Trump Administration Whistleblower Cover-Up

[JimL]

Folks should read Shokin's sworn statement if they want to see what a real mob shakedown by the Biden gang looks like. Eye-widening stuff!

https://www.scribd.com/document/4276...okin-Statement

Why would we care what a known corrupt prosecutor has to say. The entire western world, including the IMF wanted him fired and Biden was there to convince the Ukranians to do that if they wanted the wests support. You and Trump want to make this about Biden, but it was not only the U.S. that was behind this effort to rid Ukraine of corruption and in particular this corrupt Prosecutor General. Whether Bidens son is guilty of anything or not is irrelevant to that.

[Bill the Cat]

Why would we care what a known corrupt prosecutor has to say. The entire western world, including the IMF wanted him fired and Biden was there to convince the Ukranians to do that if they wanted the wests support.

Admitting a quid-pro-quo There's hope for you yet, Jimmy...

You and Trump want to make this about Biden, but it was not only the U.S. that was behind this effort to rid Ukraine of corruption and in particular this corrupt Prosecutor General. Whether Bidens son is guilty of anything or not is irrelevant to that.

Sure it is. He was investigating Biden's son. At a MINIMUM, that is a conflict of interest, and Biden should have recused himself in the discussions. Either way, Biden is done. There are more accusations against his other kids too.

[Sam]

Admitting a quid-pro-quo There's hope for you yet, Jimmy...



Sure it is. He was investigating Biden's son. At a MINIMUM, that is a conflict of interest, and Biden should have recused himself in the discussions. Either way, Biden is done. There are more accusations against his other kids too.

If that's the standard used for when someone is "done", what does it say about Trump, whose children are currently getting favorable business deals around the globe?

[Mountain Man]

Why would we care what a known corrupt prosecutor has to say.

Because he wasn't corrupt. As John Solomon shows with his extensive investigative reporting, the false stories of corruption were planted by members of the Obama administration in order to put pressure on the Ukrainian government, for which the Burisma lawyers apologized!

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign...wYDEV8.twitter

[mikewhitney]

Did anyone address the political tactic to call someone a whistleblower who simply was a leaker of private information? I wish that some people in the media would clarify that this was just a le eak.

we need a whistleblower who will expose this person (or fake person) as a fake whistleblower.

[Teallaura]

Except that polls show a huge shift in the peoples move in support of impeachment.

Or not:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ed/2438970001/

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...t-impeachment/


The polling is not surprisingly mixed and showing a slight uptick - but were done last weekend before the document releases. Even so, one showed a downturn and none were done by major pollsters.

Too early - and way too early to assume a ground swell of support.

[Sam]

Did anyone address the political tactic to call someone a whistleblower who simply was a leaker of private information? I wish that some people in the media would clarify that this was just a le eak.

we need a whistleblower who will expose this person (or fake person) as a fake whistleblower.

The person is called a "whistleblower" because they issued a complaint about government malfeasance through the mechanism defined in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act.

A "leak" goes to the public (e.g., Woodward and Bernstein/Deep Throat), though that can still be whistleblowing, since the term refers to exposure of corruption within one's own company or administration.

The whole thing about "this isn't really a whistleblower" is just the dumbest sort of talking point to diffuse and deflect. Anyone who finds themselves using it needs to take that as a signal to reevaluate how they're consuming and processing news.

--Sam

[Mountain Man]

Voters are now evenly split on beginning impeachment, 43% to 43%. That's a 13% rise in support just since last friday. Support amongst democrats has risen 7%, amongst Republicans it's up 5%.

http://www.politico.com/story/2019/0...-trump-1515012

A lot of it depends on how the question is framed. It's easy to shift the needle towards "yes" to impeachment if you manipulate the subject into accepting even hypothetically that the President is guilty of a crime.

Of course these kinds of stories never reveal the actual questions for the same reason a magician never reveals his secrets: it's easier to fool people when they don't know how the trick is done.

[Teallaura]

A lot of it depends on how the question is framed. It's easy to shift the needle towards "yes" to impeachment if you manipulate the subject into accepting even hypothetically that the President is guilty of a crime.

Of course these kinds of stories never reveal the actual questions for the same reason a magician never reveals his secrets: it's easier to fool people when they don't know how the trick is done.

Some seem skewy to me but the real problem is they were mostly done on the 19th and 20th - just after the news broke.

[Mountain Man]

The whole thing about "this isn't really a whistleblower" is just the dumbest sort of talking point to diffuse and deflect. Anyone who finds themselves using it needs to take that as a signal to reevaluate how they're consuming and processing news.

A person dealing in information he acquired through office gossip that has proven to be incorrect or at least wildly exaggerated is not a whistleblower, he's a rumormonger. No honest judge in the country would tolerate a witness who starts his testimony with "Well, you see, according to this guy I know..."

[mikewhitney]

The person is called a "whistleblower" because they issued a complaint about government malfeasance through the mechanism defined in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act.

A "leak" goes to the public (e.g., Woodward and Bernstein/Deep Throat), though that can still be whistleblowing, since the term refers to exposure of corruption within one's own company or administration.

The whole thing about "this isn't really a whistleblower" is just the dumbest sort of talking point to diffuse and deflect. Anyone who finds themselves using it needs to take that as a signal to reevaluate how they're consuming and processing news.

--Sam

Ah. Thanks for propagating the misunderstanding of the situation.

[seer]

Or not:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ed/2438970001/

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...t-impeachment/


The polling is not surprisingly mixed and showing a slight uptick - but were done last weekend before the document releases. Even so, one showed a downturn and none were done by major pollsters.

Too early - and way too early to assume a ground swell of support.

I actually expect it to run fairly even in the near future - especially with the media's full court press.

[lilpixieofterror]

A lot of it depends on how the question is framed. It's easy to shift the needle towards "yes" to impeachment if you manipulate the subject into accepting even hypothetically that the President is guilty of a crime.

Of course these kinds of stories never reveal the actual questions for the same reason a magician never reveals his secrets: it's easier to fool people when they don't know how the trick is done.

[mikewhitney]

The person is called a "whistleblower" because they issued a complaint about government malfeasance through the mechanism defined in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act.

A "leak" goes to the public (e.g., Woodward and Bernstein/Deep Throat), though that can still be whistleblowing, since the term refers to exposure of corruption within one's own company or administration.

The whole thing about "this isn't really a whistleblower" is just the dumbest sort of talking point to diffuse and deflect. Anyone who finds themselves using it needs to take that as a signal to reevaluate how they're consuming and processing news.

--Sam

Everyone who is consuming and processing news needs to reevaluate how they are consuming and processing news.

One key question is to ask why the media gleans on to a topic -- this is the why-this-why-now question.

[rogue06]

Sure it is. He was investigating Biden's son. At a MINIMUM, that is a conflict of interest, and Biden should have recused himself in the discussions. Either way, Biden is done. There are more accusations against his other kids too.

Details are now emerging that most of his family including his brother have pretty much made their living being related to Joe.