ADVERTISEMENT

Person thought to be the whistleblower revealed.....

the worst of it(or maybe the beauty) is it’s reduced intelligent centrists democrats into squawking pearl clutchers.

they’d prefer wealth redistribution via socialized medicine and a blanket socialist economic model via climate change over a nationalist maga platform

the swamp booing trump at game 5 said all you need to know

those weren’t hood rats in attendance
 
For the record, Eric Ciaramella's name was placed in a thread on this forum a couple of weeks ago.

Sorry imprimis never saw that....did just see another article that Vindman has some very shady dealings/associations with Ukrainian folks. Didn't realize he was also born in The Ukraine.

Folks there are so many State Department people and CIA folks tied up in this, wonder if we have a bunch of double agents pushing this?
 
So is this a good leak or a bad leak? Just want to make sure I understand which leaks are treasonous and which are not.

Curious also why people would get wound up about the whistle blower. I guess if it was the case that he lied or something you might care, but at this point pretty much everything in their account has been corroborated.
 
So is this a good leak or a bad leak? Just want to make sure I understand which leaks are treasonous and which are not.

Curious also why people would get wound up about the whistle blower. I guess if it was the case that he lied or something you might care, but at this point pretty much everything in their account has been corroborated.
Except the transcript itself which was released.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunsOfFrankEaton
Sorry imprimis never saw that....did just see another article that Vindman has some very shady dealings/associations with Ukrainian folks. Didn't realize he was also born in The Ukraine.

Folks there are so many State Department people and CIA folks tied up in this, wonder if we have a bunch of double agents pushing this?

giphy.gif
 
So is this a good leak or a bad leak? Just want to make sure I understand which leaks are treasonous and which are not.

Curious also why people would get wound up about the whistle blower. I guess if it was the case that he lied or something you might care, but at this point pretty much everything in their account has been corroborated.

Corroborated how? Giving their opinion on what Trump said? If we are going to impeach Presidents on the opinions people have of what they say there will not be a President that makes it through one term.
 
So is this a good leak or a bad leak? Just want to make sure I understand which leaks are treasonous and which are not.

Curious also why people would get wound up about the whistle blower. I guess if it was the case that he lied or something you might care, but at this point pretty much everything in their account has been corroborated.
Including the part from his memo where he said (something to the effect of) transcripts are considered routine and accurate?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunsOfFrankEaton
Corroborated how? Giving their opinion on what Trump said? If we are going to impeach Presidents on the opinions people have of what they say there will not be a President that makes it through one term.
Take each assertion in the whistle blower account and compare it to the public statements of those who have testified thus far. Each items is confirmed. That corroborated how.
 
Take each assertion in the whistle blower account and compare it to the public statements of those who have testified thus far. Each items is confirmed. That corroborated how.

You only believe that which you believe while you ignore all the other testimony that disagree with that you believe. Take for example the testimony from today.

 
Including the part from his memo where he said (something to the effect of) transcripts are considered routine and accurate?
Sorry, long day - not following. You saying the whistleblower asserted the summary transcript was "routine and accurate"?

Looking over the statement the only thing even close to what you paraphrase is this:

In the days following the phone call, I learned from multiple U.S. officials that senior White House officials had intervened to “lock down” all records of the phone call, especially the official word-for-word transcript of the call that was produced—as is customary-by the White House Situation Room. This set of actions underscored to me that White House officials understood the gravity of what had transpired in the call.

The reference to word for word might be suspect given the ellipsis - that is pure speculation on my part. Are you thinking of something different?
 
You only believe that which you believe while you ignore all the other testimony that disagree with that you believe. Take for example the testimony from today.

You keep believing whatever you want about me. That really doesn't mean crap.

This is a nice tidbit. Morrison is questioning accuracy of the transcript - very interesting.

Have to ask though - was this another Schiffty Schiff leak or maybe from somewhere else? If the Repubs are leaking supportive bits for the POTUS why is this the first one unless this is the first one?

Fascinating...
 
You keep believing whatever you want about me. That really doesn't mean crap.

This is a nice tidbit. Morrison is questioning accuracy of the transcript - very interesting.

Have to ask though - was this another Schiffty Schiff leak or maybe from somewhere else? If the Repubs are leaking supportive bits for the POTUS why is this the first one unless this is the first one?

Fascinating...

You're the one that claims moral superiority, yet you continually seem to post things from only one perspective.
 
You're the one that claims moral superiority, yet you continually seem to post things from only one perspective.
Can you help me out. Can you point me to where I asserted moral superiority? I make a concerted effort NOT to do that.

As you have experienced, I will assert intellectual superiority - not overtly mind you, but by exposing foolishness. Don't need help finding that, it is all over this joint.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Been Jammin
Sorry, long day - not following. You saying the whistleblower asserted the summary transcript was "routine and accurate"?

Looking over the statement the only thing even close to what you paraphrase is this:

In the days following the phone call, I learned from multiple U.S. officials that senior White House officials had intervened to “lock down” all records of the phone call, especially the official word-for-word transcript of the call that was produced—as is customary-by the White House Situation Room. This set of actions underscored to me that White House officials understood the gravity of what had transpired in the call.

The reference to word for word might be suspect given the ellipsis - that is pure speculation on my part. Are you thinking of something different?

Ellipses? Cmon man. Yes that’s it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunsOfFrankEaton
Good grief. It is CYA boilerplate language. It is as close to verbatim as humanly possible without an audio recording. Transcribed in real time by multiple people then refined into one transcript by a collaborative effort of the transcribers.
Do you think there is an audio recording?
 
Nope. Audio recordings stopped on the 1970s.

Maybe the White House stopped recording, but part of me suspects that there is an audio recording of the call somewhere within the murky world of post 9/11 “capture all the data because terrorism” mass surveillance and “capture data from team Trump for political purposes” surveillance.

Maybe that’ll be the bombshell that the Democrats end up lobbing after months of posturing. Or if the transcript is word...for...word correct, it’ll never see the light of day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: imprimis
it's a disclaimer...it means nothing. It's just a cya for whoever tries to make it something it's not.
 
Maybe the White House stopped recording, but part of me suspects that there is an audio recording of the call somewhere within the murky world of post 9/11 “capture all the data because terrorism” mass surveillance and “capture data from team Trump for political purposes” surveillance.

Maybe that’ll be the bombshell that the Democrats end up lobbing after months of posturing. Or if the transcript is word...for...word correct, it’ll never see the light of day.
Everything nowadays is recorded by somebody. The conversation is probably in the Utah computer center. Only reason it hasn't been leaked is the transcript is accurate.

Schiff has been promising for almost 3 years he has irrefutable conclusive evidence against Trump yet hasn't produced anything. The only evidence Schiff has is naked photos of Trump on his nightstand which he uses as a sleep aid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iasooner1
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT