Jump to content

Whistleblower Has Been Backed Up By Multiple Witnesses


Tiberius

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

I've been quietly following, but I just want you all to know that I'm an engineer in DC and I don't teach any classes on the side or anything. I do enjoy a nice glass of bourbon, though. 

 

In DC?...... So you're the whistleblower? I knew it all along. 

  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Crayola64 said:

 

Only brought up my job because DR brought up his.  And you all ran with it.  Oh well

 

I get it now. You're allergic to being honest. Because you're an asshat. Glad that's settled.  

 

The truth is, I only mentioned I was a professional writer after you tried (poorly) to say I am a poor writer. My retort was not a brag, not talking about what I write or do, it was a direct insult to your position. You got offended -- so you then escalated it into how you "drive a fancy car and make more money". Because your ego is out of control and you (again) failed to understand the point being made. 

 

Now, two days later, you're a (proven) liar who thinks it's sad to care about your country and "conspiratorial" to read information first hand. 

 

(In other words, you're a joke. And you keep underlining the punchline) :lol: 

Edited by Deranged Rhino
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Crayola64 said:

 

Only brought up my job because DR brought up his.  And you all ran with it.  Oh well

DR has never tried to use his job to impress anyone here. If he did he would have received the same treatment as you and Scooby. The essence of his job only came about to give an insight as to his actual investigations into the Deep State. You're a Johnny Come Lately who should have scouted out the territory down here before shooting off your mouth. I guess in your mind "scouting" would take on the same importance as research or reading. We may have many deplorables down here but we stand heads and shoulders above some middle aged 3rd chair braggart.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

WASHINGTON — The whistle-blower who revealed that President Trump sought foreign help for his re-election and that the White House sought to cover it up is a C.I.A. officer who was detailed to work at the White House at one point, according to three people familiar with his identity.

 

The man has since returned to the C.I.A., the people said. Little else is known about him. His complaint made public Thursday suggested he was an analyst by training and made clear he was steeped in details of American foreign policy toward Europe, demonstrating a sophisticated understanding of Ukrainian politics and at least some knowledge of the law.

 

The whistle-blower’s expertise will likely add to lawmakers’ confidence about the merits of his complaint, and tamp down allegations that he might have misunderstood what he learned about Mr. Trump. He did not listen directly to a July call between Mr. Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine that is at the center of the political firestorm over the president’s mixing of diplomacy with personal political gain. Sign Up for On Politics With Lisa Lerer

 

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...

 

 

 


.

That's interesting 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I get it now. You're allergic to being honest. Because you're an asshat. Glad that's settled.  

 

The truth is, I only mentioned I was a professional writer after you tried (poorly) to say I am a poor writer. My retort was not a brag, not talking about what I write or do, it was a direct insult to your position. You got offended -- so you then escalated it into how you "drive a fancy car and make more money". Because you're ego is out of control and you (again) failed to understand the point being made. 

 

Now, two days later, you're a (proven) liar who thinks it's sad to care about your country and "conspiratorial" to read information first hand. 

 

(In other words, you're a joke. And you keep underlining the punchline) :lol: 

 

Dude, your writing is terrible.  You are the only one here that can ramble for 10 paragraphs without saying anything.  And you and drought are the only one she keep posting objectively false stuff

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

DR has never tried to use his job to impress anyone here. If he did he would have received the same treatment as you and Scooby. The essence of his job only came about to give an insight as to his actual investigations into the Deep State. You're a Johnny Come Lately who should have scouted out the territory down here before shooting off your mouth. I guess in your mind "scouting" would take on the same importance as research or reading. We may have many deplorables down here but we stand heads and shoulders above some middle aged 3rd chair braggart.

 

I am happy you are back to riding DR!  Your original stuff was yikes lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Crayola64 said:

 

Dude, your writing is terrible.  You are the only one here that can ramble for 10 paragraphs without saying anything.  And you and drought are the only one she keep posting objectively false stuff

 

To be fair, what else can he say at this point. The ship be sinking. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FTA:

 

The much-sought whistle-blower complaint against President Trump has been released.

 

This followed a feverous pursuit of impeachment based on a phone call with the Ukrainian president in which no illicitness is even shown. Sure, you have people straining to proclaim what President Zelensky might have interpreted, but the facts are that there was no quid pro quo and that Trump was not even the one to bring up Giuliani.

 

That left us with the whistle-blower complaint, with the supposition that it would contain the real bad stuff. So did it?

 

No, not really. As Joe writes, it lays out a pathway for impeachment, but anyone can make claims based on second and third-hand information. It was clearly drafted by lawyers, probably with the help of House Democrats, with its entire intent being to drive the media narrative.

 

Why do I say that? Because even its most serious charge isn’t illegal and has a perfectly reasonable explanation.

 

What we are seeing is an allegation of a cover-up of a call that Trump released with a smile the moment it was requested. He either sucks at cover-ups or the more likely reason these calls went to another server is to stop the leak-fest that was happening throughout 2017 and early 2018. Given we saw far less leaks of Trump’s private calls after that move, it seems to confirm that it was the intel community doing the leaking.

 

 

But perhaps Trump moved the calls to an improper place, i.e. the Hillary Clinton mail server fiasco? Nope. They went to a top secret, codeword server that is run and sanctioned by the federal government. In other words, there was nothing illegal or even necessarily improper about it. In fact, if you dig down, the whistle-blower’s accusation seems to boil down to the idea that the calls were classified improperly. But that also makes no sense. A call between the President and a foreign leader would always end up classified.

 

Further, it’s fairly clear that this whistle-blower isn’t actually a whistle-blower and that the IC has no jurisdiction over this matter.

 

 

More at the link: https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2019/09/26/heres-problem-now-released-whistle-blower-complaint/

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today began with a violent thunderstorm. The stairways were wet, the elevator out of order. Our tour guide was across the street from where we will told to meet her. It was a bit of an early morning cluster *****. 

 

Once we finally connected with our tour guide and driver, it was a day filled with wine, food, and good company.

And then, I got back to the airbnb, got on my computer and I opened this thread. At that point, I started to read some of the brain-dead TDSers. :death:

Forgive me if I don't go through this thread again to give likes to those with coherent thoughts and great information; I'm not certain I can stand a second reading. :cry:
 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kemp said:

 

To be fair, what else can he say at this point. The ship be sinking. 

 

Oh, look, another guy who refused to read material when presented to him and instead tried (and failed) to doxx me because his cognitive dissonance got him so rattled. 

 

My ship is the country we both share. So if it's sinking, you're on it too ;) 

(but details)

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

And you're a proven liar. 

 

I win. You lose. 

 

Again. 

 

Bye! :beer: 

 

You cant quote one false thing from me.  But I can of you :)

 

 

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Oh, look, another guy who refused to read material when presented to him and instead tried (and failed) to doxx me because his cognitive dissonance got him so rattled. 

 

My ship is the country we both share. So if it's sinking, you're on it too ;) 

(but details)

 

You fail to understand.  People don’t want to engage with your substance because it is childish and patently nutty.  Don’t confuse that with people not being able to handle or because they are sheeple.

 

its literally because you are a weird internet oddity.  I know that won’t sink in, but’s it true

Edited by Crayola64
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Crayola64 said:

 

Dude, your writing is terrible.  You are the only one here that can ramble for 10 paragraphs without saying anything.  And you and drought are the only one she keep posting objectively false stuff

 

I am happy you are back to riding DR!  Your original stuff was yikes lol

So, this what you've claimed so far:

 

You've never really tried a case in court but did sit in a 3rd chair once.

 

You're a big time lawyer.

 

You're a litigator.

 

So, what is it?

 

 

  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

So, this what you've claimed so far:

 

You've never really tried a case in court but did sit in a 3rd chair once.

 

You're a big time lawyer.

 

You're a litigator.

 

So, what is it?

 

 

Phishing? 

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

and? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RoyBatty is alive said:

Peter Schiff has had the whistleblower report since August

 

Correct. 16 days before he tweeted about it being URGENT. 

 

It's literally the SAME playbook they tried to run with Russia collusion: fabricate an IC "leaker" to the media who hypes a "crime" as being a threat to our republic, the media inflates those baseless, anonymous claims setting up Schiff and others to do soundbytes --

 

--- Then when it's all revealed, the public sees there wasn't smoke. There wasn't fire. There was partisan/IC *****ery trying to unseat a legally elected POTUS simply because they disagreed with the people's choice. 

 

And rather than be outraged that this gambit was tried twice (and failed, twice), there are a handful of suckers thinking "THE SHIP IS SINKING!" :lol: 

 

They'll never learn -- because they refuse to think for themselves. That's how TDS becomes terminal. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

5 minutes ago, Crayola64 said:

 

You cant quote one false thing from me.  But I can of you :)

 

 

 

You fail to understand.  People don’t want to engage with your substance because it is childish and patently nutty.  Don’t confuse that with people not being able to handle or because they are sheeple.

 

its literally because you are a weird internet oddity.  I know that won’t sink in, but’s it true

 

You've spent a hell of a lot of time engaging someone you're too good to engage... 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Haha (+1) 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...