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

[Dill]

(09-26-2019, 08:53 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/463139-whistleblower-complaint-accuses-trump-admin-of-pattern-of-obfuscation?fbclid=IwAR27u6chrWbByWUKUZxEwGIp7jcpXA59lCWNXRPyN0wYYqtIPY0EohtMhfs

Apparently the whistleblower complaint claims that the White House moved a number of records of Trump's conversations with leaders to a separate computer network than the one they are suppose to be on.

And they did it IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE CALL, at the direction of lawyers, i.e., people cognizant of the "perfect" call's import.

The "separate network" was for material highly sensitive to national security--which this was not.

[*michaelsean*]

(09-26-2019, 09:41 AM)jj22 Wrote: Why anyone would let Trump define them as a person and American is beyond me. It's cringe worthy and embarrassing to see it happen.

They claim the know he's a liar/con/not a good man (and they don't vote for him) and yet you see them regurgitating his lies or falling for his con (both is embarrassingly reflective of their character).

What we are learning is not only can he shoot a man on 5th Avenue and get away with it. He can do it, admit to it, and then spin it and they'll still find a way to claim those who say he did it lied and blame it on the libs. I mean why let anyone have that kind of power over you let alone a known con?

We must do better, where is the self pride? self respect? and Patriotism?

It makes me yearn for the days of kneelgate. I didn't agree, but at least people acted like they loved this country.

You need to quit obsessing over the diehards.  They aren't changing.  I know one.  Lives next door to my sister-in-law in Cleveland.  He flies a Trump flag next to his American flag every day.  If you don't know it, take a gander at the serenity prayer. It's not just for alcoholics.

[jj22]

(09-26-2019, 10:09 AM)michaelsean Wrote: You need to quit obsessing over the diehards.  They aren't changing.  I know one.  Lives next door to my sister-in-law in Cleveland.  He flies a Trump flag next to his American flag every day.  If you don't know it, take a gander at the serenity prayer.  It's not just for alcoholics.

I focus on the "diehards" because they are gaining power (on both sides).

The moderates and independents are a dying breed in American politics. We've long lost influence.

If we want change, we must ostracize these diehards for who they are, let them know they do not represent the great people of this country or our greatest qualities as a nation, and take America back.

[Dill]

(09-26-2019, 09:41 AM)jj22 Wrote: Why anyone would let Trump define them as a person and American is beyond me. It's cringe worthy and embarrassing to see it happen.

They claim the know he's a liar/con/not a good man (and they don't vote for him) and yet you see them regurgitating his lies or falling for his con (both is embarrassingly reflective of their character).

What we are learning is not only can he shoot a man on 5th Avenue and get away with it. He can do it, admit to it, and then spin it and they'll still find a way to claim those who say he did it lied and blame it on the libs. I mean why let anyone have that kind of power over you let alone a known con?

You may be confusing Trump defenders with Trump supporters here.

Trump supporters DO NOT know that he is a liar and con man.

Trump defenders do, but "the Left" (Fox-defined) is still worse so they run interference, attacking Trump's critics.

Neither group should appear admirable to traditional Americans, Repub or Dem.

But the good side of this is the defenders are beginning to peel away, in Congress as well as on this message board.

The overstuffed Trump spin machine has broken a belt, water is pouring over the floor as the smoking engine continues to run without effect.

[*michaelsean*]

(09-26-2019, 10:13 AM)jj22 Wrote: I focus on the "diehards" because they are gaining power (on both sides).

The moderates and independents are a dying breed in American politics. We've long lost influence.

I mean the diehard Trump supporters.  They aren't gaining any more power.  Nobody who wasn't is going to become one.  I'm not convinced the Senate Republicans won't kick him out if it gets to them.  Not out of any nobility, but because he's a burden.

[hollodero]

(09-26-2019, 10:09 AM)michaelsean Wrote: You need to quit obsessing over the diehards.  They aren't changing.  I know one.  Lives next door to my sister-in-law in Cleveland.  He flies a Trump flag next to his American flag every day.

It's just that these diehards determine the narrative, at least on the right-wing media like FOX et al. Diehards won't change, but that the diehard's narrative always gets so mainstream conservative is still puzzling.

"While granting aid is not my call in the first place, I still say you only get that aid vital for your defense against Russia if you investigate the American son of an opponent of mine based on no hard evidence whatsoever..." yeah there was a time I thought all Americans would condemn a president for insinuating that, no matter what party. Nowadays I think that assumption does not apply if team red is president.

[BmorePat87]

(09-26-2019, 10:05 AM)Dill Wrote: And they did it IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE CALL, at the direction of lawyers, i.e., people cognizant of the "perfect" call's import.

The "separate network" was for material highly sensitive to national security--which this was not.

Yep, I just read the report. They basically scrambled to "lock down" all records of this call and place them somewhere that was not accessible. 

But... hey... maybe they didn't know any better?

[Bengalzona]

(09-25-2019, 08:36 PM)hollodero Wrote: I think asking a foreign country for a favor which consists of investigating the family of a political rival is a big deal. When that question is tied to funds for defense against Russian aggression is even a bigger deal. And even bigger indeed if granting said funding is not even the president's perogative in the first place, but Congress'. How can this not warrant an impeachment investigation? --- is what I would ask if I still would wonder. (But ever since Qatar obviously got extorted to buy a Kushner skyscraper, I stopped wondering.)

Also, I think that has nothing to do with any democrat crying impeachment from day one. Nothing at all. And Pelosi sure did not seem to jump to impeachment with any kind of joy. Otherwise she would have jumped way earlier.

Our forefathers who wrote the Constitution realized that one of the major problems that existing nations at that time had was foreign intervention in their internal affairs. For this reason, checks and balances were created to protect the nacent nation from this.

BTW - Does anyone else notice the inconsistency of a President who has on multiple occasions solicited internal intervention from foreign governments also making a speech about nationalism in front of the U.N.?

[Belsnickel]

(09-26-2019, 10:20 AM)michaelsean Wrote: I mean the diehard Trump supporters.  They aren't gaining any more power.  Nobody who wasn't is going to become one.  I'm not convinced the Senate Republicans won't kick him out if it gets to them.  Not out of any nobility, but because he's a burden.

They won't, and here is why: https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx

Trump approval ratings among Republicans are consistently in the mid-80s to low-90s. Republicans in the legislature are scared of moving against Trump because he is popular among their base. They may know he is wrong for the country, and their party, but those running for reelection are more concerned about keeping their seat and not being primaried from the right or abandoned by their base in the general election. He is a burden to them personally, but supporting him is a boon to them politically.

[Bengalzona]

(09-26-2019, 10:20 AM)michaelsean Wrote: I mean the diehard Trump supporters.  They aren't gaining any more power.  Nobody who wasn't is going to become one.  I'm not convinced the Senate Republicans won't kick him out if it gets to them.  Not out of any nobility, but because he's a burden.

I would think Pence would be a more competitive choice for the 2020 election over Trump. Assuming that existing Trump voters would vote for Pence over any Democrat (not too much of an extreme assumption, I think), he could potentially draw additional votes where Trump has burned a lot of bridges.

I think a race between Pence and someone like Warren would be interesting. I couldn't even begin to guess who would win that one.

[Dill]

(09-26-2019, 10:36 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: They won't, and here is why: https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx

Trump approval ratings among Republicans are consistently in the mid-80s to low-90s. Republicans in the legislature are scared of moving against Trump because he is popular among their base. They may know he is wrong for the country, and their party, but those running for reelection are more concerned about keeping their seat and not being primaried from the right or abandoned by their base in the general election. He is a burden to them personally, but supporting him is a boon to them politically.

Check those ratings next week. 

The Senate may ultimately not impeach Trump, but I'm pretty sure we are going to see some Repubs break from the party line, in part for reasons of conscience and in part because Trump support will dilute in their constituency.

It's not just Trump supporters holding Republican Senators in office everywhere they hold office. 

Supporters are now being organized to fight impeachment at the local level with state anti-impeach chapters forming. That will concentrate the most strident supporters and give them more attention, but it may well negatively affect other voters around them, as the will to defend illegal action weakens outside the core.

[Dill]

(09-26-2019, 10:49 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: I would think Pence would be a more competitive choice for the 2020 election over Trump. Assuming that existing Trump voters would vote for Pence over any Democrat (not too much of an extreme assumption, I think), he could potentially draw additional votes where Trump has burned a lot of bridges.

I think a race between Pence and someone like Warren would be interesting. I couldn't even begin to guess who would win that one.

If you are a fire-in-the-belly Trump supporter who cheers when Trump calls women "pigs" and warns of ISIS fighters embedded in caravan invasions of the homeland, what about the mild-mannered Pence would attract you? I don't see him leading chants of "lock her up" or "send them back."

He would be vulnerable even to a Cruz-style primary opponent.

On the other hand, he is not crazy, and it is Trump crazy that would put voters over the top for Warren, at this point--people who grasp that real crazy and incompetence really is worse than the socialist bogeyman.

[jj22]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/video/live-news-coverage-from-cbs-news/ar-BBmYvYY?appwebview=true&ocid=ientp

Anyone listening?

[Bengalzona]

(09-26-2019, 11:42 AM)Dill Wrote: If you are a fire-in-the-belly Trump supporter who cheers when Trump calls women "pigs" and warns of ISIS fighters embedded in caravan invasions of the homeland, what about the mild-mannered Pence would attract you? I don't see him leading chants of "lock her up" or "send them back."

He would be vulnerable even to a Cruz-style primary opponent.

On the other hand, he is not crazy, and it is Trump crazy that would put voters over the top for Warren, at this point--people who grasp that real crazy and incompetence really is worse than the socialist bogeyman.

He also inspires evangelicals.

[*bfine32*]

(09-26-2019, 07:04 AM)hollodero Wrote: Oh, I guess that makes it ok then. Calm down, fellas. He didn't extort Ukraine to hurt Biden's son by smearing Biden's son, he just held back aid appropriated by Congress because he wanted vindication, so nothing to see here. Everybody abuses power like that.
If Obama had done this, held back money to protect from Russia and sent Holder and his personal attorney to talk to Ukraine officials to have Ivanka investigated over an unfounded hunch, that sure would have been ok with you as well.

Also, of course the democrats are the real culprit here. Enough is enough! Let Trump's administration break the law already. Everyone's annoyed by pointing these things out.

--- This is an amazing point of view. How does the man in the mirror not turn away in disbelief?

As I said earlier I have no problem with our Head of State asking another Head of State to work with us to find corruption in both our Governments. As i further stated it would be wrong to force the lesser country to comply.  No one can show where anyone was forced and the HoS of the lesser country said he felt absolutely no pressure.

You can consider such a point of view to be "amazing" if you wish.

[Dill]

(09-26-2019, 11:44 AM)jj22 Wrote: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/video/live-news-coverage-from-cbs-news/ar-BBmYvYY?appwebview=true&ocid=ientp

Anyone listening?

Devon Nunes opening statement is a master class on mirror-image attack, point by point flipping the charges levelled at the president back on the Dems--the ones who really colluded with Russia and Ukraine and covered it with the Russia "Witchhunt" to take down a sitting president and subvert the will of the people.  They abused public trust by deploying the intel services in a private vendetta against the people's choice.

And now they are on another witch hunt. 

Combine this with Lindsay Graham's defense yesterday, which is basically that the words "quid" and "quo" do not appear in the transcript, so how could there be a quid pro quo?

[Dill]

(09-26-2019, 12:24 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As I said earlier I have no problem with our Head of State asking another Head of State to work with us to find corruption in both our Governments. As i further stated it would be wrong to force the lesser country to comply.  No one can show where anyone was forced and the HoS of the lesser country said he felt absolutely no pressure.

You can consider such a point of view to be "amazing" if you wish.

May I also consider it "amazing"? 

Trump had an ambassador pressing anti-corruption measures in Ukraine and fired her.

Someone has already explained to you that the "corruption" was specifically to be found in Hunter Biden's business dealings and his father's push to get rid of Shokin on anti corruption grounds. "Reciprocity" for aid given by Congress to resist a US adversary, but now withheld until there is assurance Ukraine will "play ball." That is not fighting corruption--that IS corruption.

It has also been explained that there is a difference in acting to further official US policy (fighting corruption would be consistent with that) and running an unofficial side show in which private citizens help the president manipulate official policy for private ends, not to mention the Attorney General, whose job description does not include meetings with foreign leaders to insure they "understand what is expected" and are "making progress."

Instead of responding to cues from the president's defense team, you could break personal precedent and read the whistleblower's actual complaint to gain direct understanding of the policy issues, rather than continuing these rear-guard, ad hoc defenses of illegal behavior.
https://www.scribd.com/document/427562713/Declassified-Whisteblower-Complaint#from_embed

[Dill]

(09-26-2019, 10:26 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Yep, I just read the report. They basically scrambled to "lock down" all records of this call and place them somewhere that was not accessible. 

But... hey... maybe they didn't know any better?

So fascinating... it appears that one goal of the "corruption investigation" in Ukraine was to exonerate Putin of election-meddling charge. Another to get Hillary's 30,000 deleted emails, supposed squirreled away on a server in the Ukraine.

I do think Trump believes these Fox-spun conspiracies, and is bending US foreign policy to support them.

[*bfine32*]

(09-26-2019, 12:37 PM)Dill Wrote: May I also consider it "amazing"? 

Trump had an ambassador pressing anti-corruption measures in Ukraine and fired her.

Someone has already explained to you that the "corruption" was specifically to be found in Hunter Biden's business dealings and his father's push to get rid of Shokin on anti corruption grounds. "Reciprocity" for aid given by Congress to resist a US adversary, but now withheld until there is assurance Ukraine will "play ball." That is not fighting corruption--that IS corruption.

It has also been explained that there is a difference in acting to further official US policy (fighting corruption would be consistent with that) and running an unofficial side show in which private citizens help the president manipulate official policy for private ends, not to mention the Attorney General, whose job description does not include meetings with foreign leaders to insure they "understand what is expected" and are "making progress."

Instead of responding to cues from the president's defense team, you could break personal precedent and read the whistleblower's actual complaint to gain direct understanding of the policy issues, rather than continuing these rear-guard, ad hoc defenses of illegal behavior.
https://www.scribd.com/document/427562713/Declassified-Whisteblower-Complaint#from_embed

Consider it amazing as well. My position has remained unchanged. If he committed a crime he should be held accountable. It's just, unlike you and others, I'm not qualified to label his actions criminal. I've been told it comes down to one's view of the legitimacy of the Barr investigation. So I may read the report for information, not to make my decision. I'll leave it to you and others to draw conclusions. 

It does appear the Maguire interview is not going in Trump's favor. 

[*michaelsean*]

So I assume the sources the whistle blower used will have to come forward and testify? Are they allowed to do that behind closed doors if they want to remain anonymous to the general public?