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

[6andcounting]

(11-15-2019, 11:31 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The complaint was investigated by the IG and found credible and urgent. The IG is required by law to report credible complaints to Congress. The IG’s report to Congress was blocked. Right now the House is investigating multiple witnesses to determine if there is enough evidence to vote for impeachment. Thus Trump hasn’t been impeached based upon hearsay of one whistleblower. Hearsay, which I might add, is from officials within the White House who have security clearances to handle this type of information. The whole “hearsay” label is just an attempt by the White House to equate the whistleblower’s information to nothing more than water cooler gossip. The IG already determined it’s not gossip, but rather credible and urgent.

I think the investigation can and should move forward based on evidence that came forth after the whistleblower released his report. The claims others made that were put in the report can be followed-up on.

(11-15-2019, 11:31 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: This is an investigation. Not a trial. If the House votes for impeachment based upon their investigation then the Senate will conduct the trial where he can be cross examined.

Cross-examining witnesses is specifically written-out as something Trump is allowed to do in the impeachment resolution guidelines.....

(11-15-2019, 11:31 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: It is not a transcript. It’s a summary which deliberately excludes parts of the conversation.

It's not a summary. There could be inaccuracies as it's not a "verbatim transcript" because it's typed in real-time, but that doesn't make it a summary.

(11-15-2019, 11:31 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: See Pat’s summary. In addition there is a lawsuit asking a judge to decide if witnesses have to comply with Congressional subpoenas or with Trump’s directive not to cooperate. Mulvaney tried to join the lawsuit then changed his mind. Can you imagine that?  Mulvaney needs clarification if he should cooperate with a Congressional investigation into wrongdoing or listen to his boss who is attempting to stonewall the Congressional investigation into wrongdoing because Mulvaney doesn’t want to get in trouble with the law. Dawg, you’ve made your bed, time to lie in it.

(11-15-2019, 11:31 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Taylor testified Ukrainian officials were aware the aid was withheld and directly tied to the quid pro qua the White House has admitted was, in fact, a quid pro quo.

Taylor just said yesterday the Ukrainians had no idea aid was withheld until Aug 29. The whistleblower report was filed on Aug 12.