Why does the Whistleblower Complaint read like it's written by a law firm?
Intel Community Uploaded Altered Whistleblower Form 2 Days Before Complaint Released to Public
Prior to September 24th, 2019, a whistleblower had to witness the conduct firsthand. At 4:25pm on September 24th, the form as amended to include "heard about from others"
The evidence in the Whistleblower report was not witnessed by the complainant; it's rather a compilation of references to what anonymous officials allegedly told the complainant.
(i hope this is bullshit)
Quote: @BlackMagic7 said:
Why does the Whistleblower Complaint read like it's written by a law firm?
Ah, ya cracked the case! Fake news yet again!
Quote: @KingBash said:
@ BlackMagic7 said:
Why does the Whistleblower Complaint read like it's written by a law firm?
Ah, ya cracked the case! Fake news yet again!
Nah...
I was watching the hearing with Joseph McGuire when Congresswoman Sewell made a great case for protecting whistle blower rights and protecting their anonymity when coming forward. I kept picturing somebody witnessing something and filling out an accessible, dictated by policy, form they can fill out and file.
I didn't quite imagine an ex-CIA agent who heard about these things, or a multi-pronged legal team behind the complaint. It's written like Verizon Wireless' fucking Terms of Service.
Quote: @BlackMagic7 said:
@ KingBash said:
@ BlackMagic7 said:
Why does the Whistleblower Complaint read like it's written by a law firm?
Ah, ya cracked the case! Fake news yet again!
Nah...
I was watching the hearing with Joseph McGuire when Congresswoman Sewell made a great case for protecting whistle blower rights and protecting their anonymity when coming forward. I kept picturing somebody witnessing something and filling out an accessible, dictated by policy, form they can fill out and file.
I didn't quite imagine an ex-CIA agent who heard about these things, or a multi-pronged legal team behind the complaint. It's written like Verizon Wireless' fucking Terms of Service.
Okay, keep going. How massive is this conspiracy then? I'll throw you all the rope you want.
Quote: @BlackMagic7 said:
Why does the Whistleblower Complaint read like it's written by a law firm?
It was well prepared. For a good reason. I think this might help explain why...
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/463396-the-intelligence-community-strikes-back-an-impeachment-game-changer
President Donald J. Trump will be impeached — maybe not convicted by the Senate but impeached by the House. That’s my prediction, given the rapidly unfolding events in Ukrainegate. The catalyst for impeachment is the alleged CIA whistleblower and the team of intelligence community officials he is going to bat for. Trump picked a fight with the wrong crowd. Now, they’re fighting back, with the Constitution in one hand and evidence of Trump’s corruption in the other. Game on.
You might call this team, collectively, “Deep State Throat.” They’re a deep state, all right, but not like Trump thinks. They’re not rogues. They’re patriots. Let’s just buckle up and watch how this plays out over the coming weeks and months.
I read the White House “transcript” between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. I read the whistleblower complaint. And I read the inspector general cover letter. By background, I spent 34 years dealing intimately with whistleblowers and protecting them. I spent 19 years in the United States Senate deeply involved in writing every prominent whistleblower law from 1983 to 2000. I then spent five years as executive director of the National Whistleblower Center, which helped write post-Enron corporate whistleblower laws, and defended numerous national security and other whistleblowers.
I have never seen a more buttoned-up set of whistleblower allegations than these.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
Great link! Thanks!
Admitting that many members of the IC are conspiring to "ensnare" Trump (sedition!) is what many of us have been saying all along.
Trumpers have more evidence of that, than anti-Trumpers ever had of "collusion".
Even the Hill opinion author admitted that:
"On Thursday, former CIA officer Robert Baer suggested on CNN that the whistleblower’s efforts, together with others cited in his complaint, might reflect “a palace coup” against the president. I believe he said that before The New York Times reported that the whistleblower was allegedly a CIA officer.
Baer’s allusion was neither sinister nor fanciful. It was a well-grounded hypothesis."IOW, "Whistleblower"...my ass.
As someone earlier pointed out... the very definition of "whistleblower" had to be changed to submit this.
This wasn't some happenstance where a bureaucrat stumbled into some important info and felt compelled to report this.
This was admitted "hearsay" dressed up as a "bombshell" sold and bought by the Dems & the MSM.
All rendered moot by Trump releasing the transcript.
There was nothing "criminal" in that call transcript. As pointed out (and still not refuted), Obama did the same thing. (entreating the Ukraine to investigate Manafort, as reported by McCarthy)
And no, I didn't think that was "criminal", either. Just hard-ball politics.
Even Schiff had to "parody" (lmao!) the transcript to pretend there was any there, there.
https://static.thefederalistpapers.org/w...artoon.jpg
And we have Biden boasting about even worse! Quid pro quo! On video tape! (Unless of course, he was embellishing his story. Always likely)
No...this is all partisan politics. And that's fine. I've said all along (during the Mueller shit-show) and now... at least the Dems are (apparently)
moving their TDS into the proper venue. Impeachment inquiry/impeachment. Apparently that's the route they've decided to go. At least that's constitutional.
& fine, bring it, already! Draft full-on Articles of Impeachment...not this mamby-pamby Nadler committee crap.
But I do appreciate this link's author for finally defining/admitting what is going on with this continued Deep-State "palace coup".
Of course the link's author calls the coup-ers, "Patriots, armed with the constitution". lmao. How noble! Who elected these guardians of the constitution?
I wonder why Linda Tripp was never afforded such a glowing endorsement?
Quote: @savannahskol said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Great link! Thanks!
Admitting that many members of the IC are conspiring to "ensnare" Trump (sedition!) is what many of us have been saying all along.
Trumpers have more evidence of that, than anti-Trumpers ever had of "collusion".
Even the Hill opinion author admitted that:
"On Thursday, former CIA officer Robert Baer suggested on CNN that the whistleblower’s efforts, together with others cited in his complaint, might reflect “a palace coup” against the president. I believe he said that before The New York Times reported that the whistleblower was allegedly a CIA officer.
Baer’s allusion was neither sinister nor fanciful. It was a well-grounded hypothesis."IOW, "Whistleblower"...my ass.
As someone earlier pointed out... the very definition of "whistleblower" had to be changed to submit this.
This wasn't some happenstance where a bureaucrat stumbled into some important info and felt compelled to report this.
This was admitted "hearsay" dressed up as a "bombshell" sold and bought by the Dems & the MSM.
All rendered moot by Trump releasing the transcript.
There was nothing "criminal" in that call transcript. As pointed out (and still not refuted), Obama did the same thing. (entreating the Ukraine to investigate Manafort, as reported by McCarthy)
And no, I didn't think that was "criminal", either. Just hard-ball politics.
Even Schiff had to "parody" (lmao!) the transcript to pretend there was any there, there.
https://static.thefederalistpapers.org/w...artoon.jpg
And we have Biden boasting about even worse! Quid pro quo! On video tape! (Unless of course, he was embellishing his story. Always likely)
No...this is all partisan politics. And that's fine. I've said all along (during the Mueller shit-show) and now... at least the Dems are (apparently)
moving their TDS into the proper venue. Impeachment inquiry/impeachment. Apparently that's the route they've decided to go. At least that's constitutional.
& fine, bring it, already! Draft full-on Articles of Impeachment...not this mamby-pamby Nadler committee crap.
But I do appreciate this link's author for finally defining/admitting what is going on with this continued Deep-State "palace coup".
Of course the link's author calls the coup-ers, "Patriots, armed with the constitution". lmao. How noble! Who elected these guardians of the constitution?
I wonder why Linda Tripp was never afforded such a glowing endorsement?
The reality conservatives live in is so peculiar to me. Fox News has seriously damaged your way of thinking. You're focused on technicalities and wordplay instead of admitting the fact, once again - strap in kids, that THE PRESIDENT ASKED THE UKRAINIANS TO INTERFERE IN OUR ELECTION FOR HIS BENEFIT!
We need to keep repeating this to you because clearly it's not sinking in.
And once that came out (and he admitted to it!), now the avalanche is building and we're unearthing all the other corrupt shit that INFORMED PEOPLE have been saying all along. Why do you think Russia has said that it'd be wise of us not to check the records of his calls with them?
Quote: @KingBash said:
@ savannahskol said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Great link! Thanks!
Admitting that many members of the IC are conspiring to "ensnare" Trump (sedition!) is what many of us have been saying all along.
Trumpers have more evidence of that, than anti-Trumpers ever had of "collusion".
Even the Hill opinion author admitted that:
"On Thursday, former CIA officer Robert Baer suggested on CNN that the whistleblower’s efforts, together with others cited in his complaint, might reflect “a palace coup” against the president. I believe he said that before The New York Times reported that the whistleblower was allegedly a CIA officer.
Baer’s allusion was neither sinister nor fanciful. It was a well-grounded hypothesis."IOW, "Whistleblower"...my ass.
As someone earlier pointed out... the very definition of "whistleblower" had to be changed to submit this.
This wasn't some happenstance where a bureaucrat stumbled into some important info and felt compelled to report this.
This was admitted "hearsay" dressed up as a "bombshell" sold and bought by the Dems & the MSM.
All rendered moot by Trump releasing the transcript.
There was nothing "criminal" in that call transcript. As pointed out (and still not refuted), Obama did the same thing. (entreating the Ukraine to investigate Manafort, as reported by McCarthy)
And no, I didn't think that was "criminal", either. Just hard-ball politics.
Even Schiff had to "parody" (lmao!) the transcript to pretend there was any there, there.
https://static.thefederalistpapers.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Schiff-Cartoon.jpg
And we have Biden boasting about even worse! Quid pro quo! On video tape! (Unless of course, he was embellishing his story. Always likely)
No...this is all partisan politics. And that's fine. I've said all along (during the Mueller shit-show) and now... at least the Dems are (apparently)
moving their TDS into the proper venue. Impeachment inquiry/impeachment. Apparently that's the route they've decided to go. At least that's constitutional.
& fine, bring it, already! Draft full-on Articles of Impeachment...not this mamby-pamby Nadler committee crap.
But I do appreciate this link's author for finally defining/admitting what is going on with this continued Deep-State "palace coup".
Of course the link's author calls the coup-ers, "Patriots, armed with the constitution". lmao. How noble! Who elected these guardians of the constitution?
I wonder why Linda Tripp was never afforded such a glowing endorsement?
The reality conservatives live in is so peculiar to me.
You coming from Santa Monica...that's no surprise.
Google: "global warming extremists shut down traffic".
Ya. You in the "mainstream". LMAO.
Fox News has seriously damaged your way of thinking.
Of course I watch FoxNews, but I can name you 5 (easily) other conservative voices/blogs/webz I read before FoxNews.
2 from National Review (of "never" Trump fame)
1 Andrew McCarthy
2 Victor Davis Hanson
3 from the Federalist
Mollie Hemingway
4 Ann Coulter bloggist, extraordinaire
5 Kimberly Strassel (WSJ)
Fox? Chris Wallace & Shep Smith are Dem stooges.
Catherine Herridge, is fantastic.
Hannity? I like his "goals"...but he is insufferable (personally) ... and always talks over his more-accomplished guests. Irritating, af.
Honorable mention?
Drudge Report.
Rush Limbaugh (what else is there at noon. Genius slotting)
Mark Levin.
You're focused on technicalities and wordplay instead of admitting the fact, once again - strap in kids, that THE PRESIDENT ASKED THE UKRAINIANS TO INTERFERE IN OUR ELECTION FOR HIS BENEFIT!
We need to keep repeating this to you because clearly it's not sinking in.
Ah Jeeze.
Can you be less self-aware?
The President DID NOT ask for the Ukrainians to interfere in our election for his benefit.
The transcript is "out there". Do me (us) a solid, KB. Can you cite us the passage? And then upon that citation...quote the US criminal code violation, that Trump made?
And once that came out (and he admitted to it!), now the avalanche is building and we're unearthing all the other corrupt shit that INFORMED PEOPLE have been saying all along. Why do you think Russia has said that it'd be wise of us not to check the records of his calls with them?
Ya'll said the same things during the Mueller investigation. On these pages. Don't make me revive them, it'd be embarrasing.
You'd think, you'd be properly chastened to not follow down the same road. But by your comments, you'd be wrong.
Waiting for your claim of another "victory lap" ....lmao.
Quote: @savannahskol said:
The reality conservatives live in is so peculiar to me.
You coming from Santa Monica...that's no surprise.
Google: "global warming extremists shut down traffic".
Ya. You in the "mainstream". LMAO.
What the fuck does this even mean? You mean the beach town I live in where the weather is nice year round, there are beautiful women all over the streets where I walk my dog (I'm in my 30s), and I have a good, fulfilling career? You got me!
Fox News has seriously damaged your way of thinking.
Of course I watch FoxNews, but I can name you 5 (easily) other conservative voices/blogs/webz I read before FoxNews.
2 from National Review (of "never" Trump fame)
1 Andrew McCarthy
2 Victor Davis Hanson
3 from the Federalist
Mollie Hemingway
4 Ann Coulter bloggist, extraordinaire
5 Kimberly Strassel (WSJ)
Fox? Chris Wallace & Shep Smith are Dem stooges.
Catherine Herridge, is fantastic.
Hannity? I like his "goals"...but he is insufferable (personally) ... and always talks over his more-accomplished guests. Irritating, af.
Honorable mention?
Drudge Report.
Rush Limbaugh (what else is there at noon. Genius slotting)
Mark Levin.
This is exactly why we'll never, ever see eye to eye. We can agree on this: we both think the other listens to absolute garbage. That's about as much of an olive branch I can offer here.
You're focused on technicalities and wordplay instead of admitting the fact, once again - strap in kids, that THE PRESIDENT ASKED THE UKRAINIANS TO INTERFERE IN OUR ELECTION FOR HIS BENEFIT!
We need to keep repeating this to you because clearly it's not sinking in.
Ah Jeeze.
Can you be less self-aware?
The President DID NOT ask for the Ukrainians to interfere in our election for his benefit.
The transcript is "out there". Do me (us) a solid, KB. Can you cite us the passage? And then upon that citation...quote the US criminal code violation, that Trump made?
What do you make of "I would like you to do us a favor?" Come on. This is why I said you're relying on technicalities. Technically, there's nothing illegal there. But withholding taxpayer funded foreign aid, then saying that, then going into the Biden thing... come on. Why does this cult have such a strong hold on you people? My point I always go back to: if Obama did this...
And once that came out (and he admitted to it!), now the avalanche is building and we're unearthing all the other corrupt shit that INFORMED PEOPLE have been saying all along. Why do you think Russia has said that it'd be wise of us not to check the records of his calls with them?
Ya'll said the same things during the Mueller investigation. On these pages. Don't make me revive them, it'd be embarrasing.
You'd think, you'd be properly chastened to not follow down the same road. But by your comments, you'd be wrong.
Waiting for your claim of another "victory lap" ....lmao.
We're all rightfully taking a victory lap. Whether or not anything will materialize from any of this... chances are slim. I have no faith in Republican senators, and less faith in the American people. You're the reason for it.
As for the Mueller report, your thinking has been warped by William Barr stifling the facts, Trump's repeated tweeting victoriously (you repeat it enough, people believe it), and your numerous news sources.
I'll make you a deal, just for fun. I don't know your schedule, maybe you've got a lot on your plate, but if you've got some free time, let's each read a book by the other's choosing. I'm not sure there's anything out there you've read that you think fairly encapsulates why Trump has been wronged/why he's innocent.
I just ordered Proof Of Conspiracy by Seth Abramson. It was delivered today. I can't vouch for it since I haven't cracked it open yet (and won't until tomorrow night), but I feel pretty confident that it's solid based on what I've heard from friends. If you can think of anything, tell me and I'll order it and read it if you'll do the same about Proof Of Conspiracy.
Yeah, that's a time commitment with a total stranger on a message board, so definitely feel free to tell me to go fuck myself ha.
|
