Go To The Transcript #7

The transcripts of the testimony of the witnesses that was given in the SCIF are being released slowly but slowly….that is because they must go through a vetting process….

Yesterday two more transcripts were released…..Timothy Morrison, a National Security Council staffer and Jennifer Williams who is an aid to VP Pence…..

For those that would like to read the words of these witnesses then I have posted links to their transcripts…..

First, Timothy Morrison……https://www.lawfareblog.com/transcript-tim-morrison-testimony

Next that of Jennifer Williams…….Read her testimony transcript here.

And in case that you are late to the transcript reading I will also pst links to all the released documents to date…..

Read Yovanovitch’s testimony in full here. (Initial news coverage of her testimony is here.)

Read McKinley’s testimony in full here.

Read Volker’s testimony here……https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6540429/CPRT-116-IG00-D007.pdf

… another transcript was released to the public…that of Ukraine expert…..Bill Taylor and it can be read here……https://www.scribd.com/document/433753426/William-Taylor-testimony

Second from Fiona Hill……https://www.scribd.com/document/434065486/Fiona-Hill-testimony

…another 3 transcripts were released….that of a Deputy Sec. of Defense, Laura Cooper……you may read the entire thing here…..https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D012.pdf

Christopher Anderson who was an assistant to the Ukraine Envoy….his testimony can be read here……https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/11/politics/read-testimony-christopher-anderson/index.html

Catherine Croft, a top State Department official….her’s can be read here…..https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/read-transcript-state-dept-official-catherine-croft-s-impeachment-testimony-n1080331

So far the transcripts have proven valuable documents for those that truly want to see this process play out legally and fair.

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

 

The most recent release from yesterday…..State Department employee testimony can be read here…..https://www.scribd.com/document/433921637/George-Kent-testimony

…two transcripts released for public consumption……..first the transcript of the testimony from Col. Vindman…….https://www.scribd.com/document/434064258/Vindman-pdf

Sorry tom interrupt your weekend with this news….but I want to get them out there as soon as I can so my readers will be well informed…

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

The Outer Space Treaty of 1967

My FYI Weekend continues……

I have been writing a lot about space and the new proposed Space Force….and in all those posts I have referenced the outer Space Treaty of 1967…..and now it has come time to explain the treaty and its functions.

But this subject means very little to most people….my posts are not what one would call popular…..that aside I keep writing and posting because this whole idea will cost billions and the taxpayer will be on the hook for the total.

Let us start with my writings so far…..

https://lobotero.com/2019/04/12/space-law/

https://lobotero.com/2019/08/01/do-laws-apply-in-space/

https://lobotero.com/2019/07/16/space-law-part-2/

In 1967 a UN Outer Space Treaty was signed into reality….and for the most part it has been a success…..but is it a treaty for the 21st century?

Space exploration is governed by a complex series of international treaties and agreements which have been in place for years. The first and probably most important of them celebrates its 50th anniversary on January 27 – The Outer Space Treaty. This treaty, which was signed in 1967, was agreed through the United Nations, and today it remain as the “constitution” of outer space. It has been signed and made official, or ratified, by 105 countries across the world.

The treaty has worked well so far but challenges have increasingly started to crop up. So will it survive another 50 years?

The Outer Space Treaty, like all international law, is technically binding to those countries who sign up to it. But the obvious lack of “space police” means that it cannot be practically enforced. So a country, individual or company could simply ignore it if they so wished. Implications for not complying could include sanctions, but mainly a lack of legitimacy and respect which is of importance in the international arena.

https://theconversation.com/the-outer-space-treaty-has-been-remarkably-successful-but-is-it-fit-for-the-modern-age-71381

Trump’s new Space Command and the proposal for a Space Force could the US violate a long standing treaty and by doing so start yet another war….this time among the stars…..

By directing the Pentagon to create a special “Space Force” as an independent branch of the US military to ensure the safety of US spacecraft and astronauts, US President Donald Trump has sparked concern that Washington would ignite an arms race in outer space.

Since outer space is the common property of humankind, China has always advocated its peaceful use and objected to its weaponisation. It also opposes attempts to turn outer space into a battlefield, and hopes all countries will make joint efforts to keep outer space peaceful.

The United Nations’ Outer Space Treaty, which came into force on October 10, 1967, stipulates that no country should take possession of outer space (including the moon and other celestial bodies) by means of sovereign claims, use or occupation, or by any other means. It also says signatory states must use outer space for peaceful purposes and should not establish military bases or facilities, or test any type of weapons or conduct military exercises in outer space or on celestial bodies.

https://www.nationthailand.com/opinion/30348429

So many questions about our extension into space and so few answers…the Treaty of 1967 was not the only document that deals with space and the handling of events……the Moon Agreement….

The Moon Agreement was considered and elaborated by the Legal Subcommittee from 1972 to 1979. The Agreement was adopted by the General Assembly in 1979 in resolution 34/68. It was not until June 1984, however, that the fifth country, Austria, ratified the Agreement, allowing it to enter into force in July 1984. The Agreement reaffirms and elaborates on many of the provisions of the Outer Space Treaty as applied to the Moon and other celestial bodies, providing that those bodies should be used exclusively for peaceful purposes, that their environments should not be disrupted, that the United Nations should be informed of the location and purpose of any station established on those bodies. In addition, the Agreement provides that the Moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind and that an international regime should be established to govern the exploitation of such resources when such exploitation is about to become feasible.

http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/intromoon-agreement.html

Watch a short video that will help explain the “Treaty”……

I spend a lot of time on this subject for space will become more and more important and someone has to use their training to set up parameters….like when a corporation goes to Mars to mine…..they did not sign the Treaty of 1967…..what stops them from raping the planet of resources?

For those that are interested there is a place to go for all the news on Space Policy…….https://spacepolicyonline.com/

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

Impeachment Hearing–Day 2

I break with my tradition of posting very little news on the weekends but this is important enough for me to break with my routine…..

The House impeachment saga returns for a second day of witnesses…..as a service I will try and post my thoughts on these proceedings to help my readers become aware of the antics and evidence as it is made public…..

Today was the testimony of ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch…….

We begin with the opening statements from the the ambassador and the two heads of the committee,,,,,

  • Opening statement: Read Yovanovitch’s in full via Axios here. “Our Ukraine policy has been thrown into disarray, and shady interests the world over have learned how little it takes to remove an American Ambassador who does not give them what they want,” she said. (Read a summary of her testimony from behind closed doors last month.)
  • Schiff: Read his opening statement here. He said Yovanovitch’s ouster as ambassador “was a stunning turn of events for this highly regarded career diplomat.” The ouster was purely political, he added. “Yovanovitch was serving our nation’s interest in fighting corruption in Ukraine, but she was considered an obstacle to the furtherance of the President’s personal and political agenda. For that she was smeared and cast aside.”
  • Devin Nunes: In his own opening statement, Schiff’s GOP counterpart slammed Democrats for acting like “some kind of strange cult” while seeking to “fulfill their Watergate fantasies,” per the Washington Post. Nunes also read an excerpt from Trump’s first phone call with Ukraine’s leader, in April, to make the case that Trump sought no favors. (The White House released a readout of that call on Friday.) “It’s unfortunate that today and for most of the next week we will continue engaging in the Democrats’ day-long TV spectacles instead of the problems we were all sent to Washington to address,” he said. His full opening statement is here.

Now the day’s doings…….

In his questioning of Marie Yovanovitch during Friday’s impeachment hearing, GOP Rep. Mike Conaway seemed to perplex the former ambassador with one of his queries. It happened after he referred to the testimony of diplomat George Kent earlier in the week:

  • Conaway: Kent “made some exemplary statements about you, really glowing,” said Conaway, per CNN. “All of us would like to be the recipient of something that worthy, and I believe you are as well. Any reason on Earth that you can think of that George Kent would be saying that because of some reason other than the fact he believes it in his heart of hearts?”
  • Yovanovitch: “Like, like what?”
  • Conaway: “Well, I mean like somebody paid him to do it?”
  • Yovanovitch: “No, absolutely not.”

Politico has video of the exchange and says Yovanovitch was “stunned” by it. Some other notable moments:

  • “Are you a never Trumper?” asked Democratic Rep. Terri Sewell, per the Wall Street Journal. “No,” responded Yovanovitch, noting that she has served under four Republican presidents.
  • Another response from Yovanovitch, who was ousted from her post as ambassador to Ukraine: “What I’d like to say is, while I obviously don’t dispute that the President has the right to withdraw an ambassador at any time for any reason, but what I do wonder is why it was necessary to smear my reputation also?”
  • GOP Rep. Jim Jordan mentioned criticism by Ukrainian officials in 2016 of then-candidate Donald Trump in 2016. “No one did anything,” Jordan told Yovanovitch, per the Washington Post. So “you see why maybe, maybe the president was a little concerned about what went on in Ukraine.” But the former ambassador responded: “I can’t speak for the president on this. … From my point of view, that doesn’t create a Ukrainian government strategy to interfere in our election. … It doesn’t necessarily constitute interference.”

Jimbo Baggins (Rep. Jim Jordan) and Willy the Weasel(Rep. Devin Nunes) accomplished the only thing they are capable of doing….attempt to disrupt and look like the spineless toads they truly are….their words were incoherent and rattled……these guys failed…… all they accomplished was to put their lip prints on Trump’s ass.

Day two of the hearings is in the bag…..Monday we begin again…..

Remember:  It Ain’t Over Until It’s Over!

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

Read The Transcript–Part 2

Closing Thought–15Nov19

Just to be honest this the is memo of the second phone call made by the president to Ukraine……Trump has released his second transcript (it is not a transcript and says so on the document)…..(read the warning in highlighted yellow)…….

Trying to head off some of the fallout from the hearings evidence no doubt….

Read the Memo here……https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6429034-White-House-memo-on-Trump-call-with-Ukraine.html

Be sure to watch for my days summary of the Hearing in tomorrow’s blog.

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

Ukraine For Dummies

Ukraine this and Ukraine that…..but what do most Americans really know about the country and the region?

First a general description…… Ukraine was the center of the first eastern Slavic state, Kyivan Rus, which during the 10th and 11th centuries was the largest and most powerful state in Europe. Weakened by internecine quarrels and Mongol invasions, Kyivan Rus was incorporated into the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and eventually into the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The cultural and religious legacy of Kyivan Rus laid the foundation for Ukrainian nationalism through subsequent centuries. A new Ukrainian state, the Cossack Hetmanate, was established during the mid-17th century after an uprising against the Poles. Despite continuous Muscovite pressure, the Hetmanate managed to remain autonomous for well over 100 years. During the latter part of the 18th century, most Ukrainian ethnographic territory was absorbed by the Russian Empire. Following the collapse of czarist Russia in 1917, Ukraine achieved a short-lived period of independence (1917-20), but was reconquered and endured a brutal Soviet rule that engineered two forced famines (1921-22 and 1932-33) in which over 8 million died. In World War II, German and Soviet armies were responsible for 7 to 8 million more deaths. Although Ukraine achieved independence in 1991 with the dissolution of the USSR, democracy and prosperity remained elusive as the legacy of state control and endemic corruption stalled efforts at economic reform, privatization, and civil liberties.

Now a map of the region…….

Image result for Ukraine images

For those that may not completely understand the history or the situation then maybe a short refresher course will be of some help……..

So here is a kind of primer for those who might be interested in some Ukraine history:

  • Late 1700s: Catherine the Great consolidated her rule; established Russia’s first and only warm-water naval base in Crimea.
  • In 1919, after the Bolshevik Revolution, Moscow defeated resistance in Ukraine and the country becomes one of 15 Republics of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR).
  • In 1954, after Stalin’s death the year before, Nikita Khrushchev, a Ukrainian, assumed power. Pandering to Ukrainian supporters, he unilaterally decreed that henceforth Crimea would be part of the Ukrainian SSR, not the Russian SSR. Since all 15 Republics of the USSR were under tight rule from Moscow, the switch was a distinction without much of a difference – until later, when the USSR fell apart.

Read On…….

Ukraine for Dummies

Hopefully since the MSM will not explain the situation completely this may help my readers in some small way.

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

A Coming Nuke Spring?

Trump in his wisdom(?) has left most of the treaties that the US has lived by for decades…..most of the nuclear treaties have been hit the hardest, INF and START….

Kolossal’naya opasnost.” In a recent BBC interview, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev used those two words – “colossal danger” – to sound the alarm of the risk the world faces as tensions rise between Russia and the West. What prompted such strong language to describe the geopolitical standoff? Two more words: nuclear weapons.

Indeed, Gorbachev himself was a key player in unprecedented atomic disarmament a generation ago, signing the landmark 1987 accord with U.S. President Ronald Reagan to reduce arsenals of the then two superpowers with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty). Over the past year, both the U.S. and Russia announced their withdrawal from the INF.

https://www.worldcrunch.com/world-affairs/disarmament-to-rearmament-the-quiet-return-of-nuclear-risk

I am not looking forward to a f*cked nuke policy…..I lived through all the duck and roll drills, all the fear and speculation of the nuclear holocaust to come…..

But it is 2020 and an election year….so which of the Dem candidates is capable of a nuclear policy?

Will the candidates continue to support the policy that gives the US president unfettered authority to start a nuclear war? Or will they instead lower global risk of war and publicly commit the US to a nuclear No First Use policy?

Fifty-seven years ago last month the world breathed a sigh of relief. Most of that October in 1962 had been spent on the brink of nuclear war. A stare down at a naval blockade, dramatic UN Security Council meetings, a somber Presidential address, a shot down spy plane – and through it all tense backroom negotiations and letters between Kennedy and Kruschev. Ultimately peace prevailed and we backed away from nuclear armageddon. Now the anniversary is remembered as a shining example of Presidential resolve in the face of crisis. However, that’s not the whole story.

President Kennedy’s leadership didn’t end with the removal of missiles. In some ways it was only just beginning. What he knew was that his responsibility went further. He couldn’t just prevent disaster, he needed to address the causes to prevent it from happening in the future. Some steps were taken immediately, the famous “hotline” between the Kremlin and the White House was installed. Kennedy and then Soviet leader, Nikita Khrushchev, continued the correspondence they began in the heat of the moment no longer discussing immediate moves and demands but potential long term routes toward nuclear de-escalation. Ultimately, in June of 1963 President Kennedy publicly outlined his “Strategy for Peace” in a speech at American University. In it he committed to ending US nuclear weapons testing, voiced his support of the global nuclear testing ban, and called for the pursuit of “complete disarmament.” By October of 1963, the US Senate had ratified the Limited Test Ban Treaty and the path seemed set for de-escalation.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/11/05/which-2020-candidates-are-ready-address-threat-nuclear-weapons

As I look at the candidates we have left in the race I cannot see any of them with a solid nuclear policy…..my candidate being antiwar may be the only one I would trust to come up with a good solid proposal…..the rest of the 2020 field is just Neocons in Dem clothing.

I Read, I Know, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

Will This Impeachment Thing Be Fair?

If you listen to Trump and his toadies in the GOP then it will not be fair, If yoiu listen to the lap dogs of Trump, Jordan, Gaetz, Meadows, then this whle process has not been fair or transparent….but that is a lie….the so-called secret hearings that these slugs ran to a camera to bitch about were lying….there were 40+ GOPers on the committees that had access to the people and the testimony and yet to listen to the idiots with the mouths we had a flawed process.

And there is their attack…they are attacking the process and NOT one word about the evidence…..that to me is pretty telling.

If the impeachment process is to be fair and transparent then it needs to hold to four principles for the Senate’s trial…..

  • Trial procedures should be established before the trial commences. A trial can only be fair if the rules are agreed to in advance. For that reason, any supplemental rules or modifications to the existing rules should be agreed to before the trial commences.
  • The Senate should hear the full case before voting on the President’s removal. The Senate must allow members of the House to present the case for the President’s removal and the President should be afforded an opportunity to respond. Both should occur before a vote to dispose of or approve an article of impeachment.
  • The trial should be open to the public. An impeachment trial of a president is a matter of exceptional importance to the American people. They should be able to understand the case for the President’s removal and the President’s defense. The doors to the Senate chamber should be open and the American people permitted to witness the proceedings to the extent possible. Transparency should only be sacrificed to advance compelling interests such as the sanctity of Senate deliberations, the need to protect legitimately classified information, or the recognition of a whistleblower’s right to anonymity.
  • Each Senator should take seriously his or her oath to “do impartial justice” and to “support and defend the Constitution.” The question is not whether to support the President. The question is whether the President has committed treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors within the meaning of the
    Constitution.

Read CREW and Public Citizen’s full report here:

 

I have been reading the transcripts and so far those GOPers that have been the loudest and lying…..the evidence is mounting and the denials are looking more and more cowardly….

Like I stated earlier…..All the protests and criticism is about the process and so far NOT one word about the evidence.

That tells me the GOP is struggling to try and spin the truth into the bullsh*t of Trump and his Boyz.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”