Jump to content

Whistleblower Has Been Backed Up By Multiple Witnesses

Tiberius

By Tiberius
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

 Share

Recommended Posts

Capco Veteran

Capco

Posted
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Had we been having this exact conversation just a week or two ago, you could rightfully argue that it wasn't problematic with a high degree of confidence. But now that the USN admitted that there is something in our skies with advanced technology being operated by someone/something unknown, it's a harder sell. At least for me. 

 

I think this is a bit of a leap.  There are undoubtedly still unexplained natural phenomena that are terrestrial in nature.  What was seen was not definitively an advanced craft operated by someone/something unknown.  That was neither declared, nor can it be made certain from the information provided.  It could very well be something natural and terrestrial in character that we just don't know about yet.  As far as we know, we didn't get up close to it or examine it, whatever it was.  

 

There's still more questions than answers.  

Edited by Capco
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

TakeYouToTasker
TakeYouToTasker

This is getting tiring.  Democrats are essentially arguing that the President doesn’t have the Constitutional authority to conduct foreign policy, and the CIA has decided that it should be the body wh

Deranged Rhino
Deranged Rhino

Take a step back and look and what the past three years alone have exposed. Over 14 of the highest ranking members of the FBI and DOJ were fired for cause, including back-to-back directors of the FBI

leh-nerd skin-erd
leh-nerd skin-erd

I have to admit ths thread got dicey.  I went back about 10 hours and found out:   1.  Tibs was in rare form.  He posted a series of Tibseaque thoughts, but agreed with a few points raised b

Posted Images

Westside Veteran

Westside

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, John Adams said:

So many of your avid readers want more. 

 

And you're not even getting paid for it! We are SOOOOOOO lucky. 

 

Thank you for making my day with that DR. I owe you way more than one beer for today's gift. Even better than your defense of the Hyperspace Research Institute stuff. 

You come across as being very jealous of dr, you and you're many aliases on here making you look very foolish. You should stop while you're behind. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
John Adams All Pro

John Adams

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, westside2 said:

You come across as being very jealous of dr, you and you're many aliases on here making you look very foolish. You should stop while you're behind. 

 

I am jealous of the fact that his posts here get picked up far and wide. We are literally on the edge of a movement that he's creating. Right here on PPP!

 

I've been looking foolish far longer than you or he have been posting here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Westside Veteran

Westside

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, John Adams said:

 

I am jealous of the fact that his posts here get picked up far and wide. We are literally on the edge of a movement that he's creating. Right here on PPP!

 

I've been looking foolish far longer than you or he have been posting here. 

What's the point?

Agree to disagree and move on. You look very foolish and petty with your name calling and personal vendetta against DR.

It's time to grow up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John Adams All Pro

John Adams

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, westside2 said:

What's the point?

Agree to disagree and move on. You look very foolish and petty with your name calling and personal vendetta against DR.

It's time to grow up.


i don’t have a vendetta. You may  be taking things a bit too seriously here friend. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiberius Hall of Famer

Tiberius

Posted
  • Author
Posted

He is openly breaking the law right now. If they just released the whistleblower complaint it might just defuse this situation, but them hiding information about our national security when it's been officially tagged as urgent just ramps up the pressure and intrigue. What's in that complaint?? 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/22/us/politics/trump-impeachment-whistle-blower.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

Quote

“Strikingly, some traditionally cautious veteran Democrats said the party might have no choice but to move toward impeachment. They believe that Senate Republicans, who are clinging to their majority of 53 seats, would pay a political price for protecting Mr. Trump if they voted to exonerate him in the face of damning evidence of malfeasance and a House vote to impeach.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Westside Veteran

Westside

Posted
Posted
Just now, John Adams said:


i don’t have a vendetta. You may  be taking things a bit too seriously here friend. 

To be honest it certainly looks like one. Or maybe you're just stalking him. 

Either explain your reasons for not believing what he says, debate him, challenge him, show evidence that proves your beliefs are right. Then you will be taken seriously. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiberius Hall of Famer

Tiberius

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Quote

White House spokesman Hogan Gidley rejected claims that Trump was engaged in a quid pro quo. “But because the media wants this story to be true so badly, they’ll once again manufacture a frenzy and drive ignorant, fake stories to attack this president,” Gidley said.

Just release the whistleblower allegation as is required by law! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tommy Callahan All Pro

Tommy Callahan

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

He is openly breaking the law right now. If they just released the whistleblower complaint it might just defuse this situation, but them hiding information about our national security when it's been officially tagged as urgent just ramps up the pressure and intrigue. What's in that complaint?? 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/22/us/politics/trump-impeachment-whistle-blower.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

 

LOL  NYT with more "unnamed sources" rage bait.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
snafu Veteran

snafu

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

They just need to release the whistleblower allegation as the law requires. 

 

Trump is breaking the law to hide his corruption 

 

You know, the whistleblower can come out and spill his or her own beans without the official report.

I think the whistleblower should step forward since we aren’t getting any satisfaction and this is such an important event.

The whistleblower can go to the press, or even straight to Schiff for an interview.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiberius Hall of Famer

Tiberius

Posted
  • Author
Posted
9 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

You know, the whistleblower can come out and spill his or her own beans without the official report.

I think the whistleblower should step forward since we aren’t getting any satisfaction and this is such an important event.

The whistleblower can go to the press, or even straight to Schiff for an interview.

 

 

All true. Or those in charge can just follow the law. Thursday will be interesting. Will the ACTING intel guy bring the complaint to congress and if not, why not? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
3rdnlng Hall of Famer

3rdnlng

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

All true. Or those in charge can just follow the law. Thursday will be interesting. Will the ACTING intel guy bring the complaint to congress and if not, why not? 

This is more complicated than you can understand. The supposed "Whistleblower" is in reality a rumor monger. He/she did not witness anything themselves but passed on a rumor and claimed he was a whistleblower. This is a legal issue and has to be sorted out. Congress has no right to breach the confidentiality of conversations between the president and other world leaders. With your won/lost record you should have played for the Washington Generals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
3rdnlng Hall of Famer

3rdnlng

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, John Adams said:


i don’t have a vendetta. You may  be taking things a bit too seriously here friend. 

The problem is that you don't take anything seriously. We may joke around here but serious subjects are discussed and you just want to make fun of everything. The last time I remember you being "for" anything was your same sex marriage crusade. Since then all you've done is be a contrarian and a clown. Here's a new avatar for you. It combines both of your professions.

 

See the source image

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiberius Hall of Famer

Tiberius

Posted
  • Author
Posted
7 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

This is more complicated than you can understand. The supposed "Whistleblower" is in reality a rumor monger. He/she did not witness anything themselves but passed on a rumor and claimed he was a whistleblower. This is a legal issue and has to be sorted out. Congress has no right to breach the confidentiality of conversations between the president and other world leaders. With your won/lost record you should have played for the Washington Generals.

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Albwan Veteran

Albwan

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, John Adams said:

 

I am jealous of the fact that his posts here get picked up far and wide. We are literally on the edge of a movement that he's creating. Right here on PPP!

 

I've been looking foolish far longer than you or he have been posting here. 

And yet, you're here reading it, getting triggered about it, and whining about it. 

tee hee

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
B-Man Hall of Famer

B-Man

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Albwan said:

And yet, you're here reading it, getting triggered about it, and whining about it. 

tee hee

 

Now, now Albwan.  John A. is not "triggered", he is just one of those, all too common posters. 

 

The "I'm above it all" who visits once in a while to point out the many mistakes of all those posters below him.....................We are indeed fortunate that he dropped by.

 

And even though most of his conclusions are wrong that shouldn't lessen our gratitude.

 

 

 

 

 

 

AND NOW.......................

 

Back to the actual Whistleblower thread,

 

Edited by B-Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Koko78 All Pro

Koko78

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

The inspector general agreed it was a serious and urgent matter. Trump appointed that IG, btw 

 

Well, that's nice.

 

Still doesn't mean the rumor-monger meets the legal definition of a "whistleblower".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiberius Hall of Famer

Tiberius

Posted
  • Author
Posted
10 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

Well, that's nice.

 

Still doesn't mean the rumor-monger meets the legal definition of a "whistleblower".

Then Trump should stop violating the law and simply release the allegation. Either its a really bad accusation with proof, which explains why they are covering this up, or its nothing and Trump and crew are complete idiots for allowing this violation of the law to make them look really bad. 

 

If the truth will get out anyway, why cover this up? Makes no sense. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiberius Hall of Famer

Tiberius

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, B-Man said:

All the people who’ve been wrong about everything for the last three years are telling you Trump is in trouble with the Ukraine thing.

 

Please excuse me if I’m a little skeptical.

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
.

 

 

What happened to Hillary in all these scandals? Come on man, if you are going to spread fake news at least have Hillary in there sucking blood or killing innocents somehow. Gosh 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John Adams All Pro

John Adams

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

Now, now Albwan.  John A. is not "triggered", he is just one of those, all too common posters. 

 

The "I'm above it all" who visits once in a while to point out the many mistakes of all those posters below him.....................We are indeed fortunate that he dropped by.

.

 

You may someday be worthy of mockery, but to get there, you'd have to first stop being 26CopyPaste's little brother and speak for yourself. 

3 hours ago, Albwan said:

And yet, you're here reading it, getting triggered about it, and whining about it. 

tee hee

 

I have no idea who you are but welcome to PPP. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Capco Veteran

Capco

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/3033

 

(5)
(A)
An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employee assigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employee of a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General.
(B)
Not later than the end of the 14-calendar-day period beginning on the date of receipt from an employee of a complaint or information under subparagraph (A), the Inspector General shall determine whether the complaint or information appears credible. Upon making such a determination, the Inspector General shall transmit to the Director a notice of that determination, together with the complaint or information.
(C)
Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B), the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate.
(D)
(i)
If the Inspector General does not find credible under subparagraph (B) a complaint or information submitted under subparagraph (A), or does not transmit the complaint or information to the Director in accurate form under subparagraph (B), the employee (subject to clause (ii)) may submit the complaint or information to Congress by contacting either or both of the congressional intelligence committees directly.
(ii)An employee may contact the congressional intelligence committees directly as described in clause (i) only if the employee—
(I)
before making such a contact, furnishes to the Director, through the Inspector General, a statement of the employee’s complaint or information and notice of the employee’s intent to contact the congressional intelligence committees directly; and
(II)
obtains and follows from the Director, through the Inspector General, direction on how to contact the congressional intelligence committees in accordance with appropriate security practices.
(iii)
A member or employee of one of the congressional intelligence committees who receives a complaint or information under this subparagraph does so in that member or employee’s official capacity as a member or employee of such committee.
(E)
The Inspector General shall notify an employee who reports a complaint or information to the Inspector General under this paragraph of each action taken under this paragraph with respect to the complaint or information. Such notice shall be provided not later than 3 days after any such action is taken.
(F)
An action taken by the Director or the Inspector General under this paragraph shall not be subject to judicial review.
(G)In this paragraph, the term “urgent concern” means any of the following:
(i)
A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters.
(ii)
A false statement to Congress, or a willful withholding from Congress, on an issue of material fact relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity.
(iii)
An action, including a personnel action described in section 2302(a)(2)(A) of title 5, constituting reprisal or threat of reprisal prohibited under subsection (g)(3)(B) of this section in response to an employee’s reporting an urgent concern in accordance with this paragraph.
(H)
Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the protections afforded to an employee under section 3517(d) of this title or section 8H of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.).
(I)
An individual who has submitted a complaint or information to the Inspector General under this section may notify any member of either of the congressional intelligence committees, or a staff member of either of such committees, of the fact that such individual has made a submission to the Inspector General, and of the date on which such submission was made.
(6)
In accordance with section 535 of title 28, the Inspector General shall expeditiously report to the Attorney General any information, allegation, or complaint received by the Inspector General relating to violations of Federal criminal law that involves [1] a program or operation of an element of the intelligence community, or in the relationships between the elements of the intelligence community, consistent with such guidelines as may be issued by the Attorney General pursuant to subsection (b)(2) of such section. A copy of each such report shall be furnished to the Director.
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SoCal Deek Hall of Famer

SoCal Deek

Posted
Posted

Let me get this straight. It’s illegal for the President of the United States to inquire with a foreign leader about whether the next president (Biden) may be guilty of a crime, prior to him getting elected?  Isn’t that exactly what Obama was doing with Trump prior to his election? Doesn’t anyone see the irony in any of this? Sheeeesh!

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

KRC

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Let me get this straight. It’s illegal for the President of the United States to inquire with a foreign leader about whether the next president (Biden) may be guilty of a crime, prior to him getting elected?  Isn’t that exactly what Obama was doing with Trump prior to his election? Doesn’t anyone see the irony in any of this? Sheeeesh!

 

It's OK when they do it.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiberius Hall of Famer

Tiberius

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, KRC said:

 

True. They are not investigating Biden and his corruption. We finally agree on something.

You are always being cheated. Media is unfair. Government is unfair. Hollywood, unfair. Deep state is unfairLife unfair, 

 

Everything is unfair to Conservatives 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KRC Veteran

KRC

Posted
Posted
Just now, Tiberius said:

You are always being cheated. Media is unfair. Government is unfair. Hollywood, unfair. Deep state is unfairLife unfair, 

 

Everything is unfair to Conservatives 

 

So, we shouldn't investigate corruption, or only investigate corruption if it involves Republicans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiberius Hall of Famer

Tiberius

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, KRC said:

 

So, we shouldn't investigate corruption, or only investigate corruption if it involves Republicans?

This is stupid. Your guy has been caught red handed, that doesn't mean you get off by simply raising a false claim. 

 

So you lose. Maybe you should try going on a hunger strike. I'll support you 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...