare. © Gleb Garanich/Reuters
New York Times: Ukraine Knew of Aid Freeze by Early August, Undermining Trump Defense
KIEV, Ukraine — To Democrats who say that President Trump’s decision to freeze $391 million in military aid was intended to bully Ukraine’s leader into carrying out investigations for Mr. Trump’s political benefit, the president and his allies have had a simple response: There was no quid pro quo because the Ukrainians did not know assistance had been blocked.
But then on Tuesday, William B. Taylor Jr., the top United States diplomat in Kiev, told House impeachment investigators that the freeze was directly linked to Mr. Trump’s demand. That did not deter the president, who on Wednesday approvingly tweeted a quote by a congressional Republican saying neither Mr. Taylor nor any other witness had “provided testimony that the Ukrainians were aware that military aid was being withheld.”
Read more ....
WNU Editor: Former U.S. diplomat William Taylor Jr, a well known Trump critic, comes out and say that he heard from someone who heard it from someone else that there was a "quid-pro-quo" .... Diplomat says Ukraine aid was tied to political investigations (The Hill). Followed by an AP report saying that in May of this year Ukrainian officials were "worried "about pressure from the U.S. president to investigate his Democratic rival Joe Biden" .... Ukrainian leader felt Trump pressure before taking office (AP). The problem is that both Ukraine President Zelenskiy and Ukraine Foreign Minster Vadym Prystaiko have already made it very clear that they were never under pressure from President Trump .... Ukraine Foreign Minister Denies Media Reports That President Trump Pressured Ukraine President Zelenskiy (September 22, 2019). So who is right? The New York Times and AP with their anonymous sources, or the Ukraine President and Foreign Minister coming out publicly and stating very bluntly that there was never any pressure? I can only speak for myself. But considering how the main stream media has been consistently wrong on covering everything from Russian collusion to this story, my money is NOT on the New York Times and AP.
6 comments:
I've noticed in the last week or two that I am able to access some publications that gave limited to no access. NYT springs to mind and this morning the WSJ. I wonder if this is a response to declining readership.
Heard it from a friend who
Heard it from a friend who
Heard it from another you ...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=41ENCM70xr0
Smith
the NY Times is doing very well and electronic readership is very high and continuing to do well. It is you. Clear your cache
Anon sources are often used to protect those sources. to suggest that anon means it is fiction is plain wrong. If mainstream press is wrong, then no reason why White House should worry, right?
Smith clears his cache and does regularly. The WSJ never displayed anything but a few lines. The NYT gave two or so articles a month for signing in as did the Washington Post. Haven't tried any others lately.
As for the NYT doing well...your statement contradicts a number of mentions in articles I've read. Nonetheless, if indeed I can unknowingly overcome firewalls as your comment suggests, I'm not complaining.
" If mainstream press is wrong, then no reason why White House should worry, right?"
If Stalin's henchmen do not have the fact, then there is no chance I am going to Siberia, right?
Basically, Democrats thought their predominance in the press, politics, NGO's and elsewhere
are opting to not prosecute their own, but to trump up charges on Republicans.
But the panting porn parrot does not care so long his side is winning. Porn parrot has no morals.
Post a Comment