The Whistleblower complaint against Donald Trump
- Thread starter tlwwake
- Start date
The whistle-blower wrote a letter to the comittees directly
There are three co-equal branches. They keep each other in check. Quit with the wanna be monarchy bullshit.
Yeah he has been exposed as well in all this. He doesn’t want to be fired before retirement either.
My thought exactly when I read that crap. Do these people not understand we have separation of powers/checks and balances for a reason. They talk about the Constitution but apparently ignore everything that is in it!
Hell, we even have freedom of the press for a reason too. That serves as a check as well. Yet, they consistently attack it. It's crazy.
Hello. You too.
Crazy people.
No capacity to lead. (Or provide credible checks and balances, apparently)
Operating from a null hypothesis here. Onus is on you smart-guy.
You look dirty...and crazy.
The summary of the telecon confirms what you want it to mean.
It has all the elements mentioned by the whistle-blower, but the pieces don't fit together like the WB alleged.
I've not stated otherwise. I was simply clarifying @my2cents' point as to "Why the anti-Republican characterization of the whistleblower?". That was a direct question by @my2cents and I stated the source and that it wasn't pulled from thin air. However, having done so, I was then accused as "attacking the source and deflecting". Further demonstrating that certain posters choose to interpret statements with a particular bent even when its explicitly not there.
Elections where the winner didn't get a majority? Eh.
Welcome to the fine print. Impeachment is in there along with the electoral college
Just because the whistleblower may "arguably" have a political bias doesn't mean he has to be characterized as "anti-Trump." That is an attempt to attack him, and to deflect away from what he is exposing.
That is what Trump and his minions do to anyone who raises concerns about Trump's actions.
Strange that the WB didn't include the ranking members in the letter which would be the normal etiquette
haha, I'm telling you, they are grasping at straws. This has completely taken them by surprise and they don't know what to do with it.
If it was a Democrat they would be yelling the loudest for impeachment. But for some reason, they just can't bring themselves to see clearly when it comes to Trump.
Yeah, I think his public sector career is probably over now. Which is unfortunate but what tends to happen for anyone who goes to work for this administration.
Where did I characterize the whistleblower as Anti-Trump and where did I attack him? It didn't happen.
You're going to get 4 more years of Trump with that strategy.
You might want to check that before you start spewing your disinformation campaign. He retired from the Navy went into the private sector for three years leaving that to run a non profit, until Dam Coates asked him to come on board. Watch his opening statement and you can see it in his own words.
Blatantly not true. We didnt yell for impeachment during Fast n' Furious, during Conservative targeting by the IRS, or any number of scandals. I'm glad we didn't too, as the precedent for initiating impeachment charges needs to be higher than "ha, we've got the majority in the house, and we don't like you".
My response was to the tweet that was posted. Again, there is no reason to label this whistleblower "anti-Trump" except to deflect and attack the source.
I don't even know if we are going to have another year of Trump. Who knows where all of this is going to end up. This is serious and I hope you recognize that.
Trump now has much more to worry about than just trying to get elected as an unpopular President next November.
Probably felt since the heads of both committees were from opposite parties it was best to keep the need to know to a small group initially.
So you translate that calling someone who was characterized by the IG as having "bias favoring a Trump political opponent" as being attacked when labeled as anti-Trump? Seems like semantics to me. Beyond the anti-Trump label, the tweet referenced made no other attacks against the whistleblower. It simply stated the truth that his report was all based on hearsay.
lol, of course many on the right did yell just that back then. What are you talking about??
Problem was, there was no real evidence to back impeachment. And of course let's not forget the GOP falling over themselves to impeach Clinton.
The only reason Obama was impeached for those scandals is because the didn't hold up to even a whiff of scrutiny.
Elections where the winner didn't get a majority? Eh.
Welcome to the fine print. Impeachment is in there along with the electoral college
I don't disagree.
But beware your branding.
Lol. Clinton should have been impeached for Sexual harassment. But I guess we seem to think that back then having sex with your interns was acceptable behavior for executives. As for evidence on the more recent, I disagree. We chose not to look (particularly the media) because we didn't want to be accused of racism.
This guy gets it.
Dems, your only play is praying for a recession.
But you don't pray, so I don't know what to tell ya...
Again, what the IG said was that the whistleblower had "arguable" political bias. You keep leaving out that word "arguable." The IG then said regardless, regardless, the complaint was credible. Something else you keep ignoring. And yes, when a political hack tweets out calling the whistleblower "anti-Trump," that is an attack on the source and a deflection from the credible material being exposed.
This will sadly continue because in the minds of the maga cult, everyone is to blame and be attacked BUT Trump. Everyone is wrong BUT Trump. It's ridiculous.
Think goodness the DNI at least defended the whistleblower.
This is a gift to the Republicans as it gives them a chances to ditch a candidate with dementia and replace him with Nikki Haley.
