Trump Administration Whistleblower Cover-Up

[Teallaura]

Unsubstantiated roomers: the very worst kind of roomers.

Eh, it's the insubstantial roomers that bother me...

[Mountain Man]

Better than insubstantial bloomers!

[JimL]

Says the person trying to desperately link Trump to a mob boss, repeating unsubstantiated roomers as fact. Trump is going to win in 2020 because of hysterical people, like you. Most of the political right sources I read started off as anti Trump (shoot so did I, as my 2016 post would show). Many of them have switched due to Democrat political dirty tricks. Democrats could have made Trump into a one term president, they created this monster and I enjoy watching them get crushed by it.

One 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!

[Bill the Cat]

One 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!

You're such a huckster, Jim. Trump's not a dictator any more than you are a decent human being.

[seer]

You're such a huckster, Jim. Trump's not a dictator any more than you are a decent human being.

ouch...

[JimL]

You're such a huckster, Jim. Trump's not a dictator any more than you are a decent human being.

He'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.

[JimL]

ouch...

You okay?

[Sam]

To swing back around to this, the Office of the ICIG released this today, confirming that:

1) The form used by the whistleblower had/has not been recently changed
2) The whistleblower attested to both direct and indirect knowledge regarding the complaint
3) The ICIG determined that the whistleblower's direct knowledge was credible and corroborated by other sources

This would be a good time for folks to assess the value of The Federalist and what, exactly, how the author should be treated as a journalistic source if he doesn't cop to the major error.

Could you please comment in light of this article?

Specifically,

[RumTumTugger]

He'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.

Repeating 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.

[Mountain Man]

To swing back around to this...

From 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.

[Sam]

From 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

[JimL]

Repeating 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.

Oh, his guilt, his collusion, his abuse of power, his obstruction of Congress, it's all substantiated alright, but you'll find that out soon enough RTT, he's going to be impeached, and he's going to be found guilty, if not by the cowardly, unprincipled Republican Senate, then by the people. I suspect he might flee to Russia before the state courts get their hands on him after his ouster. But you're beloved dictator is done for and the crew and hostages are abandoning the fast sinking ship. You'll see, you'll see, don't worry RTT you will see.

[Mountain Man]

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

So what you're saying is that he got it right, but he still got it wrong. Okay...

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.

[NorrinRadd]

Tell me about it - I had one who would never clean his dirty dishes!

Through some bizarre coincidence, all my roommates also had that same one bad roommate.

[Tassman]

Says who?

specificallyhttps://www.politico.com/story/2019/...script-1514714

In short, it's being used for a cover-up.