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.
See more
See less

Trump Administration Whistleblower Cover-Up

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Sam View Post
    This is incorrect and, when you think about it, kind of absurd.
    No it isn't on either count. Whistleblower laws exist to protect lower level employees from retaliation by their supervisors.

    The statute is for reporting malfeasance that impacts "intelligence activity" and is specifically framed in ways that extend past the boundaries of an intelligence agency. The ICWPA provides a mechanism for whistleblowers to report malfeasance that touches on intelligence activities and PPD-19 prohibits retaliation against intelligence employees who submit such reports.

    --Sam
    Wrong.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...what-law-says/

    The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act has no provision for what should happen if the inspector general determines something is of urgent concern but the director of national intelligence refuses to forward it to Congress. The scenario has never come up before.
    That's what
    - She

    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
    - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
    Stephen R. Donaldson

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
      No he didn't extort him. No threat of withholding funds was made as punishment for not investigating. In fact, no investigation happened, and funds were released.
      Doesn't matter. At least according to Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D - Vt.) who said it makes no difference whether there was a threat or any quid pro quo, because the very request "itself is a betrayal of the presidency."

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        Doesn't matter. At least according to Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D - Vt.) who said it makes no difference whether there was a threat or any quid pro quo, because the very request "itself is a betrayal of the presidency."
        Yeah, no it isn't. Leaders ask each other for favors all of the time.
        That's what
        - She

        Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
        - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

        I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
        Stephen R. Donaldson

        Comment


        • Nutsy Pelosi reveals the typical Democrat thought process (note that this conversation happened after the transcript had been released):

          "I havenít seen [the transcript]," Pelosi admitted. But, "the fact is that the president of the United States, in breach of his constitutional responsibilities, has asked a foreign government to help his political campaign at the expense of our national security."

          https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortne...mning-n2553672

          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
          Than a fool in the eyes of God


          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            Nutsy Pelosi reveals the typical Democrat thought process (note that this conversation happened after the transcript had been released):

            "I haven’t seen [the transcript]," Pelosi admitted. But, "the fact is that the president of the United States, in breach of his constitutional responsibilities, has asked a foreign government to help his political campaign at the expense of our national security."

            https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortne...mning-n2553672

            Context, context and context.

            Read Nancy Pelosi's full remarks as she called for an impeachment inquiry of President Trump

            Sadly, on that day, the Intelligence Community Inspector General formally notified the Congress that the Administration was forbidding him from turning over a whistleblower complaint. On Constitution Day. This is a violation of law.
            The facts are these: the Intelligence Community Inspector General, who was appointed by President Trump, determined that the complaint is both of ¬Ďurgent concern and credible,¬í and its disclosure, he went on to say, that it ¬Ďrelates to one of the most significant and important of the Director of National Intelligence¬ís responsibilities to the American people.¬í
            On Thursday, the Inspector General testified before the House Intelligence Committee, stating that the Acting Director of National Intelligence blocked him from disclosing the whistleblower complaint. This is a violation of the law.

            The law is unequivocal. The DNI, it says, the Director of National Intelligence ¬Ďshall¬í provide Congress the full whistleblower complaint.
            And this week, the President has admitted to asking the President of Ukraine to take actions which would benefit him politically. The action of ¬Ė the actions of the Trump Presidency revealed the dishonorable fact of the President¬ís betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security, and betrayal of the integrity of our elections.
            "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And itís an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by JimL View Post
              Oh, I see, so if Hunter Biden and his company are working for Burisma and they are the recipients of money for their work, whatever that work might entail, then they are guilty of corruption? Is that what you're asserting? Besides that, whether Biden is guilty of anything is besides the point, the point is that Trump extorted the Ukrainian President in order to force his hand into opening an investigation into his political rival. And he did so at the risk of U.S. national security.
              Yup - skipping the mischaracterization and the accusation, of course.
              There are enough votes now, and they aren't being scared off, they're signing on. Pelosi is a vote counter, and the fact that she is now on board with opening a formal inquiry means that she now knows that she has the votes.
              No, it doesn't. She's getting the babies off her back - if she had the votes, she'd be taking a resolution at least.
              Last edited by Teallaura; 09-25-2019, 03:29 PM.

              "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot


              "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

              My Personal Blog

              My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

              Comment


              • What are you going on about? What I quoted was from a TV interview today, after the transcript was released, in which Pelosi admitted her ignorance of what was in the transcript but went on to suggest that the President was guilty anyway.

                FOX News' John Roberts hilariously concluded the interview by saying, "She said, 'I haven't seen the transcript,' and then proceeds to condemn the president based on a transcript that she hasn't read."

                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                  No it isn't on either count. Whistleblower laws exist to protect lower level employees from retaliation by their supervisors.



                  Wrong.

                  https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...what-law-says/

                  The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act has no provision for what should happen if the inspector general determines something is of urgent concern but the director of national intelligence refuses to forward it to Congress. The scenario has never come up before.
                  That only deals with half of your claim, omitting the protection afforded the whistleblower, but you're wrong on this part, too. There's no provision for what happens if the DNI disagrees because the law plainly states that the DNI "shall" forward the complaint to Congress, with the DNI's notes, if necessary. There's no provision for the DNI to overrule the ICIG or refuse to forward it to Congress at all. The statute uses "shall" and that means "shall".

                  PPD-19 protects whistleblowers utilizing ICWPA, regardless of whether the complaint deals with someone inside or outside the IC.

                  --Sam
                  "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" ó Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                    What are you going on about? What I quoted was from a TV interview today, after the transcript was released, in which Pelosi admitted her ignorance of what was in the transcript but went on to suggest that the President was guilty anyway.

                    FOX News' John Roberts hilariously concluded the interview by saying, "She said, 'I haven't seen the transcript,' and then proceeds to condemn the president based on a transcript that she hasn't read."

                    Read it again and you will realize that she knew of other facts. Repeating your point out of context wont help you.
                    "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And itís an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Sam View Post
                      That only deals with half of your claim, omitting the protection afforded the whistleblower, but you're wrong on this part, too. There's no provision for what happens if the DNI disagrees because the law plainly states that the DNI "shall" forward the complaint to Congress, with the DNI's notes, if necessary. There's no provision for the DNI to overrule the ICIG or refuse to forward it to Congress at all. The statute uses "shall" and that means "shall".

                      PPD-19 protects whistleblowers utilizing ICWPA, regardless of whether the complaint deals with someone inside or outside the IC.

                      --Sam
                      The part you keep ignoring is that in order to legally qualify as a "whistleblower", the person blowing the whistle must have firsthand knowledge. Dealing in rumors and hearsay do not qualify one for "whistleblower" protection.

                      And anyway, with the release of the transcript, we're now well aware that there nothing to blow the whistle about, so this whole discussion has become moot.
                      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                      Than a fool in the eyes of God


                      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                        [...]And anyway, with the release of the transcript, we're now well aware that there nothing to blow the whistle about, so this whole discussion has become moot.
                        Who are "we" in this context?
                        "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And itís an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Sam View Post
                          That only deals with half of your claim, omitting the protection afforded the whistleblower, but you're wrong on this part, too.
                          No I am not. Or else there would not be a public discussion in the first place.

                          There's no provision for what happens if the DNI disagrees because the law plainly states that the DNI "shall" forward the complaint to Congress, with the DNI's notes, if necessary.
                          Nor is there a provision for overriding the DNI if they deem it "not necessary". Or if the President enforced Executive Privilege over the conversation. That's why Slate made this hit piece

                          There's no provision for the DNI to overrule the ICIG or refuse to forward it to Congress at all.
                          Yes there is. Executive Privilege is one such provision.

                          The statute uses "shall" and that means "shall".
                          So where does it stipulate that second hand information can be protected? Oh, that's right... it doesn't.

                          PPD-19 protects whistleblowers utilizing ICWPA, regardless of whether the complaint deals with someone inside or outside the IC.
                          No it doesn't. Other agencies and public entities have their own whistleblower laws. The IC is different in that classified information is a factor. Oh, I forgot. I haven't been in the DoD Intelligence Community for 20 years and have never received whistleblower training as an employee and a supervisor or anything...
                          That's what
                          - She

                          Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                          - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                          I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                          Stephen R. Donaldson

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Chuckles View Post
                            Who are "we" in this context?
                            Anybody who is literate and has taken the time to read the transcript.
                            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                            Than a fool in the eyes of God


                            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Chuckles View Post
                              Read it again and you will realize that she knew of other facts. Repeating your point out of context wont help you.
                              What "other facts"? A supposed "whistleblower" who made false claims about the content of a phone conversation that he had no firsthand knowledge of? Sure, that's a lot more credible than reading the transcript itself.
                              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                              Than a fool in the eyes of God


                              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                                No I am not. Or else there would not be a public discussion in the first place.



                                Nor is there a provision for overriding the DNI if they deem it "not necessary". Or if the President enforced Executive Privilege over the conversation. That's why Slate made this hit piece



                                Yes there is. Executive Privilege is one such provision.



                                So where does it stipulate that second hand information can be protected? Oh, that's right... it doesn't.



                                No it doesn't. Other agencies and public entities have their own whistleblower laws. The IC is different in that classified information is a factor. Oh, I forgot. I haven't been in the DoD Intelligence Community for 20 years and have never received whistleblower training as an employee and a supervisor or anything...
                                I mean, the -title- of PPD-19 is "Protecting Whistleblowers with Access to Classified Information" so...

                                "Executive privilege" isn't a "provision" of the law. The DNI, according to statute "shall" send the report to Congress. Full stop. If the administration wants to exert executive privilege then it has to argue in court that the statute, as written, unlawfully infringes on the separation of powers.

                                But the law says what it says and it makes no provision for the DNI to overrule the ICIG or refuse to send the report.

                                --Sam
                                "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" ó Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Electric Skeptic, Today, 10:28 AM
                                0 responses
                                7 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Electric Skeptic  
                                Started by Whateverman, Yesterday, 05:50 PM
                                8 responses
                                81 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Stoic
                                by Stoic
                                 
                                Started by LiconaFan97, Yesterday, 05:19 PM
                                3 responses
                                19 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Starlight  
                                Started by Kate22, Yesterday, 08:56 AM
                                18 responses
                                159 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Maranatha  
                                Started by Reepicheep, Yesterday, 08:06 AM
                                2 responses
                                38 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Working...
                                X