Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
snitwitch

***Official Donald J. Trump Impeachment (Whistleblower) Thread***

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, dkp993 said:

Re: bolded--> Why?  

I could completely understand if the WB was the lynch pin and held info that was vital to the case.  But in this case they are not.  They simply reported what they heard which has been backed up multiple times by people much closer to the situation then the WB ever was

Well, for one I really don’t think of this guy as a whistleblower.  Whistleblowers don’t get to mosey back into work- they have their careers ruined and their lives ripped apart before being subjected to legal nightmares.  They don’t get this red carpet treatment from the media.  It’s strange, and it makes me question the real motives behind this thing.  So I think hearing from the informant would be revealing in a sense.  

Secondly, the CIA is one of the most insidious, undemocratic institutions on the planet.  They’re literally the last people on earth we should turn to for help righting the ship.  The CIA was involved in seeding the Trump/Russia conspiracy theories that consumed this country for 2 years.  Now they’ve set proceedings in motion that could remove him from office?  And they’re being portrayed as heroes again?  How many times will they get to define our national discourse before people realize there’s something problematic with all this?  

I’m having a hard time thinking of a situation I’m less sympathetic to than not giving tanks and lethal military hardware to Ukraine.  I think this sort of underhanded power dynamic happens all the time in Washington, except now it’s a big deal because Trump is doing it.  We’ve been big swinging ##### to the rest of the world for 70 years now, but now people are gravely wounded by it because Trump is doing it.  It speaks to a very naive understanding of how the US does politics abroad.  And it doesn’t speak to “whistleblowing” at all so much as selective, partisan application of the law.

It’s strange to see this individual painted as a goodfaith whistleblower who deserves our protection, when those same people couldn’t bring themselves to lift a finger for Chelsea Manning.  She’s in prison right now and she’s racked up $133K in legal bills from the Trump DOJ for resisting a vindictive grand jury process.  Where’s the antitrump resistance and 24/7 Trump news cycle at for her?

As was mentioned before, we already know this impeachment process is taking place only because the corporate ownership approves of it.  That means it’s another drawn-out lawfare spectacle that won’t threaten their interests and won’t provide meaningful help to working people’s lives, with a strangely militarist subtext.  Sound familiar?

Nope, I don’t trust any of this at all.  If he was a real whistleblower, the media would hate him, his agency would turn on him, and he’d be locked up somewhere in Virginia with a bunch of espionage act charges on the docket.  The CIA doesn’t get to kick off impeachment proceedings and hide behind anonymity under the veil of “whistleblowing.”  Not for something this important.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ren hoek said:

Whistleblowers don’t get to mosey back into work- they have their careers ruined and their lives ripped apart before being subjected to legal nightmares.

This happens when they don’t avail themselves of rules designed to protect them and ensure they’re heard.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:
4 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

"whatever you can do" doesn't need any other qualifier. He's plainly asking Ukraine to get dirt on Biden.

No, what ever you can do with attorney general.  Not dirt.  

:rolleyes:

"dirt", in this context, means "anything that makes a person appear dirty". Includes both fake and real things.

Also, it's clear from the full conversation that Trump wanted both Rudy and the AG involved:

"I would like [Rudy Giuliani] to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, there's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that, so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Imagine thinking its everyone else who is lying.  Including people with impeccable records of service to their country.

Its one of the most illogical things.

It truly is.  
 

the GOP is not even running a defence that it didn’t happen anymore. That trump leveraged the weight of US foreign policy to benefit his political campaign can’t realistically be contested at this point unless you resort to flat earth level conspiracy theory.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

Page 5: "President Zelensky stated that during the July 25 call, President Trump had" three times" raised "some very sensitive issues" and that he would have to follow up on those when they me "in person". 

🤔

Page 6:  "I heard Ambassador Sondland greet the President and explain that he was calling from Kyiv. I heard President Trump then clarify that Ambassador Sondland was in Ukraine. Ambassador Sondland replied, yes, he was in Ukraine ( :lmao:) and went on to state that President Zelenskyy loves your ###. I then heard President Trump ask "So, he's going to do the investigation?" Ambassador Sondland replied that "he's going to do it" adding that President Zelenskyy will do "anything you ask him to." 

There's much more after that but tired of typing. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

And those who haven't voted or weren’t motivated to vote for Hillary to get up and get out and vote against him.

Yeah there is that to. I understand why in 2016 voters in the blue wall states saying "what the hell let's see how he does." Let's see if they still feel that way now. His margin in winning those 3 states was razor thin.  It could easily swing the other way in 2020.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

EXCLUSIVE: At last year's WH Hanukkah party, Lev Parnas & Igor Fruman had a private meeting w Trump & Giuliani during which Trump tasked the two men with “a secret mission” to pressure the Ukrainian gov't to investigate Joe & Hunter Biden, sources say. https://t.co/LoeQ7msJIA

 

 

This seems like big news.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

This happens when they don’t avail themselves of rules designed to protect them and ensure they’re heard.

Saints- the rules don’t work for whistleblowers.  We’ve already established that.  Why would anyone, ever in a million years, subject themselves to Espionage Act charges if there was already a safe, fair and open process in place?  They assume great risk to get the truth out to the rest of us and we should support them.  Not cave to a legal system that functions to insulate power from accountability.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

EXCLUSIVE: At last year's WH Hanukkah party, Lev Parnas & Igor Fruman had a private meeting w Trump & Giuliani during which Trump tasked the two men with “a secret mission” to pressure the Ukrainian gov't to investigate Joe & Hunter Biden, sources say. https://t.co/LoeQ7msJIA

 

Impossible, Trump has never heard of Parmas & Fruman. 

Edited by Sheriff Bart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Well, for one I really don’t think of this guy as a whistleblower.  Whistleblowers don’t get to mosey back into work- they have their careers ruined and their lives ripped apart before being subjected to legal nightmares.  They don’t get this red carpet treatment from the media.  It’s strange, and it makes me question the real motives behind this thing.  So I think hearing from the informant would be revealing in a sense.  

Secondly, the CIA is one of the most insidious, undemocratic institutions on the planet.  They’re literally the last people on earth we should turn to for help righting the ship.  The CIA was involved in seeding the Trump/Russia conspiracy theories that consumed this country for 2 years.  Now they’ve set proceedings in motion that could remove him from office?  And they’re being portrayed as heroes again?  How many times will they get to define our national discourse before people realize there’s something problematic with all this?  

I’m having a hard time thinking of a situation I’m less sympathetic to than not giving tanks and lethal military hardware to Ukraine.  I think this sort of underhanded power dynamic happens all the time in Washington, except now it’s a big deal because Trump is doing it.  We’ve been big swinging ##### to the rest of the world for 70 years now, but now people are gravely wounded by it because Trump is doing it.  It speaks to a very naive understanding of how the US does politics abroad.  And it doesn’t speak to “whistleblowing” at all so much as selective, partisan application of the law.

It’s strange to see this individual painted as a goodfaith whistleblower who deserves our protection, when those same people couldn’t bring themselves to lift a finger for Chelsea Manning.  She’s in prison right now and she’s racked up $133K in legal bills from the Trump DOJ for resisting a vindictive grand jury process.  Where’s the antitrump resistance and 24/7 Trump news cycle at for her?

As was mentioned before, we already know this impeachment process is taking place only because the corporate ownership approves of it.  That means it’s another drawn-out lawfare spectacle that won’t threaten their interests and won’t provide meaningful help to working people’s lives, with a strangely militarist subtext.  Sound familiar?

Nope, I don’t trust any of this at all.  If he was a real whistleblower, the media would hate him, his agency would turn on him, and he’d be locked up somewhere in Virginia with a bunch of espionage act charges on the docket.  The CIA doesn’t get to kick off impeachment proceedings and hide behind anonymity under the veil of “whistleblowing.”  Not for something this important.  

Thanks for the well thought out post.  The only issue is it didn’t answer my question, why the WB is important anymore.  I certainly now understand your position on how you feel about this person being a WB so thanks. And I certainly already knew of your love for the CIA.  But again what does the WB have anything to do with anything anymore?  They simply reported what they heard.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Saints- the rules don’t work for whistleblowers.  We’ve already established that.  Why would anyone, ever in a million years, subject themselves to Espionage Act charges if there was already a safe, fair and open process in place?  They assume great risk to get the truth out to the rest of us and we should support them.  Not cave to a legal system that functions to insulate power from accountability.  

I don't understand. The current whistleblower used those rules.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

EXCLUSIVE: At last year's WH Hanukkah party, Lev Parnas & Igor Fruman had a private meeting w Trump & Giuliani during which Trump tasked the two men with “a secret mission” to pressure the Ukrainian gov't to investigate Joe & Hunter Biden, sources say. https://t.co/LoeQ7msJIA

 

Lordy, I hope there are tapes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, whoknew said:

This seems like big news.

The fact that those two guys were arrested trying to flee the country and are in the middle of this whole thing?  Yeah.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Thanks for the well thought out post.  The only issue is it didn’t answer my question, why the WB is important anymore.  I certainly now understand your position on how you feel about this person being a WB so thanks. And I certainly already knew of your love for the CIA.  But again what does the WB have anything to do with anything anymore?  They simply reported what they heard.  

Yeah, it went a lot longer than it probably should have.  I thought I answered it when I said it would be revealing in a sense, the ‘whistleblowing’ here isn’t really whistleblowing so much as a partisan application of the law, and whistleblowing is a tenuous excuse for granting the individual anonymity for something on the scale of removing a president from office.  This is one of the biggest spectacles in the history of the world, with massive implications for our civic and societal fabric.  I think it’s appropriate that we hear from the guy in some form or another, and drop the ‘whistleblower’ pretense.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Saints- the rules don’t work for whistleblowers.  We’ve already established that.  Why would anyone, ever in a million years, subject themselves to Espionage Act charges if there was already a safe, fair and open process in place?  They assume great risk to get the truth out to the rest of us and we should support them.  Not cave to a legal system that functions to insulate power from accountability.  

I think your values are right, I feel like I share them at least here, but look at the discussion you’re having. You’re pointing to WBers whose lives are destroyed for acting outside the system, but then you’re claiming that someone who has acted inside the system is somehow inauthentic because he’s acted inside it. This WBer has triggered an impeachment. I really think Snowden and Manning acting outside the system greatly undercut what they were trying to do and harmed them personally. If Manning and Snowden had approached Widen’s staff the way this WBer approached Schiff’s then maybe their history & America’s may have been very different.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

The fact that those two guys were arrested trying to flee the country and are in the middle of this whole thing?  Yeah.

The walls are starting to close in on some of these guys. If there is anything at all to this it won't belong before one of these guys decides maybe prison isn't for them and the first one to  turn gets the best deal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Mile High said:

It's not really his base. It's the 100k or so that voted for him in 2016 from 3 states that historically in the past 30 or so years have voted blue. 

Do you think those people are still on the fence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

EXCLUSIVE: At last year's WH Hanukkah party, Lev Parnas & Igor Fruman had a private meeting w Trump & Giuliani during which Trump tasked the two men with “a secret mission” to pressure the Ukrainian gov't to investigate Joe & Hunter Biden, sources say. https://t.co/LoeQ7msJIA

 

Quote

 

However he felt back then, those two sources say Parnas now feels quite differently about Trump. The day after Parnas and Fruman were arrested on October 9 and charged with criminal campaign finance violations, Trump publicly denied ever knowing them, a move that was enormously upsetting to Parnas, according to three sources close to him. 

"I don't know those gentlemen," Trump told reporters from the South Lawn of the White House on October 10. "Maybe they were clients of Rudy. You'd have to ask Rudy, I just don't know."  

In the weeks since his arrest, Parnas has become disenchanted with Trump, these sources say. He's even signaled that he's willing to cooperate with the Congressional impeachment inquiry. Parnas' lawyer Bondy said his client would comply with a Congressional subpoena for documents and testimony as part of the impeachment inquiry in a manner that would allow him to protect his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

:popcorn:

  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Yeah, it went a lot longer than it probably should have.  I thought I answered it when I said it would be revealing in a sense, the ‘whistleblowing’ here isn’t really whistleblowing so much as a partisan application of the law, and whistleblowing is a tenuous excuse for granting the individual anonymity for something on the scale of removing a president from office.  This is one of the biggest spectacles in the history of the world, with massive implications for our civic and societal fabric.  I think it’s appropriate that we hear from the guy in some form or another, and drop the ‘whistleblower’ pretense.  

Ok. So that I understand, and to be clear I’m not trying to be combative, just trying to figure out how they (the WB) matter anymore. I get it for the partisan folk who are looking to score points by hopefully exposing this person as a partisan hack ( though how that matters also makes no sense to me).  But for you, other then just general fascination, it’s about redefining what the definition of a WB’er is?

Edited by dkp993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ingram on Fox went to Benghazi just now. :lmao: she’s a meme I swear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Why is taking the fifth better than claiming absolute immunity?

Because only the President can do that apparently

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Why is taking the fifth better than claiming absolute immunity?

I confess that I don’t know what you mean.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Apple Jack said:

Do you think those people are still on the fence?

 I think there's a good chance they return back to how they voted in the past,  but they did  vote for him once. Doesn't hurt to keep working on them to not do it again. Keep pointing out what kind of person he is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, zoonation said:

I confess that I don’t know what you mean.  

In May 2019, the Department of Justice wrote an opinion letter stating that the President’s close advisors cannot be compelled to testify to Congress about their official duties. They have absolute immunity from subpoenas.

It’s never been recognized by a court, but I believe it’s what the White House is using to instruct Kupperman, Mulvaney, Bolton, and Giuliani not to testify.

Update: Here’s the letter.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

The fact that those two guys were arrested trying to flee the country and are in the middle of this whole thing?  Yeah.

Were they fleeing the country or just on a flight out of the country?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jamny said:

Were they fleeing the country or just on a flight out of the country?

Ah, both?

Edited by dkp993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Don't Noonan said:

Absolutely 

The conspiracy you’re buying into is truly remarkable.  The guy decided he would fly home from the Ukraine to insert himself into this mess so he could take an oath and lie.  Wow. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:
1 hour ago, zoonation said:

I think he takes the fifth. 

Why is taking the fifth better than claiming absolute immunity?

I think a fifth of tequila will get you double-secret absolute immunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, zoonation said:

The conspiracy you’re buying into is truly remarkable.  The guy decided he would fly home from the Ukraine to insert himself into this mess so he could take an oath and lie.  Wow. 

You are foolish if you think there is any there there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, zoonation said:

The conspiracy you’re buying into is truly remarkable.  The guy decided he would fly home from the Ukraine to insert himself into this mess so he could take an oath and lie.  Wow. 

Pretty amazing that Dems are now relying on a guy who "overheard" a phone call in a cafe.  This is beyond crazy, to assume he heard the full context of the conversation and he is telling the truth not the two guys on the actual call.  :lol:

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Pretty amazing that Dems are now relying on a guy who "overheard" a phone call in a cafe.  This is beyond crazy, to assume he heard the full context of the conversation and he is telling the truth not the two guys on the actual call.  :lol:

There’s like 8 people now, including Sondland, who have all said that giving Ukraine the money was going to be dependent on doing Trump’s tinhat investigations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Pretty amazing that Dems are now relying on a guy who "overheard" a phone call in a cafe.  This is beyond crazy, to assume he heard the full context of the conversation and he is telling the truth not the two guys on the actual call.  :lol:

Why? Could you flesh this out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:
46 minutes ago, zoonation said:

I confess that I don’t know what you mean.  

In May 2019, the Department of Justice wrote an opinion letter stating that the President’s close advisors cannot be compelled to testify to Congress about their official duties. They have absolute immunity from subpoenas.

It’s never been recognized by a court, but I believe it’s what the White House is using to instruct Kupperman, Mulvaney, Bolton, and Giuliani not to testify.

Update: Here’s the letter.

What the! 

In all the chaos, I missed this.  I'm no scholar, but it strikes me that the oaths sworn should override this memo; likewise, the checks and balances laid out in our country's founding principles.

Edited by Mister CIA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Pretty amazing that Dems are now relying on a guy who "overheard" a phone call in a cafe.  This is beyond crazy, to assume he heard the full context of the conversation and he is telling the truth not the two guys on the actual call.  :lol:

Considering one of those guys on the call has already had to refine his testimony to avoid perjury and the other one lies dozens of times each day...yeah, I’ll take the other guy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Ok. So that I understand, and to be clear I’m not trying to be combative, just trying to figure out how they (the WB) matter anymore. I get it for the partisan folk who are looking to score points by hopefully exposing this person as a partisan hack ( though how that matters also makes no sense to me).  But for you, other then just general fascination, it’s about redefining what the definition of a WB’er is?

It just doesn't strike me as 'whistleblowing' in any traditional sense.  He's just a witness.  While I think it's relevant to consider whether or not this thing was rooted in partisanship, we're talking about the removal of a president.  Of course he should testify.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ren hoek said:

Saints- the rules don’t work for whistleblowers.  We’ve already established that.  Why would anyone, ever in a million years, subject themselves to Espionage Act charges if there was already a safe, fair and open process in place?  They assume great risk to get the truth out to the rest of us and we should support them.  Not cave to a legal system that functions to insulate power from accountability.  

We’ve discussed this repeatedly. When you report on an institution the rules generally don’t work.  When you report on a person they often do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, The General said:

There’s like 8 people now, including Sondland, who have all said that giving Ukraine the money was going to be dependent on doing Trump’s tinhat investigations. 

Please go ahead and list the 8 people 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

When you report on an institution the rules generally don’t work.

Yes- exactly.  That's the problem.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Pretty amazing that Dems are now relying on a guy who "overheard" a phone call in a cafe.  This is beyond crazy, to assume he heard the full context of the conversation and he is telling the truth not the two guys on the actual call.  :lol:

They are not “relying” on it.  
 

It is yet another witness who has put another piece into a children’s puzzle that we could see was a dairy cow 10 pieces ago.  
 

I honestly don’t understand what you think is going on here?  It seems like your position is that all of these people are lying as part of some deep state conspiracy.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, zoonation said:

They are not “relying” on it.  
 

It is yet another witness who has put another piece into a children’s puzzle that we could see was a dairy cow 10 pieces ago.  
 

I honestly don’t understand what you think is going on here?  It seems like your position is that all of these people are lying as part of some deep state conspiracy.  

All these people?  We have three people who have testified so far.  When asked directly, none of them have stated Trump committed a crime.  :shrug:I am shuked.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jamny said:

I don't know what Sondland has said so far. Why is what Holmes is saying damning to him or contradictory?

Still hoping for an answer to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

you already said him

So we agree Sondland said (after he “remembered”) that the money was going to be dependent on Ukraine giving Trump his tinhat investigations.

Next will be William Taylor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The General said:

So we agree Sondland said (after he “remembered”) that the money was going to be dependent on Ukraine giving Trump his tinhat investigations.

Next will be William Taylor.

No, I mean guys who have first hand knowledge.  Taylor does not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don't Noonan said:

No, I mean guys who have first hand knowledge.  Taylor does not.

:lol: How many people associated with this that all say the same thing do you need?

Taylor testified the money was dependent on doing Trump’s tinhat investigations. Did he just misunderstand? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The General said:

:lol: How many people associated with this that all say the same thing do you need?

Taylor testified the money was dependent on doing Trump’s tinhat investigations. Did he just misunderstand? 

I need more than hearsay sorry.  Taylor, Kent, and the former ambassador today have not helped the Dems case at all.

Edited by Don't Noonan
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don't Noonan said:

I need more than hearsay sorry.  Taylor, Kent, and the former ambassador today have not helped the Dems case at all.

Where do you think this all comes from? Is it just conjured out of thin air?

Sondland flipped his story after he realized he was busted. Trump directed these people to shakedown the Ukraine to investigate his conspiracy theories.

He may as well have been looking for Bigfoot, instead it was this “magic server” and Biden’s kid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.