Modded Mustang Forums banner

21 - 40 of 82 Posts

·
US Air Force (retired)
Joined
·
13,527 Posts
Gonzo, that appears to be a section of the complaint. It is hearsay evidence from an anonymous person.

Schiff's entire premise is that since foreign aid was mentioned before he mentioned looking into Hunter Biden's criminal investigation that this was an inferred strong arm tactic. There is one problem if this last report is true. The newly elected Ukrainian President didn't know military aid had been temporarily held back. He hadn't been told at the time of the phone call.

I find it unbelievable that Democrats are willing to excuse Joe Biden's very open threat to get the prosecutor fired and Hillary Clinton's inappropriate handling of classified information which are both proved beyond a reasonable doubt but they are condemning Trump for an imagined threat and for properly handling classified information.
 

·
PSN alphadong11
Joined
·
28,935 Posts
But it's pretty damn accurate hearsay.

---------- Post added at 07:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:38 AM ----------

Why didn't they use the word hearsay?



---------- Post added at 08:00 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:53 AM ----------

 

·
US Air Force (retired)
Joined
·
13,527 Posts
It implicates the Department of State? You are aware the the Department of States' job is to talk to representatives of foreign governments?

This is a circus. Trump will never be convicted in the Senate. He will stay in office. The entire charade is about the 2020 election but Democrats in their blind hatred are destroying what some say is their best candidate in the process.

Hearsay: 1. information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor. 2. Law, the report of another person's words by a witness, which is usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law.

They very clearly did say it.
 

·
PSN alphadong11
Joined
·
28,935 Posts
If the information in the complaint was horseshit it would have been dead in the water right there. They obtained some other information during the preliminary review which apparently gave it some credibility from someone on the inside.

And what was the state department doing hooking up Giuliani to Ukraine? Was he acting as the presidents attorney at the time or a diplomat? Why back channel through Giuliani?
 

·
US Air Force (retired)
Joined
·
13,527 Posts
That is an assumption. It may or may not be true. We will have to wait and see.

You do understand that the whistleblower may very well believe his complaint and it can still be false. The people telling him this stuff could be wrong. (A bitch session over beers?) Now that the documents have been released it appears the complaint was false, except maybe in the imagination of Schiff and his allies.
 

·
PSN alphadong11
Joined
·
28,935 Posts
It implicates the Department of State? You are aware the the Department of States' job is to talk to representatives of foreign governments?

This is a circus. Trump will never be convicted in the Senate. He will stay in office. The entire charade is about the 2020 election but Democrats in their blind hatred are destroying what some say is their best candidate in the process.

Hearsay: 1. information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor. 2. Law, the report of another person's words by a witness, which is usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law.

They very clearly did say it.
The report also says even though it was through a 2nd party that the information obtained appeared credible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,183 Posts
May just be a matter of time before something is said or done to capture the attention of the media and day to day people to distract any and everyone from this. Be it a political/policy move or some weird attention grabbing statement.
 

·
US Air Force (retired)
Joined
·
13,527 Posts
The report also says even though it was through a 2nd party that the information obtained appeared credible.
Yes. Credible for an investigation, not a courts martial (impeachment). "Who Investigates The Whistleblower Case? Whomever the Department of Justice decides is appropriate to investigate the case. So, if it’s a defense case, it might be one investigatory agency. If it’s a Medicare case, it might be another. If it’s some kind of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) case, it might be another entity entirely.'

"It just depends on what agency of the government has been defrauded, then the government will determine whose inspector general it might reach out to, whose investigator it may use to investigate the case. But obviously, officials of the government are in charge of doing that at some point."

I think that is what they are doing now but an investigation is usually done without all this hoop-la by unbiased professionals. It is my understanding that there will be some closed door meetings. Maybe they can get some real work done there but I doubt it. Democrats really hate Trump and all of those biases are going to go into the room with them.

And I understand why they hate Trump. First, he is not a likeable guy. Second, he beat the anointed one in the electoral college but lost the popular vote. That gave him the chance to appoint judges and justices that go with the original meaning of the constitution not some revisionist meaning. This not only change the character of the Supreme Court but a steady replacement of judges in the ninth circuit has its character as well swinging the most liberal appellate court in the nation toward the center.

He is a stumbling block on their progressive movement.

But from the FISA warrant, through the Mueller report, and now his Ukraine phone call the Democrats seem to imagine far more wrong doing than is actually there. But its not going to stop. They want to affect the 2020 election. They want to dominate the headlines with their imagined wrongs.

By the way, I trust Schiff, Pelosi, and others just about as far as I can throw an elephant. I do trust the Constitution and the process our founding fathers created. So we will have to wait and see what happens.
 

·
He of Long Wind
Joined
·
2,164 Posts
Discussion Starter #31
If the information in the complaint was horseshit it would have been dead in the water right there ...
No. That's the mission of the swamp - to manufacture something nefarious and manipulate due-process. It doesn't matter that it's all bullshit - they still get to perform their show. Can't you see it? This is another cooked-up bullshit story about nothing; it's a sham. We're only going through the motions to satisfy protocol. Trump might be an obtuse loudmouth, but I don't question his patriotism. The transcript is clear ... he didn't promise or demand anything. Nothing else matters. No quid-pro-quo, no case - end of story. He didn't break the law. Game over. The "whistleblower's" complaint is just anti-Trump partisan propaganda and supposition which was cleverly distorted and rolled-into a bullshit allegation (mud-slinging).

I disagree with your summation. I think the complaint IS decidedly horseshit ... just like the Steel dossier, just like the Ford testimony, just like every other phony leftist scandal since Trump's election. It WILL be "dead in the water" ... after we waste millions of taxpayer dollars, of course. Dems will lose, Trump will win and the media will move on to the next scandal. That's our reality now. Libs hate him with a passion ... we get it. So, I say, just vote him out if he's so terrible ... but don't support ridiculous coup attempts. It's unAmerican.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,093 Posts
LOL! The twisting and turning trying to justify the obvious illegality occurring right in front of their eyes is telling. Patriots? Pffffft…………

John
 

·
He of Long Wind
Joined
·
2,164 Posts
Discussion Starter #33
LOL! The twisting and turning trying to justify the obvious illegality occurring right in front of their eyes is telling. Patriots? Pffffft…………
There's nothing "obviously illegal" about it. That's why Dems are performing their algebraic arguments in an effort to prove one thing is equal to another. If a violation of law were obvious, that wouldn't really be necessary, would it?
 

·
US Air Force (retired)
Joined
·
13,527 Posts
An honest Democrat: "This isn't about trying to get facts. We've already decided, as a partisan Democratic Party. I'm sorry to say, we've already decided we have to get rid of the president. We're moving forward with it, irrespective of facts. That is clear."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,183 Posts
An seemingly honest Republican but just bc he didn’t fall in line with other Republicans or “circle the wagon” with a slight or outright defense like some others in the party that far from makes him the voice for the Republicans on this matter or any who have a sight problem with what happened. Seem to be an opinion within the party out of many so it’s doubtful his opposition to the matter will make a huge wave all obvious things considered.


https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/25/politics/mitt-romney-impeachment-trump-ukraine/index.html
 

·
US Air Force (retired)
Joined
·
13,527 Posts
I heard someone say this when the TV was on in the background. Ken Starr, lead investigator into President Clinton, says Trump is not guilty of any crime. The TV speaker wanted to know how can he have committed high crimes and misdemeanors if no crime was committed? Interesting question.

Starr predicts the impeachment is doomed to fail. "This will not result in a conviction, so why are we on the impeachment train, we should be on the oversight train and quit calling it impeachment," he said.

Democrats are creating a lot of fog around this stuff for political benefit. Susan Rice was condemning the use of a classified server to store Trump's transcript. When asked if Obama ever used one the answer was yes. (Note: A classified server is the only legal place to store classified information.) She then went on to say that none of Obama's discussions were classified at the highest level. Duh. Neither was Trump's. I read the de-classified transcript and saw the old classification. It was classified Secret not Top Secret. For some reason the anonymous whistleblower's complaint was classified Top Secret, the highest level.

I love the circle the wagons comment. Democrats have been calling to impeach Trump from the first day he took office over one thing or another. When those fell through they would look for another reason. His crime in their minds is winning the election. They don't need another reason. And those still supporting it are now saying impeachment is a political process not a legal process. Meaning? No crime needs to be committed. I realize the document means little to them but maybe they should read the constitution.

By the way, I'm retired Air Force. My oath is to the Constitution and I will join any circling of wagons to protect it.
 

·
US Air Force (retired)
Joined
·
13,527 Posts
Here is some more interesting facts.


"Federal records show that the intelligence community secretly revised the formal whistleblower complaint form in August 2019 to eliminate the requirement of direct, first-hand knowledge of wrongdoing."

That is after Trump's July 25 phone call but before the whistleblower's complaint dated August 12.

"A previous version of the whistleblower complaint document, which the ICIG and DNI until recently provided to potential whistleblowers, declared that any complaint must contain only first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoing and that complaints that provide only hearsay, rumor, or gossip would be rejected.'

“The [Intelligence Community Inspector General] cannot transmit information via the ICPWA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing,” the previous form stated under the bolded heading “FIRST-HAND INFORMATION REQUIRED.” “This includes information received from another person, such as when an employee informs you that he/she witnessed some type of wrongdoing.'

“If you think that wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than second-hand or unsubstantiated assertions, [the Intelligence Community Inspector General] will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA,” the form concluded."

Anonymous officials told an anonymous whistleblower who filled a brand new form that allowed complaints that would have been rejected a month earlier for hearsay evidence or rumors. Coincidence? Maybe but it does sound a bit suspicious. The complainant obvious didn't know much because many of his accusation were wrong.

"While the complaint alleged that Trump demanded that Ukraine physically return multiple servers potentially related to ongoing investigations of foreign interference in the 2016 elections, the transcript of the call between Trump and Zelensky shows that such a request was never made.'

"The complainant also falsely alleged that Trump told Zelensky that he should keep the current prosecutor general at the time, Yuriy Lutsenko, in his current position in the country. The transcript showed that exchange also did not happen.'

"Additionally, the complaint falsely alleged that T. Ulrich Brechbuhl, a U.S. State Department official, was a party to the phone call between Trump and Zelensky.'

“I was told that a State Department official, Mr. T. Ulrich Brechbuhl, also listened in on the call,” the complaint alleged. Shortly after the complaint was released, CBS News reported that Brechbuhl was not on the phone call.'
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,183 Posts
Keep up the defensive scramble Eagle. I said awhile back that this post Trump era Eagle should be hired in some shape form or fashion to help defend this current administration.

I suppose if you can't do it officially or on the books then the by any means no matter what defense on the social forum level will do. Keep up the focus and determination my guy.
 

·
US Air Force (retired)
Joined
·
13,527 Posts
All I'm doing is trying to present the facts so that informed decisions can be made. I really don't think the Democrats in the House of Representatives are behaving rationally. Emotions are running high and they are willing to believe every lie told. Look at what Schiff did. He told a blatant lie to get emotional support. When he got caught he called it a "Parody." That was just another lie. He knew his friends in the media would pick his statement up and play it. Most people would never hear anything else and since it came from a political leader would believe it.

As I said before, this is nothing but a political circus. I heard someone ask how long was the inquiry going to take. That an easy question to answer. It will take until the election. Its sole purpose is to affect the 2020 election. The Senate will never convict Trump on such flimsy evidence.
 

·
US Air Force (retired)
Joined
·
13,527 Posts
so much delicious irony

---------- Post added at 09:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:17 AM ----------



Hold on, are you implying you're buying into this "Civil War" **** our "patriotic" president is peddling?
An emphatic... NO! I don't believe any of that. And I didn't mean to suggest to anyone that I do. I think it takes a lot of reading into my comment to come up with all that. But if that is how you read it, I'm sorry. Let me read your post again.

Your post is so idiotic it doesn't deserve a response. Were you drinking? I didn't say a thing about shooting or violence. Where do you get that crap? Is that where you mind goes if there is a disagreement during a discussion? Is that the first thing you think of?

You live in the middle of Antifa? Are you one of them? I only know what I see on the news and that shows Antifa as a violent organization whose sole goal is to silence any voice that disagrees with them through violence. It that where you get this crap.

By the way, you know I believe the Constitution. My circle the wagons comment was a play off T-Lees comment. It wasn't meant to be any more than that.
 
21 - 40 of 82 Posts
Top