Originally posted by lilpixieofterror
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Trump Administration Whistleblower Cover-Up
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostThe fact that the TDS crowd keeps going back to the whistleblower's report on the conversation between Trump and Zelensky rather than the transcript of the actual conversation reveals that they understand that the conversation isn't damning so they have to rely on a gossip's erroneous second and third hand accounts to continue to prop up their claims.Last edited by lilpixieofterror; 10-01-2019, 06:37 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View PostNo there isn’t. What we have is a secondhand claim that makes several factual errors that can be compared to the transcript. You’re doing an awesome job in helping Trump win in 2020.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostThere is no "scheme'. There is a gross abuse of power that several who happen to have a conscience observed. A person can't live as immorally and as dishonestly as Donald Trump has and not eventually have to face the consequences.
Jim
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostHe's a dictator at heart Bill. He's also a crook. His only problem is that he's a dictator and a crook at the head of a democracy, which so far is holding up. He's made one thing apparent though, he's exposed the cracks in the system that might allow the possibility of a corrupt authoritarian like himelf to bring the system down. Probably took instructions from his best bud Vladimir.
Leave a comment:
-
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostOne term? Democrats, because the republican congress has no principles, are hopefully going to make him less than a one term president. If the unprincipled majority Senate refuse to convict, then the Dems at least will have done the right and patriotic thing anyway by beginning the impeachment process, and when the fair objective minded republican constituency out there, (not you) see the evidence of his criminality and abuse of power, he will lose in a landslide. If not, then you'll get the dictator that you deserve!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostIn short, you're begging the question.
And I'm still not seeing any law or government policy saying that the server can't or shouldn't be used in the manner described. I think what really has liberals upset is that it has proven to be an effective means of preventing leaks, which is why they were forced to go with the "no firsthand knowledge whistleblower" scheme.
Jim
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Tassmoron View PostThe NSC’s codeword-level system is specifically designed to protect highly sensitive compartmented intelligence matters.
So now “Experts are homing in on allegations that the White House used a computer system meant for highly classified information to store details of President Donald Trump’s calls with foreign leaders, in what they described as a stark departure from how the server is normally used and how memos of the president’s exchanges are typically handled”.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...script-1514714
In short, it's being used for a cover-up.
And I'm still not seeing any law or government policy saying that the server can't or shouldn't be used in the manner described. I think what really has liberals upset is that it has proven to be an effective means of preventing leaks, which is why they were forced to go with the "no firsthand knowledge whistleblower" scheme.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostSays who?
So now “Experts are homing in on allegations that the White House used a computer system meant for highly classified information to store details of President Donald Trump’s calls with foreign leaders, in what they described as a stark departure from how the server is normally used and how memos of the president’s exchanges are typically handled”.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...script-1514714
In short, it's being used for a cover-up.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by seer View PostTell me about it - I had one who would never clean his dirty dishes!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostYeah, no, nice try on that one but Davis' entire thrust was that this was a recent and secret change. Davis goes on to say that the "new" form was surreptitiously uploaded only days before the whistleblower complaint was made public and marked as sometime in August 2019. As you and others tried to argue, the whole idea was that a special accommodation was being invented for this whistleblower to go along with the other talking point (also refuted by the ICIG) that the whistleblower had no "firsthand" knowledge, making the complaint invalid.
So The Federalist and Davis got it very wrong by taking something true (the "new" form came into use in late May 2018) and extending the timeline ("sometime between May 2018 and August 2019") and extrapolating that into "the form was recently changed to set up Trump with this phony whistleblower". Mendacious is the appropriate word and it should affect how people use Davis' work going forward.
--Sam
Try reading the whole article. The writer never definitively declares that it was a recent change, and he states multiple times that it's unclear exactly when the changes were made. He even contacted the ICIG and asked for clarification, but they refused to comment, so the article leaves it an open question. By all accounts, he did his due diligence as a reporter.Last edited by Mountain Man; 09-30-2019, 09:58 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by RumTumTugger View PostRepeating the same non substantieted dishonest opinion does not make it true or a fact JimL it only shows you are a one trick pony and gets old.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostFrom the ICIG press release:"The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 is the same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018..."
Very first line in The Federalist article:"Between May 2018 and August 2019, the intelligence community secretly eliminated a requirement that whistleblowers provide direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoings."
Looks like he got the dates dead on accurate. You ask "how the author should be treated as a journalistic source if he doesn't cop to the major error," but it seems you're the one who made the "major error" by not bothering to read the source you were criticizing. Seriously, man, it was the very first line!
But I will gladly admit my own error: I was under the impression that the forms were changed right before the "whistleblower" stepped forward, but it seems they were changed over a year ago, and the public wasn't aware of the change until just recently. So I was wrong on that point. Still, it's a curious change to allow the reporting of complaints based on rumors and hearsay.
Yeah, no, nice try on that one but Davis' entire thrust was that this was a recent and secret change. Davis goes on to say that the "new" form was surreptitiously uploaded only days before the whistleblower complaint was made public and marked as sometime in August 2019. As you and others tried to argue, the whole idea was that a special accommodation was being invented for this whistleblower to go along with the other talking point (also refuted by the ICIG) that the whistleblower had no "firsthand" knowledge, making the complaint invalid.
So The Federalist and Davis got it very wrong by taking something true (the "new" form came into use in late May 2018) and extending the timeline ("sometime between May 2018 and August 2019") and extrapolating that into "the form was recently changed to set up Trump with this phony whistleblower". Mendacious is the appropriate word and it should affect how people use Davis' work going forward.
--Sam
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostTo swing back around to this...
"The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 is the same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018..."
Very first line in The Federalist article:
"Between May 2018 and August 2019, the intelligence community secretly eliminated a requirement that whistleblowers provide direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoings."
Looks like he got the dates dead on accurate. You ask "how the author should be treated as a journalistic source if he doesn't cop to the major error," but it seems you're the one who made the "major error" by not bothering to read the source you were criticizing. Seriously, man, it was the very first line!
But I will gladly admit my own error: I was under the impression that the forms were changed right before the "whistleblower" stepped forward, but it seems they were changed over a year ago, and the public wasn't aware of the change until just recently. So I was wrong on that point. Still, it's a curious change to allow the reporting of complaints based on rumors and hearsay.Last edited by Mountain Man; 09-30-2019, 08:43 PM.
Leave a comment:
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by seer, Yesterday, 01:12 PM
|
4 responses
62 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
Yesterday, 02:38 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 04-17-2024, 09:33 AM
|
45 responses
359 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by Starlight
Yesterday, 05:05 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-16-2024, 10:43 PM
|
60 responses
389 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Yesterday, 03:09 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 04-16-2024, 09:38 AM
|
0 responses
27 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by rogue06
04-16-2024, 09:38 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 04-16-2024, 06:47 AM
|
100 responses
440 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Yesterday, 12:45 PM |
Leave a comment: