- 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
re: I’d Like to Hear Some Arguments Why the ID of the Whistleblower is Necessary
Posted on 11/24/19 at 4:46 pm to Huevos
Posted on 11/24/19 at 4:46 pm to Huevos
Because every American, even the lowly President, has a right to face and cross examine his/her accuser.
You cant even be convicted of speeding if the officer doesn't show up to testify.
But you think an underling of the President ought to be able to accuse the President of whatever the frick they want and Trump has to prove his innocence (another constitutional violation) without even getting to question the "whistleblower"
GTFO Comrade
You cant even be convicted of speeding if the officer doesn't show up to testify.
But you think an underling of the President ought to be able to accuse the President of whatever the frick they want and Trump has to prove his innocence (another constitutional violation) without even getting to question the "whistleblower"
GTFO Comrade
2
Posted on 11/24/19 at 4:51 pm to More&Les
The Sixth Amendment doesn't apply to a political impeachment.
Period.
Period.
Posted on 11/24/19 at 4:53 pm to Huevos
quote:
Seems to me it’s completely irrelevant in this context.
Nope.
1) The Democrat Media Complex has been trying to impeach President Trump from Day One. 25th Amendment, Emoluments Clause, Stormy Daniels, Trump/Russia, Trump/Ukraine, etc. By now, even the most ardent Trump-hater has to acknowledge that YET ANOTHER attempt to bring down this President could very well be nothing but a pre-planned scheme.
2) Without OFFICIALLY knowing who the "whistleblower" is, it is impossible to assess his possible motives, who he may have interacted with, etc.
3) At one time, Adam Schiff was downright giddy about having the "whistleblower" testify. Then it was discovered that not only did Schiff and his staff lie about not knowing the identity of the "whistleblower," they had also had multiple interactions with the "whistleblower."
4) Everybody and their favorite dog knows that Eric CIAramella is the "whistleblower." There's really nothing left to hide.
5) Why can't Team Trump face their accuser? Why were they not allowed to call their own witnesses? Why is little weasel Adam Schiff a 2-time loser now, who has lied TWICE about having impeachable evidence against President Trump? Schiff lied about Trump/Russia, and now he has been caught lying about Trump/Ukraine.
You are WAY OFF BASE, OP.
Posted on 11/24/19 at 4:53 pm to Huevos
Because in America we have the right to confront our accuser
Posted on 11/24/19 at 4:53 pm to Huevos
quote:
I’d Like to Hear Some Arguments Why the ID of the Whistleblower is Necessary
You have a right to confront your accuser in this country.
Posted on 11/24/19 at 4:55 pm to Huevos
Knowing the identity allows us to examine any possible political connections or motivations he may have had.
Posted on 11/24/19 at 4:55 pm to Huevos
Who told him about the call?
When?
Who did he tell?
When?
Who assisted him in preparing his complaint?
How many versions were there before the final draft?
Who has them?
Did he speak to anyone about this call BEFORE it took place?
Sign this authorization for your cell phone records, emails, etc.
Just a start
When?
Who did he tell?
When?
Who assisted him in preparing his complaint?
How many versions were there before the final draft?
Who has them?
Did he speak to anyone about this call BEFORE it took place?
Sign this authorization for your cell phone records, emails, etc.
Just a start
Posted on 11/24/19 at 4:56 pm to texashorn
quote:
quote:
This. Under the 6th Amendment, Trump has a right to face his accusers.
quote:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
This is why it wont go to the Senate. Right now, it's not a trial, and the Dems can do whatever they want.
This isn't a trial. It is for show, and requires a complicit and participating media. This is why they call a "witness," who gives their opinion on what they heard and how they felt, then Schiff runs out to the media during "bathroom/lunch" to do a press conference and get the talking points out. Then, the Rs ask their question and the morning's narrative falls apart. The damage is done and the narrative is already out there by the time that happens though.
Posted on 11/24/19 at 4:58 pm to SoulGlo
Even if it goes to the Senate for trial, it's still not a criminal prosecution.
Posted on 11/24/19 at 4:58 pm to texashorn
quote:
Even if it goes to the Senate for trial, it's still not a criminal prosecution
Due process applies in civil and regulatory actions.
Posted on 11/24/19 at 5:00 pm to Huevos
quote:Well, it seems like it would be mildly relevant if he's basically a political operative.
Seems to me it’s completely irrelevant in this context.
quote:Part of the reason it's weak is because it relies on the "impressions" of obvious hacks. So, them being hacks is relevant.
I think republicans would be much better off fighting the merits of a pretty weak case
quote:Well, in this case, it's because the fire you see was set by the person yelling fire.
Heard a GOP pundit rationalize the necessity of revealing the whistleblower’s identity by saying “if someone yells fire and you look over and there is actually a fire, you want to know who first saw the fire.” Not sure I understand his argument there
Posted on 11/24/19 at 5:00 pm to Erin Go Bragh
quote:
goes to motivation, credibility, and access.
Exactly!
Posted on 11/24/19 at 5:01 pm to Huevos
quote:
I’d Like to Hear Some Arguments Why the ID of the Whistleblower is Necessary
You serious Clark?
Posted on 11/24/19 at 5:03 pm to udtiger
Due process is the Fifth Amendment.
Plus, there is no danger of being deprived of life, liberty or property with a Senate trial.
Plus, there is no danger of being deprived of life, liberty or property with a Senate trial.
Posted on 11/24/19 at 5:11 pm to Huevos
quote:
Heard a GOP pundit rationalize the necessity of revealing the whistleblower’s identity by saying “if someone yells fire and you look over and there is actually a fire, you want to know who first saw the fire.” Not sure I understand his argument there
Surely he said “if there IS NOT a fire”
Posted on 11/24/19 at 5:12 pm to Huevos
If this is a real question you need to go back to 9th grade civics and 11th grade American History. One of the reasons we broke away from England was the Star Chamber/lack of ability to confront your accuser. It is a fundamental right to have the ability to confront , question and examine your accuser for bias, inconsistency, or relevancy. The failure to do so leads to abuse of process, which is exactly what is going on with this shite show. Any non political American with average intelligence can see what is transpiring in the House. I think it is similar to the Clinton/Lewinsky debockle in that it is completely partisan and flimsy accusations. It is truly a shame that either party will allow moderate leaders any longer who govern form the center as opposed to catering to the extreme of their party.
Posted on 11/24/19 at 5:14 pm to Huevos
There are a lot of reasons.
1. Every American has the right to face their accuser.
2. The whistleblower was directly coordinating with Adam Schiff’s Office.
3. Much of the complaint is factually inaccurate and relies entirely on hearsay.
4. The whistleblower wants to bring down the President, but is too much of a coward to deal with important questions about where and how they got their information.
1. Every American has the right to face their accuser.
2. The whistleblower was directly coordinating with Adam Schiff’s Office.
3. Much of the complaint is factually inaccurate and relies entirely on hearsay.
4. The whistleblower wants to bring down the President, but is too much of a coward to deal with important questions about where and how they got their information.
Posted on 11/24/19 at 5:14 pm to texashorn
quote:
The Sixth Amendment doesn't apply to a political impeachment.
Period.
And complete anonymity doesn't apply to the whistle blower law and that person actually isn't a whistleblower.
Period.
Posted on 11/24/19 at 5:30 pm to More&Les
quote:
Because every American, even the lowly President, has a right to face and cross examine his/her accuser.
what The whistleblower is not the one formally accusing him of anything, it’s congress.
You guys simply do not understand the confrontation clause and it’s applicability to these proceedings.
If I work for a government agency and witness fraud, waste or abuse by a government employee and alert the inspector general, they will be the one accusing him, not me.
Posted on 11/24/19 at 5:31 pm to Huevos
quote:
If I work for a government agency and witness fraud, waste or abuse by a government employee and alert the inspector general, they will be the one accusing him, not me.
And?
After they accuse him, he has a right to validate the accusations or nah??
You people!
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News