Whistleblower complaint describes White House cover-up on Trump-Ukraine scandal

[Tippaporn]

12 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Oh look, it’s the  ‘Leave our traitor in the WH alone or we’ll break your windows’ defense.

It's not about Trump, Chomper.  It's about removing a duly elected legitimate president using illegitimate means.  You may not like him.  You may even hate him.  But this is not the way it should be done.

[Becker]

3 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

It's not about Trump, Chomper.  It's about removing a duly elected legitimate president using illegitimate means.  You may not like him.  You may even hate him.  But this is not the way it should be done.

No, it shouldn't be necessary but thankfully the constitution allows for it when the elected official clearly is unfit for office either through diminished mental capabilities or because of his illegal actions.

Well done Trump, two for two!

[Tippaporn]

6 minutes ago, Becker said:

. . . .

Here's the situation and what this thread is about:

Trump tried to blackmail the Ukrainian president for own political gain . . . .

That is not fact.  It is interpretation.  The whistle blower claim is interpretation as well.  Again, the passing of opinion off as indisputable fact.  Doing so is dishonest, Becker.  Honesty would be to frame it as, "I believe," or "I think," or "It is my opinion," or "I suspect," or "I conclude."  Let's be honest in the discussion of this topic.

[lannarebirth]

1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

That is not fact.  It is interpretation.  The whistle blower claim is interpretation as well.  Again, the passing of opinion off as indisputable fact.  Doing so is dishonest, Becker.  Honesty would be to frame it as, "I believe," or "I think," or "It is my opinion," or "I suspect," or "I conclude."  Let's be honest in the discussion of this topic.

Fair enough, but wouldn't you agree that a tribunal, whether a court of law, or Congress as Constitutionally charged is the proper setting for establishing what the facts, if any, are? And to pass judgement based on the finding of those facts or lack thereof?

[Tippaporn]

17 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

Fair enough, but wouldn't you agree that a tribunal, whether a court of law, or Congress as Constitutionally charged is the proper setting for establishing what the facts, if any, are? And to pass judgement based on the finding of those facts or lack thereof?

I wholeheartedly agree with you, lannarebirth.  Spot on.

Edited September 29, 2019 by Tippaporn

[Tippaporn]

There's nothing wrong with speculating either.  And my speculation is that the whistle blower report was another set-up designed, as I believe Russiagate was, for multiple purposes.  At least that I can think of.  First and foremost to oust Trump as TPTB quite understand that the general population will never accept an ousting by any other than legitimate and accepted processes.

[mtls2005]

34 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

It's about removing a duly elected legitimate president using illegitimate means.

 

So now the Constitution is illegitimate? Who knew?

 

The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

— Article I, Section 2, Clause 5

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

—Article I, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7

 

 

51 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Oh look, it’s the  ‘Leave our traitor in the WH alone or we’ll break your windows’ defense.

You heard this sort of vague threat of civil war a lot back in 1974. BTW such a threat smacks of treason. But a few knobheads will use up all their ammo in the first hour then what? Loot the local Walmart for moer ammo?

 

 

[Tippaporn]

5 minutes ago, Becker said:

I didn't post that. Maybe you should try answering lannarebirth's question instead.

Sorry, I was still able to correct it in my original post.

[Tippaporn]

5 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Apologies, I was unable to find a scratching my head emoji.

Sorry, lannarebirth.  I corrected my original post.

[Tippaporn]

3 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

So now the Constitution is illegitimate? Who knew?

. . . .

 

It's obvious, mtls2005, that within the context of the post I am suggesting, as I have often enough, that if the whistle blower is a set-up, as Russiagate is turning out to be as reported by some, then it would be an illegitimate removal.

[Tippaporn]

3 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

I second that......

In the spirit of humour, I'll pile on in agreement.

[mtls2005]

9 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

It's obvious, mtls2005, that within the context of the post I am suggesting, as I have often enough, that if the whistle blower is a set-up, as Russiagate is turning out to be as reported by some, then it would be an illegitimate removal.

 

Sorry, having a hard time following you. 

 

So the defense of the president is that the Whistle Blower's Complaint is somehow false? Fine. If so, it will not support an impeachment, let alone a conviction. I guess with that level of trust and confidence one would support an Impeachment Inquiry, and susbequent referral? Then the president will look "perfect", and the Dems, losers.

 

 

The crime(s) which the president committed, which are documented in the memo of conversation with the Ukranian President (released by the White House, for some odd reason - McConnell may have egged him on to do this?) are really the basis for the Impeachment Inquiry.

 

Attacking the WB's complaint seems like a precarious defense. What happens when 3, 4, 5, all twelve insiders spill the beans? (Some will, in the stampede for immunity.) Egg meet face; foot meet mouth, "Sean, gimme a new talking point stat."

 

Time to dust off that Fifth Ammendment...

 

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

 

Suspect this baby will be getting used a lot soon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 29, 2019 by mtls2005

[Becker]

16 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

There's nothing wrong with speculating either.  And my speculation is that the whistle blower report was another set-up designed, as I believe Russiagate was, for multiple purposes.  At least that I can think of.  First and foremost to oust Trump as TPTB quite understand that the general population will never accept an ousting by any other than legitimate and accepted processes.

"There's nothing wrong with speculating either."

Wow, what delightful backpedalling! So now you'll allow for speculations. That's very gracious of you.

 

"...the general population..."

I'll interpret that as "base Trump supporters".

 

"...never accept an ousting by any other than legitimate and accepted processes."

So what's written in the constitution will never be accepted?

 

[Becker]

13 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

I second that......

LOL, talk about....never mind.

[Jingthing]

One beauty thing about Ukraine-gate is that it's moving so fast and furious that "trump" has totally lost control of the narrative. It's obvious that he's freaking out big time now. That's been most of his game from the start and now he is really and truly LOSING it.  Shock and awe indeed. 

[Becker]

12 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

It's obvious, mtls2005, that within the context of the post I am suggesting, as I have often enough, that if the whistle blower is a set-up, as Russiagate is turning out to be as reported by some, then it would be an illegitimate removal.

Indeed, and the impeachment proceedings (as I now see you agree should go forward) will hopefully uncover all the nefarious plots the "Ukrainegate" story contains and will leave our boy Don smelling like a bunch of orange roses in the end!

[Becker]

Just now, Jingthing said:

One beauty thing about Ukraine-gate is that it's moving so fast and furious that "trump" has totally lost control of the narrative. It's obvious that he's freaking out big time now. That's been most of his game from the start and now he is really and truly LOSING it.  Shock and awe indeed. 

And isn't it beautiful to behold!

[lannarebirth]

18 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

It's obvious, mtls2005, that within the context of the post I am suggesting, as I have often enough, that if the whistle blower is a set-up, as Russiagate is turning out to be as reported by some, then it would be an illegitimate removal.

A sticking point seems to be that the WB may not have been a first hand observer and received second hand information. Obviously the person from which this information was received will be subpeonaed and made to confirm, or not, the veracity of the assertions.  I don't think people should get bogged down in this second hand information stuff. It's a red herring. Whatever happened will all come out.

Edited September 29, 2019 by lannarebirth

[metisdead]

An inflammatory post and the replies have been removed. 

 

Some members need to be aware that the report button is not be used as a method of disagreeing with another poster's opinion:

 

Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact us immediately via the report function. We do have the ability to remove objectionable messages and will make every effort to do so if we determine that removal is necessary. Please use the report button only for posts in blatant violation of the forum rules. Misuse of the report button is not allowed. Removal is a manual process so please realize we may not be able to remove or edit particular messages immediately. Responding to objectionable messages is discouraged.
 

 

 

 

A post using a trolling representation of Trump's name has been removed. 

[mtls2005]

It's ironic/karmic that, in the effort to hide these presidential conversations - which one assumes display a similar level of lawlessness (consciousness of guilt) - they've been moved to a highly secure system, which requires individual code-word access to enter, remove, erase, thereby by leaving an unassailable audit trail.  

 

So now there's a record of who did what, and when. Should be easy enough to find out why, and who commanded it?

 

Some folks at the WH better be wearing the brown pants, and ask mom & dad (or Wayne LaPierre, he's still flush with rubles) for $100,000 for a retainer (legal, not dental).

 

"Janet, go make a popcorn river."

 

 

For a final time, come up with a single, rational defense of the president's statements in the call to Zelensky. Stop using multiple, confusing, unrelated defenses (deep state, fake news, WB is a traitor) as the "base" needs something simple, chantable. And no, "He's not a crook", or "Don't lock him up", works.

 

Lastly, make sure all the former employees are back-stopped, and no, an NDA does not count.

 

CoS Kelly is said to have put calls on hold many times, while informing his boss that what he was saying was a crime. Oops.

 

The president's boat is leaking so fast, maybe time to stop drilling more holes to let the water out?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 29, 2019 by mtls2005

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, englishoak said:

 

Clearly you have already decided as no doubt you had on the Russia collusion scam before it i suspect. I am far more interested in the bigger game being played. You have an emotional investment in Trump i do not have, you also make up things i have not said but of course its a propaganda campaign, just as Russia collusion was. Are you really that naive to suppose ANY president does not do wrong things ? on the contrary every single one in the past 30 years has more blood on their hands than DT and quite dramatically so too. The Bushes were/are war criminals as is Obama who is also imo a traitor and Clinton is a serial rapist AND a war criminal, Johnson, Reagan and Nixon, the list goes on no matter the party.. 

 

I am just as scathing of my own ex leaders btw be it Thatcher, Major, Blair or Cameron etc war criminals all. I am not partisan by any means but there are ways of ousting a sitting president or PM in a democracy and that should be by the people, at an election, as it should be and has been to date. If you were honest and clear headed youd admit that is impossible by democratic means because Trump is so popular so yes its a propaganda campaign and will be done by lawful coup whilst Democrats will cheer it on because losing to the opposition can no longer tolerated, this history teaches us leads to tyranny, it also utterly undermines your democratic system and you will lose your Republic and undermine your Constitution if allowed to happen as we are losing ours for nothing but a circus with drama fuelled by media and political manipulation of your emotions to see your "team" win at any cost.. you are a fool not to look deeper. They do not care about you or the people nor does Trump but he cares more about your country than most of his predecessors have that much im sure of simply because he is NOT a war monger, just a businessman given the opportunity to be POTUS and for that he is hated by TPTB, any sensible and non partisan critical thinker should be able to see that by now. The media is there to stop sense, clear thinking and inject narrative and bias. im sure youd agree hat is what fox media does and so do CNN and all the rest, choose your poison.  

I

Dont worry if Trump is removed by lawful coup as i believe is very likely youll get your war and can cheer whilst many more lives are wasted in the name of some narrative peddled as necessary while the powerful will continue to consolidate the march towards total control and less freedoms for you and your offspring. You are the blind mob, keen to have your personal political ego massaged no matter the means and are thus easily led, sleep well and continue your partisan slumber friend. One day you might wake up and ask where your freedoms went.     

A "lawful coup".  What is that?

 

How do you think Presidents who have broken the law should be removed?  Do you think that Presidents are above the law?

[Farangwithaplan]

Well some dates have been set to have people with real insight into this mess give evidence.

 

Marie Yovanovitch - Former Ambassador to Ukraine. Oct 2.

Kurt Volker - Special Envoy. Oct 3.

George Kent - Deputy Assistant Secretary Oct 7.

T. Ulrich Brechbuhl - Counceler. Oct 8.

Gordon Sondland - Ambassador to Ukraine. Oct 10.

 

It will be interesting to see who turns up. I am imagine all people engaged in the current government probably will. For them to not turn up would be a terrible look for a Government that claims they have done nothing wrong.

 

Volker will probably turn up and as he has resigned he doesn't have to watch what he says anymore. He has shown he doesn't give a damn about toeing the line for Trump anymore - if in fact he ever did. Out of this lot, I'd put money on Volker having the most 'interesting' things to say.

 

Personally, I'd like to know who told Volker to stay in touch with Guiliani.

[Morch]

9 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Apparently I posted not only a link to an article but portions of the article itself.  I've just reviewed TV forum rules and it is indeed the case that only a headline and the first three sentences of an article from a supplied link may be reposted.  Now that I understand fully I will repost the original link.  Thanks for the guidance, Scott.

 

The article is excellent providing understanding and in analyzing the unusual change in IC policy which allows for 2nd hand, 3rd hand, and perhaps infinite hand knowledge to be acceptable in submitting complaints.  The previous policy was that information must be direct 1st hand only.

 

https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2019/09/27/breaking-intel-community-secretly-changed-whistle-blower-rules-allow-trump-ukraine-complaint-just-days-filed/

 

Worth a read as the source is credible.

 

 

"Worth a read as the source is credible."

 

Was. Sorta. Once. All the more so when it comes to Trump.

But an unsurprising comment given your obviously alternative take on credibility.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RedState#Notable_incidents

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/red-state/

 

Why We Are Quitting RedState

https://thebulwark.com/why-we-are-quitting-redstate/

 

 

[Morch]

8 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

There's nothing wrong with speculating either.  And my speculation is that the whistle blower report was another set-up designed, as I believe Russiagate was, for multiple purposes.  At least that I can think of.  First and foremost to oust Trump as TPTB quite understand that the general population will never accept an ousting by any other than legitimate and accepted processes.

 

Use of such handy terms and phrases like "TPTB" (The Powers That Be), especially when no actual reference as to whom this label applies to is provided, is on of them easy giveaways the poster is into conspiracy theory stuff.

 

And while at it, could you possibly avoid co-opting the "general population"? Most of it not very supportive of Trump, and certainly not of misdeeds by Trump.

 

Edited September 29, 2019 by Morch

[Scott]

Off-topic, troll posts removed.  

 

[bendejo]

9 hours ago, Farangwithaplan said:

It will be interesting to see who turns up. I am imagine all people engaged in the current government probably will. For them to not turn up would be a terrible look for a Government that claims they have done nothing wrong.

Now that the impeachment inquiry is official they can't go on ignoring subpoenas without being charged with contempt of Congress.  This was one of the things Nixon would have had to face if he hadn't quit, and in the post-Mueller carnival it was the only charge that seems to strike a chord in Barr.

 

9 hours ago, Farangwithaplan said:

Volker will probably turn up and as he has resigned he doesn't have to watch what he says anymore.

Well he, and any other former employee, could very well be charged with criminal acts.  There are now two sets of laws: the co-opted DOJ, where the stooge AG enforces whatever the president says is or isn't law, and the laws Congress can enforce.  The former is putting effort into prosecuting whoever the president said wronged him.  If this impeachment flops expect purges and show trials involving anyone who made or supported allegations against DT, like McCabe is going through.  Otherwise a lot of them, including Barr himself could be behind the walls, if he lives long enough -- I say this because he's the guy who said "everybody dies," which makes me suspect his days are numbered due to health issues, and he's doing all this because he has nothing to lose.

 

 

Edited September 29, 2019 by bendejo

[Chomper Higgot]

11 hours ago, Farangwithaplan said:

Well some dates have been set to have people with real insight into this mess give evidence.

 

Marie Yovanovitch - Former Ambassador to Ukraine. Oct 2.

Kurt Volker - Special Envoy. Oct 3.

George Kent - Deputy Assistant Secretary Oct 7.

T. Ulrich Brechbuhl - Counceler. Oct 8.

Gordon Sondland - Ambassador to Ukraine. Oct 10.

 

It will be interesting to see who turns up. I am imagine all people engaged in the current government probably will. For them to not turn up would be a terrible look for a Government that claims they have done nothing wrong.

 

Volker will probably turn up and as he has resigned he doesn't have to watch what he says anymore. He has shown he doesn't give a damn about toeing the line for Trump anymore - if in fact he ever did. Out of this lot, I'd put money on Volker having the most 'interesting' things to say.

 

Personally, I'd like to know who told Volker to stay in touch with Guiliani.

Adam Schiff has stated he has the agreement of the whistleblower her/himself to give testimony to Congress.

 

Rest assured those persons involved in hiding transcripts on the Intelligence servers are now in a race to cut a cooperating plea deal.

 

And we know how those go, the plea deal requires the confession to all crimes, who would chance not revealing other hidden transcripts while certain they are not the only person with knowledge of the facts cutting a deal.

 

A real life prisoner’s dilemma brought to you by Trump’s WH.

 

The winning just gets better.

[Chomper Higgot]

There is something else too.

 

When Trump’s supporters point out that the Whistleblower reported both his own and observations others shared with him/her, they think they’ve found a weakness. 

 

Far from it.

 

Multiple witnessed sharing accounts of criminal behavior offer the certain prospect of more individuals testifying, more corroboration and perhaps more crimes to report.

 

It also tells us, and the President that the WH is awash with people observing and reporting Trump’s troubling behavior.

 

This might not worry Trump, but it will be of concern to those he asks to commit crimes on his behalf.

 

 

 

[stevenl]

Really worrying are his latest tweets, demanding a meeting with the whistleblower and the others who provided information.

Sounds like obstruction.

[Chomper Higgot]

15 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Really worrying are his latest tweets, demanding a meeting with the whistleblower and the others who provided information.

Sounds like obstruction.

He’s not in a position to demand anything.