Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > The President & the Executive Branch
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

The President & the Executive Branch Discuss Source says whistleblower didn't have ‘firsthand knowledge’ of Trump call with Ukrain at the Political Forums; Oops, another fake news, phony scandal springs a leak. The whistleblower who sparked a mounting controversy over President Trump’s July ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-24-2019, 09:36 AM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 17,682
Thanks: 11,010
Thanked 11,627 Times in 6,922 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Source says whistleblower didn't have ‘firsthand knowledge’ of Trump call with Ukrain

Oops, another fake news, phony scandal springs a leak.

Quote:
The whistleblower who sparked a mounting controversy over President Trump’s July phone call with Ukraine’s president did not have “firsthand knowledge” of the conversation, a person familiar with the situation told Fox News -- even as the issue fuels impeachment calls from Democrats.

The source said that it is made clear in the complaint itself that the whistleblower did not have direct knowledge of the July phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Of course the likelihood of the whistleblower complaint being nothing but a rumor didn't stop Democrats from rushing to the nearest microphone to demand Trump's impeachment or a so-called Republican primary challenger to denounce Trump as a traitor.

House Democrat intelligence committee chair Adam Schiff repeated the same pattern used in the Russian collusion hoax of acting as if the allegations were true, hysterically describing Trump as evil. All the false promises of Russian collusion proof Schiff made for years are ignored, instead he is instantly accorded credibility because he signs on to the smear.

Quote:
Fox News has learned that typically, multiple U.S. officials are on such calls with the president, but this would indicate the whistleblower is not one of those people. It's unclear if the individual read a transcript of the call, heard about it in conversation, or learned of it another way.
Of course the possibility that a Trump hating bureaucrat concocted the story can't be mentioned. Pundits and so-called reporters sometimes include the qualifier "if true" as a perfunctory disclaimer before condemning Trump as President by foreign interference in our elections.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fox...-president.amp
__________________
What is a 30 something year old single man with a rock in one hand and a Honduran flag in the other?

An asylum seeker.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-24-2019, 06:11 PM
Hairy Jello's Avatar
Deplorable
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,519
Thanks: 1,965
Thanked 13,189 Times in 8,254 Posts
Default Re: Source says whistleblower didn't have ‘firsthand knowledge’ of Trump call with Uk

Let me know when it's taco time.
__________________

Not an accurate representation of a white person.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09-24-2019, 08:39 PM
Hairy Jello's Avatar
Deplorable
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,519
Thanks: 1,965
Thanked 13,189 Times in 8,254 Posts
Default Re: Source says whistleblower didn't have ‘firsthand knowledge’ of Trump call with Uk

Oops!

WH to release document showing intel community watchdog found whistleblower had 'political bias'
__________________

Not an accurate representation of a white person.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 09-24-2019, 09:06 PM
Hairy Jello's Avatar
Deplorable
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,519
Thanks: 1,965
Thanked 13,189 Times in 8,254 Posts
Default Re: Source says whistleblower didn't have ‘firsthand knowledge’ of Trump call with Uk

Pelosi’s impeachment flip-flop changes everything

For months, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned itchy Democrats against the perils of impeachment. She should have stuck to her guns.

In surrendering to the radicals and the noisy drumbeat of their media handmaidens, Pelosi established a formal investigative process involving the top legislative committees.

Yet she did something else, too, something far more monumental: She effectively committed House Dems to impeaching President Trump.

Because of what she said and did, if the House doesn’t go all the way, it will be a political disaster. Either failing to take a vote on articles of impeachment, or failing to get enough votes among her majority to pass any articles, would be seen as a political exoneration for Trump, likely leading to his re-election.


If all that weren’t risky enough, consider another scenario. If House Dems do impeach Trump on grounds that much of the public sees as flimsy and concocted, they could win the battle and lose the war. Indeed, no matter what the House does, there is a next-to-zero chance the GOP controlled Senate would convict the president absent clear and convincing “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Pelosi knew all that since January, when she became Speaker, which is why she kept resisting the impeachers. But her surrender proved again that her party can’t quit 2016. Like generals fighting the last war, she and they are now committed to taking their sore-loser grievances to 2020 voters.


Dems apparently assume the country hates Trump as much as they do. President Hillary Clinton had no comment on the strategy.

They also are demonstrating they didn’t learn the lessons of the Robert Mueller probe. They assumed for two years the special counsel would get the goods that would drive Trump from office. We know how that worked out, yet here they go again.

Although Pelosi stopped short of creating a select panel and reportedly has no plans to call for a formal House vote, the Speaker’s claims that Trump “seriously violated the Constitution” and “betrayed the oath of office” in a conversation with Ukraine’s president leave her no wiggle room. If she believes those charges, how can she not advocate for the president’s removal?

And if she advocates for it, she must deliver it, or she can no longer be the leader.

We should know a lot more by Wednesday thanks to Trump’s promise to release an unredacted transcript of the phone call. It’s safe to assume he and his lawyers think he did nothing wrong, or they wouldn’t release it.

Dems might agree, which is why they have moved the goalposts and now also demand the complaint from a so-called whistleblower that initially set Washington’s hair on fire. Reports that the complainer had no direct access to the call raises questions of credibility.

Pelosi may think she went only halfway Tuesday and could eventually back down on impeachment if the Ukraine issue fizzles, but that’s wishful thinking. Anything less than a public flogging of Trump will not satisfy the far left of her own party, including the 150 or so House members who already demanded impeachment before the Ukraine issue appeared.

Meanwhile, Pelosi’s endorsement also pushes the presidential candidates toward the impeachment path, whether they like it or not. None of them can possibly be against it, nor can they be wishy-washy about it.

Bet that within days, there will be virtually unanimous support among the White House wannabes. Anything less will be disqualifying among the loud left.

In short, Pelosi just changed everything. The next election is now about impeachment.

If you think America is polarized today, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

Pelosi caved in because of the mounting pressure within her party and because the New York Times, the Washington Post and a handful of television gasbags demanded that she act over what the president reportedly said in the July conversation with Ukraine’s new president, Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump admits he asked Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, over whether the then-vice president took any action to protect his son from a corruption probe.

Hunter Biden was being paid $50,000 a month by an energy company that was at one time the focus of a corruption inquiry. Reports have said Biden used his VP position to demand that the inquiry be dropped and the prosector involved fired, or America would withhold aid.

Ironically, a full examination of the facts could make Biden the first casualty of the impeachment jihad. He is already a weak front-runner and even if he did nothing legally wrong in dealing with Ukraine, the fact that his son was enriching himself by free-riding on the coattails of his father’s job won’t sit well with progressive voters, many of whom already dislike and distrust Biden.

Put it this way: Would Hunter Biden have gotten that job if his father were not vice president? Ditto for a sweetheart investment deal Hunter Biden got from the Chinese government. On at least one occasion, he reportedly flew with his father on Air Force Two to China to seal a lucrative agreement there.

That doesn’t pass the smell test and Biden could get knocked down and even out as events unfold.

Count that possibility as another sign that, based on what we know, Pelosi is making a high-risk, low-reward bet.
__________________

Not an accurate representation of a white person.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 09-24-2019, 09:56 PM
Manitou's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Gender: Male
Posts: 20,255
Thanks: 539
Thanked 6,495 Times in 4,675 Posts
Default Re: Source says whistleblower didn't have ‘firsthand knowledge’ of Trump call with Uk

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hairy Jello View Post
Pelosi’s impeachment flip-flop changes everything

For months, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned itchy Democrats against the perils of impeachment. She should have stuck to her guns.
Ocasio wouldn't have it any other way.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 09-25-2019, 03:04 PM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 17,682
Thanks: 11,010
Thanked 11,627 Times in 6,922 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: Source says whistleblower didn't have ‘firsthand knowledge’ of Trump call with Uk

The whistleblower wants to testify before Congress but anonymously. Let's see, an anonymous accuser wants to give second hand rumors but only in secret. No wonder the Resistance is so enthusiastic.
__________________
What is a 30 something year old single man with a rock in one hand and a Honduran flag in the other?

An asylum seeker.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 09-25-2019, 11:20 PM
cnredd's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Gender: Male
Posts: 54,953
Thanks: 2,211
Thanked 35,107 Times in 20,172 Posts
Default Re: Source says whistleblower didn't have ‘firsthand knowledge’ of Trump call with Uk

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
The whistleblower wants to testify before Congress but anonymously. Let's see, an anonymous accuser wants to give second hand rumors but only in secret. No wonder the Resistance is so enthusiastic.
I imagine the anonymous accuser plans to use the "Christine Blasey Ford baby voice" during the proceedings, too...
__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to cnredd For This Useful Post:
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 09-26-2019, 07:54 PM
saltwn's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Esto perpetua
Posts: 81,125
Thanks: 55,374
Thanked 26,240 Times in 18,773 Posts
Send a message via AIM to saltwn Send a message via MSN to saltwn Send a message via Yahoo to saltwn
Default Re: Source says whistleblower didn't have ‘firsthand knowledge’ of Trump call with Uk

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
Oops, another fake news, phony scandal springs a leak.



Of course the likelihood of the whistleblower complaint being nothing but a rumor didn't stop Democrats from rushing to the nearest microphone to demand Trump's impeachment or a so-called Republican primary challenger to denounce Trump as a traitor.

House Democrat intelligence committee chair Adam Schiff repeated the same pattern used in the Russian collusion hoax of acting as if the allegations were true, hysterically describing Trump as evil. All the false promises of Russian collusion proof Schiff made for years are ignored, instead he is instantly accorded credibility because he signs on to the smear.



Of course the possibility that a Trump hating bureaucrat concocted the story can't be mentioned. Pundits and so-called reporters sometimes include the qualifier "if true" as a perfunctory disclaimer before condemning Trump as President by foreign interference in our elections.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fox...-president.amp

Dan Coats signed off on the fact that this complainant did have the sources and the knowledge to make the complaint. Says so in the whistleblower complaint the IG put out today.
__________________
Trump’s only true skill is the con...~Serwer|The Atlantic
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 09-26-2019, 09:19 PM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 17,682
Thanks: 11,010
Thanked 11,627 Times in 6,922 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: Source says whistleblower didn't have ‘firsthand knowledge’ of Trump call with Uk

Quote:
Originally Posted by saltwn View Post
Dan Coats signed off on the fact that this complainant did have the sources and the knowledge to make the complaint. Says so in the whistleblower complaint the IG put out today.
The former DNI knows the so-called whistleblower? Current acting DNI Maguire testified before the House unintelligent committee that he doesn't know his or her identity. The whole idea of all the whistleblower protections is to protect them from retribution from the likes of the DNI. But all that matters is Orange man bad.

The complaint is made up of second hand data, rumors, and third hand news media stories. Whistleblower laws are intended to protect people with first hand knowledge of corruption or waste, not a partisan collective of rumors the whistleblower is peddling.
__________________
What is a 30 something year old single man with a rock in one hand and a Honduran flag in the other?

An asylum seeker.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 09-26-2019, 10:25 PM
saltwn's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Esto perpetua
Posts: 81,125
Thanks: 55,374
Thanked 26,240 Times in 18,773 Posts
Send a message via AIM to saltwn Send a message via MSN to saltwn Send a message via Yahoo to saltwn
Default Re: Source says whistleblower didn't have ‘firsthand knowledge’ of Trump call with Uk

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
The former DNI knows the so-called whistleblower? Current acting DNI Maguire testified before the House unintelligent committee that he doesn't know his or her identity.
He's an unnamed employee of the intelligence community. That came out today also. I don't know if he gave permission to release his complete identity or just that he/SHE was an employee in intel.
Quote:
The whole idea of all the whistleblower protections is to protect them from retribution from the likes of the DNI. But all that matters is Orange man bad.
The whistleblower's identity is protected unless he/she wants it out there. Protection from whomever he blows that whistle on.
wHISTLE BLOWER tells the IG. The IG looks at it and determines if it IS CREDIBLE AND URGENT.
This IG determined not only it was credible but of utmost urgency.
tHEN IG reports matter to the DNI. The DNI doesn't get to second guess if the matter is urgent or credible, but is to contact whistleblower with instructions how to report to congress.
The words of the law state that the DNI "shall forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees” of Congress.
that wasn't done

So, The inspector general has informed Congress in writing that he is at an “impasse” with the DNI because “the Acting DNI has no present intention of providing direction” on how the whistleblower can contact the intelligence committees directly.


Quote:
The complaint is made up of second hand data, rumors, and third hand news media stories. Whistleblower laws are intended to protect people with first hand knowledge of corruption or waste, not a partisan collective of rumors the whistleblower is peddling.
So far, I know that these intelligence people: the IG, 12 witnesses to a conversation on a call, Dan Coats and even the present temporary DNI, have all sworn that in their estimation the info is credible and urgent.
__________________
Trump’s only true skill is the con...~Serwer|The Atlantic
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
call, didnt, have, knowledge’, says, source, trump, ukrain, whistleblower, with, ‘firsthand

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0