Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Read it. Once combined with the transcript of the call in question provided earlier, it clearly shows a whole lot of nothing. What is amazing is that amount of detail this has in regards to the "crowdstrike" server that the media has completely whitewashed in their reporting.
For Joe Biden ...Starting to look a lot like Watergate.
Trump is in trouble. He has been caught on this and I think even he is starting to realize that. He has no one to blame but his own corrupt self too.
I think the odds are very good that Trump is going to be impeached. And who knows where else this unprecedented (as the acting DNI stated) saga is going to lead.
Starting to look a lot like Watergate.
For Joe Biden ...
Honest question: Does Pelosi run a vote out as soon as she gets her 218 number aligned to it? And why doesn't she have that yet if all this is so clearly serious. Do you expect a vote this week or next?
Not in the next week. They are going to try to have others testify, including the whistleblower and maybe even some White House officials (based on what is in the complaint). They were already setting up the whistleblower testimony with the questions to the DNI earlier. They are going to let the American people hear what has happened first and then move forward.
I think a question Republicans need to be asking themselves (and one you can bet GOP Senators are asking behind closed doors) is whether or not they want this hanging over their heads over the next six to eight months heading into a presidential election. This isn't going to get better for Trump. He is in trouble on this. And there is still time for a nomination battle within the GOP (which again, I'm sure a number of GOP Senators have in mind who would like to be in the White House themselves).
Isn't anything the whistleblower says simply hearsay? Putting him/her on the stand for both sides to question will be a losing proposition for the Dems.
I
As for your second paragraph, I can't help but laugh. If this were such a slam dunk, Dems wouldn't still be scratching to find moderate Dems in the house to support the initial vote. In reality, Pelosi is trying to figure out how to get impeachment passed to quiet her vocal left-wing base without exposing those moderate Dems that got elected in purplish or red districts.
I think the Senate would be more concerned if this happened in May or June of next year and thus had to deal with this during campaign season and had the media giving free daily advertising to those pushing the left's narrative.
Isn't anything the whistleblower says simply hearsay? Putting him/her on the stand for both sides to question will be a losing proposition for the Dems.
Ratcliffe just destroyed the whistleblower document.
Doesn't the transcript, released yesterday, corroborate the whistleblower complaint? The way I see it, that puts the "hearsay" argument to bed.
Sure.
First, why the "anti-Trump" characterization of the whistleblower? Just because he spoke out and filed a complaint doesn't make him anti-Trump. Are you seriously going to support political hacks attacking a whistleblower that even the DNI is defending today? Whistleblowers play an important role in our government and they should be protected. How low is the maga cult going to go in defending Trump's corruption?
I would note that the same media that we are supposed to trust with utter reverance reported that the IG determined that the whistleblower was "in favor of a rival political candidate". The IG raised the concern of potential bias. It wasn't pulled from thin air by us 'deniers'.
I would note that the same media that we are supposed to trust with utter reverance reported that the IG determined that the whistleblower was "in favor of a rival political candidate". The IG raised the concern of potential bias. It wasn't pulled from thin air by us 'deniers'.
It's pretty clear that the whistleblower did get a pretty thorough description of the phone call, although a few inaccuracies. But, mostly it is an assemblage of creative interpretation of many pieces of information. But, it is pretty consistent that there was a desire to have Ukraine help investigate criminal acts of Americans and non-Americans. Which, I can't imagine anyone really being opposed to doing in general.Doesn't the transcript, released yesterday, corroborate the whistleblower complaint? The way I see it, that puts the "hearsay" argument to bed.
I would note that the same media that we are supposed to trust with utter reverance reported that the IG determined that the whistleblower was "in favor of a rival political candidate". The IG raised the concern of potential bias. It wasn't pulled from thin air by us 'deniers'.
You'd think that you would have been humbled by all the times your TDS has led you to swing and miss.lol, I see you are still out of touch with reality.
Wake up.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/whistleblower-complaint-trump-key-highlights-142343493.html
During a hearing Thursday morning, acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire said that he didn’t believe the whistleblower was a political hack, stating that he operated in good faith.
“I think the whistleblower did the right thing, I think he followed the law every step of the way,” said Maguire.