Jump to content

What's going on with this DNI Whistleblower ?

triplehorn

By triplehorn
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 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

Junior Miller

Junior Miller 1502

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, pantone159 said:

Yes, no matter what the investigation comes up with, the Senate will do nothing and there will be no impeachment trial. The end.

 

If the American people weren't so ridiculously stupid that would be the worst play he could make. If the Senate did nothing then the people blast the republicans in 2020 knocking every branch to the democrats and a newly Democrat led DOJ comes hard after trump and all his idiot co-conspirators with charges. The correct play if the American people weren't complete idiots would be to dump trump now, make him the fall guy, and run on "real family values" bullshit to have a chance in 2020. 

In the end it's the complete idiocy of the American people that allow the abject corruption to continue and eventually bring about the financial collapse of the country.  

Edited by Junior Miller
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mdhorn

Mdhorn 6166

Posted
Posted (edited)
49 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Watching the replay of the entire Jordan/tapper interview. Painful.  Jordan is making up new facts (lies) about the timeline.  When tapper tries to correct Jordan, his only reply is that tapper is ignoring the main point. You can’t support your main point with fake facts.  

And I agree that hunter Biden getting paid by a Ukrainian company is suspect but back it up with facts. 

same thing on Meet the Press this morning.  They Kellyanne Conwayed it up regardless of the question.  After a few futile attempts, Chuck just lets them spew unabated which again, only benefits them.  However, it ends with them asking if Biden should go on checker and the Republican blowhole says yeah, along with Hunter.  Fine, but wtf don't the all agree on Trump going on with his children?  Why is logic and checks only applied one way?   They all effectively said this can hurt both sides.  Why?  Chuck or any of the Dems or press on the panel, in response to all of this being a witch hunt or harassment, ask if so, why have there been so many arrests on Trumps election team?  These were tried in courts of law with irrefutable evidence. Ask them what actual evidence do they have of there being anything on Hunter? If we're so concerned with Biden's son, why aren't we applying this to Trump's family members?  I give a fuck less about Biden.  Had they anything, do they think Trump, Nunes, Jordan or any of those jackasses could've sat on it this long?   

Edited by Mdhorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32600

Posted
Posted

It's come to this.

The President of the United States is implying a death penalty for a sitting US Congressman, while a whistleblower is hidden in federal custody to protect their life.

If you are a congressional member of the GOP, and you just shrug your shoulders, you have no business holding the office you occupy.

If you are a voter who supports this, then you should have your voting rights taken away.

 

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PsychMike

PsychMike 1553

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, SameSame said:

Watching 60 minutes and if you didn't know it before it is pretty clear that Kevin McCarthy is a vapid dipshit.

Yeah, that blunder when he said that the point of the Republican-led Benghazi committee was to sink Clinton’s presidential bid? Cost him the Speaker job. What an idiot!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gap03

Gap03 3389

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Ladies and Gentlemen, the House Minority Leader.  Take it away, Mr. McCarthy:

 

 

I was really hoping that some shows would start doing a side-by-side of the interviews and the talking points memo, where they highlighted each of the talking points as the Republicans hit each of them in succession.  It would really drive home the GOP MO of just repeating their bullshit talking points over and over and over until the idiots start believing them.

Edited by Gap03
Formatting
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13736

Posted
Posted

When the facts don’t help you, argue about the process.   

To me the whistleblower and their identity seem like a pointless issue now. Their total knowledge is now on their complaint and we have the phone transcript.  Unless they have more info which is possible. 

Trump is being trump in that his guy reaction is to attempt to scare the whistleblower or future whistleblowers.  Speak up and I will ruin your life. It’s why his main business tactic is to file lawsuits.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 18328

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

When the facts don’t help you, argue about the process.   

To me the whistleblower and their identity seem like a pointless issue now. Their total knowledge is now on their complaint and we have the phone transcript.  Unless they have more info which is possible. 

Trump is being trump in that his guy reaction is to attempt to scare the whistleblower or future whistleblowers.  Speak up and I will ruin your life. It’s why his main business tactic is to file lawsuits.

God damn it, we dont have the transcript. We have a summary. I would love to see the actual transcript. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Junior Miller

Junior Miller 1502

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

God damn it, we dont have the transcript. We have a summary. I would love to see the actual transcript. 

You know, if trump believed he were truly innocent here there's one simple way to prove it.  Release the transcript and any recording that may exist for everyone to see. Give America access to the entire call. The evidence is there to prove an innocent man innocent and he has it. 

Oh, except he's completely guilty and releasing the call would prove he's guilty. 

Edited by Junior Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuingToGetAMessageBoard?

SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3873

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Junior Miller said:

You know, if trump believed he were truly innocent here there's one simple way to prove it.  Release the transcript and any recording that may exist for everyone to see. Give America access to the entire call. The evidence is there to prove an innocent man innocent and he has it. 

Oh, except he's completely guilty and releasing the call would prove he's guilty. 

 They aren't arguing that the transcript differs from the summary — That somehow they would be vindicated by the transcript in a way that the summary doesn’t. They claim the summary vindicates them itself.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87190

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Minor point:  I don't believe the calls are "recorded".  Multiple officials listen in and take notes, which have not been released, but audio recording is apparently no longer a thing, no doubt in part due to Nixon's shenanigans.

Israel already had cellphone surveillance near the White House.  Not out of the realm of possibility that a recording exist somewhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 47221

Posted
Posted
Just now, Js1 said:

Israel already had cellphone surveillance near the White House.  Not out of the realm of possibility that a recording exist somewhere. 

OK, I wasn't referring to Donald's iPhone.  I was referring to official calls between Trump and foreign dignitaries -- the policy appears to be "no audio recording".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pig Bellmont

Pig Bellmont 8887

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

The Trump presidency & McConnell leadership will ultimately lead to more constitutional amendments.  

When the Senate fails to advise & consent on scotus nominees or potentially stand as court in an impeachment trial, future presidents could ignore the senates authority since they subjectively apply their authority. 

They can’t refuse to hold a trial without voting to modify the current Senate rules. The politics on that vote would be absolutely fatal, so there will definitely be some kind of trial- it will most likely focus on Hunter Biden however 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Junior Miller

Junior Miller 1502

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

 They aren't arguing that the transcript differs from the summary — That somehow they would be vindicated by the transcript in a way that the summary doesn’t. They claim the summary vindicates them itself.  

Well then no need to hide the transcripts in a secured clearance location. Release them all and let the officials who wrote them testify to open session Congress about what they heard. 

What they claim doesn't matter because it's bullshit. They know he's guilty and the transcripts will prove it. That's why they tried to hide them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Junior Miller

Junior Miller 1502

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Minor point:  I don't believe the calls are "recorded".  Multiple officials listen in and take notes, which have not been released, but audio recording is apparently no longer a thing, no doubt in part due to Nixon's shenanigans.

They probably aren't but with Dumb Watergate any level of stupidity is possible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixonHur

DixonHur 11961

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

This seems important.  I mean, if the KREMLIN says we need their consent to release Trump-Putin transcripts, then I guess we'll just have to wait for them to grant permission.  Damn the luck.

 

Too bad for Russia that DC has a one-party consent law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13736

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

They can’t refuse to hold a trial without voting to modify the current Senate rules. The politics on that vote would be absolutely fatal, so there will definitely be some kind of trial- it will most likely focus on Hunter Biden however 

Is there a rule requiring the trial within a certain number of days?  McConnell didn't care about holding any SCOTUS nomination hearings or votes for close to a year. It would seem that there would be more rules around that as opposed to an impeachment trial as SCOTUS nominations are relatively frequent events.

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...