+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums)
+--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0)
+---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive)
+---- Thread: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump (/Thread-Whistle-Blower%E2%80%99s-Complaint-Is-Said-to-Involve-Multiple-Acts-by-Trump)
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - michaelsean - 09-27-2019
Even if people didn't agree with him, it seemed most people respected Rudy. He seems to have gone off the deep end.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - Dill - 09-27-2019
(09-27-2019, 07:54 AM)Stonyhands Wrote: I watched Fox tonight and the most recent few nights. You glossed over a whole bunch of information that explains why everything you listed above that they said is more likely true than this BS “whistleblower” complaint.
Like the fact that they rushed to an impeachment inquiry decision before they had the transcript and before they supposedly had the whistleblower report. A report by the way that has been analyzed over and over and is said not to have been written by any CIA analyst but from an attorney’s standpoint as a a legal brief type of document. One that several dems have had in there possession long before the transcript was released and the whistleblower complaint was formally released.
The transcript does not fit the whistleblower complaint narrative and the fake news msm is busy spinning this non stop. Because the alleged report didn’t have any firsthand knowledge of the actual calls only what they heard some people talk about. Which by the way you must have heard Nunes say that he deals with Whistleblowers all the time and the fact that this person DID NOT hear anything first hand and that they had a ClEAR BIAS it’s two big red flags. Forget the fact that the organizations that are behind all of this are funded by none other than George Soros and the whistleblower is going through the same attorneys that worked for Clinton and Schumer.
I‘m watching Fox News and thinking to myself how anybody could possibly seriously believe the dem’s narrative with all the evidence that is out there saying otherwise. Literally the entire impeachment case is based off of what one person heard other people talking about. Why didn’t the actual people involved file a whistleblower complaint?
Ukraine is where the entire BS Russian collusion started. If any of the stuff Levin, Ingram, Tucker, Solomon, Nunes, is saying is true doesn’t that bother any of you.
Doesn’t Hunter Biden’s role on a Board that he has zero experience or business being a part of on a Ukrainian company known to be under investigation and his dad’s known involvement in the firing of a prosecutor who’s sworn on a legal affidavit that he was in fact investigating that company before being fired raise any red flags.
My take is that some Dems caught wind that Trump was developing a tight relationship with the new Ukrainian leadership and that there’s some talks going around behind the scenes from the whitehouse and the DOJ as to the origination of the Dossier 1.0/Crowdstrike/Russian collusion hoax. The dems were probably most likely to rig the primaries so that Biden was the candidate despite several polls showing he’s not the front runner. Now lots of information is coming out of Ukraine regarding the false Russia collusion allegations which will very likely point to some Dems in DC. Additionally all of the details of the Biden corruption in Ukraine regarding his role in protecting his son are emerging as well. Just wait until they start investigating what happened in China.
Yow Stony, you are corroborating my Fox Report.
Have you read Trump's transcript and the Whistleblower's report? They fit hand in glove. And the Whistleblower report alleges more, like classifying the transcript to hide it. But your post does not go by your own reading, but Sean and Mark's prompts for you.
Who has analyzed the report FOR YOU "over and over"? Sean and Mark Levin.
You are saying "what if what ingraham, solomon, tucker etc are saying is true." Sure. What if they actually brought forward evidence for their wild conspiracy claims instead of just claiming it exists. Their goal is just to get some counter-narrative circulating among the fox faithful in hopes people will doubt the evidence-based "fake news" narrative.
If you could pull yourself away from Fox for an hour or two in favor of the "fake news" you would find that Biden's "involvement" in the firing of a corrupt prosecutor amounts to no more than executing policy initiated not by him but by the US, the IMF and the EU. Biden was only one of many messengers. The corrupt prosecutor has "sworn an affidavit" which harms the people who fired him, claims he was doing exactly what every international investigative body says he wasn't doing--pursuing corruption. Jeezus.
My take is the Dems caught Trump violating his oath of office and bending official US policy in the service of a Russian-inspired conspiracy theory, not to mention using government resources and the power of his office to leverage a foreign government into providing dirt on a political opponent.
The "entire impeachment" is not based on "what one person heard." It is based on the phone transcript, which fits exactly what "one person heard" from many others. Not to mention the further corroboration coming from the DNI and Inspector General. Those "other people" will be providing their testimony soon.
Finally, have you not yet recognized that Fox always has a cloud of "emerging details" about Democrats that don't pan out?
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - GMDino - 09-27-2019
(09-27-2019, 09:10 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Even if people didn't agree with him, it seemed most people respected Rudy. He seems to have gone off the deep end.
No offense but he's been of the deep end for quite awhile now.
Not sure if it's just a age thing or what but he's gone.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - Dill - 09-27-2019
(09-27-2019, 08:13 AM)Stonyhands Wrote: Which by the way, if you read the transcript of the call in it’s entirety does not corroborate the whistleblower report...it in fact contradicts it. Which is easily explained....the whistleblower had NO FIRSTHAND KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT WAS SAID.
Here is your chance, Stony. Identify those portions of the transcript which do not corroborate the whistelblower report. Quote them. Especially the parts which you say contradict it.
(09-27-2019, 08:13 AM)Stonyhands Wrote: Or that there was zero quid pro quo in the entire unredacted transcripts. Trump released funds to Ukraine only after withholding a very short period only to try and pressure other countries into releasing funds they had promised Ukraine.
Whaaa??? "Better release your funds or we won't release ours!" That's some pressure. LOL
You give Dino $5 right now or I will not give him $10!!
Meantime, Trump speaks of Ukraine's failing "reciprocity" and he's sending Rudy to help square that.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - bfine32 - 09-27-2019
(09-27-2019, 01:08 AM)Dill Wrote: Sure. But now it's corroborated hearsay. No longer "hearsay" as legally defined and excluded from trial proceedings. The IG didn't just skim the report and say "sounds good."Glad we agree that the report was hearsay. I think I was the first in this thread to suggest it as such and a bunch of smart guys told me I had no idea. The next thing I'm curious to see is the relationship the sources had with the whistleblower. Hopefully he was in their chain of command. If so, then no one should be able to refute the information provided.
Doesn't matter now if the whistleblower claims an angel came to him in a wet dream and told him about the Trump phone call.
No wait, it does matter because now there is a series of "first-hand" observers whose testimony looks to further secure the "hearsay" report.
The lawyers and others who helped hide the transcript are now subject to prosecution for knowingly covering up a crime. Some of these will crack and likely provide more info about other secreted transcripts. Trump stains those around him. Barr's legacy shattered now.
Surrounded by bad people in a dysfunctional staff, expect more missteps (lol WH talking points sent to Dems) as the pressure increases. Public support for impeachment reached 49% tonight, says Rachel Maddow.
As to the allegations of Political Bias. It means nothing to me.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - Goalpost - 09-27-2019
So Nunez mentioned the letter that Dems sent to Ukraine during the Mueller investigation. Not sure if it has been posted on here, but here it is.
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/5-4-18%20Menendez%20joint%20letter%20to%20General%20Prosecutor%20of%20Ukraine%20on%20Mueller%20investigation.pdf
I guess my question is....these are senior Senators whom Trump is obviously their political foe. They re NOT part of Mueller' team. They hold influence in appropriating money to Ukraine. Is this proper and aren't they implying how to investigate with a quid pro quo.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - GMDino - 09-27-2019
(09-27-2019, 09:23 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Glad we agree that the report was hearsay. I think I was the first in this thread to suggest it as such and a bunch of smart guys told me I had no idea. The next thing I'm curious to see is the relationship the sources had with the whistleblower. Hopefully he was in their chain of command. If so, then no one should be able to refute the information provided.
As to the allegations of Political Bias. It means nothing to me.
Speaking of chain of command:
The whistleblower complaint was found to be "urgent and credible" after being looked into. So "hearsay" or not it was handled correctly and the WH chose to cover it up for awhile until it broke publicly.
We still don't have a good answer why it was taken to the people being complained about (the WH, Trump, Barr) other than the admission yesterday by Maguire that he wasn't the best qualified for the job but took it because the President wanted him.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - BmorePat87 - 09-27-2019
lol
![[Image: as9b3h6cbaxb1uv7px2u.jpg]](https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--bl4O8YUN--/c_scale,f_auto,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/as9b3h6cbaxb1uv7px2u.jpg)
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - GMDino - 09-27-2019
(09-27-2019, 09:50 AM)Goalpost Wrote: So Nunez mentioned the letter that Dems sent to Ukraine during the Mueller investigation. Not sure if it has been posted on here, but here it is.
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/5-4-18%20Menendez%20joint%20letter%20to%20General%20Prosecutor%20of%20Ukraine%20on%20Mueller%20investigation.pdf
I guess my question is....these are senior Senators whom Trump is obviously their political foe. They re NOT part of Mueller' team. They hold influence in appropriating money to Ukraine. Is this proper and aren't they implying how to investigate with a quid pro quo.
My understanding after reading about this is the letter was about protecting an investigation not a specific request to investigate a specific political opponent.
Being on opposite sides of the aisle is not the same as going for the same job.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - Dill - 09-27-2019
(09-27-2019, 09:50 AM)Goalpost Wrote: So Nunez mentioned the letter that Dems sent to Ukraine during the Mueller investigation. Not sure if it has been posted on here, but here it is.
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/5-4-18%20Menendez%20joint%20letter%20to%20General%20Prosecutor%20of%20Ukraine%20on%20Mueller%20investigation.pdf
I guess my question is....these are senior Senators whom Trump is obviously their political foe. They re NOT part of Mueller' team. They hold influence in appropriating money to Ukraine. Is this proper and aren't they implying how to investigate with a quid pro quo.
It seems "proper"; but I have some questions. Check out article 1 of this treaty we signed with the Ukraine in 1998. https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/12978-Ukraine-Law-Enforcement-MLAT-7.22.1998.pdf. Ukraine is expected to cooperate with US investigations. A possible problem here is that according to the Treaty such inquiries are expected to be initiated by a "central authority," in this case the AG's office, the AG of the guy under investigation. The current president, however, complicates the matter, as privately "cooperating" with him to hinder the Mueller investigation would be a breach of the treaty.
These Senators are--officially and publicly--exploring the possibility that Trump was using his office to block Ukrainian cooperation into the Mueller probe. Doesn't matter if they are "political foes" of Trump and are not on Mueller's team. What matters is whether the Mueller investigation is being impeded, either at direct request from Trump or by Ukrainians currying favor on their own initiative.The senators could argue they are exercising official oversight, which they do have. The exec might counter they are usurping exec foreign policy powers.
Also, OFFICIAL quid pro quo is common in diplomacy and all manner of trade cooperation. Sanctions are a kind of "quid pro quo--or else." If "implying how to investigate" means do your job, as your own law and our mutual treaty requires, then that request certainly is proper.
The problem with the Trump quid pro quo is not that it was a quid pro quo, but that it was an unofficial and private use of official aid to get dirt on an opponent--in short, an abuse of the power of office. Corruption.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - Bengalzona - 09-27-2019
I wonder what will happen in the summer next year when Biden, leading in the polls, publicly asks the Saudis to investigate Trump's boys with the hint of withholding weapons sales to them after he is elected if they do not?
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - GMDino - 09-27-2019
Less than an hour ago.
“IT WAS A PERFECT CONVERSATION WITH UKRAINE PRESIDENT!”
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 27, 2019
Clearly the posting of sane, innocent man.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - fredtoast - 09-27-2019
(09-27-2019, 09:23 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Glad we agree that the report was hearsay.
You do realize that based on your definition of "hearsay" every single police report is hearsay except in the rare cases where a criminal commits a crime in front of a police officer.
The term means nothing in this context. It is just a speaking point the echo chamber has planted in the brains of rubes to make them think they have a valid point regarding the legitimacy of the report.
The underlying basis for the report is first hand eyewitness testimony, not hearsay. And it was based on MULTIPLE first hand eyewitness reports. That is the same for almost all police reports and warrants. Funny how FoxNews doesn't obsess over the fact that every police report and warrant is "hearsay".
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - fredtoast - 09-27-2019
(09-27-2019, 09:50 AM)Goalpost Wrote: So Nunez mentioned the letter that Dems sent to Ukraine during the Mueller investigation. Not sure if it has been posted on here, but here it is.
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/5-4-18%20Menendez%20joint%20letter%20to%20General%20Prosecutor%20of%20Ukraine%20on%20Mueller%20investigation.pdf
I guess my question is....these are senior Senators whom Trump is obviously their political foe. They re NOT part of Mueller' team. They hold influence in appropriating money to Ukraine. Is this proper and aren't they implying how to investigate with a quid pro quo.
There is a huge difference between a legitimate on-going authorized investigation into a sitting President and a secret investigation into a private citizen who is the political foe of the President.
Congressional oversight over the office of the President is one of the checks and balances built into the Constitution. This letter was just them doing their job. That has nothing to do with a President using the power of his official position to investigate private citizens who is his political opponenet.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - GMDino - 09-27-2019
All within the last hour.
He should be working. Isn't it infrastructure week?
![[Image: DJT092719.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/Zn4rFts2/DJT092719.jpg)
Trump has made a career out of being able to control the narrative. To always be the victim and have an "out".
He's cracking.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - bfine32 - 09-27-2019
(09-27-2019, 11:09 AM)fredtoast Wrote: You do realize that based on your definition of "hearsay" every single police report is hearsay except in the rare cases where a criminal commits a crime in front of a police officer.What is funny is how folks take issue with the proper term. The whistleblower doesn't not appear to have first hand knowledge of the incidents and has stated as much. Does that mean the information provided by him/her cannot be proven true and correct? No. Does it make the whistleblower a firsthand witness of the incidents? No.
The term means nothing in this context. It is just a speaking point the echo chamber has planted in the brains of rubes to make them think they have a valid point regarding the legitimacy of the report.
The underlying basis for the report is first hand eyewitness testimony, not hearsay. And it was based on MULTIPLE first hand eyewitness reports. That is the same for almost all police reports and warrants. Funny how FoxNews doesn't obsess over the fact that every police report and warrant is "hearsay".
I truly don't know what/why you are arguing.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - fredtoast - 09-27-2019
(09-27-2019, 07:54 AM)Stonyhands Wrote: Like the fact that they rushed to an impeachment inquiry decision before they had the transcript and before they supposedly had the whistleblower report.
One that several dems have had in there possession long before the transcript was released and the whistleblower complaint was formally released.
The started the impeachment inquiry before they had the report because the WH was refusing to release the report.
What report did Dems have before the complaint was released.
(09-27-2019, 07:54 AM)Stonyhands Wrote: Which by the way you must have heard Nunes say that he deals with Whistleblowers all the time and the fact that this person DID NOT hear anything first hand and that they had a ClEAR BIAS it’s two big red flags.
What is the evidence of "clear bias"?
(09-27-2019, 07:54 AM)Stonyhands Wrote: The transcript does not fit the whistleblower complaint narrative and the fake news msm is busy spinning this non stop.
Yes it does.
(09-27-2019, 07:54 AM)Stonyhands Wrote: Why didn’t the actual people involved file a whistleblower complaint?
For the same reason that when a person witnesses a crime he does not try to convene a grand jury himself. Instead he reports it to authorities.
(09-27-2019, 07:54 AM)Stonyhands Wrote: Ukraine is where the entire BS Russian collusion started. If any of the stuff Levin, Ingram, Tucker, Solomon, Nunes, is saying is true doesn’t that bother any of you.
None of what they are saying is true. Their claims are based on wild allegations by an ousted Ukranian AG. There is not evidence to support any of his conspiracy theories.
(09-27-2019, 07:54 AM)Stonyhands Wrote: Doesn’t Hunter Biden’s role on a Board that he has zero experience or business being a part of on a Ukrainian company known to be under investigation and his dad’s known involvement in the firing of a prosecutor who’s sworn on a legal affidavit that he was in fact investigating that company before being fired raise any red flags.
First of all Hunter Biden had extensive experience in international business and lobbying before being appointed. Republican President George W Bush had appointed him to the Board of Directors for Amtrak.
And the fact Biden joined many other world leaders in pushing for the removal of a corrupt AG would actually be a sign that Hunters company would be investigated MORE aggressively. So that argument defies logic. Joe was trying to get MORE corruption investigated in Ukraine. If his son was corrupt then he would have been better off under the AG his dad was trying to remove.
(09-27-2019, 07:54 AM)Stonyhands Wrote: Forget the fact that the organizations that are behind all of this are funded by none other than George Soros and the whistleblower is going through the same attorneys that worked for Clinton and Schumer.
What do you mean by "all of this".
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - GMDino - 09-27-2019
(09-27-2019, 11:26 AM)bfine32 Wrote: What is funny is how folks take issue with the proper term. The whistleblower doesn't not appear to have first hand knowledge of the incidents and has stated as much. Does that mean the information provided by him/her cannot be proven true and correct? No. Does it make the whistleblower a firsthand witness of the incidents? No.
I truly don't know what/why you are arguing.
Because the bold is implied when the only thing posted is that the whistleblower is "only" hearsay...and that is a weak defense when the complaint was looked into and determined to be urgent AND credible.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - fredtoast - 09-27-2019
(09-27-2019, 11:26 AM)bfine32 Wrote: What is funny is how folks take issue with the proper term. The whistleblower doesn't not appear to have first hand knowledge of the incidents and has stated as much. Does that mean the information provided by him/her cannot be proven true and correct? No. Does it make the whistleblower a firsthand witness of the incidents? No.
I truly don't know what/why you are arguing.
I am not arguing about anything. I just think it is funny that some people like you are obsessing over the term "hearsay" when every police report is also "hearsay".
Why keep obsessing over a term like that when it means zero in context of the investigation. The complaint is based on first hand eyewitness reports. When you report that you have been mugged that is "hearsay" in the officers report an warrant, but it is based on first hand eyewitness testimony.
Any defense attorney obsessing over how that warrant and report were "hearsay" would be laughed out of court, but the echo chamber has convinced all the Trump supporters that this is a crucial point to make.
RE: Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump - GMDino - 09-27-2019
The Gang that couldn't lie straight keeps saying the whistleblower may not have had good information (hearsay)...and then turn around and confirm exactly what was in the complaint.
WH acknowledges for first time that the Ukraine transcript was filed in a separate classified system. WH official tells @PamelaBrownCNN it was done under the direction of NSC attorneys. Source said: "NSC lawyers directed that the classified document be handled appropriately.”
— Marshall Cohen (@MarshallCohen) September 27, 2019