- 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
Is it possible the Whistleblower DID have first hand knowledge
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:26 am
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:26 am
of all the things outlined in the complaint? I just read it, and too many paragraphs start with, "multiple White House officials informed me".
Before being attacked any more, let me preface my argument by saying I am a Trump supporter. Trump himself doesn't think this person was fed this info. I think the WB is lying and possibly trying to conceal his identity by claiming to have been informed. This person has obviously coordinated with Schiff or someone.
This report reads like an entire case laid out against Trump and Rudy. Dates, times, over several months where half a dozen officials came to this person at various times to "inform" him or her what's going on. It's not just this phone call happened, it's a whole case trying to convince the reader that Trump sought election interference.
Are we supposed to believe that these officials can't keep their mouths shut ever? Really?
It seems more likely that this person actually DID have first hand knowledge of these events, but in an effort to conceal their identity, they put the blame on officials telling him/her these things.
The problem? Whistleblowers are supposed to have first hand knowledge of wrong doings. Which forces the change of that whistleblower requirement just days ago.
Here's the complaint. LINK
Also, here is Trump's tweet from yesterday saying he doesn't think this person was fed this info.
Trump Tweet: Sounding more and more like the so-called Whistleblower isn’t a Whistleblower at all. In addition, all second hand information that proved to be so inaccurate that there may not have even been somebody else, a leaker or spy, feeding it to him or her? A partisan operative?
Before being attacked any more, let me preface my argument by saying I am a Trump supporter. Trump himself doesn't think this person was fed this info. I think the WB is lying and possibly trying to conceal his identity by claiming to have been informed. This person has obviously coordinated with Schiff or someone.
This report reads like an entire case laid out against Trump and Rudy. Dates, times, over several months where half a dozen officials came to this person at various times to "inform" him or her what's going on. It's not just this phone call happened, it's a whole case trying to convince the reader that Trump sought election interference.
Are we supposed to believe that these officials can't keep their mouths shut ever? Really?
It seems more likely that this person actually DID have first hand knowledge of these events, but in an effort to conceal their identity, they put the blame on officials telling him/her these things.
The problem? Whistleblowers are supposed to have first hand knowledge of wrong doings. Which forces the change of that whistleblower requirement just days ago.
Here's the complaint. LINK
Also, here is Trump's tweet from yesterday saying he doesn't think this person was fed this info.
Trump Tweet: Sounding more and more like the so-called Whistleblower isn’t a Whistleblower at all. In addition, all second hand information that proved to be so inaccurate that there may not have even been somebody else, a leaker or spy, feeding it to him or her? A partisan operative?
This post was edited on 9/28/19 at 10:57 am
16
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:28 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
Even if true...I have no problem with the president using his leverage to have corruption involving foreign activities investigated. Republican or Democrat....shouldn’t matter as long as the info is verified and credible.
ESPECIALLY considering our own FBI is so biased they can’t be relied on to do it.
ESPECIALLY considering our own FBI is so biased they can’t be relied on to do it.
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:30 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
No, cause he said he didn’t. Relied on other people and news reports. This is not a Whistleblower, nothing in that report would hold up to any legal standards. He might have something right, but now you’ll have endless investigations with other people, which is the point, and endless fishing expedition for Obstruction
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:32 am to SquatchDawg
quote:
Even if true...I have no problem with the president using his leverage to have corruption involving foreign activities investigated.
Oh, I agree with you. I think Trump laid a trap for this person and they fell for it. He has an incredibly brilliant way of giving people all the rope they need to hang themselves.
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:34 am to CamdenTiger
quote:
This is not a Whistleblower, nothing in that report would hold up to any legal standards.
I agree with your point here. I still don't understand how all of these hearings held by Congress follow no measure of any actual legal standard. None of these things could be done in a court of law.
Court of public opinion is what they're going for.
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:39 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
We would know by now.
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:41 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
If so it’s a tactical miscalculation because the hearsay nature of it kills it, at least in the mind of any logical person.
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:41 am to SquatchDawg
quote:
Even if true...I have no problem with the president using his leverage to have corruption involving foreign activities investigated
This is the most insane thing.
The democrats are furious Trump wanted corruption looked into.
That narrative is fricking insane.
And truly depressing and bizarre part is they and the entire main stream media have no problem screaming that corruption should never be investigated.
This post was edited on 9/28/19 at 8:43 am
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:43 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
Nancy said herself... nodody is above the law. So lock all the shite traitors up! Biden, obuma, comey, ll... all of them!
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:44 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
Nothing wrong for a President to request a country to look into shady business. Obama did it.
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:50 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
Changing your story is never a positive thing. Going from I have no first hand knowledge to I have first hand knowledge destroys all credibility. The obvious question would become did he lie originally or is he lying now by changing his story. Can’t have a get Trump deep stater telling 2 different stories.
Also, by releasing the transcript, they’ve essentially locked the whistleblower into his story. His story doesn’t match the transcript no matter how much mental gymnastics they undertake.
Also, by releasing the transcript, they’ve essentially locked the whistleblower into his story. His story doesn’t match the transcript no matter how much mental gymnastics they undertake.
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:54 am to Blizzard of Chizz
quote:
Also, by releasing the transcript, they’ve essentially locked the whistleblower into his story. His story doesn’t match the transcript no matter how much mental gymnastics they undertake.
Yep! The Dems never thought Trump would release it. That's why they attacked this week with Trump having UN meetings all week. They thought he wouldn't want the "embarrassment" with so many world leaders stateside.
The Dems are stupid. They will not triumph here.
Posted on 9/28/19 at 8:58 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
Does anyone think it's inside the realm of possibility that the WB is Bolton?
Remember him declaring he resigned? Trump didn't fire me I resigned. Was this also locking him into that statement so it can't be said later that he was fired in retaliation?
Just a theory!
Remember him declaring he resigned? Trump didn't fire me I resigned. Was this also locking him into that statement so it can't be said later that he was fired in retaliation?
Just a theory!
Posted on 9/28/19 at 9:00 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
It was written by lawfare scum
Posted on 9/28/19 at 9:02 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
What are all these weird Russian bot alters that are coming here lately
Posted on 9/28/19 at 9:06 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
It doesn't matter. No quid pro quo. Why is there no heat on Biden and Crowdstrike?
Posted on 9/28/19 at 9:12 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
quote:
It seems more likely that this person actually DID have first hand knowledge of these events, but in an effort to conceal their identity, they put the blame on officials telling him/her these things.
Sue Gordon, the country’s number two intelligence official and an intelligence veteran of more than 30 years resigned on August 8, 2019, after she was passed up for the position of Director of National Intelligence.
Hell hath no furry like a woman scorned.
Just saying...
Posted on 9/28/19 at 9:18 am to WylieTiger
quote:
It doesn't matter. No quid pro quo. Why is there no heat on Biden and Crowdstrike?
Yeah, why has Crowdstrike been so lost from the headlines? They say Russia hacked the server and that's the final answer? Really? They also said Bernie's camp essentially hacked HRC due to a faulty firewall.
Posted on 9/28/19 at 9:21 am to The Pirate King
quote:
What are all these weird Russian bot alters that are coming here lately
Because only Russian bot alters support Trump?
Posted on 9/28/19 at 9:24 am to BeNotDeceivedGal6_7
quote:
"multiple White House officials informed me".
I hate to have to tell you, but "multiple sources informed me" that you wife/so is shagging a postal worker.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News