Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump

[jj22]

He's trying to switch the issue from the whistleblowers report to the call transcript. Which was never what Congress had wanted. This was always about the whistleblowers report. Which could possibly be more than just a call.

He's already confessed to the illegal act.

[*bfine32*]

(09-25-2019, 08:30 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: As to Trump turning it over: too little, too late. He said this after the impeachment announcement and stonewalling for days? Yeah, you don't get to break the law and then go "my bad, I take it back."

For the rest of the post, no offense, but this is head-in-the-sand level denial. First, there is zero evidence the whistleblower did this out of political bias. Second, the Trump appointed ICIG found the complaint "credible and urgent." Considering the IG is the only person who should know the full details at this point including who made it, they are Trump appointed, and they found the complaint to be credible, I would say the likelihood of the complainant doing it out of political animus is low. And, if anyone tries to make that claim, then there would be reason to investigate whether they illegally obtained information on who the complainant was.

Edit: I saw the Fox News exclusive on this about the IG supposedly saying the whistleblower had "political bias" and was in favor of "a political rival" or something  in a report the White House plans to release. If this actually mattered to the facts of the complaint, the complaint would not have been found credible. This is nothing more than a red herring the administration is hoping will convince their base that this is much ado about nothing.

Maybe, just maybe SSF was right and the Trump admin was playing the Dems for fools. 

Yeah, unfortunately when this blew up I was forced to watch News networks again. This is where I heard the IG would be reporting on the "whistleblower" today. I guess we'll find out soon enough if Red Herring or not. 

[Belsnickel]

(09-25-2019, 09:58 AM)jj22 Wrote: No matter what comes out of this Trump has confessed to trying to get a foreign country to investigate a political opponent. He's confessed. What more do Trump defenders have to question? If a confession isn't good enough what will be

We already know what the response is to this, though:

(09-23-2019, 09:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Is this a time where we don't care about finding out the truth?

People don't know the whole Biden thing is a debunked conspiracy theory (or they don't care it's been debunked) and so their argument will be that if we are so concerned about holding people accountable, there should be support for Ukraine looking into the matter.

[GMDino]

(09-25-2019, 10:33 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: We already know what the response is to this, though:


People don't know the whole Biden thing is a debunked conspiracy theory (or they don't care it's been debunked) and so their argument will be that if we are so concerned about holding people accountable, there should be support for Ukraine looking into the matter.

Matt!  Trump is just playing the "libs"!

He had this planned all along as a set up to force them to start impeachment so he could pull back the curtain and show nothing happened.

Which is SO much better that the POTUS spent months setting up a practical joke on a political party by pretending to have abused his power and wasting time and money on investigations.

Right?

[Belsnickel]

(09-25-2019, 10:29 AM)jj22 Wrote: He's trying to switch the issue from the whistleblowers report to the call transcript. Which was never what Congress had wanted. This was always about the whistleblowers report. Which could possibly be more than just a call.

He's already confessed to the illegal act.

Yup. Many people don't know that, though. They may not even realize that at the very least he committed a campaign finance violation with that phone call.

(09-25-2019, 10:32 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Maybe, just maybe SSF was right and the Trump admin was playing the Dems for fools. 

Yeah, I'm doubting that. There is nothing in what Trump has done up to this point that would indicate to me that this is some 3D chess type of strategy.

(09-25-2019, 10:32 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Yeah, unfortunately when this blew up I was forced to watch News networks again. This is where I heard the IG would be reporting on the "whistleblower" today. I guess we'll find out soon enough if Red Herring or not. 

The same IG that found the complaint credible and urgent (it would have to be them) isn't going to then contradict themselves by saying partisan animus was the reason for the complaint. If they did that, then they would have to be investigated for perjury and many other things regarding lying on official government reports. If that happens, then it is almost certain they were pressured to do so by the White House. So either this is a red herring or it is a corrupt act of obstruction.

[BmorePat87]

(09-25-2019, 09:58 AM)jj22 Wrote: This is true. Not sure what this new spin is about, but it's obviously a desperate attempt to change the subject. Obviously if there was transcripts that Biden did something wrong Trump would have declassified them and released them. He has that power not Biden. If only American voters would use common sense, these politicians wouldn't treat them like fools.

Why do his defenders keep swinging and missing when it comes to defending Trump? They even act like they know who the whistleblower is when they nor Trump do?

The length they go to defend a man who twice got caught colluding to attack America's Democracy and citizens is one of the most head scratching moments in American History.

No matter what comes out of this Trump has confessed to trying to get a foreign country to investigate a political opponent. He's confessed. What more do Trump defenders have to question? If a confession isn't good enough what will be

The desperation of Trump defenders is cringe worthy.

The response by the RNC was either very ignorant or a calculate deflection. The latter seems more likely. 

Ask why Biden isn't releasing his calls. They know he can't, but they've already planted the narrative that the "real" controversy is Biden and what is he covering up? Those who eat this up will not let themselves believe that Biden does not have the power to release confidential records he has no access to. 

[*bfine32*]

(09-25-2019, 10:41 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Yup. Many people don't know that, though. They may not even realize that at the very least he committed a campaign finance violation with that phone call.


Yeah, I'm doubting that. There is nothing in what Trump has done up to this point that would indicate to me that this is some 3D chess type of strategy.


The same IG that found the complaint credible and urgent (it would have to be them) isn't going to then contradict themselves by saying partisan animus was the reason for the complaint. If they did that, then they would have to be investigated for perjury and many other things regarding lying on official government reports. If that happens, then it is almost certain they were pressured to do so by the White House. So either this is a red herring or it is a corrupt act of obstruction.

As I said: "We'll see" and soon it appears. Perhaps the IG discovered something after he called the report credible and urgent. IDK, maybe after further investigation.

I clearly stated if the transcript/report prove wrong doing by POTUS he should be held accountable. But my opinion is just like the Mueller Report when I was called a bad American for not reading it cover to cover. I don't need to see it; nor do I think the American public needs to see it. Because it's most likely going to lead to the same BS that the Mueller report has from the court of public opinion. 

Release the documents to Pelosci's Impeachment panel and let them do their job. I'm not going to ask them to come pull triggers next time there's a conflict and they shouldn't be asking the merican public to do their job

[GMDino]

(09-25-2019, 11:06 AM)bfine32 Wrote: As I said: "We'll see" and soon it appears. Perhaps the IG discovered something after he called the report credible and urgent. IDK, maybe after further investigation.

I clearly stated if the transcript/report prove wrong doing by POTUS he should be held accountable. But my opinion is just like the Mueller Report when I was called a bad American for not reading it cover to cover. I don't need to see it; nor do I think the American public needs to see it. Because it's most likely going to lead to the same BS that the Mueller report has from the court of public opinion. 

Release the documents to Pelosci's Impeachment panel and let them do their job. I'm not going to ask them to come pull triggers next time there's a conflict and they shouldn't be asking the merican public to do their job

That's just saying you would rather remain ignorant than face any facts.

[*bfine32*]

Did Nancy Pelosci just say she hasn't read it but said the President was guilty?

[jj22]

(09-25-2019, 11:39 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Did Nancy Pelosci just say she hasn't read it but said the President was guilty?

Based off of his confession yes.

Bfine. He's confessed. What more is needed?

[GMDino]

Well the dotard released the notes from the call (not a transcript):

Don't read it bfine.  No need to know what's going on.     That won't make you a "Bad American" just one of the 40% that don't care what Trump does.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ukraine-call-transcript-shows-trump-sought-biden-probe-but-made-no-mention-of-us-aid

Quote:The White House on Wednesday released a transcript of President Trump’s July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky showing him seeking a review of Biden family dealings in the country – but the document does not show Trump explicitly leveraging military aid as part of a quid-pro-quo, as Democrats have suggested in pressing forward with impeachment.



The document, declassified by Trump a day earlier, indicates the call – which Trump made from the White House residence -- took place July 25 from 9:03 a.m. to 9:33 a.m. A notation on the memo says it does not represent a "verbatim transcript" but is based on "notes and recollections" of those listening and memorializing the call. It is still presented in transcript form.

The memo begins with the president congratulating Zelensky on his election victory, before Trump eventually broaches the subject former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.


READ THE UKRAINE CALL MEMO

“There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great,” Trump said in the phone call. 
“Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it…It sounds horrible to me.”


That refers to Joe Biden, while vice president, urging Ukraine to fire its top prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, while Shokin was investigating the natural gas firm Burisma Holdings — where Hunter Biden was on the board. Biden has maintained that corruption concerns prompted his intervention.


Trump, in the run-up to the transcript's release, was accused by Democrats of essentially pressuring a foreign power to investigate a political opponent, as Biden is now a top contender for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.


On Monday, it was reported that Trump had even ordered his staff to freeze nearly $400 million in aid to Ukraine a few days before the phone call with Zelensky, a detail that fueled impeachment calls leading to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announcing a formal impeachment inquiry Tuesday. But the call transcript does not include any mention of the aid, as a bargaining chip or otherwise.


In fact, it shows Zelensky telling Trump: "I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense."

The transcript shows Zelensky suggesting to Trump the Biden matter would be looked into by a new prosecutor. 
“He or she will look into the situation specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue, the issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue to restore the honesty so we will take care of that and we will work on the investigation of the case.”


The president told Zelensky he wanted his lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and Attorney General Bill Barr to get involved.


“I will have Mr. Giuliani give you call and I’m also going to have Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom if it. I’m sure you will figure it out,” he said.


A Department of Justice spokeswoman, Kerri Kupec, said in a statement that the attorney general was first notified of the president’s conversation with Zelensky several weeks after the call took place “when the Department of Justice learned of a potential referral.”


“The president has not spoken with the Attorney General about having Ukraine investigate anything relating to former Vice President Biden or his son,” Kupec said. “The president has not asked the Attorney General to contact Ukraine- on this or any other matter. The attorney general has not communicated with Ukraine – on this or any other subject. Nor has the Attorney General discussed this matter, or anything related to Ukraine, with Rudy Giuliani.”


Before the transcript was released, Democrats accused Trump of improperly using his office to pressure another country to investigate one of his chief Democratic rivals. Hogan Gidley, a White House spokesman, said during an appearance on Fox News: "There was no pressure. There was no quid pro quo."


Trump has denied wrongdoing and has repeatedly referred to the impeachment push as a partisan “witchhunt.”
“Will the Democrats apologize after seeing what was said on the call with the Ukrainian President? They should, a perfect call - got them by surprise!” the president tweeted Wednesday.

Quote:
[/url]Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump




Will the Democrats apologize after seeing what was said on the call with the Ukrainian President? They should, a perfect call - got them by surprise!

[url=https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1176848267759509504]49K
9:17 AM - Sep 25, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy

The Trump-Zelensky conversation led to a whistleblower complaint against the president, provoking an avalanche of impeachment calls from Democrats.


But the Justice Department – in a new letter from the Office of Legal Counsel obtained by Fox News -- is pushing back on the claim that the whistleblower brought out something of “urgent concern” that would have to be turned over to Congress.


“For the reasons set forth above, we conclude that the complaint submitted to the ICIG does not involve an 'urgent concern'…”  It adds: “As a result, the statute does not require that the DNI transmit the complaint to the intelligence committees.”


The DOJ opinion also said the intelligence community inspector general found “some indicia of an arguable political bias on the part of the complainant in favor of a rival political candidate,” but still said the allegations “appeared credible.” Fox News previously reported that, according to a source, the individual also did not have “firsthand knowledge” of the phone call.


On Tuesday night, Pelosi – who had resisted calls from the liberal base to pursue articles of impeachment -- announced a formal impeachment inquiry against the president. Even without a "quid pro quo" illustrated in the transcript, Democrats are likely to move full speed ahead on impeachment. Wednesday’s transcript release is the first time lawmakers have seen exactly what was said in the conversation.


Democrats, though, have said they won’t be satisfied with just seeing the transcript and have said they want access to the full whistleblower report. That complaint may soon be turned over, however, as the administration weighs how to handle the document.

The transcript also shows Trump asking for a “favor” in the form of Ukraine providing information about the hacking of the DNC server in 2016.


“I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike… I guess you have one of your wealthy people… The server, they say Ukraine has it,” Trump said.


Later, Trump is slated to meet with Zelensky, in what will be a high-stakes moment amid the impeachment push, on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York. The meeting was previously scheduled, unrelated to the whistleblower allegation, though the two leaders are expected to receive questions from reporters on the matter.


Trump then is expected to hold a press conference in New York in the late afternoon, where the impeachment drive is sure to be front and center.


A senior Trump administration official told Fox News that the White House has been working as quickly as it can to release to Congress the whistleblower complaint involving Trump’s conversations with the Ukrainian president, as long as it’s legally possible.


The White House has maintained that they have nothing to hide and that there has been no wrongdoing. Their general position has been that it will make everything possible available to Congress or the public regarding Trump’s call and the complaint to the intelligence community’s inspector general.


“The president must be held accountable,” Pelosi said, citing his alleged “betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security, and the betrayal of the integrity of our elections.”


Pelosi and Democrats also allege that the administration violated the law by not turning over a whistleblower complaint concerning Trump’s July call.

Not sure how he thinks this helps his cause.

[jj22]

The "memo" doesn't help his case at all.

And just think this is the sharpie version of it. If the sharpie version is damning, imagine what the actual transcript/call was....

[*bfine32*]

(09-25-2019, 11:42 AM)jj22 Wrote: Based off of his confession yes.

Bfine. He's confessed. What more is needed?

He confessed to withholding funds voted on to go to the Ukraine unless they help him with his reelection? If that is true than he should be impeached or resign. 

[GMDino]

(09-25-2019, 11:48 AM)bfine32 Wrote: He confessed to withholding funds voted on to go to the Ukraine unless they help him with his reelection? If that is true than he should be impeached or resign. 

Here we go.

[jj22]

(09-25-2019, 11:48 AM)bfine32 Wrote: He confessed to withholding funds voted on to go to the Ukraine unless they help him with his reelection? If that is true than he should be impeached or resign. 

I think we both know what he confessed to......

If you're fine with colluding with a foreign country to attack an American to help him win an election just say so, but don't try to drag us down to your level of patriotism.

[*bfine32*]

(09-25-2019, 11:54 AM)jj22 Wrote: I think we both know what he confessed to......

I do not. Tell me. As I said I just started tracking this issue today. I've not heard anyone mention a confession. So what did he confess to? 

[GMDino]

(09-25-2019, 11:56 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I do not. Tell me. As I said I just started tracking this issue today. I've not heard anyone mention a confession. So what did he confess to? 

You said you "just started" yesterday.  

[GMDino]

So we all knew this was not a verbatim transcript and that one of those does not exist.

However this was an interesting catch.

Here are the other two ellipses in the document, which the White House has admitted is not a verbatim transcript. pic.twitter.com/4qKMbkgebZ

— Dan Diamond (@ddiamond) September 25, 2019

 

[Belsnickel]

(09-25-2019, 11:56 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I do not. Tell me. As I said I just started tracking this issue today. I've not heard anyone mention a confession. So what did he confess to? 

Using his office to commit a campaign finance violation.

[*bfine32*]

(09-25-2019, 11:54 AM)jj22 Wrote: I think we both know what he confessed to......

If you're fine with colluding with a foreign country to attack an American to help him win an election just say so, but don't try to drag us down to your level of patriotism.

To your edit and personal attack (surprise):

I am fine with heads of state talking to each other and mutually agreeing to work in an ongoing investigation. If you chose to call that colluding then fine.

I am not fine with a more powerful Head of State threatening to withhold agreed upon funds to lesser country unless they help him win reelection.