Jump to content

What's going on with this DNI Whistleblower ?

triplehorn

By triplehorn
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Pig Bellmont

Pig Bellmont 8886

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

They're blaming NSC lawyers, although the direction they attribute to the NSC lawyers is pretty vague:

"In a statement provided to CNN, a senior White House official says it was under the direction of National Security Council attorneys: "NSC lawyers directed that the classified document be handled appropriately."

If this is to be taken literally, the question then is why the White House thought it was appropriate to put the transcript on that particular server. 

I mean I get the excuse - “nsc lawyers determined this not at all classified conversation go on a code word level server and we all went along with it” but it’s so obviously bullshit. It was a repeated practice and I’m almost positive White House counsel was involved. 

Plus John Dean did hard time for Watergate. The precedent has been set

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Js1
Js1

I'm sure you took both sides of that debate. 

Crusher
Crusher

First off there was no extortion. That was not in the transcript. No quid pro quo. Why do you make up shit? Who do you think you are, Adam Schiff?  

Post Oak
Post Oak

I spent a lot of time thinking about this, unfortunately. You have to have so little self-respect that you are ok being lied to over and over.  You have to be ok with being told what to do.  You

Posted Images

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13629

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

White House confirms the substance of the cover-up charge from the whistleblower:

 

"You're a faker. A fake little man from the Fake News. Everything about you is fake. You make your dinner in an Easy Fake Oven, Fakey McFakerson. Fakity fake fake fo fanarama fo faker fake to high heavens.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ok, it's true."

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
deech

deech 2391

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, BNB said:

Ive heard they started that in 2017 after a transcript with Mexico and another were leaked. Not sure if true

Whistleblower says it was after the Mexico and Australia conversations - so its been going on for a few years I would suspect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chooky

Chooky 13340

Posted
Posted

The call with Mexico revealed that he didn't know Canada was part of NAFTA.  You know, the trade agreement he considered a "disaster" but didn't even know the most basic thing that 7th graders already knew.  And I don't think they're above using that as a defense -- "it would be irresponsible of us as a staff to rattle the country by allowing them to know how really just how stone fucking dumb this guy really is."

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hpslugga

hpslugga 4097

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Chooky said:

The call with Mexico revealed that he didn't know Canada was part of NAFTA.  You know, the trade agreement he considered a "disaster" but didn't even know the most basic thing that 7th graders already knew.  And I don't think they're above using that as a defense -- "it would be irresponsible of us as a staff to rattle the country by allowing them to know how really just how stone fucking dumb this guy really is."

Between that and this

190401-fox-and-friends-three-mexican-cou

I legitimately wonder if these people know what Mexico even is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 18324

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, housious said:

What's the story here? Were they trying to hide incriminating conversations? Trying to prevent the leaks that plagued him during the first year of his presidency? Both? 

Try paying attention, like at all. Seriously, how the fuck is this a question?

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23720

Posted
Posted

http://news.trust.org/item/20190927093440-cuva6

MOSCOW, Sept 27 (Reuters) - The Kremlin said on Friday that it hoped that Washington would not release confidential details of phone calls between President Vladimir Putin and his U.S. counterpart Donald Trump.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov made the comment when asked about the White House's release of a reconstruction of Trump's July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy that has set off a U.S. domestic political storm.

Peskov said it was not normal diplomatic practice to release confidential details of such calls and that he hoped the bad state of ties with Washington would not lead to a similar situation arising in Russia's case. (Reporting by Andrew Osborn and Tom Balmforth; Writing by Tom Balmforth; Editing by Maria Kiselyova)

 

Please, Br'er Fox, don't fling me in dat brier-patch!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pig Bellmont

Pig Bellmont 8886

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, BNB said:

Ive heard they started that in 2017 after a transcript with Mexico and another were leaked. Not sure if true

So prior abuse and cover up of political conversations hidden on a code word classified server is supposed to counter the narrative that admin officials knew this call was fucked and they needed to hide it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87185

Posted
Posted
Just now, David Dennison said:

Using the national security apparatus for campaign purposes to own the libs.

I remember the faux outrage that Obama used the IRS to hurt conservative groups.

This is real.  And so much worse. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
American Swindle

American Swindle 102

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

So you think he's being niggardly with his interpretation of the remark? 

I think he's being outrageous and deflecting from the Caitlin's substance in the article that pertains to the thread.  Here's more from the article from the rogue journalist who's more left leaning than anything and has been a prominent supporter of Assange, anti-US Empire/Foreign Policy, and was outspoken in her critique of the Russia-Trump narrative being a total nothingburger:

So there you have it. A mysterious stranger from the lying, torturing, propagandizing, drug trafficking, assassinating, coup-staging, warmongering, psychopathic CIA was working in the White House, heroically provided the political/media class with politically powerful information out of the goodness of his heart, and then vanished off into the Langley sunset. Clearly there is nothing suspicious about this story at all.

In all seriousness, even to call this spook a “whistleblower” is ridiculous on its face. You don’t get to call someone from the US intelligence community a whistleblower unless they are actually whistleblowing on the US intelligence community. That’s not a thing. A CIA officer who exposes information about government officials is an operative performing an operation unless proven otherwise, because that’s what the CIA does; it liberally leaks information wherever it’s convenient for CIA agendas while withholding all other information behind a veil of government secrecy.

What about the term spook in the article would lead one to believe it was being used as disparaging black people? Outrage culture gonna outrage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
American Swindle

American Swindle 102

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

I think he's being outrageous and deflecting from the Caitlin's substance in the article that pertains to the thread.  Here's more from the article from the rogue journalist who's more left leaning than anything and has been a prominent supporter of Assange, anti-US Empire/Foreign Policy, and was outspoken in her critique of the Russia-Trump narrative being a total nothingburger:

So there you have it. A mysterious stranger from the lying, torturing, propagandizing, drug trafficking, assassinating, coup-staging, warmongering, psychopathic CIA was working in the White House, heroically provided the political/media class with politically powerful information out of the goodness of his heart, and then vanished off into the Langley sunset. Clearly there is nothing suspicious about this story at all.

In all seriousness, even to call this spook a “whistleblower” is ridiculous on its face. You don’t get to call someone from the US intelligence community a whistleblower unless they are actually whistleblowing on the US intelligence community. That’s not a thing. A CIA officer who exposes information about government officials is an operative performing an operation unless proven otherwise, because that’s what the CIA does; it liberally leaks information wherever it’s convenient for CIA agendas while withholding all other information behind a veil of government secrecy.

What about the term spook in the article would lead one to believe it was being used as disparaging black people? Outrage culture gonna outrage. 

Forgot to bring in her expansion on the main point in her tweet:

 

While all this political/media class cheerleading for whistleblower protections is going on, the most prominent whistleblower in America remains imprisoned for taking a principled stand against secret grand juries while being driven into crippling debt. Chelsea Manning is still racking up fines of $1,000 per day while locked in a Virginia federal detention center for refusing to testify against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. The mainstream press that is so keen to champion a “whistleblower” who works for the CIA and provided information which feeds into America’s fake partisan pro wrestling feud has been almost completely silent on the actual whistleblower who exposed actual US war crimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

I think he's being outrageous and deflecting from the Caitlin's substance in the article that pertains to the thread.  Here's more from the article from the rogue journalist who's more left leaning than anything and has been a prominent supporter of Assange, anti-US Empire/Foreign Policy, and was outspoken in her critique of the Russia-Trump narrative being a total nothingburger:

So there you have it. A mysterious stranger from the lying, torturing, propagandizing, drug trafficking, assassinating, coup-staging, warmongering, psychopathic CIA was working in the White House, heroically provided the political/media class with politically powerful information out of the goodness of his heart, and then vanished off into the Langley sunset. Clearly there is nothing suspicious about this story at all.

In all seriousness, even to call this spook a “whistleblower” is ridiculous on its face. You don’t get to call someone from the US intelligence community a whistleblower unless they are actually whistleblowing on the US intelligence community. That’s not a thing. A CIA officer who exposes information about government officials is an operative performing an operation unless proven otherwise, because that’s what the CIA does; it liberally leaks information wherever it’s convenient for CIA agendas while withholding all other information behind a veil of government secrecy.

What about the term spook in the article would lead one to believe it was being used as disparaging black people? Outrage culture gonna outrage. 

This is not a perfect post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
troph

troph 25227

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, American Swindle said:

Forgot to bring in her expansion on the main point in her tweet:

 

While all this political/media class cheerleading for whistleblower protections is going on, the most prominent whistleblower in America remains imprisoned for taking a principled stand against secret grand juries while being driven into crippling debt. Chelsea Manning is still racking up fines of $1,000 per day while locked in a Virginia federal detention center for refusing to testify against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. The mainstream press that is so keen to champion a “whistleblower” who works for the CIA and provided information which feeds into America’s fake partisan pro wrestling feud has been almost completely silent on the actual whistleblower who exposed actual US war crimes.

Morally right or wrong, the current WB followed the law to disclose, she didn’t. 

Edited by troph
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 106900

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, kevwun said:

Putin puppet Tulsi is backing the impeachment inquiry now.

Wow.  Takes real moral courage to [checks notes] apply the exact same facts you had yesterday, but now realize the political winds are against you, so change your position.

I presume that now we can put the myth of "Tulsi -- woman of courage and principles" into a hole and bury it.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lemonlime

lemonlime 5503

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, American Swindle said:

I think he's being outrageous and deflecting from the Caitlin's substance in the article that pertains to the thread.  Here's more from the article from the rogue journalist who's more left leaning than anything and has been a prominent supporter of Assange, anti-US Empire/Foreign Policy, and was outspoken in her critique of the Russia-Trump narrative being a total nothingburger:

So there you have it. A mysterious stranger from the lying, torturing, propagandizing, drug trafficking, assassinating, coup-staging, warmongering, psychopathic CIA was working in the White House, heroically provided the political/media class with politically powerful information out of the goodness of his heart, and then vanished off into the Langley sunset. Clearly there is nothing suspicious about this story at all.

In all seriousness, even to call this spook a “whistleblower” is ridiculous on its face. You don’t get to call someone from the US intelligence community a whistleblower unless they are actually whistleblowing on the US intelligence community. That’s not a thing. A CIA officer who exposes information about government officials is an operative performing an operation unless proven otherwise, because that’s what the CIA does; it liberally leaks information wherever it’s convenient for CIA agendas while withholding all other information behind a veil of government secrecy.

What about the term spook in the article would lead one to believe it was being used as disparaging black people? Outrage culture gonna outrage. 

JFC.  I'm far more outraged by people trying to spin for a president using the office we entrusted to him to grift and commit crimes than I am by the dog whistle in the tweet you posted.  I'm not reading that hack's entire article.  The tweet was more than enough.  But that you're defensive about the tweet you posted hours later is telling.

Instead of spouting off about outrage culture, maybe explain if you think the President using the State Department, his private lawyer, and maybe the DOJ to get a foreign government to investigate a political rival is an appropriate use of the office of the presidency, instead of what abouting to the CIA and the person (people?) who brought this to our attention?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eastwood

Eastwood 4394

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

Fox is going to have to jump off the sinking ship at some point.  Fox has shown it can survive the loss of O’Reilly and Ailes and others.  They shouldn’t give a shit if their current lineup of two-bit grifter radio host hacks like Hannity and Ingraham take their ball and go home.  

Fox’s brand is being the champion of the current opposition to the Democrats, not focusing on the GOP’s fallen figures and reminding the audience about failures.  They don’t even portray W all that well, and they wouldn’t piss on McCain or Romney if they were on fire.  Trump is about to be Stupid Nixon in the broader public consciousness, and they can’t spin that away and make it a feel good infotainment product for lib-hating patriots who want to believe they’re winning.

Time to get the audience hooked on the next guy who might not be such a loser.

My prediction is that they are waiting for a big Russian shoe to drop so that way they can pivot and say that their viewer base were the victims of Russia and their bought traitors. That way, their viewers aren't stupid, no... They and all of America were under attack and Trump was originally their champion but he was surrounded by traitors who misled him, and he collapsed under the pressure. What Fox needs is a reason that will make viewers think it was out of their control, that their viewers made the right vote originally, and that it was outside forces that screwed it all up. Hell, they'll even sprinkle in that Obama knew that Russia was coming and did nothing. They'll have the "1980s wants their foreign policy back" clip on repeat. Think of the line they say now that W was a good president, 9/11 fell into his lap, he did his best, but was misled by those around him. They also stated that Bill Clinton had Bin Laden in his grasp and let him go. It's not your fault, you made the right choice, forces out of your control made it all go sideways, and in fact, it was a D who started it all.

Fox is always ready to pivot. Hell, that's why they keep Shepherd Smith around. Once they finally pivot, they will air his clips to show they were onto it all along. By the time all this happens 4, 5 months down the road, their viewers will have forgotten all the thrashing the other 90% of their on-air people were doing over all this. Fox is just waiting to shoot their shot.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eastwood

Eastwood 4394

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Wow.  Takes real moral courage to [checks notes] apply the exact same facts you had yesterday, but now realize the political winds are against you, so change your position.

I presume that now we can put the myth of "Tulsi -- woman of courage and principles" into a hole and bury it.

I think it was one of your posts where I first heard the phrase, "It's easy to take the high road when the valley is flooded."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90650

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, longhornmatt said:

Fox is going to have to jump off the sinking ship at some point.  Fox has shown it can survive the loss of O’Reilly and Ailes and others.  They shouldn’t give a shit if their current lineup of two-bit grifter radio host hacks like Hannity and Ingraham take their ball and go home.  

Fox’s brand is being the champion of the current opposition to the Democrats, not focusing on the GOP’s fallen figures and reminding the audience about failures.  They don’t even portray W all that well, and they wouldn’t piss on McCain or Romney if they were on fire.  Trump is about to be Stupid Nixon in the broader public consciousness, and they can’t spin that away and make it a feel good infotainment product for lib-hating patriots who want to believe they’re winning.

Time to get the audience hooked on the next guy who might not be such a loser.

Fox News has hosts openly attacking one another on-air.  And Wallace, Smith, and Judge Neapolitan and the others who are either criticizing Trump, or his backers, are doing so with the support of management.   I’m guessing Tucker is being pressured by Trump, and feeding him info about Fox News goings-on, hence his little spat with Smith.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...