Whistleblower offers Republicans testimony as Trump pushes to unmask

[Tippaporn]

It's been speculated that the whistle blower is one Eric Ciaramella.  I remember so long ago when this whole thing started and I kept making the point that the whistle blower's identity is important.  And the libs would just blow it off saying that who he was didn't matter.  Well, if it is Eric Ciaramella that would be one helluva bombshell.  And very, very bad for the Dems.

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/pinnacle-of-irresponsibility-attorneys-decline-to-confirm-cia-officer-eric-ciaramella-is-whistleblower

[RideJocky]

2 hours ago, J Town said:

Here is the direct quote:

“The spies and treason, we used to handle it a little differently than we do now,” Trump said.

 

Yes, that is definitely a death threat. 
 

 

 

[Dap]

9 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

if a person is known, they will be a witness and may have to give evidence. Anonymous tips you must mean. This isnt an anonymous tip here. The "whistleblower" has no legal entitlement to anonymity outside the statue he filed his false statement under.

Well if they are the ones who set the fire......

What "false" statement? Everything the whistleblower claimed has been more than substantiated by many other witnesses.

[Tug]

1 hour ago, BobBKK said:

I post with balance I am not a Trump supporter by any means but I loathe hypocrisy. BTW I am not American just a neutral observer.

Bs

[Becker]

1 hour ago, BobBKK said:

"I post with balance I am not a Trump supporter......"

BWAHAHAHAHA!

[Mavideol]

11 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

Or we can observe the Constitution, which gives the accused the right to face their accuser.

not in this case, if so why the law is so clear as to state ALL whistleblower's anonymity, without that protection nobody will never come forward with any complain

[J Town]

3 hours ago, BobBKK said:

Not at all you won't tell us why it is not hypocritical for Biden to explicitly force out a prosecutor and boast he threatened the Ukrainians with no aid but it terrible for Trump to ask about Bidens son working, with no experience, for a Ukrainian company. Back to the whistleblower,  anyone is entitled to defend themselves, ask question and be represented as IN THE PAST.

That is a red herring. It's probably true what you say about Biden, but again - that's not the topic.

[J Town]

1 hour ago, Becker said:

BWAHAHAHAHA!

Yeah, I had trouble with that one, too. Kinda destroys all credibility.

[Crazy Alex]

1 hour ago, Dap said:

What "false" statement? Everything the whistleblower claimed has been more than substantiated by many other witnesses.

So what's the hold up? Impeach now.

[J Town]

1 hour ago, Dap said:

What "false" statement? Everything the whistleblower claimed has been more than substantiated by many other witnesses.

Again, Trump supporters are in a deep state of denial/desperation. The walls are closing in, the truth is becoming clear in spite of their attempts to obstruct or smear the good names of the witnesses, and once this goes live (hopefully prime time) there will be no legitimate excuses.

[J Town]

1 minute ago, Crazy Alex said:

So what's the hold up? Impeach now.

I'm sure you know that's exactly what they are in the process of doing. They are being methodical about their approach because they don't act on emotions as do their Republican counterparts.

[J Town]

1 hour ago, RideJocky said:

Yes, that is definitely a death threat. 

Yes, they used to put forth the death penalty for what Trump claims this whistleblower did.

[J Town]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

It's been speculated that the whistle blower is one Eric Ciaramella.  I remember so long ago when this whole thing started and I kept making the point that the whistle blower's identity is important.  And the libs would just blow it off saying that who he was didn't matter.  Well, if it is Eric Ciaramella that would be one helluva bombshell.  And very, very bad for the Dems.

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/pinnacle-of-irresponsibility-attorneys-decline-to-confirm-cia-officer-eric-ciaramella-is-whistleblower

Firchrissake, the whistleblower's id is now a moot point. Even if Krusty the Clown, or Jack the Ripper, or Casper the friendly ghost reports a fire, the fire department doesn't give a tinker's damn who called it in. They have the smoke, they have the fire, now move on.

[Crazy Alex]

13 minutes ago, J Town said:

I'm sure you know that's exactly what they are in the process of doing. They are being methodical about their approach because they don't act on emotions as do their Republican counterparts.

Yes, they've been in the process of impeaching for over two years.

[RideJocky]

16 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Yes, they've been in the process of impeaching for over two years.

I’d bet there has has not been a week go by since Trump was elected the left here has been moaning on about all the crimes and that impeachment was coming any day...

 

This time for sure!!!!

[Becker]

3 minutes ago, RideJocky said:

I’d bet there has has not been a week go by since Trump was elected the left here has been moaning on about all the crimes and that impeachment was coming any day...

Yes, we really should stop moaning about his criminal activities, past and present.

To all those who believe in democracy and the rule of law:

STOP THAT!

[RideJocky]

24 minutes ago, Becker said:

Yes, we really should stop moaning about his criminal activities, past and present.

To all those who believe in democracy and the rule of law:

STOP THAT!

Yes, except the “crimes“ keep dissolving. What  happened to campaign financing, tax evasion, obstruction, perjury and all the other crimes? 
 

No doubt Nancy has been biding her time and methodically building an iron-clad case. This latest act of a maniacal tyrant will surly be the last nail in the coffin! 
 

 

[Crazy Alex]

1 minute ago, RideJocky said:

Yes, except the “crimes“ keep dissolving. What  happened to campaign financing, tax evasion, obstruction, perjury and all the other crimes? 
 

No doubt Nancy has been biding her time and methodically building an iron-clad case. This latest act of a maniacal tyrant will surly be the last nail in the coffin! 
 

 

This time they really really really got Trump. No, REALLY!

[riclag]

All the  house GOP stuck together with 2 dems!  At one time Nancy said there should  be bi partisan consensus for a impeachment! 

The reason they stuck together is easy! The false WB (the POTUS isn't a intel agent ,so he's not subjected to WB protocol) is not substantiated  beyond a doubt especially with their reported bias,hear say second hand opinions,while other first hand witnesses said it was a good call ,nothing wrong..I can't get over the biggest fact of the matter ,Ukraine Prez saying no pressure,no quid .

Edited November 4, 2019 by riclag

[Crazy Alex]

3 minutes ago, riclag said:

All the  house GOP stuck together with 2 dems!  At one time Nancy said there should  be bi partisan consensus for a impeachment! 

The reason they stuck together is easy! The false WB (the POTUS isn't a intel agent ,so he's not subjected to WB protocol) is not substantiated  beyond a doubt especially with their reported bias,hear say second hand opinions,while other first hand witnesses said it was a good call ,nothing wrong..I can't get over the biggest fact of the matter ,Ukraine Prez saying no pressure,no quid .

Good reply. You got me to thinking. There were supposedly dozens of people listening to the phone call. If the House wants to investigate, why aren't they calling every single person who heard the phone call in to testify?

 

I think everyone knows the answer to that.

[candide]

17 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Good reply. You got me to thinking. There were supposedly dozens of people listening to the phone call. If the House wants to investigate, why aren't they calling every single person who heard the phone call in to testify?

 

I think everyone knows the answer to that.

You should follow the news. You would have noticed that Trump prevents officials from testifying, including those who are obviously pro-Trump. Why does he prevent persons who heard the phone call to testify?

I think everyone knows the answer to that! ????

 

[Crazy Alex]

22 minutes ago, candide said:

You should follow the news. You would have noticed that Trump prevents officials from testifying, including those who are obviously pro-Trump. Why does he prevent persons who heard the phone call to testify?

I think everyone knows the answer to that! ????

 

Yes, because I'm certain Trump would hate to have people testify if they're going to say the phone call was perfectly fine and legal. I suppose someone somewhere may believe that.

[sirineou]

15 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Yes, because I'm certain Trump would hate to have people testify if they're going to say the phone call was perfectly fine and legal. I suppose someone somewhere may believe that.

I am sure He would love it, But difficult to find people that would perjure themselves after what happened to those who did before, 

[sirineou]

1 hour ago, Crazy Alex said:

Good reply. You got me to thinking. There were supposedly dozens of people listening to the phone call. If the House wants to investigate, why aren't they calling every single person who heard the phone call in to testify?

 

I think everyone knows the answer to that.

You know that there are Republicans in the inquiry committee and they can also call witnesses, If there are witnesses that would collaborate trump's narrative,  why don't they call them?  

[candide]

37 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Yes, because I'm certain Trump would hate to have people testify if they're going to say the phone call was perfectly fine and legal. I suppose someone somewhere may believe that.

He surely would like that. So why does he prevent anyone to testify? As you constantly claim that the current testimonies are obvious lies, there should be plenty of persons ready to establish the truth UNDER OATH.

By the way, under the new rules, the Republican minority can request testimonies, including by subpoena.

[Tippaporn]

6 hours ago, J Town said:

Firchrissake, the whistleblower's id is now a moot point. Even if Krusty the Clown, or Jack the Ripper, or Casper the friendly ghost reports a fire, the fire department doesn't give a tinker's damn who called it in. They have the smoke, they have the fire, now move on.

You have no idea what you're talking about.  Do a bit of digging and you'll understand the import.

 

P.S. You won't find any info from the MSM.  They don't want you to know.

[Crazy Alex]

1 hour ago, candide said:

He surely would like that. So why does he prevent anyone to testify? As you constantly claim that the current testimonies are obvious lies, there should be plenty of persons ready to establish the truth UNDER OATH.

By the way, under the new rules, the Republican minority can request testimonies, including by subpoena.

I said the current testimonies are lies? Link? Here, let me help. You won't find such accusations. If you found anything, it would be a difference of opinion. Perhaps you have me confused with someone else.

[bendejo]

1 hour ago, sirineou said:

You know that there are Republicans in the inquiry committee and they can also call witnesses, If there are witnesses that would collaborate trump's narrative,  why don't they call them?  

Yes, his GOP colleagues are at the ready to declare the notion of impeachment as against the US Constitution which they love with (obviously) blind passion, the disgraceful way the investigation is being handled (and this is the party that had 2 years of Benghazi inquisitions and 6 years of fishing for crimes by the Clintons but came up with only a stained dress) but they back off about the actual acts committed, and it has DT worried.

Why?  Because they know there is no justification, the best they can do is change the subject, and come up up with silly accusations against those seeking impeachment.  Best one yet is that "Soviet style" stuff, a great reminder of who's hands DT is playing into.  It's sort of like the defense attorney of a serial killer saying the prosecutor is behaving like Charlie Manson.  Well, as I heard one not-too-bright US Senator say in an interview "you don't have to pass an IQ test to become a senator" -- the look on his face after he realized what he had just said was classic!  BTW, that was not how the Soviets handled forced removal.

 

 

News of the testimonies being released is happening while I write this, and there will be a lot of regrets that things were not kept secret.  Be careful what you wish for.

 

Personally I think the GOP senators could pull together a back-room plurality and figure if enough of them vote en masse to dump him he'll be out and away and in no position to wield vengeance.  Boot licking sycophants appear prideless but can harbor a hatred.

 

 

[sirineou]

28 minutes ago, bendejo said:

Yes, his GOP colleagues are at the ready to declare the notion of impeachment as against the US Constitution which they love with (obviously) blind passion, the disgraceful way the investigation is being handled (and this is the party that had 2 years of Benghazi inquisitions and 6 years of fishing for crimes by the Clintons but came up with only a stained dress) but they back off about the actual acts committed, and it has DT worried.

Why?  Because they know there is no justification, the best they can do is change the subject, and come up up with silly accusations against those seeking impeachment.  Best one yet is that "Soviet style" stuff, a great reminder of who's hands DT is playing into.  It's sort of like the defense attorney of a serial killer saying the prosecutor is behaving like Charlie Manson.  Well, as I heard one not-too-bright US Senator say in an interview "you don't have to pass an IQ test to become a senator" -- the look on his face after he realized what he had just said was classic!  BTW, that was not how the Soviets handled forced removal.

 

 

News of the testimonies being released is happening while I write this, and there will be a lot of regrets that things were not kept secret.  Be careful what you wish for.

 

Personally I think the GOP senators could pull together a back-room plurality and figure if enough of them vote en masse to dump him he'll be out and away and in no position to wield vengeance.  Boot licking sycophants appear prideless but can harbor a hatred.

 

 

You have to understand their position,  They don't know how this thing is going to play and are waiting to see which way the wind blows, If they say anything now and trump survives they are politically dead.

The same thing happened with Nixon, before the tapes they were al defending him.

The next couple of months a crucial for the country.

[rabas]

12 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

13 hours ago, Dap said:

What "false" statement? Everything the whistleblower claimed has been more than substantiated by many other witnesses.

So what's the hold up? Impeach now.

Impeach now and forever. At least till 2024. Washington will run out of whistles.