- Joined
- Jun 22, 2013
- Messages
- 22,546
- Reaction score
- 32,884
- Location
- Mid-West USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Mulvaney did not assert a "Quid Pro Quo" to investigate Biden and influence the Current campaign.
Okay so we've had this running "misinterpretation" playing out in the MSM that Mick Mulvaney admitted Trump withheld aid to affect the current election.
Here is the entire segment of the briefing starting with the questions asked by ABC's Jonathan Karl which led to the "Admitting to quid pro quo."
Context is everything, and is important these days when being given slanted news on a daily basis.
Mulvaney was clear when "dealing with the second question" (Ukraine aid) first.
1. He points out that the President has always been opposed to sending US aid to corrupt places.
2. He then points out that the EU nations have given nearly zero dollars for "lethal aid" while the USA is giving it's money for such "lethal aid." That Trump did not like that disparity in aid disbursement.
3. That Trump also mentioned "in passing the corruption related to the DNC server." That concerned the issue of hacking from back in 2016; and Mulvaney says "That's it. THAT's why we held up the money," referring to corruption and lethal aid disparities serving to delay aid disbursement.
Jonathan Karl then asks "So the demand for an investigation into the Democrats was part of the reason he ordered to withhold funding Ukraine."
Mulvaney's response "the look BACK to what happened in 2016 certainly was part of the things he (Trump) was worried about in corruption with that nation. That is absolutely appropriate."
Now at this point Mulvaney is looking to recognize another person to ask a question and Jonathan Karl sneaks in this last question:
"Withholding the funding?" to which Mulvaney responds "Yeah, which ultimately flowed."
Mulvaney then goes off on a tangent about "There was worry if we did not pay out the money it would be illegal," referring to Congressional allocation requirements and timeliness or the funds can't be used.
At this point Karl goes off again and asks "What you've just described is a 'Quid Pro Quo' concerning the investigation of the DNC server." To which Mulvaney says "We do that all the time with foreign policy." THAT is the "gotcha" moment.
Mulvaney goes on the talk about how funds are held up all the time to enforce policies using Southeast Asian drug smuggling countries as the example.
IMHO it is clear that Mulvaney was discussing the Ukraine corruption issue regarding (whether one thinks it has been debunked or not) the hacking and dissemination of information from the DNC server.
At NO POINT was the Biden issue raised. The only issue raised was the DNC server, which cannot by any stretch of imagination relate to the current election cycle.
Last point: Mr. Mulvaney was absolutely correct in that all of our past Administrations have withheld aid in one form or another to force foreign governments to do, or stop doing things we don't like or want them to improve on. Aid is rarely given without such strings. So it appears that his "walk-backs" since this MSM tempest in a teapot were actually simple clarification of the mistaken impression given during the above press briefing.
Okay so we've had this running "misinterpretation" playing out in the MSM that Mick Mulvaney admitted Trump withheld aid to affect the current election.
Here is the entire segment of the briefing starting with the questions asked by ABC's Jonathan Karl which led to the "Admitting to quid pro quo."
Context is everything, and is important these days when being given slanted news on a daily basis.
Mulvaney was clear when "dealing with the second question" (Ukraine aid) first.
1. He points out that the President has always been opposed to sending US aid to corrupt places.
2. He then points out that the EU nations have given nearly zero dollars for "lethal aid" while the USA is giving it's money for such "lethal aid." That Trump did not like that disparity in aid disbursement.
3. That Trump also mentioned "in passing the corruption related to the DNC server." That concerned the issue of hacking from back in 2016; and Mulvaney says "That's it. THAT's why we held up the money," referring to corruption and lethal aid disparities serving to delay aid disbursement.
Jonathan Karl then asks "So the demand for an investigation into the Democrats was part of the reason he ordered to withhold funding Ukraine."
Mulvaney's response "the look BACK to what happened in 2016 certainly was part of the things he (Trump) was worried about in corruption with that nation. That is absolutely appropriate."
Now at this point Mulvaney is looking to recognize another person to ask a question and Jonathan Karl sneaks in this last question:
"Withholding the funding?" to which Mulvaney responds "Yeah, which ultimately flowed."
Mulvaney then goes off on a tangent about "There was worry if we did not pay out the money it would be illegal," referring to Congressional allocation requirements and timeliness or the funds can't be used.
At this point Karl goes off again and asks "What you've just described is a 'Quid Pro Quo' concerning the investigation of the DNC server." To which Mulvaney says "We do that all the time with foreign policy." THAT is the "gotcha" moment.
Mulvaney goes on the talk about how funds are held up all the time to enforce policies using Southeast Asian drug smuggling countries as the example.
IMHO it is clear that Mulvaney was discussing the Ukraine corruption issue regarding (whether one thinks it has been debunked or not) the hacking and dissemination of information from the DNC server.
At NO POINT was the Biden issue raised. The only issue raised was the DNC server, which cannot by any stretch of imagination relate to the current election cycle.
Last point: Mr. Mulvaney was absolutely correct in that all of our past Administrations have withheld aid in one form or another to force foreign governments to do, or stop doing things we don't like or want them to improve on. Aid is rarely given without such strings. So it appears that his "walk-backs" since this MSM tempest in a teapot were actually simple clarification of the mistaken impression given during the above press briefing.
Last edited:
