Originally posted by Sparko
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
Senate GOP blocks three election security bills
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
What are you talking about? First of all, there was nothing illegal about the phone call. This can be verified simply by reading the transcript. Even Vindman in his testimony to the House refused to be pinned down on declaring the phone call improper, saying that he only believed it to be improper (in other words, he was doing nothing more than expressing his opinion rather than declaring an objective fact).
Furthermore, Vindman didn't blow the whistle; rather, he improperly leaked privileged details of the phone call (along with his own embellishments) to CIA stooge Eric Ciarmella who was the one who eventually wrote the whistle blower complaint in coordination with Shifty Schiff.
Btw, don't just make stuff up, MM. You have no knowledge that Schiff had anything to do with the writing of the complaint.
And this after the IG changed the rules to allow unverified hearsay as a whistle blower complaint.
Seriously, man, find some better sources, because your grasp of the facts is tenuous at best.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimLamebrain View PostYes, it was illegal, it was bribery/extortion by way of soliciting foreign help in smearing a political opponent which is itself an abuse of power.
Doesn't matter, as I've already explained to you, Vindman, according to the military whistleblower law, is protected by it whether he was the one who actually reported the crime to the IG or not. As for Ciarmella, whether he is the one who blew the whistle is an educated guess, there is no confirmation as to the actual identity of the whistleblower. But, who the actual whistleblower is, is irrelevant anyway.
Btw, don't just make stuff up, MM. You have no knowledge that Schiff had anything to do with the writing of the complaint.
It's always unverified hearsay until it's investigated.
Seriously man, try using your own brain once in a while rather than spouting conservative talkingpointsfordummies.
It wasn't illegal. Again, read the transcript. Nothing illegal in it, and not even Vindman the Traitor could bring himself to say that it was actually improper.
Yes, we know for a fact that Schiff had contact with Ciaramella. He admitted it, remember?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sch...-whistleblower
A firsthand account is not hearsay, you dope, which was the standard for whistle blowers until the form was changed to allow secondhand rumors.
Face it, Jimmy, you're ignorant, and whatever sources you trust are misinforming you, possibly intentionally.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 PostIf you're going to try and insult someone, at least try to be original.
It wasn't illegal. Again, read the transcript. Nothing illegal in it, and not even Vindman the Traitor could bring himself to say that it was actually improper.
Yes, we know for a fact that Schiff had contact with Ciaramella. He admitted it, remember?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sch...-whistleblower
A firsthand account is not hearsay, you dope, which was the standard for whistle blowers until the form was changed to allow secondhand rumors.
Face it, Jimmy, you're ignorant, and whatever sources you trust are misinforming you, possibly intentionally.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seanD View PostBecause the election process we have now is fine. There are no Russian boogiemen influencing US voters on a mass scale;
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostNot so. The Mueller Report found that the Russian government "interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion" and "violated U.S. criminal law". The report relayed two methods by which Russia attempted to influence the election. And the Intelligence agencies have been warning of similar interference regarding the upcoming presidential election. Although, it's obviously in the interests of Trump and his supporters to allow this to occur - if not in the interests of the country nor the free world.
Comment
-
Or it could just be trolling foreign actors doing it to screw with us, knowing how hyper paranoid we'll get (observing how paranoid we got after 911) and how divisive and politically disruptive it would be, just like it is today. Or it could be the intelligence communities exaggerating it because they need a new national boogieman to justify their sickening overblown budgets (Bush era Jihadi terrorism fearmongering kind of went out of style when we discovered we were actually funding and supporting these groups in Libya and Syria). Or it could be a combo of both
Comment
-
Originally posted by seanD View PostOr it could just be trolling foreign actors doing it to screw with us, knowing how hyper paranoid we'll get (observing how paranoid we got after 911) and how divisive and politically disruptive it would be, just like it is today. Or it could be the intelligence communities exaggerating it because they need a new national boogieman to justify their sickening overblown budgets (Bush era Jihadi terrorism fearmongering kind of went out of style when we discovered we were actually funding and supporting these groups in Libya and Syria). Or it could be a combo of both
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassmoron View PostOr, most likely, Mueller's Report finding that the Russian government "interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion" favoring Trump against Hillary had an unknown degree of influence on the 2016 election results. But sufficient to encourage Russia to do it again in the forthcoming 2020 presidential election as is detected by US Intel. Agencies.
Which is to say that if you were asked to prove Russian interference, and your evidence was the Mueller report, then you would have an uphill battle on very steep slope. 2-years and $30 million dollars for Mueller to basically shrug his shoulders and say, "We really don't know."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 JimL View PostThey're not, all voters have to register, but they are against corrupt republican legislators illegally throwing people of the registration rolls, moving polling places without notification, forcing college students to return to their home states in order to vote, throwing out ballots because the signature looks slightly different than the one on the register etc etc. That's how republicans win, and we know you're okay with that. We'd most likely have a democrat governor in Georgia right now if not for the current Governors election shananigans.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostYes, they are against simple ID laws such as showing an ID at the polls. Any law that would protect our elections by making sure only citizens can vote are consistently blocked by democrats.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostThat there are people illegally voting is a canard used by republicans to suppress the vote and that has been adjudicated and proven time and time again. It is not only ID laws, it is the removing of people from the registers, the closing and moving of polling stations, the rejecting of ballots due to signatures that look slightly different than previously etc etc. That is how republicans win, and that is why you are all for it, not because you want to protect the system.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostIn fact, the Mueller report's case for Russian attempts to influence the election is shockingly weak and contradictory.
Which is to say that if you were asked to prove Russian interference, and your evidence was the Mueller report, then you would have an uphill battle on very steep slope. 2-years and $30 million dollars for Mueller to basically shrug his shoulders and say, "We really don't know."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostSo you aren't for any bills which seek to make sure our elections are protected and only influenced by Americans, after all?
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by seer, Yesterday, 05:12 PM
|
3 responses
37 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sam
Yesterday, 05:26 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 02:07 PM
|
17 responses
62 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 09:40 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 02:00 PM
|
6 responses
51 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 09:43 PM
|
||
Started by whag, Yesterday, 10:21 AM
|
10 responses
86 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Starlight
Today, 01:31 AM
|
||
Started by seer, Yesterday, 08:53 AM
|
42 responses
166 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
Today, 12:38 AM
|
Comment