The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Ukraine ‘Scandal’ Hoax Imploding

Posted on | October 3, 2019 | 1 Comment


Before we run down the latest developments in the Ukraine hoax, let me remind you of a post I wrote three months ago — June 22:

The Fake Ukrainian Ledger Angle: How
the Media Colluded With the ‘Deep State’

As I explained there, the New York Times reported in August 2016 how Ukraine’s “newly formed National Anti-Corruption Bureau” took an interest in Donald Trump’s campaign manager Paul Manafort — what a coincidence! — and guess what they found? A handwritten ledger allegedly showing cash payments to Manafort. Except this was ridiculous, for several reasons, and the ledger was obviously a forgery:

Manafort’s Ukrainian business partner Konstantin Kilimnik, a regular informer for the State Department, told the U.S. government almost immediately after The New York Times wrote about the ledger in August 2016 that the document probably was fake.
Manafort “could not have possibly taken large amounts of cash across three borders. It was always a different arrangement — payments were in wire transfers to his companies, which is not a violation,” Kilimnik wrote in an email to a senior U.S. official on Aug. 22, 2016.
He added: “I have some questions about this black cash stuff, because those published records do not make sense. The timeframe doesn’t match anything related to payments made to Manafort. …It does not match my records. All fees Manafort got were wires, not cash.”
Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team and the FBI were given copies of Kilimnik’s warning, according to three sources familiar with the documents.

Ace explained what the FBI was doing:

It’s illegal to submit, as part of an official record, evidence to a judge — for example, in seeking a warrant against Paul Manafort– which the person submitting knows to be fraudulent, or which may be fraudulent.
It can result in an actual criminal charge being filed.
So, what did Mueller and Weismann do?
They could not submit the “black cash ledger” as evidence in seeking probable cause warrants against Manafort — that could expose their own corrupt asses to federal charges.
But they were determined to jam it in there anyway.
So they submitted media reports as evidence supporting the warrant, based on leaks about the likely fraudulent ledger, as part of their application.
They effectively submitted the contents of the “ledger,” without submitting the ledger itself — in order to avoid having to tell the judge, straight up, that they’d been warned by several informed sources that the thing was a forgery and a sham.

So, by leaking this “Ukraine ledger” story to the New York Times, the FBI in effect manufactured “evidence” to use to get a warrant to conduct surveillance on Manafort, a pattern of misconduct very similar to what the FBI did with the infamous “Steele dossier.”

But gosh, why was Ukraine investigating Manafort?

Former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy noted at National Review [Sept. 26] that then-President Barack Obama’s administration asked Ukraine to investigate Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Paul Manafort, in 2016. . . .
McCarthy notes that “the Obama administration’s law-enforcement agencies pressured their Ukrainian counterparts to revive a dormant corruption investigation of Paul Manafort” in the middle of the 2016 presidential election.
The results were soon clear: leaks about Manafort’s activities in Ukraine began to appear in the U.S. media, spun in the worst possible light. He was replaced at the Trump campaign and became a target in the phony “collusion” narrative.
McCarthy notes the glaring double standard: “When the Obama administration leans on Ukraine for help in an investigation of political opponents, the Democrats and the media say, ‘But look how corrupt Paul Manafort was!’ When the Trump administration leans on Ukraine for help in an investigation of political opponents, the Democrats and the media say, ‘Abuse of power — impeach him!’”

The whole Russian “collusion” thing was a set-up — a frame job — and Attorney General William Barr has ordered an investigation to find out what happened in 2016, which is why Democrats panicked and started this not-really-an-impeachment over the Ukraine “whistleblower.”

And, wow, is this blowing up in their faces:

Republican congressional leaders accused Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Democrats of rigging the impeachment scheme after news broke that Schiff was in contact with the whistleblower before the complaint against President Donald Trump was filed.
The report from the New York Times claimed that Schiff received an “early account by the future whistleblower” days before the person filed the complaint accusing Trump of presidential misconduct.
The report seemed to be confirmed by a Schiff spokesman, who said: “Like other whistle-blowers have done before and since under Republican and Democratic-controlled committees, the whistle-blower contacted the committee for guidance on how to report possible wrongdoing within the jurisdiction of the intelligence community.”
Schiff said during a Sept. 17 interview on MSNBC that he did not have “direct contact” with the person who filed the complaint.
Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), the minority whip, was among those reacting to the news, telling a Fox News reporter that he was “deeply concerned” that the whistleblower went to Schiff’s staff instead of waiting for the CIA whistleblower process to work through its conclusion. The person, who has not been identified publicly, reportedly filed the complaint initially with the CIA.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) shared the report and wrote in a statement: “Chairman Adam Schiff just got caught orchestrating with the whistleblower before the complaint was ever filed. Democrats have rigged this process from the start.”

Furthermore, the rules of the Intelligence Committee requires that information brought to the committee be shared with members of both parties, something that Schiff manifestly failed to do. Of course, viewers of CNN and MSNBC know nothing about this — if you’re not watching Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson, you might actually think the Ukraine “whistleblower” story is a real scandal, which it’s not. Trump went off on Schiff in a press conference today:


Oh, and here’s an interesting headline:

Ex-Ukraine prosecutor said he was told to back off
probe of Biden-linked firm, files show

Keep in mind, nobody was talking about the Biden-Ukraine thing before Schiff tried to turn this “whistleblower” into an impeachment. What Schiff never expected was that Trump would react by declassifying the transcript of his phone call and releasing it so everybody could see for themselves what he’d said to the Ukrainian president. And once he did that, most people looked at the transcript and said, “What scandal?”

If it was not wrong to ask Ukraine to investigate Paul Manafort, why is it wrong to ask Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden? Oops. And once people start asking those questions, who knows what they’ll become curious about next?


Keep asking that question. The answer matters.



One Response to “Ukraine ‘Scandal’ Hoax Imploding”

  1. Ukraine ‘Scandal’ Hoax Imploding « Bacon Time !!!!!!
    October 3rd, 2019 @ 1:12 pm

    […] Ukraine ‘Scandal’ Hoax Imploding […]