The "Whistleblower"

[Dos Equis]

The call is the issue. Had Trump never made it, we'd not be discussing Trump's impeachment. The witnesses' testimony will determine whether Trump committed an impeachable act, not the whistle blower.

No they won't.  Who the heck cares what people's opinions of the call are??  We have the transcript.  And the president of Ukraine said he was never pressured and had no idea aid had been withheld.  There is nothing there. 

But we definitely need to hear from the "whistleblower" so we can expose how corrupt this entire episode is. 

[JustPlaneJane]

No they won't.  Who the heck cares what people's opinions of the call are??  We have the transcript.  And the president of Ukraine said he was never pressured and had no idea aid had been withheld.  There is nothing there. 

But we definitely need to hear from the "whistleblower" so we can expose how corrupt this entire episode is. 

In the Democrat world, a fake whistleblower with third-hand information is more believable than the actual two people having the discussion.

[chaos]

Knowing who the whistle blower is changes nothing

Absolute bullshit. It changes everything.

[JustPlaneJane]

Can someone post the transcript of the July 25th call and underline the exact sections where specifically the withholding of aid money is discussed?

[Skeletor]

Can someone post the transcript of the July 25th call and underline the exact sections where specifically the withholding of aid money is discussed?

Not the July 25th call but it shows what you describe:

"You're not getting a billion, I'm gonna be leaving here, I think it was what, 6 hours, I looked I said I'm leaving in 6 hours, if the prosecutor is not fired you're not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch, he got fired"

[Dos Equis]

In the Democrat world, a fake whistleblower with third-hand information is more believable than the actual two people having the discussion.

Yep.  Pretty stupid. 

[Princess L]

The name has been out in public for a week. Schiff released it in a transcript.

More fake outrage by the libidiots.

I’d fucking subpoena Hillary, Obama, Pelosi, the Bidens, Nadler, Rice, Holder, Schiff and every crooked liberal in their Party and put them under oath in public in the impeachment inquiry

Lying sack of Schiff

[Dos Equis]

Lying sack of Schiff

Amazing how he can lie to the entire country with a straight face and both his party and the media do nothing about it. 

[funk51]

the original white house whistleblower.

[JustPlaneJane]

All these years I have been following politics and I never realized until now that Democrat Party Presidents don’t set foreign policy, they actually leave that up to paper pushing, pencil neck, geek, career ambassadors.

I could see that for someone as completely incompetent as Barry Sotero.

Now I’m 100% certain the stolen aid money from the Ukraine has a trail right back to the Obamas, Clintons, and Bidens.

[SOMEPARTS]

Not reporting this guy's name at this point is just as dishonest as Schiff saying he doesn't know who he is after his staff met with the guy. Like Schiff didn't review all this beforehand.

The guy's name is out there. Leaked even by Schiff's office on docs. Silly.

[JustPlaneJane]

Really?
So the fed law states he is ,but JPJ of get big forums disagrees? I'm shocked they don't use that defense in court.
Lawyer-Your honor, JPJ and some other get big regulars posted disagreement on this whistle blower protection status.
Judge - That's pretty good evidence. Release his ID immediately  

Question:
Ok, so if Coach farts in your face, but a getbigger posts that he didn't fart, do you still smell it? Just curious...

Federal law does not state under these circumstances that the leaker is a whistleblower.

Howard, how do you know with certainty the whistleblower is a male?

You’re talking out your ass.

[Dos Equis]

Dos, c'mon now this isn't a close call.
Trump tried to "shake down" the UK Pres .

FYI, every defense and conspiracy theory Trumps on this forum have tried , has been shot down numerous times
by the testimony and evidence . I lack the energy and inclination to go back and forth with people who are already convinced.
I'd rather watch the actual testimony and learn the facts.
Thanks

 

[Dos Equis]

LOL, ok, fair enough. 

But seriously, I know how most Trumpers will excuse this UK bribe deal, REGARDLESS of the evidence.

I've dealt with this kind of attitude before in everything from judging bodybuilders to girl/guy interactions.
It's clear to me that no reasonable amount of evidence will ever be enough for some true believers.
This has become more an issue of faith in Trump and his supporters. I don't think you'd have the same blind faith
for most other political figures. To me, this is as clear and obvious as a solved physics problem.


Believe it or not, I've heard, read or seen the counter to EVERY defense the GOP has on this.
  First they said, nobody was on record who had first hand knowledge of the call. So they has Lt Col Vidman testify , who was listening to the call. Then they claimed they only had the one call. So they brought in Amb Taylor ( and others) that gave testimony into the  action of this Pres to shake down Ukraine. Now we have the testimony of amb Yovanovich as well, etc ad nasuem.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ousted-ambassador-felt-big-threat-trump-assails-her-anew/ar-BBWMA09?ocid=spartanntp
 
 

Oh shut the heck up already.  You haven't looked into anything.  You read headlines on links that pop up in Google searches.  You are always full of crap. 

There is nothing here.  We have the transcript.  We have the president of Ukraine and the Ukraine ambassador saying it didn't happen.  But none of that matters to hacks like you.  So go on and be the good little sheep and regurgitate what the media and Congressional Democrats tell you. 

[Primemuscle]

Really?
So the fed law states he is ,but JPJ of get big forums disagrees? I'm shocked they don't use that defense in court.
Lawyer-Your honor, JPJ and some other get big regulars posted disagreement on this whistle blower protection status.
Judge - That's pretty good evidence. Release his ID immediately  

Question:
Ok, so if Coach farts in your face, but a getbigger posts that he didn't fart, do you still smell it? Just curious...

High protein farts are the worst!

[Primemuscle]

LOL, ok, fair enough. 

But seriously, I know how most Trumpers will excuse this UK bribe deal, REGARDLESS of the evidence.

I've dealt with this kind of attitude before in everything from judging bodybuilders to girl/guy interactions.
It's clear to me that no reasonable amount of evidence will ever be enough for some true believers.
This has become more an issue of faith in Trump and his supporters. I don't think you'd have the same blind faith
for most other political figures. To me, this is as clear and obvious as a solved physics problem.


Believe it or not, I've heard, read or seen the counter to EVERY defense the GOP has on this.
  First they said, nobody was on record who had first hand knowledge of the call. So they has Lt Col Vidman testify , who was listening to the call. Then they claimed they only had the one call. So they brought in Amb Taylor ( and others) that gave testimony into the  action of this Pres to shake down Ukraine. Now we have the testimony of amb Yovanovich as well, etc ad nasuem.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ousted-ambassador-felt-big-threat-trump-assails-her-anew/ar-BBWMA09?ocid=spartanntp
 
 

Thanks for the link. Very interesting reading.

[Dos Equis]

How many times did you hear Schiff say that the "Whistleblower" has a statutory right to anonymity?  He was lying each and every time he said it.

WaPo gives Schiff three Pinocchois on whistleblower anonymity claim
BY JOE CONCHA - 11/20/19
 
The Washington Post gave House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) three Pinocchios on Wednesday for his claim that the whistleblower in the impeachment process against President Trump "has a statutory right to anonymity." 

The Post's fact-checker applies Pinocchios ranging from one to four, with three and four being reserved for what the column considers the more egregious statements. 

Schiff has said repeatedly, including during impeachment hearings on Tuesday, that the whistleblower who filed a formal complaint about Trump’s July 25 phone call with the president of Ukraine has a statutory right to remain anonymous.

“The whistleblower has the right, a statutory right, to anonymity. These proceedings will not be used to out the whistleblower," Schiff said Tuesday.

The Post fact-checker disagreed, stating "it's not a right spelled out in any statute."

The analysis also cites the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act in coming to its conclusion to award Schiff three Pinocchios.
 
"The case for Three: The ICWPA doesn’t include language granting whistleblowers a right to anonymity. Neither do other statutes, directives or court rulings that apply to the intelligence community," it reads. "The argument that whistleblower-protection laws implicitly provide anonymity is more nuanced, and debatable, than what Schiff said in a nationally televised hearing. And what good is a statutory right anyway if there’s no mechanism to enforce it?"

"We found the case for Three Pinocchios more compelling. Schiff says the whistleblower has a 'statutory right' to anonymity, and it apparently, in Schiff’s understanding, extends to congressional hearings and settings that don’t involve the inspector general," the fact-check concludes. "That’s debatable at best."
 
The three Pinocchios comes after Schiff was given four Pinocchios in October for claiming his panel had "not spoken directly with the whistleblower," with the paper calling the claim "flat-out false."

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/471256-wapo-gives-schiff-three-pinocchois-on-whistleblower-anonymity-claim

[Dos Equis]

Rep. Ratcliffe suggested Monday that the “whistleblower” Eric Ciaramella committed perjury by making false statements in his written forms filed with the ICIG and that Adam Schiff is hiding evidence of Ciaramella’s crimes to protect him from a criminal investigation.

Note for history: When the President of the United States attacks a whistleblower publicly, endangering that whistleblower's life, he has crossed another line into authoritarianism. Yet one more reason the @GOP is derelict in addressing this menace to democracy.

The media is just pretending the entire establishment and most of America didn't already know CIA asset ERIC CIARAMELLA was the guy Adam Schiff colluded with to take out Trump.

Eric Ciaramella's name was released by Adam Schiff in a sloppily redacted document release of witness testimony. His name has been known for weeks. Don't blame @realDonaldTrump

Mitch McConnell should release a statement that he will not consider moving forward with a senate trial until ALL transcripts from the House inquiry have been made public, including damning testimony exposing Adam Schiff's fake whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella.

One of the reasons I like President Trump is because he says what everyone knows to be true. The CIA guy, Eric Ciaramella is just doing what the CIA has done since 2015; trying to get rid of Trump.

[Dos Equis]

I really hope they put this guy under oath.

Senate braces for fight over impeachment whistleblower testimony
BY JORDAIN CARNEY - 02/16/20
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/483196-senate-braces-for-fight-over-impeachment-whistleblower-testimony

[Primemuscle]

I really hope they put this guy under oath.

Senate braces for fight over impeachment whistleblower testimony
BY JORDAIN CARNEY - 02/16/20
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/483196-senate-braces-for-fight-over-impeachment-whistleblower-testimony

There's never a dull moment.

[TacoBell]

There's never a dull moment.

You post daily 

[Primemuscle]

You post daily  

Seems like it. Probably so. Not to be rude. But, how is what I spend my time doing your concern?