Ukraine Whistleblower, Transcript, Complaint & Impeachment — Real Law Review
Articles Blog

Ukraine Whistleblower, Transcript, Complaint & Impeachment — Real Law Review

October 18, 2019

Only registered users can comment.

  1. UGH, sorry about the typos. I wanted to get this video out ASAP. But you can learn to avoid those errors by checking out this week’s sponsor: Skillshare!

  2. You can't blame the man for riding the fake news train. There's so much material you can work with if you just turn off your brain and assume everything you see on the news is 100% true even though it's constantly changing and being proven false. His views went WAY up when he started covered this… stuff.

  3. People go along playing the same games over and over again, and the games continue on until an innocent person is sacrificed. Have we reached that point yet? US presidents have used regime change for years, but it wasn't until no WMD were found in Iraq, and that meant Saddam Hussein was attempting to comply with UN sanctions that the games backlashed on Bush and Blair. Is this part of a Trump playbook? This investigation is not that much different than the Mueller Investigation, with bribes and dirt on political opponents, and obstruction. Trump very likely believes he can get away with it, too. Is Zelensky innocent?

    Why is it so difficult to get the Republicans to acknowledge wrongdoing by the president? People lie to protect their security and support, and what I find to be totally ludicrous is that the people they are lying to now is Congress to keep their support, and Congress accepts the lies. Like Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation hearing when he lied to the Judiciary Committee to keep the support of the Republicans, including Lindsay Graham. Of course judges know it is unlawful to commit perjury! Trump's playbook includes pushing and pushing until he gets his way, especially with judges. .

    Many Trump supporters are avid 2nd Amendment supporters, but why isn't the 1st Amendment Freedom of the Press considered important? Two power games are based on weaving an illusion–genocide and slavery. If you can take what is someone else's, you can own them, and you own them by outsmarting them. When the president talks about fake news, you can bet a genocide is devolving, so why isn't that an impeachable offence–when people's rights are being taken from them? Trump swore an oath of office to uphold the Constitution–which gives him nearly unlimited power, or so he says.

    Michael Cohen testified it was his job to create shell companies. If Trump functions for his own interests, like using his cabinet to "run his errands for him," how would that affect the Republicans? Why should they support a president who functions entirely for his own interests? What if this is conspiracy, and the executive branch has been compromised by Putin?

  4. 4.4k Trumpists that can't handle reality gave this a thumbs down. These people won't listen to anyone but their orange demagogue. Oh, and Rudy Giuliani 😂. It's kinda sad, and very worrisome.

  5. I loved Maguire's explanation in front of Congress, as to why he didn't follow protocol, and took the complaint to the White House instead of Congress.
    Maguire: "Ya know, I'm not a lawyer, so what do I know? They tell me it's executive privilege, how do I know it's not? It seemed like it could be.. Like I said, I'm not a lawyer, so I just help with cover ups by default." The next person that gets caught robbing a bank should just be like, "Ya know, I ain't a cop. You say it's illegal, how do I know that?"
    In America, we put stupid, selfish people that lack a moral compass, in charge.. what could go wrong? The more self-serving, and immoral one is, the higher they go. Sounds great!

  6. So good ole Rudy is whispering sweet nothings into the president's ear, of Biden and far, far right conspiracy theories, and the president is leveraging American aid against other countries, to get them to fabricate evidence to support said conspiracy theories? Sounds about right. What a time.

  7. Barr should recuse himself, but he prob won't. Barr is Trump's Roy Cohn. This is a lawless time in America, especially for the rich and powerful. Barr has no integrity, so he won't make the moral decision in this matter, imo. And everyone close to Trump thinks they can do whatever they want.

  8. Have to say for such an evolving ever-changing story as this is becoming you managed to make it informative educational whilst keeping it relatively lighthearted and fun. Looking forward to the analysis of all the new information coming and along with the testimonial breakdowns that are to come.

  9. I got into your channel from your breakdown of My Cousin Vinny, and now you're laying down the hard logic bombs on the entire current crisis…you sir are a badass. I've enjoyed every single video.

  10. Your vids lack an element of summarization and despite your protests to the contrary your analysis is politically biased

  11. The DNC and Obama's FBI spied on the trump campaign, worked with the ukrainian embassy to dig up dirt on trump, paid a British spy to go to Russia to get more dirt on trump and you're going to pretend that investigating Ukrainian interference in 2016 is somehow worse?

    Listen dude I get it you want a job in the Democrat party but I've seen less partisan hacks on MSNBC and fox.

  12. There is NO impeachment inquiry, their won't be one until the House VOTES on it and they haven't and won't do that. Not to mention the fact that Trump set them up, this was all to expose the liers. Truth is like a beach ball you can hold it underwater and hide it as long as you have the power to counter buoyancy. Once your power is no longer strong enough to counter the Truth it will expose itself and that is what is happening. I will admit it is not as obvious as it should be because so much of television is propaganda. Never the less JUSTICE is coming and I mean real justice. Also, you can submit a whistleblower complaint with SECOND-hand knowledge, this was changed VERY recently. It used to require you to have FIRST-hand knowledge to file a complaint. This is RED FLAG #1 not to mention this complaint was, in fact, SECOND-hand knowledge and had NO proof to back it up wich was obvious when Adam Shiff went in front of congress and read off a FABRICATED conversation that the President NEVER had.

  13. Rudy is the acting director of impeachment. The conversation was largely corrupt. He said it himself.
    I’m pretty sure there’s more trouble in that call.
    Anyone around Trump will at some point be in legal trouble.

    Edit: 700,000 views with 4 thousand dislikes. What is there to dislike? He’s explaining the actual facts the actual Truth. I really don’t understand why this is.
    I’m reading the comments and still people are calling this fake?
    Honest to god what would it take to be real?
    This is insane.

  14. How the hell did he make such a longgggg video and still miss details? The whistleblower never heard the conversation, and thats why people are wondering if its hearsay in the first place. That, and the standards for whistleblowers changed in June, that you no longer had to hear a conversation firsthand to submit the forms. This could… Ah who am I kidding… It was likely changed for this very report.

    Just because Trump called to Ukraine, doesn't mean he isn't using the MLAT, and just because you don't like Rudy doesn't mean hes conducting foreign policy, your overwhelming bias stinks from on high.

  15. Hey there bud. I really liked your videos. They were fun, but this is it for me. I just want to let you know why… I am pretty sure you dropped your pants and finally showed us your bias in these videos. In other videos you always use terms like 'it could be argued that' or 'this seems like it could be'. You're behaving like a lawyer. You're behaving like a person that understands that things need to be proven in court with either argument or evidence.

    Here, in this video, you have stated 'facts'. You have stated things are a certain way without any evidence. You're reporting other people's truths as a certainty. I am not sure if you are some sort of long-term CNN or other far-left media plant, or just a blue-tie hiding behind a fancy suit and haircut and movie quotes to teach kids 'the law can be hip, word to your mother, yo'. But on the real-world political stuff you are no longer a lawyer, you're not treating this like a lawyer, or crafting an argument… You're pronouncing verdicts before they are given.

    So I am sorry my friend, but this is the last one for me. I really did enjoy your non-political content but I can't continue to support someone that so clearly has an alternate agenda than they are informing others. I don't think you're here for money, or to become a celebrity… But you are here to become an authority.

  16. That Skill Share plug might just be the single best sponsorship video integrations I've ever seen LOL. Great job breaking down all the info. It's a complicated matter that needs to be talked about!

  17. Why publish this video when you don’t have all the information or evidence. The transcript came out and shows exactly what was said. This is a spin on the actual story

  18. This might be the best video I have seen on the matter so far. Ver good content!

    I've been watching a lot of Tim Pool Vids lately and it's refreshing to see sombody like you, actually looking at the facts, and not just make them up.

  19. You purport to critique legal proceedings taking place in entertainment media, showing us the errors and the authentic alternatives.
    In this video, you show yourself to be yet another NeverTrumper. I don’t think any legal team’s strategy is to try someone based on news reports, one-sided reports at that.
    You should now produce an updated video, covering Schiff’s lies, the news media’s active deceit, and the Bidens’s real track record of corruption, (as opposed to the make-believe stories of trumps “corruption“).
    The whole democrat house of cards continues to collapse faster every minute. It doesn’t matter though, as I’m sure the next “scandal” is already cooking and ready to go.

  20. I stoped watching video after 1:30, please learn first how it went down then comment about Ukraine situation. Guess rest of the video will be same bs ….

  21. I would expect an expert to get the facts correct. The timeline is below and shows that Ukraine's investigation wasn't closed until after Biden threatened to withhold funds. The UK's investigation was already closed. I would also recommend you show the Biden Q&A video where he admits to threatening (to be fair and balanced). sources
    ~Aug 2016 – Biden threatens to withhold aid if prosecutor is not fired

    Sept. 2016 – Case against Burisma closed

    Jan. 23, 2018 following a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in Washington, Biden touts his tough stance with Ukraine in 2016. He says he told Ukrainian leaders that the U.S. would withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees unless they fired Prosecutor General Shokin.

    March 2019 – Ukraine prosecutor general Lutsenko opens two investigations—one into the 2016 U.S. presidential election and a second into Burisma and Biden.

    April 21, 2019 – New Ukrainian President elected on anti-corruption agenda

    April 21, 2019 – First Trump-Zelenskyy Phone Call

  22. OBJECTION!!! Draw jopping is not a valid description of events! I ask you to clarify or recant the statement noted at 37:24 of the official record.

  23. It makes me sad that, given you're an attorney, you were so loose with your description of the conversation provided by the Trump Administration as a, "transcript," which it was not. The actual transcript was still on a code word server on the day the conversation released by the administration was released. What was actually released were, "notes," which tell us what the administration wanted to release. While you make note of that toward the end of your video, you know many people do make it to the end of the video and many other people will not register the difference between what you said in the beginning versus your modifications at the end. Perhaps, I wouldn't be so not picky to message over these kinds of things were it not for how much the electorate as a whole doesn't know if understand. Watching your video is presumably an attempt to clarify events for viewers. This country, the world, is already paying the price for having an ignorant American electorate and an electorate who misunderstands the information they have. Let's be exacting with our language.

  24. Because you wear a suit makes your stupidity worse, I hear that Joe Biden did something, I heard from a person that told another person that told another person. Your a partisan dumb-ass.

  25. Hhhhhhmmmm I'm really wondering what party your partial to …… Any guesses ??? Come on man …… You break down the legalities of South Park . Entertaining but …….

  26. You need to do more videos on trump and the legal conundrums surrounding him on a daily basis. your channel would get huge with weekly drops.

  27. Problem is you are framing the motives of the defendant, no honest judge would let you do such a thing in court, and judges I know would hold you in contempt.

    Fact is, no "dirt" was dug, and no money was withheld, so there is no crime. You can't arrest people for simply thinking about having a conversation about committing a crime.

    Also nothing illegal about a private citizen, even a friend of the president investigating a politician. You're simply wrong that political candidates cannot be investigated by private citizens.

    Also nothing wrong with two prime minsters or hte president cooperating in some investigation, which the president of Ukraine was eager to do, he and Trump have a good relationship, which isn't a crime either.

    Anyway, fake news, easy to copy and paste sentences and short paragraphs from a 8 page document together to make the words say a crime took place, but no good judge would allow that as "evidence" of motive, and even if you have motive that doesn't indicate a crime took place.

  28. I know it's not really the focus of this video, but this really exposes a fundamental problem with whistleblowing laws: the 'proper channels' you're supposed to go through are often the same channels that covered up the stuff you're blowing the whistle on. It was a fight to get as much information as we did get about what's going on in this case. See: Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, etc.

  29. Objection: You said, "criminal conspiracies are made of proactive seeking of information." Using that definition wouldn't an impeachment investigation of the president be a criminal conspiracy???

  30. Geez! I had to put on my wading boots, long after this vid started.
    I bet you have an uncle, probably from your mommy's side, who other family members refer to as, Lyin-Ass, Shifty, ShittyEyed Schiff? And, I bet you have a brother, whom you're 'very, very close' to, who does vids for V0X. Am I right? I'm right, am I not?

  31. What amazes me about this trump Ukraine phone call is “ who gives a shit to begin with” it’s a fuckin phone call, and if u looked at any presidents under a microscope this is probably minute and very common so get a life buttholes and how about talk about something important

  32. That was excellent. I wonder how many ordinary citizens are going to understand all the 'ins-and-outs' of this complex story – Tim Poole (not a lawyer) seems to suggest that the whole affair might turn out to be more damaging to the Bidens? He asserts that Trump is popular because the economy is booming and that many Americans are leery about 'Ukraine-gate' because 'Putin-gate' (alleged Russian interference in the 2016 Election) turned out to be a huge 'Nothing Burger' (to quote Don Lemon) – perhaps seeing it to be a kangaroo court trumped up by the Presidents political opponents? I dunno where the truth lies. It's interesting though.

  33. 1st objection: You purposefully skipped over the [as of writing this proven fact] facts thst Biden basically strong armed and threatened to with hold aid to the ukrain unless they did what he asked.

    This is an extremely important piece of context that sets up this entire scenario that you just skipped over for no reason beyond perhaps setting up a false narrative to pain the president in a worse than needed light. Honest and wreckless mistake at best. Manipulation of the facts at worse.

    Objection 2: You point out in the description the democrats have voted for impeachment. This is provably false and is a giant point of contention currently. They are resisting a vote, moving forward anyway and denying many steps of due process to Trump's side.

    Very big mistakes legaleagle. Expected better. But i guess political bias always wins out.

  34. OBJECTION! There is no conspiracy, no legal form needed, as the questions are merely informative in nature, there is also no quid pro quo. It's just confirmation that there is or that there isn't fowl play being played by the Bidens, if there's fowl play like nepotism, then it should lead to the legal proceedings like discovery and prosecution via the MLAT, also there is this for Trump's reason of inquiry by Zelensky:

  35. I sometimes get really confused if the guy just don't know what is corruption or if he just enjoy lying about being squeaky clean. Or if he has a delusion of being a heroic figure that "can't do wrong".

    All right, this is serious, but it would be pretty funny if Trump's administration came crashing down because of a conspiracy theory.

  36. I am curious about one thing. One aspect of this story that seems to get glossed over whenever it is covered, and I am wondering if there is something that I am missing. You state that "Trump alleges that Joe Biden used American financial aid to pressure the Ukrainian government to fire its top prosecutor…" That is not an allegation… it actually happened, and Joe Biden bragged about it on video as a flex. Is that aspect of the story minimized because it cannot be proven with as much certainty that he threatened to withhold aid because of the investigation into his son? Your CNN's and what have you try to spin it as if Joe Biden did not withhold aid when he verifiably did, but I understand that is spin… all news outlets do it.

  37. Just came here to say that you are a left wing hack, and your opinion isn't worthy of being printed on toilet paper – my butt is disgusted by how hacky you are.

  38. its not a theory that biden push for the firing of the ukranian prosecutor who investigated hunter bidens son (company) he brags about it an interview. look for it and you will find it. joe biden said it himself that he got the prosecutor fired, and you are not giving all the details. me suspicious of you

  39. For there to have been a quid pro quo, Zelenski needed to know that there was something in it for him. Since he did not know that Trump was delaying aid to Ukraine, there was no special incentive for him to cooperate beyond just national relations.

  40. The inference that Trump locked down the phone call transcript as evidence of wrongdoing is invalid because ALL phone call transcripts have been protected in that way. This call was not special in that regard. Trump locks up his transcripts out of (well-founded) paranoia about leakers and whistleblowers. Most presidents haven't had to worry about people scrutinizing and second-guessing their decisions and motivations to the extent that Trump has.

  41. The real funny thing about all of this is that Biden was not going to get the democratic nomination. So Trump wouldn't be going up against him anyways.

  42. At the end of the day, the question is whether Trump was justified, in his capacity as commander-in-chief of the United States, in investigating potential corruption involving the US government (the former Vice President). If there was corruption in Biden's dealings, any beneficial bearing on the Trump campaign in uncovering that are ancillary to the benefit of the nation. As Guiliani put it, what if the president's opponent had committed murder? Does that mean the president cannot investigate the murder because it would also benefit him politically? Of course not. Let's not pretend that a president cutting deals with other countries doesn't have an impact on US politics. That has been the case since the inception of the country. If that is our standard, we're going to have to retroactively indict every president we've ever had.

  43. And all of this against a candidate I am not even all that hyped about..
    I mean Biden would make the democrats more or less into a conservative party and this would like the transformation of the republicans into a fascist one push the overton window once again further to the right, which imo would be a bad thing for the world and the US.
    But I am not American, and maybe you guys would not elect someone further left. who knows?

  44. I’m just looking to the headlines “You’re Fired” the day Trump gets his sorry orange ass tossed out on the White House lawn.

  45. For a lawyer, you sure are stupid. Show me where the president asked for Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden. Trump never said that. "Dig up dirt on Biden" is a media lie that was never asked. Read the transcript. He asked them to investigate possible corruption with our 2016 election. Shameless people trying to cover up the fact that they are guilty of doing exactly what they claim the president was trying to do.

  46. I'd really like to hear a lawyer's opinion on the "Master Piece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission" scotus decision.

  47. Go watch the movie Tequila Sunrise and you will appreciate the suggestion that Adam Schiff, himself, is the whistleblower.

  48. EVERY other impeachment inquiry was: 1) Authorized by a vote in the House 2) Overseen by the judiciary committee and 3) conducted in public hearings fully viewable by the press and people. In other words a very democratic and lawful process…..this impeachment inquiry is: 1) taking place without a vote by House 2) being overseen by the intelligence committee and 3) being conducted in secret hearings inaccessible to even members of the house let alone the public and the press…..but if you are with a straight face able to call the story about Biden "debunked" you can probable make excuses for those circumstances also and blame Trump for destroying or governing norms and threatening our democracy because secret meetings by the intelligence committee predicated by a complaint by anonymous intelligence agents to remove an elected President is what our democratic republic is all about. Bizarre.

  49. Sure you're really a lawyer? I'm 6 minutes in and I haven't heard you talk about a single statute. At 6:30 you're essentially trying to make the argument that since we give money to some corrupt governments we should give it to all? Extrapolate that out to any other bad thing. Well we already killed 3 people should kill the 4th. Already robbed 7 stores we should probably get the eighth as well. I stopped watching after that nonsense.

  50. The electric chair? What did Biden do… pressure a foreign power to investigate his biggest political rival? Fail to politically respond to the injustices of a foreign power because he has business investments within that other nation?

  51. First of all, MAD MEN called they want their wardrobe back you liberal, socialist hack… Try actually reporting on anything the Democrats have done and hidden in the last 20 years

  52. Aaaannd at 15:22 he exposes himself as a left wing shill. Parroting talking points form the DNC and the alphabet soup mainstream news networks that are just the propaganda arm for the democrat party. I was really hoping for an honest nonpartisan opinion form a legal professional on the situation, but look what that got me…. Sigh.

    There are some significant facts regarding what Rudy has been doing in the Ukraine that everyone just wants to just dismiss as “Right wing nut job propaganda”. The fact of the matter is, their government HAS OPENLY ADMITTED to colluding with the DNC to influence the 2016 campaign. Rudy went there to get to the bottom of why the whole Russia collusion investigation into Trump started that ended up being a dud. Where better than the country that admitted to doing for the Democrats what Trump spent 3 years being investigated for, and had ties to its proceedings.

    Glossing over Cloudstrike as a lawyer makes this clown lose all credibility. Almost as much as his alert at 19:40 that ABC’s debunked story from an “anonymous source” about the Ukraine president being briefed on this being a Biden call. Cloudstrike is the private Ukrainian company that the DNC handed their material to after they were hacked, after REFUSING to give it over to the FBI. But I guess that all seems fine and dandy, nor worth looking into.

    TLDR: He’s dishonest don’t waste your time, I hoped the contrary but was wrong. If you want to hear a professional discuss the facts on both sides on the isle to help bring some clarity wrong place, left wing shill.

  53. lol what a show….Full of holes and lies… so did not enjoy hearing so much obvious deception……what a farce and what a waste of time.Too ,many people actually personally know the Pres and know the integrity of the Pres …and by the way it is ABSOLUTELY NOT JUST A SUMMARY IT IS A WORD FOR WORD DOCUMENTATION OF THE PHONE CALL….HE IS SO MISREPRESENTING SO MANY THINGS HERE. The attorneys and administration already advising the president are honest and so much better than this fascade of supposedly honest and good advice. I find him repulsive….skin crawly deceptive…. Good luck sleeping at night with that.

  54. I keep hearing about these polls, and I love it. Mainly because they are completely pointless due to the fact I was never polled. So how can a poll about the presidency be accurate if you don't include the whole population?

  55. Another example of an attorney without all of the information pushing a case against an individual, this being the President of the United States. You don't have all the information, and you are literally relying on news organizations for evidence. It's been proven already that ABC, CNN, NBC have a significant bias against President Trump, which he can use as a counter. Separately, you are trying to claim President Trump is pushing his personal agenda to help his Presidential race, which is also an opinion. From the observation of others, it is him being concerned regarding a potential presidential candidate having illegal operation activities within the Ukraine. He wants some answers from it. Also, they aren't a whistle blower if they had no direct interaction with the call. There was an actual whistle blower who WAS involved that has since come forward. As for the transcript sent to a separate electronic system, that has been proven as being normal, and the "white house official" making the claim about it being a violation is obviously not in an official position to make such a determination and is simply proving opinion. There is a large amount of information you presented that is shown from an opinion perspective. There is very little that verifies this was the intent, and as we all know, intent is considered high. Additionally, what is never clearly defined is what the President of the United States has for Executive Authority. If he has the authority to transfer transcripts, even if it is just because he wants to, then it is irrelevant what "white house officials" think, since he is within his power to do so. Not knowing what the President is doing doesn't mean it is illegal or reminiscent of the Nixon era, as you broadly claim. Again, another situation where an attorney has not enough information to actually make accurate insights and a case that would fall apart at the Supreme Court level.

  56. It is the President's responsibility to eliminate and uncover corruption when it involves the U.S.. The main responsibility of Federal Government is to Protect it's citizens from Foreign and Domestic threats. Trump had every single right under the constitution to ask for help. As obviously written in the transcript there was absolutely no Quid Pro Quo.

  57. Objection. (I figure you use this to search for comments.) Today, Oct 17th, Mick Mulvaney, Trump's Dir of the OMB and acting Chief of Staff, admitted on camera that the Jul 25th call was 1; a quid pro quo and 2; politically motivated. So how bad is this from a 'did they commit a crime' basis and a 'high crimes and misdemeanors' basis please? My un-lawyer like opinion is that it is as bad as the Cpt of the Titanic saying "ram that iceberg over there as well and hopefully the ice will fill the hole in the ship".

  58. Joe Biden bragged about what he did.
    Joe Biden in fact threatened Ukraine with the US withholding in exchange for firing the prosecutor going after his son.
    The same thing Trump is accused of doing.
    Shame on you for bypassing this fact. I am now aware you part of the fake news media.

  59. get a sponsorship/affiliation with grammarly for literally getting typos that many miss. skillshare you actually need to learn to write where grammarly is a spellchecker which also assists with grammatical errors such as plurals, possessives and contractions or reckoning participle phrases to be more professional..

    by the way, you know biden was using his position of power to enrich himself and collude with the ukrainians….

  60. FYI: The classified is secret/ originated controlled….this could be applied in multiple ways. Classification is to protect sources, so if Ukraine provides information the aids in USA in a investigation can be classified until the investigation is finalized. As for loading info on SIPR or JWICS again, information can't be classified to hide violation of the crime. Which it would be declassified. Unless a source must be protected. Trump unwillingness to release Russia interactions and the military being ordered all info to be retained.
    Something bigger is going on, Trump being a megalomaniac is acting in a way to destroy rivals.
    This will not end well.

  61. I'm not sure I follow the thought process here. The comments about Biden seem completely separate from those about foreign aid. It seems as though it's just being assumed that Trump was implying he would withhold foreign aid unless Biden was investigated. But I'm just not sure where we're getting this from. Is it because the two sentences appear in the same transcript? That seems obviously silly. Surely, there must be some legitamite reason for thinking Trump is attempting to bribe foreign officials.

  62. fault 1) heresay is irrelevant, as there is both a recording, and a transcript of the conversation….which he has refused to hand over or cooperate with the inquiry.
    fault 2) refusal to cooperate in a impeachment inquiry, is itself, a cause of action for impeachment.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *