- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Question about Whistleblower complaint that was never asked
Posted on 9/27/19 at 9:33 am
Posted on 9/27/19 at 9:33 am
To start, I want to say that I view myself as fairly apolitical, but this whistleblower thing happened just as I had a lot of free time on my hands and has caught my attention. I watched the entire hearing and read all of the documents, but there is one point that I haven’t seen brought up. Supposedly this WB received this information from multiple different sources, yet none of the sources, who had actual first-hand knowledge of the information, deemed it necessary to bring it forward. Doesn’t the fact that none of the originators of the info coming forward undermine the WB complaint?
7
Posted on 9/27/19 at 9:35 am to Baron
quote:
yet none of the sources, who had actual first-hand knowledge of the information, deemed it necessary to bring it forward.
Those that would be true whistle blowers.
Posted on 9/27/19 at 9:35 am to Baron
How dare you use logic,racist
Posted on 9/27/19 at 9:36 am to Major Dutch Schaefer
Exactly, that's what makes this whole thing BS.
Posted on 9/27/19 at 9:44 am to Baron
quote:
Doesn’t the fact that none of the originators of the info coming forward undermine the WB complaint?
Or they feared retaliation?
Posted on 9/27/19 at 9:52 am to Baron
quote:
Doesn’t the fact that none of the originators of the info coming forward undermine the WB complaint?
It does to me, but desperate people, take what they can get, anyway that they can get it.
That's why this pretend whistleblower, should have been told to get lost, and his report not accepted, because it is hearsay.
Posted on 9/27/19 at 9:55 am to bmy
quote:
Or they feared retaliation?
Whistleblowers are protected from retaliation. Unless it’s against a Clinton, then it’s death
Posted on 9/27/19 at 9:56 am to bmy
quote:
Or they feared retaliation?
They would have had Whistleblower protection under the law. That's exactly what the laws are for.
Posted on 9/27/19 at 10:00 am to Baron
How about this, does the whistle blower complaint match what is on the transcript? Did the media orgasms the days before match the transcript or were they lies?
Posted on 9/27/19 at 10:21 am to Baron
quote:To the time of this posting the so-called sources for the so-called WB have still not come forward.
none of the sources, who had actual first-hand knowledge of the information, deemed it necessary to bring it forward.
If the complaint was valid, serious, and urgent!!!...not one single patriot was inspired by such a brave and bold fellow "patriot" to also come forward.
Silence IS golden!
Posted on 9/27/19 at 10:40 am to bmy
quote:
Or they feared retaliation?
Bless your heart. You just can't help it.
Posted on 9/27/19 at 10:49 am to bmy
Well that would be a dumb way to go about it BMY. By leaking they could be placing themselves in a position without a defense. If they had made the whistleblower complaint they would have protection. Mostly likely they will be fired now, if not worse.
Posted on 9/27/19 at 10:50 am to Baron
This is a good rhetorical point; however, it could also be that all those "sources" knew that this was not proper for a "whistleblower" complaint under the law (which in and of itself presents another significant issue).
That said, the bigger point is this: If this is "true" (and we already know it's not because there are significant factual problems ), then there are MULTIPLE people in the WH that are more than willing to say "frick it" to security and freely gab to a CIA officer (apparently KNOWN to be a CIA officer) about a conversation that was, by it's very nature, CLASSIFIED.
In other words, it appears that after almost three years and efforts to clear the place of swamp dwellers and rats, the infestation is still bad...[i]if this is true.
And perhaps that is the secondary motive of this whole thing (the first being to stoke the peach mint fires)...to sow distrust and discontent in the WH.
That said, the bigger point is this: If this is "true" (and we already know it's not because there are significant factual problems ), then there are MULTIPLE people in the WH that are more than willing to say "frick it" to security and freely gab to a CIA officer (apparently KNOWN to be a CIA officer) about a conversation that was, by it's very nature, CLASSIFIED.
In other words, it appears that after almost three years and efforts to clear the place of swamp dwellers and rats, the infestation is still bad...[i]if this is true.
And perhaps that is the secondary motive of this whole thing (the first being to stoke the peach mint fires)...to sow distrust and discontent in the WH.
This post was edited on 9/27/19 at 10:55 am
Posted on 9/27/19 at 10:52 am to bmy
quote:
Or they feared retaliation?
So, tell me bmy, when did you stop molesting little kids? I have it on good authority from several posters on this forum that you like molesting kids... Granted, no first hand evidence, just hearsay but they fear retaliation if they come forward, so I am taking what they told me and asking you directly in front of the whole board... So, do you have an answer to these very credible allegations?
Now, did I just make that shite up or not? Putz...
Posted on 9/27/19 at 12:35 pm to bmy
Oh bmy? not going to answer the question? I mean the accusation is credible...
Posted on 9/27/19 at 8:35 pm to bmy
quote:
Or they feared retaliation?
From who?
Every resister is treated like a hero in our media and culture.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News