Originally posted by Bill the Cat
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 Teallaura View PostJim, you mean 'imply. You (general) can't 'infer' quid pro quo - or anything else - and have a criminal charge.
She was sweeter than aspartame
Her kisses reconfigured my DNA
And after that I never was the same
And I loved her even more
Than Marlon Brando loved souffle
She was gorgeous, she was charming
Yeah, she was perfect in every way
Except she was always using the word "infer"
When she obviously meant "imply"
And I know some guys would put up with that kind of thing
But frankly, I can't imagine why
And I told her, I said
"Hey! Are we playing horseshoes, honey?
No, I don't think we are!
You're close! (Close!)
But no cigar!"
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostJim, you mean 'imply. You (general) can't 'infer' quid pro quo - or anything else - and have a criminal charge.
The Ukrainians deny being pressured - in affidavit!
And the press coverage was what alerted the White House to the issue with Biden's son.
It's Constitutional law 101 - the Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to face one's accuser. The whistleblower laws cannot override that nor do they negate it.
No, I said there were no named accusers in the complaint. Beyond that, there's no one saying "I witnessed X" or " i was intimidated by soandso" - THAT'S a very bad thing at this stage.
The evidence in affidavit supports Trump - all the sworn statements by principals are in support of Trump's side. I wasn't arguing about 'impeachable' (isn't and the House hasn't even brought articles - the Senate hasn't done anything at all - so no, Congress didn't decide anything of the sort*) - I'm telling you there is next to no admissible evidence and what there is supports Trump.
*It's the House's, not Congress' decision and it has not been made. Well, sorta - the Senate could take issue with the articles at trial.Last edited by JimL; 10-01-2019, 06:03 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
There is a very interesting podcast on this subject, titled, ‘How the Whistle Blower Complaint Almost Didn’t Happen’ by ‘The Daily’. It looks like there was a complaint to CIA before the whistle blower complaint but it was blocked by, the now infamous, Barr.
If there is any justice in this world, Barr will resign or be impeached, with, perhaps, a handful of creepy White House lawyers. Let’s pray for justice and speak up to ‘our’ congressmen.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostThere was a quid pro quo inferred...
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View Post[ATTACH=CONFIG]40038[/ATTACH]
And now even after reading the transcript and seeing how the whistleblower's complaint is full of factual errors, instead of backing off they've decide to double even triple down.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostOh, 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.Last edited by RumTumTugger; 10-01-2019, 12:31 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostThere was a quid pro quo infered, and anyone with half a brain can see that in the wording of the text. There is also the common sense understanding that Trump didn't just wake up one day and think, hmmm, I think I'll look into this already debunked Hunter Biden thing from years ago just for the heck of it.
The Ukrainians deny being pressured - in affidavit!
And the press coverage was what alerted the White House to the issue with Biden's son.
It's the whistleblower law, Tea, whistleblowers aren't named for good reason. And second hand info has nothing to do with it since the evidence is the transcript itself not the who blew the whistle on it.
You already said that.
I don't know what you mean to say by this. If it's just an assertion that it's not an impeachable offense, that's up to Congress to decide, and they already have decided.
*It's the House's, not Congress' decision and it has not been made. Well, sorta - the Senate could take issue with the articles at trial.Last edited by Teallaura; 10-01-2019, 10:17 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostI can't imagine what it's like for you to try to get through each day through the fog of delusion.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostThere is no quid pro quo in the transcript. If the transcript is what 'you've got', then you (general) have nothing. There's nothing actionable in the transcript - and supporting testimony and documentation that rule out any quid pro quo.
There are no named accusers in the complaint - I read it and realized that all by myself. Everything in the complaint is secondhand or possibly hearsay ('officials' rather than 'official' opens the possibility) - the whistleblower never states he directly observed/heard anything.
Most damning of all, no accusers at all - not even the whistleblower has been named.
Every affidavit on record supports defense, not prosecution.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JimLamebrain View PostIf it weren't for that big blue wave, there'd be no check on your dictator President and you could kiss your democracy goodbye. It must have been such a disappointment, it almost worked out for him.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostShhhh... don't tell Jimmy that. He still thinks there was a Big Blue Wave last November.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostThere is no quid pro quo in the transcript. If the transcript is what 'you've got', then you (general) have nothing. There's nothing actionable in the transcript - and supporting testimony and documentation that rule out any quid pro quo.
There are no named accusers in the complaint - I read it and realized that all by myself. Everything in the complaint is secondhand or possibly hearsay ('officials' rather than 'official' opens the possibility) - the whistleblower never states he directly observed/heard anything.
Most damning of all, no accusers at all - not even the whistleblower has been named. Every affidavit on record supports defense, not prosecution.
And now even after reading the transcript and seeing how the whistleblower's complaint is full of factual errors, instead of backing off they've decide to double even triple down.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostNo, what we have is the transcript of the call itself. We don't need it direct from the whistleblower, it's in the transcript. The second hand claim nonsense is just the talking point for dummies you're buying into.
There are no named accusers in the complaint - I read it and realized that all by myself. Everything in the complaint is secondhand or possibly hearsay ('officials' rather than 'official' opens the possibility) - the whistleblower never states he directly observed/heard anything.
Most damning of all, no accusers at all - not even the whistleblower has been named. Every affidavit on record supports defense, not prosecution.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View PostThus, among the reasons the democrats are going to lose in 2020 (that and their candidates going all in on the far left stuff). In fact, this whole impeachment scheme could cost them some purple democrat seats too.
Leave a comment:
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
|
7 responses
60 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
Today, 08:33 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
|
42 responses
244 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by whag
Yesterday, 03:53 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
|
25 responses
106 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 08:36 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
|
33 responses
194 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Roy
Today, 07:43 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
|
73 responses
322 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 03:51 AM |
Leave a comment: