Kyle
Beloved Misanthrope
Just a bitter Democrat Asshat!
How DARE Americans focus on Joe Biden steering over a billion dollars in aid money to Ukraine while his son bagged a sweetheart deal from their govern
- Thread starter Kyle
- Start date
Just a bitter Democrat Asshat!
PsyOps
Pixelated
I heard Vince Coglianese (on WMAL) talking about this whistleblower saying he has deep ties to the democrat party. I have no idea where he got this info, because I haven't been able to confirm it. I mean we don't even know who this person is.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
It’s funny how the IG can investigate it and find the whistleblower credible but fox tells you something different so you go with that.....No. We haven't heard from the this so-called "whistleblower". His testimony was behind closed doors. All we know about is his written complaint. He stated that Trump was trying to influence the election and that he "pressured" the Ukrainian president to investigate Biden. Zelenski has flatly denied there was any pressure. And then there is this so-called quid-pro-quo. The phone call transcript and Zelenski himself state there was no quid-pro-quo.
And here's some concerning information about the whistleblower according to Greg Jarret:
Gregg Jarrett: The Trump whistleblower may not be a whistleblower at all
Who exactly is this unidentified “whistleblower”? What is the specific nature of his or her “urgent concern” complaint against the president?www.foxnews.com
Remember, that’s not a transcript, it’s just a summary. But you have to be blind to not see a quid pro quo in
Trump: ‘we need you to reciprocate more’
Ukraine: ‘we want to buy those missiles really bad’
Trump: ‘I have a favor I need you to do for me’
PsyOps
Pixelated
So, your implication is that Trump left out key stuff from the conversation that is criminal?
I just read the "transcript" again and ‘we need you to reciprocate more’ and ‘we want to buy those missiles really bad’ isn't there. Your ‘I have a favor I need you to do for me’ is worded incorrectly and not even remotely in the context you posted. The only reference to asking for a favor was this:
You're either Adam Shiff or getting your talking points from Shiff. Did you see Shiff's blatant lies about the call? Then he had to tell us that it was parody. Just like people that have to testify have to swear to tell the truth, I think member of these committees that ask questions and make comments should have to do the same. That "parody" was a blatent act of contempt of congress. These should not be allowed to demand that people that give testimony must tell the truth or be held in contempt, while they get a free pass to openly lie.
You people that want to see this president go down will stop at nothing to make that happen. Much of it is rather entertaining to see one attempt after another fail and Trump win. But the seriousness of fabricating scandals to take a president down is really concerning to me. You have to know that you liberals have set a standard for future presidents. God help you when a democrat gets elected.
Kyle
Beloved Misanthrope
What part of "I was not a direct witness" is confusing to you.
Hearsay is not evidence.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Like I mentioned in my previous post... These committee members should have to take the same oath as those testifying. They should not be allowed to lie in an official inquiry.
When they have to lie like that - I mean so overtly lie - it shows they have nothing. Then I think about Shiff's constituents. How can they even trust a guy that has to lie in order to accomplish their agenda?
He's THEIR liar. Based on the number of Shiffs and Nadlers in office...that must be all that matters.
Kyle
Beloved Misanthrope
Irrelevant. His voters are Democrats that are just as vile, deceitful and corrupt as he is.
PsyOps
Pixelated
And this editorial piece nails it...
https://www.westernjournal.com/medi...hobEqJzcjDGE2o-vt_8ZKTUDlRiIximnCwnSTyZ7EhCns
https://www.westernjournal.com/medi...hobEqJzcjDGE2o-vt_8ZKTUDlRiIximnCwnSTyZ7EhCns
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
Which part of ‘the IG investigated and found the claim credible and subject to oversight’ is confusing you?
That’s the implication from the whistleblower. That the actual electronic transcript (which is not what was released) was hidden because it contained politically sensitive information.
I was paraphrasing, all of those sentiments are in the summary of the call. Take off your orange glasses and you will see it. Don’t forget that the context of this conversation is that trump had frozen aide to Ukraine and president Z was waiting on $115M cash from the state department to use to buy weapons through our foreign sales agency.
Shiff and Nunes are two sides of the same coin. They both spin things up as much as they can. I agree that schiffs parody was out of line, but it is no more fantastical than the BS Nunes was spreading in his opening statement.
That being said, I would like to see the IG’s report on this. He found the claim credible are investigating it. That means something. He is a trump appointee and even after recognizing possible political bias he found the complaint credible and subject to oversight.
Kyle
Beloved Misanthrope
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
You should tell it to the IG. He obviously,disagrees with your assessment of the situation
PsyOps
Pixelated
What does that even mean that the complaint is credible? We don't even know what the actual complaint is. What we do know is what Trump said in his conversation, and there was nothing there that is even remotely criminal; not even unethical. Both Trump and Zelenski confirmed that there no pressure and it was a completely clean conversation.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
The complaint was released.
Look up the word credible. The IG found the complaint CREDIBLE despite any political bias he found.
Kyle
Beloved Misanthrope
Perhaps at lunch today.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Look, the entire testimony of the whistleblower is hearsay. He heard it from other people. We have found, over and over again that there are people even within the administration that want to see Trump go down. Who are these mysterious (or shall we say what the media always says "anonymous sources") sources this whistle blower is throwing out there? Are they going to come forward and testify?
This is a "his word against his word" situation that neither side can prove who's telling the truth. I don't give a damn if the IG finds this guy "credible", A lot of people believe Schiff to be credible, even though he outright lied about Trump's phone call. The whistleblower is passing on second-hand information that should never be taken on it's own as fact. This kind of thing needs to be corroborated by actual witnesses.
Lastly, who is this whistleblower that he is so important that White House officials trusted him with this information. I've heard that he works for the CIA. Did he walk into a room and say "let me know if you have any dirt on Trump. I'll be your fall guy and blow the whistle". How did it come about that these "officials" shared this information to this guy? Why would they share it with this guy? Why wouldn't they have filed a complaint?
Last edited: