By FBI Agent J. Gary DiLaura, retired
What is the evidence of any High Crime or Misdemeanor?
Those of us who followed the House debacle they called a “Hearing” saw no direct evidence of anything illegal!
The leaders of the House put forth a “Hearing”, appropriately, named a “Hearing”, because all we “heard” was what their witnesses “heard” that somebody else “heard” and passed on as evidence.
That’s called “hearsay” evidence and is not allowed in any court of the United States, no matter what Adam Schiff claims.
To firm up their “case”, the Democrats brought in four US Constitutional professors that they called experts and then asked for their expert “opinions”, if they believed the President committed a High Crime or Misdemeanor, based upon all the evidence they saw/heard/reviewed, by his actions and three of them said “yes” and one said “no”.
They were then asked if any of them saw or heard anything that would constitute “direct evidence or personal knowledge evidence” and all said, no!
In the first place, an expert witness must be qualified as such, in order to testify as an expert.
I have personal knowledge of that fact as I have attended many trials involving experts at every level and have, myself, testified in federal court, after qualification, as a firearms expert. So how were they qualified, as constitutional experts?
Most important, however, is none of us heard anything that came even close to direct personal knowledge of any crimes by the President, let alone High Crimes or Misdemeanors!
The best evidence, under the “Best Evidence Rules”, is the conversation between the two Presidents and the transcript of their conversation! That evidence, clearly shows no personal Quid Pro Quo by President Trump at any point during the conversation!
Folks, please understand this …people can say anything they want to believe but that doesn’t make it true!
There is almost always a clear line between what evidence of a crime is and what is not.
It’s tough enough to discern between what some people thought they heard, let alone what somebody else said that they heard…and passed it on!
There can still be gray areas and that is exactly why “hearsay” is not allowed in ANY court in the US.
When we FBI Agents, were called upon to “sit a wire” we received refresher instructions on what is allowed and what is not…what is evidence and what is not.
We took notes, protected them as evidence, we taped the conversations and we did our 302s within five days using our notes recordings and training.
[A FD-302 form is used by FBI agents to “report or summarize the interviews that they conduct”. It consists of information taken from the subject, rather than details about the subject themselves.]
After many wiretaps, trials, interviews, confessions we can usually discern between what is an admission and what is not… if the conversation is clear.
Trump’s conversation is transcribed and I saw no “unintelligible” markings!
In the world of evidence, to me, the President did not look for anything to benefit him, his family or anybody else. He was looking to benefit America.
Anyone who tells you that the conversation between President Trump and the Ukraine President is evidence of a crime probably would also state that he “has personal evidence that is not direct and not indirect but in-between that this President broke the law”
Do you know who said that?
That “evidence” that Congressman Schiff claimed he had never surfaced.
I submit that the evidence Schiff never showed… he never had… and it was more valuable than the fictitious 3rd hand evidence he produced during the debacle Schiff called a Hearing that led to the President’s Impeachment.
Along those lines, there is no doubt about what I heard Joe Biden admit to regarding the identical allegation!
Biden admitted to extorting, an action, that financially benefited his family, and personally harmed Ukraine Shokan financially, by using the color of official office and thereby interfering in interstate or foreign commerce, a clear violation of Title 18 Section 1951,2403 and several others USC!
On top of that, these people denied the President Due Process and Equal Rights resulting in a REAL Constitutional expert, Alan Dershowitz, to state that, “If this House Impeaches this President on the evidence they have, it will be a violation of the Constitution”.
The evidence put before the Senate requesting a trial for Impeachment has not met any threshold of evidence of Constitutionally required criminal activity and I would dismiss the charges based upon no evidence of any crime. Further, no court in the United States would allow any case to go to trial where the defendant has been denied Due Process, as this President has!
I rest my case!
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
Parnas will end up in the same place that Michael Cohen currently resides and Michael Avenatti ….headed to federal prison.
But he’s their new “star witness!”
If these idiot Dems cultists could, they would hang their hat on Jack The Ripper as their next witness. Or more of their standard pedophiles!
As Trump stated:
” They’re not after me. They’re after YOU. I’m just in the way.”
This is a coup against a sitting President.
The dems have no party. They have no platform. They have no agenda except socialism, big unions, and the destruction of our constitution.
The only way they can expand is by bringing in more people who will need social programs to survive, because social programs have become the money laundering schemata of the Democratic party.
Hey Anonymaker–the Inspector General of the GAO who issued the “guilty” verdict on Trump is an Obama appointee.
Do a little digging before you count on Politico or the Hollywood Reporter.
There was no quid pro quo, and even if there was, it’s not a high crime or misdemeanor. All of government and lobbying is quid pro quo. How stupid.
As both a lawyer and a scholar, I will say: there is no impeachable offense. This is a partisan witchhunt and every American should be concerned.
The Executive Branch under the Constitution has 100% authority over all matters of Foreign Affairs.
If a Vice President and candidate has his hand in the cookie jar with the Ukraine, China and Iraq, its a foreign affair.
And Pelosi’s son is in on it too.
And FWIW, as of midnight EST this is the headline on the Drudge Report:
WATCHDOG: WHITE HOUSE BROKE LAW
HOLD ON UKRAINE AID ILLEGAL
links to: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/16/white-house-violated-the-law-by-freezing-ukraine-aid-gao-says-099682
Hey AnonyFaker….pull my finger…come and kick the football with Charlie Brown……you are one fucking gullible democrap. Are there any other kind of Democraps?
Hey, Slick, you might want to beat your tiny meat to another fantasy. BTW Drudge sold the report a couple of years ago. It has turned left-wing nut since then.
https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2020/01/16/ukranian-foreign-minister-throws-cold-water-on-lev-parnas-bombshell/
Earlier today, I did a writeup on Lev Parnas’ “bombshell” interview with Rachel Maddow. While Parnas did make a lot of serious accusations, there’s ample reason to not believe a word he says. He’s currently under indictment for unrelated finance crimes and is desperately trying to get the SDNY to cut him a deal. His claims also contradict many of the facts that the DOJ has laid out in their charges against him.
For example, while Parnas is trying to paint himself as a lackey of Rudy Giuliani, the opposite is true. Parnas actually sought out and paid for Giuliani’s “services” and was looking to get rid of former Ambassador Yovanovitch for his own reasons. It was Parnas who first brought up the issue, not anyone connected to Trump. The more you read his indictment and look at the timeline, the more obvious it is that Parnas is not a victim, but a mastermind who fed bad information to Giuliani in order to benefit himself.
Kid, you’re credulously falling for, and then parroting, the worst of conspiracy theory fake news – and recent, not years-old. I did a fact-check, and there’s no evidence Drudge Report has been sold – Drudge has just apparently made the unforgivable error of falling out of ideological lockstep, and the culty black-and-white thinkers can’t imagine how anyone could see even a shade of grail, or fail to absolutely venerate their Dear Leader, are grasping at straws to explain the defection from group-think. The only hint of actual information that turned up, is this, from someone with real sources:
‘I did get a hint. I have a friend who is actual, real-life friends with Matt. I asked them what the deal is. After all, no website was more pro-Trump in 2016 than the Drudge Report. Matt even ventured to a debate to see it all firsthand. The answer was telling, if only because there’s so little to go on.
“Maybe he’s sick of nothing being done on the border,” was the gist of the answer.’
https://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2019/12/03/what-happened-to-drudge-n2557319
Talk about about believing in fantasies.
It’s also typical of culty thinkers and cult apologists to paint themselves into a corner with explanations that turn out to be damning in and of themselves, when actually analyzed: if Parnas sandbagged the President’s private counsel, as the link (and uncited quote from it) above suggest, that also doesn’t look good for the White House, and even portrays corrupt figures from the former Soviet Union as having undue influence that reached the Oval Office.
Not thinking things through again, are you?
Keep lying you old fuck
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/01/huge-maddows-nutcase-witness-lev-parnes-caught-in-numerous-lies-and-smears-shokin-may-join-nunes-in-lawsuits-video/
Maddow’s Nutcase Witness Lev Parnes CAUGHT IN NUMEROUS LIES AND SMEARS — Shokin May Join Nunes in Lawsuits (VIDEO)
Seriously, you lying left-wing stooge, suicide yourself cause it is only going to get worse.
Parlato thinks you work hard for this blog. HAHAHA, You are a fucking cultist just leaving NXIVM for the Democrat Satanist cult.
Hey Slick, here is a better Townhall article on you and your fellow cultist blowhards.
https://townhall.com/columnists/jeffcrouere/2020/01/19/cnn-is-the-home-of-liberal-hacks-n2559744
Parnas was something that came out in November if I recall correctly. It seems as credible as the others in the Schiff show. Not a direct contact, and he being charged makes it look like a Herr Mueller type coercion move rather than a genuine effort coming from Trump.
Parnas has not had anyone to back up his claims, and that handwritten note is just too cute to consider as legitimate.
But of course Boy Wonder AnonyFaker would latch on to that, he is also part of the propaganda team, so he will push any lies that advance the left’s agenda.
These shaky accusations from Parnas are right out of the Dem playbook. They wait until the last minute and then drop something questionable into the media when it’s past the time for new evidence. That’s exactly what they did with Chris Blasey Ford.
“Surprise, Surprise, Surprise”… Parnas now denies speaking with Trump despite reports he claimed he had. Just kiddin’ we knew he was a dud. (washingtonexaminer.com)
Parnas now denies speaking with Trump despite reports he claimed he had
by Dominick Mastrangelo
| January 16, 2020 04:48 PM
Indicted businessman Lev Parnas said he did not speak directly with President Trump about a pressure campaign against Ukraine that sought to benefit Trump politically, despite earlier reports to the contrary.
Last November, CNN reported that Parnas told close associates he had spoken to Trump. “At one point during the party that night, Parnas and Fruman slipped out of a large reception room packed with hundreds of Trump donors to have a private meeting with the President and Giuliani, according to two acquaintances in whom Parnas confided right after the meeting,” CNN wrote.
“Eventually, according to what Parnas told his confidants, the topic turned to Ukraine that night,” the article continued. “According to those two confidants, Parnas said that ‘the big guy,’ as he sometimes referred to the President in conversation, talked about tasking him and Fruman with what Parnas described as ‘a secret mission’ to pressure the Ukrainian government to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter.”
The New York Times told a different story Wednesday, reporting: “Mr. Parnas said that although he did not speak with Mr. Trump about the efforts, he met with the president on several occasions and was told by Mr. Giuliani that Mr. Trump was kept in the loop.”
Parnas’s decision to go public has led to congressional Democrats demanding that he and other key players in the pressure campaign be called to testify in next week’s Senate impeachment trial.
Awesome article! Your thoughtful analysis is appreciated. So often people just rant and rave without any insight.
AnonyMaker, If you read the Constitution it will tell you that the President can only be Impeached from office upon “CONVICTION” of Treason, Bribery or High Crimes and Misdemeanors. It MUST be a crime! Next ,the 6th Amendment Applies to ALL citizens accused of a crime and does not exclude Impeachment of a sitting president. That’s why Nixon and Clinton were allowed Due Process(6th Amendment ) and Allan Dershowitz says this impeachment is Unconstitutional! Stop listening to Congressman Schiff or Swallow. They both flunked law school and received GED law certificates!The Right Side
That’s not what the majority of lawyers and scholars say, who actually study and understand these things – no matter how many of your words you put in caps.
“Dershowitz has idiosyncratic views on impeachment in a number of ways. He also takes a very restrictive view of what the constitutional phrase “high crimes and misdemeanors” means and so regards a great deal of potential presidential misconduct as beyond the reach of the congressional impeachment power. This is the kind of argument that one would expect a defense lawyer for a target of an impeachment inquiry to make, but it is not a mainstream view—for good reason.”
https://www.lawfareblog.com/alan-dershowitz-wrong-about-impeachments
Having read a couple of things on partisan websites, doesn’t make you an expert in the matter any more than does staying at a Holiday Inn Express.
Apparently we need to be talking about the Dunning-Kruger effect more here:
“In the field of psychology, the Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people assess their cognitive ability as greater than it is. It is related to the cognitive bias of illusory superiority and comes from the inability of people to recognize their lack of ability.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Dunning–Kruger_effect
It shows up as a common characteristic of actual cult members, too.
Stick Wikipedia where the sun does not shine, Slick. Obviously, you are clueless as to how entries are put in there, fool. The fucking impeachment is a fucking sham because you lying corrupt democraps are going to get your asses kicked in November. It will go nowhere and a trial should bring out much of your corrupt democrap party corruption.
Kid, pay attention – like I keep telling you.
I mostly cited sources other than Wikipedia regarding impeachment.
Regarding Dunning-Kruger, here’s another source – and a more detailed explanation:
What Is the Dunning-Kruger Effect?
‘The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people wrongly overestimate their knowledge or ability in a specific area. This tends to occur because a lack of self-awareness prevents them from accurately assessing their skills.
The concept is based on a 1999 paper by Cornell University psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger. The pair tested participants on their logic, grammar, and sense of humor, and found that those who performed in the bottom quartile rated their skills far above average. For example, those in the 12th percentile self-rated their expertise to be, on average, in the 62nd percentile.
The researchers attributed the trend to a problem of metacognition—the ability to analyze one’s own thoughts or performance. “Those with limited knowledge in a domain suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach mistaken conclusions and make regrettable errors, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it,” they wrote.’
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/dunning-kruger-effect
If you actually read this far, go back and re-read the last sentence of that quote.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the AnonyFaker, I also give you the Constitution, some assembly required. The assembly requires some duct tape, perjured witnesses, a basement, and a, terminal case of TDS.
I have not heard a single non partisan lawyer say Trump committed an impeachable offense.
AnonyMaker
January 16, 2020 at 9:30 pm
That’s not what the majority of lawyers and scholars say
Do you ever get tired of being a lying left wing stooge Slick. Constantly pulling statements out of your ass that are totally not verifiable, except to left wing nut conspiracy kooks like you.
Hey AnonySlayer — I want to stop using a moniker’s that simply mocks another commenter. AnonyMaker puts serious effort into this website and his comments are worthwhile. I don’t agree with all of them but that is not the point. We want debate. AnonyMaker is polite.
If you wish to comment – please change your moniker to one that is not a play-off of another moniker – and make your same points. This is also true for people playing off of Shadow State’s moniker.
We really have to clean up the vicious comments a little, much as I love free speech. Of course, there is nothing stopping you or others from starting your own blog and expressing yourself with any name you care to choose. After today, I will not accept deliberate play-offs of sincere commenters and will change the monikers to anonymous – unless you choose one for yourself.
Here would be a good example instead of using AnonySlayer how about using TruthMaker or BullShitSlayer.
Thank you.
Hey Parlato, you have given anonyfaker carte blanche to shit all over your blog. I believe you to be a fair man and support you. However, the left-wing shitstains are the ones trying to frame your ass.
It does seem to be true that left wing partisans were the ones who authorized my frame up – but it does not mean that all left leaning people are sociopaths. I think AnonyMaker offers valuable contributions. I urge you to rebut any time with opposing views.
Donald Trump’s so called crime was not worshiping Nancy Pelosi.
What else does one call “Abuse of Congress”?
And if Donald Trump wants to investigate the corrupt deals of Democratic politicians like Joe Biden and his son Hunter, Trump must first clear it with the corrupt Democrats of Congress like Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein.
And if you criticize the Democratic Party you will be prosecuted for Hate Speech and be sent to Reeducation Camps.
Project Veritas: Sanders Staffer Suggests “Nazi” Trump Supporters be Sent to Gulags, Re-Educated
https://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2020/01/14/watch-sanders-campaign-operative-suggests-nazi-trump-supporters-be-sent-to-gulags/
Benny
✔
@bennyjohnson
· Jan 14, 2020
Bernie Sanders Campaign Operative Makes Case For Concentration Camps:
– Stalin & gulags were good
– Gulags paid a living wage
– Billionaires should be sent to gulags to break them of “privilege”
@BernieSanders hires communists who want to put YOU into camps if they are elected
Don’t use the language of criminal law for a constitutional process like impeachment
“Impeachment is a constitutional process. It is not a criminal proceeding. While there are similarities between the two, they are not the same”
https://qz.com/1754728/criminal-law-language-doesnt-suit-trump-impeachment-inquiry/
“the president can commit an impeachable high crime without violating the federal criminal law. To conclude otherwise would be to ignore the original meaning, purpose and history of the impeachment power; to subvert the constitutional design of a system of checks and balances; and to leave the nation unnecessarily vulnerable to abusive government officials.”
https://www.lawfareblog.com/must-impeachable-offenses-be-violations-criminal-code
“The majority view is that a president can legally be impeached for ‘intentional, evil deeds’ that ‘drastically subvert the Constitution and involve an unforgivable abuse of the presidency’—even if those deeds didn’t violate any criminal laws.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_crimes_and_misdemeanors
Thank you. Well said.
Yea right. You both are full of democrap shit.
a democrap shit? seriously? Please try again.
Ok GSC let me clarify. You and your fellow democrap, anonyfaker…… are full of shit.
Tsk Tsk.
High crimes and misdemeanors means exactly what is says, Slickster. The more you comment the more a fucking ignorant hypocrite you show yourself to be.
If ‘misdemeanors’ means just that, then surely Trump is guilty of something, from the misdeeds of his charitable foundation, to violating laws about adultery still on the books of one of the states where here consummated affairs – and he’s out.
You really don’t think before you post, do you? Even a cultist like Allison Mack made a pretense of being a thoughtful human being.
misdemeanor. n. a lesser crime punishable by a fine and/or county jail time for up to one year. Misdemeanors are distinguished from felonies, which can be punished by a state prison term. They are tried in the lowest local court such as municipal, police or justice courts.
https://dictionary.law.com/dictionary.law.com
“Adultery is a misdemeanor in Florida.”
https://www.mcguirelawoffices.com/adultery-crime-florida-doesnt-impact-divorce-case/
“Adultery is still a crime in New York State. Penal Law 255.17 states that a person is guilty of adultery when he/she engages in sexual intercourse with another person at a time when he/she has a living spouse. Adultery is classified as a Class B misdemeanor.”
https://www.dbnylaw.com/adultery-is-still-a-crime-in-new-york-state/
“In 21 [some sources say 23] states, cheating in a marriage is against the law, punishable by a fine or even jail time.”
https://www.freep.com/story/life/family/2014/04/17/in-which-states-is-cheating-on-your-spouse-illegal/28936155/
AnonyMaker; here’s what your Constitution states…Article 2 ;Section 4
“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
It says what it means…you can interpret it any way you want…but you don’t get to rewrite what it clearly says! On the Misdemeanor point…is he charged with one?…why not? Could it be because he didn’t commit any!? The Right Side
AnonyFaker is going to quote all the left wing blowhards he can find. He goes by what they want the Constitution to mean. If it was O-hole being impeached these same phonies would being shitting a different shade. And of course then their fellow left conspiracy kook Anonyfaker himself would be pointing out how right they were from a faulty Wikipedia cite. The numnut loves to be stuck on stupid. I really think his time in NXIVM caused more brain damage than his deprogrammer realizes.
Dear God, what a wack job. You just described your democratic party to a tee.