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
    Calling executive privilege a "provision" demonstrates a lack of understanding regarding statutory law so that's that.


    As for whether PPD-19 protects whistleblowers utilizing ICWPA ... well, folks can read the thing itself. ICWPA provides the mechanism for a whistleblower to report abuses dealing with potentially classified information, the very definition of "protected disclosures" in PPD-19.
    PPD-19 protects Intelligence Community members specifically from retaliation, which was missing from the IC's version of the whistleblower act. It does not state someone is protected outside their agency. That's why each agency has their own whistleblower regulations.

    I can read a statute and I can read a presidential directive so if Bill wants to explain how PPD-19 doesn't protect a whistleblower utilizing ICWPA, he's gonna have to actually explain it.
    First, the definition of a whistleblower that we are taught is someone with firsthand knowledge of fraud, waste, or abuse by a superior, peer, or subordinate. It does not "cover" everyone from everything. Only retaliation like removal of security clearance, reprimand, or termination by supervisors. This person had no direct knowledge of any misconduct by anyone in his chain. Therefore, he is not legally a "whistleblower" and has no protection under either act or directive. Second, the PPD-19 does not override Presidential Executive Privilege over presidential communications. If the President claims executive privilege over a conversation he had, even legitimate whistleblowers are bound by that privilege unless and until the judicial branch overrides that privilege.
    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 JimL View Post
      No, I hate treasonous dictators and republican lemmings who would stand by them,
      No, Jim. You hate Republicans and think EVERY Republican in power is a "treasonous wanna-be dictator".

      you hate liberals, democrats, and like the GOP, you apparently hate democracy as well.
      tenor.gif
      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




        PPD-19 protects Intelligence Community members specifically from retaliation, which was missing from the IC's version of the whistleblower act. It does not state someone is protected outside their agency. That's why each agency has their own whistleblower regulations.



        First, the definition of a whistleblower that we are taught is someone with firsthand knowledge of fraud, waste, or abuse by a superior, peer, or subordinate. It does not "cover" everyone from everything. Only retaliation like removal of security clearance, reprimand, or termination by supervisors. This person had no direct knowledge of any misconduct by anyone in his chain. Therefore, he is not legally a "whistleblower" and has no protection under either act or directive. Second, the PPD-19 does not override Presidential Executive Privilege over presidential communications. If the President claims executive privilege over a conversation he had, even legitimate whistleblowers are bound by that privilege unless and until the judicial branch overrides that privilege.
        You are really confusing terms, here.

        PPD-19 doesn't have anything to do with whether the content of a complaint can be shared, declassified, whatever. It's a prohibition against retaliation for protected disclosures. PPD-19 protects the whistleblower from retaliation even when the subject of the complaint is not "inside" the IC community.

        Neither the ICIG nor the DNI have made any sort of suggestion that the complaint is not legitimately within the purview of the ICIG. Specifically, the complaint deals with the "administration of an intelligence activity involving classified information" and deals directly with the DNI's responsibility to protect US elections. Arguing that this person isn't a "legal whistleblower" moves the goalposts away from the original claim ("Since the whistleblower worked for the intelligence community, they are only legally protected when blowing the whistle against the intelligence community. The President is not a member of that community.") but is, even so, very far afield from how the ICIG and the DNI understand both the complaint and the protections given to the whistleblower.

        --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?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
          So now we know the substance of the "whistleblower's" complaint, and, well...

          In the nine-page document, the so-called “whistleblower” claims that the president was “using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election.” While characterizing the Trump-Zelensky call based on hearsay, it accuses the White House of attempting to conceal records related to their conversation. Further, it claims President Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, is a “central figure” in the effort and alleges U.S. Attorney General William Barr “appears to be involved as well.”

          “The interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the president’s main domestic political rivals,” the complaint states. “The president’s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well.”

          The transcript of the call was released Tuesday, showing no pressure to investigate Biden, and President Zelensky denied in person that he felt any such pressure from the conversation.

          https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...ees-complaint/

          Did I call it? Or did I call it?


          You called it like you usually do, MM, blindly and wrongly. The transcript, even in its redacted form, clearly shows the pressure being put on an allied foriegn government badly in need of military aid in their fight against our common adversary. The quid pro quo, the extortion, is clear to anyone with an unbiased functioning brain, which the whistleblower clearly has, and saw. The President blocked the bi-partison backed aid to Ukraine, put it on hold, and then told the Ukrainian president that he'll let that aid go through, but first you need to reciprocate by begining an investigation into Trumps political rival. Doesn't matter whether the Ukrainian president says he didn't feel pressured or not, which he didn't say, that was Trump chiming in with his personal interpretation of what he said. But it doesn't matter, because the Ukrainian President needs the good will of Trump. What would you expect him to say? You are incapable of independent, objective, analysis. There is nothing that could change your mind, and you are obviously not alone in that, which is a sad thing to see when our very democratic system of governance is at stake.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            More details about the "whistblower" complaint...

            The document contains no first-hand knowledge of the July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and relies entirely on leaks by “White House officials.” The “whistleblower” even admits: “I do not know which side initiated the call.”

            Some allegations in the complaint seem to be distortions of exaggerations of information in the transcript itself, which the White House released Wednesday. For example, the whistleblower claims that Trump “praised Ukraine’s Prosecutor General, Mr. Yuriy Letsenko.” Trump appears never to have mentioned Letsenko, and his reference to a prosecutor (“I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down”) was a reference to former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin. Shokin was investigating Burisma Holdings, on whose board Hunter Biden served, at the time Joe Biden demanded he be fired, under threat of withholding $1 billion in American aid.

            In addition, the whistleblower goes beyond reporting alleged misconduct and proceeds to build a case against the president’s conduct of foreign relations with Ukraine, relying extensively on reports from the mainstream media, including the New York Times, The Hill, This Week with George Stephanopoulous on ABC News, and other sources.

            That repeats a pattern from the “Russia collusion” claim, in which the FBI relied partly on media reports to justify applying for warrants to conduct surveillance on Trump campaign officials.

            https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...ne-transcript/
            The transcript complies with the whistleblower's complaint, so the above is irrelevant hogwash.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
              It's a Rorschach test for both sides, Charles. Don't even try acting like it isn't. If you hate Trump, you will see whatever you want that confirms your bias. Same if you like him.
              Well, at least you admit to that in your own case. Now try being objective, see if you can do it!

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                Shades of Steele?

                The complaint is the same structure as the Steele Dossier. No direct knowledge; no direct evidence to the claims; second-hand gossip, rumors from people who might have known another person to have overheard something, mixed with prior media reports to narrate a story as told by the author.

                https://theconservativetreehouse.com...ere-it-is-pdf/
                Again, MM, we have the transcript and it agrees with what the whistleblower reported. It was also investigated by the IG before finding it credible and of urgent concern.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                  It's a Rorschach test for both sides, Charles. Don't even try acting like it isn't. If you hate Trump, you will see whatever you want that confirms your bias. Same if you like him.
                  I am not too certain you understand the implications such a statement has on whatever you yourself would have to say....
                  "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s 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


                  • Representative Steve Scalise:

                    It doesn’t meet the standard of a whistleblower, but more concerningly, the inspector general determined that this person has a political bias. By the way, guess who is lawyered up, right now? The so-called whistleblower has a lawyer that is a donor to Joe Biden. You can’t make this up. So you want to talk about deep state type connections, look at the fact this person, by the inspector general’s own determination, has a political bias.

                    ...

                    It really is unbelievable. When you look at the hype that was building up on this thing. Of course the media has been frothing at the mouth since literally the day Donald Trump took office. They’ve wanted to get him out of office. The left has wanted to act like he’s not president or they want to remove him as president so they had a mission when they took the majority to impeach him, regardless of the facts.

                    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...whistleblower/
                    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
                      Representative Steve Scalise:

                      It doesn’t meet the standard of a whistleblower, but more concerningly, the inspector general determined that this person has a political bias. By the way, guess who is lawyered up, right now? The so-called whistleblower has a lawyer that is a donor to Joe Biden. You can’t make this up. So you want to talk about deep state type connections, look at the fact this person, by the inspector general’s own determination, has a political bias.

                      ...

                      It really is unbelievable. When you look at the hype that was building up on this thing. Of course the media has been frothing at the mouth since literally the day Donald Trump took office. They’ve wanted to get him out of office. The left has wanted to act like he’s not president or they want to remove him as president so they had a mission when they took the majority to impeach him, regardless of the facts.

                      https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...whistleblower/
                      breitbart is not an objective source. I'll wait for others to carry the same story.

                      Jim
                      He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                      "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                        Again, MM, we have the transcript and it agrees with what the whistleblower reported. It was also investigated by the IG before finding it credible and of urgent concern.
                        Read them both - you just quoted the complaint, not the IG's evaluation of it.

                        The complaint DOES NOT agree with the transcript. It contains multiple factual errors.


                        Read them yourself! It's only about 14 pages combined.

                        "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


                        • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                          breitbart is not an objective source. I'll wait for others to carry the same story.

                          Jim


                          That's a statement from Rep. Scalise.
                          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


                            That's a statement from Rep. Scalise.
                            Well, are you suggesting that Scalise is an objective source. Scalise is about as objective as you are, MM. He, like the rest of the cowardly, unprincipled republicans in congress is an elected official who's afraid of Trump, what's your excuse?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                              Read them both - you just quoted the complaint, not the IG's evaluation of it.

                              The complaint DOES NOT agree with the transcript. It contains multiple factual errors.


                              Read them yourself! It's only about 14 pages combined.
                              Oh c'mon Tea, the IG investigated the complaint in determining its credibility as well as its urgency. The President blocked bipartisan appropriated military aid but offered to send it if the Ukranian president did him a favor. Investigate his political rival! He also asked him to investigate Ukraines involvment in the 2016 U.S election in order to vindicate his buddy Putin and Russia. That is the complaint, it's in the whistleblowers complaint. That he sent a private citizen to pressure the Ukrainians is a fact, it's in the report, it's in the complaint. What you Trumpsters are doing is trying to argue the validity of the process rather than the validity of the evidence. What Trump was doing, for personal gain, was extorting Ukraine, a democratic ally, knowing that they were in desperate need of U.S. military aid. Then he tried to hide the evidence, the transcripts, by transfering them to a private server used for classified info.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                                Oh c'mon Tea, the IG investigated the complaint in determining its credibility as well as its urgency. The President blocked bipartisan appropriated military aid but offered to send it if the Ukranian president did him a favor. Investigate his political rival! He also asked him to investigate Ukraines involvment in the 2016 U.S election in order to vindicate his buddy Putin and Russia. That is the complaint, it's in the whistleblowers complaint. That he sent a private citizen to pressure the Ukrainians is a fact, it's in the report, it's in the complaint. What you Trumpsters are doing is trying to argue the validity of the process rather than the validity of the evidence. What Trump was doing, for personal gain, was extorting Ukraine, a democratic ally, knowing that they were in desperate need of U.S. military aid. Then he tried to hide the evidence, the transcripts, by transfering them to a private server used for classified info.
                                But the phrase YOU USED comes from the complaint, not the IG like you said.

                                Wait, IG? Maquire did the review and released the complaint.


                                He tried to hide transcripts he voluntarily released?



                                It's garbage - but the Dems are welcome to dig themselves a deeper grave...

                                "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

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Mountain Man, Today, 04:57 PM
                                5 responses
                                39 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Maranatha  
                                Started by Reepicheep, Today, 10:05 AM
                                32 responses
                                182 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seanD
                                by seanD
                                 
                                Started by seer, Today, 06:05 AM
                                22 responses
                                116 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post LiconaFan97  
                                Started by Maranatha, Yesterday, 10:58 PM
                                35 responses
                                277 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post EvoUK
                                by EvoUK
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 03:56 PM
                                3 responses
                                34 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Working...
                                X