09.26.2019 10:51 AM

The whistleblower’s letter. Wow.

I’ve read whistleblower stuff before – I was one myself, back in the day, in Ottawa – but not one as meticulously detailed as this one.

Link here.


27 Comments

  1. Harry Belafonte says:

    A lot of it is just citing information already in the media. I don’t know if that adds anything else to the actual phone call transcript.

    Yes, it does sound like DT wanted Biden investigated, but is that the crime? In the call he doesn’t threaten them if they don’t, or if they come up with “Biden is clean”. Just wants the matter investigated.

    Has that never happened before? Maybe I’m naive but what about all of the spying Obama was doing on Trump, is that not worse, or was that made up?

    It does show (again) that Trump doesn’t care about appearances or protocol. Your article on him and JT is spot on. The biggest difference between the two being DT was actually successful in his life before politics. While they both feel entitled to grope women that’s where JT’s life experiences end.

    • The Doctor says:

      Having someone investigated is not a crime in isolation. Bribing or extorting a foreign government to have a political rival investigated is a crime.

      I notice that all of Trump’s tongue-bathers consistently fail to mention that bribe/extortion thingy. Funny that.

  2. Gord Tulk says:

    The partisan whistleblowers account doesn’t line up with the record of the call.

    The ask primarily had to do with CrowdStrike- not Biden.

    That Shiff tried to torque (read:lie) about what that record contained tells you that the Dems even know they haven’t much of a case.

  3. Nick M. says:

    Is that you were giving televised testimony and Clayton Ruby was your counsel?

    Cause I remember watching that years ago.

    Or my memory is playing tricks with me.

  4. The Doctor says:

    I see Trump’s now saying we should execute whistleblowers. What a great guy.

  5. Shawn says:

    Yawwwwwwwn

  6. lyn says:

    This is all hearsay!! It won’t stand up in court. Now they have a tape of Biden bribing in the Ukraine with holding billions if they don’t do what he wants! Boy is that calling the kettle black!!
    TRUMP MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!

  7. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    Murphy says 30 and Flake says 35 Republicans Senators would vote for impeachment at trial in a secret ballot. How many of them will have the actual balls to come out publicly? Uh huh.

    At least 2 Republican Governors are already on the record.

    • Ronald O'Dowd says:

      And while they’re at it, they should impeach the shit out of Barr as well. He’s a national disgrace as chief law enforcement officer of the United States.

      • The Doctor says:

        Absolutely agreed. He doesn’t recuse himself with respect to handling a complaint that includes . . . himself. Absolutely disgraceful for any lawyer or law enforcement officer. I can see maybe a non-lawyer not grasping the significance, but for any lawyer to do that is an abomination.

        He managed to make Jeff Sessions look like a paragon of virtue.

        • Fred from BC says:

          ” He doesn’t recuse himself with respect to handling a complaint that includes . . . himself. ”

          Nor does he need to. Recusing oneself generally requires a valid complaint and credible evidence. This ‘complaint’ is so flimsy as to be laughable…full of hearsay and conjecture, it’s the Steele Dossier Version 2.

          The reek of desperation emanating from the Democrats is so thick you could cut it with a knife…

          • Hearsay and conjecture is what you often have at the beginning of an investigation. What you do is subpoena the original sources to find out if it is true. I assume you agree that Trump should wave any and all cabinet or executive privilege for the investigation.

          • Ronald O'Dowd says:

            Fred,

            If so, then what’s your take on why supposedly a third of the Senate, who are Republicans, are seemingly already prepared to throw Trump to the wolves?

            You can’t blame that one on Democrats Fred.

          • Fred from BC says:

            “If so, then what’s your take on why supposedly a third of the Senate, who are Republicans, are seemingly already prepared to throw Trump to the wolves?”

            (“Supposedly” being the operative word there.)

            My take would be same as everyone else: the Never-Trumpers are still alive and well.

            The same bunch of Republicans who wanted nothing to do with Donald Trump when he was nominated (and even before) *still* don’t like him. I don’t blame them and I’m not surprised at all that they haven’t changed their minds, since Trump is NOT a Republican, and never was. Sorry Ronald…I just can’t get excited over something so predictable.

          • Fred from BC says:

            “I assume you agree that Trump should wave any and all cabinet or executive privilege for the investigation.”

            Sure. And you. of course, will agree that the investigation will be conducted by a *real* non-partisan committee (not the collection of ex-Hillary staffers and Trump-hating Democrats we had last time). And naturally, if in the course of that investigation damning information about Hunter and His father Joe should come to light, that information too will be *actively pursued* (and not ignored like it was last time).

            Deal?

          • Ronald O'Dowd says:

            Fred,

            Our biggest disagreement is that you see no legs and I’ve spotted a tarantula. (One of us is dead on.)

          • For impeachment, the investigation is done by House committees and the trial by the Senate.

            What is this damning information about the Bidens that people keep talking about, but never specifies?

  8. Canny Scott says:

    The whistleblower doesn’t meet the legal requirements for ‘whistleblower.’ He wasn’t on the call and the alleged facts are second or third-hand.

    • Fred from BC says:

      “The whistleblower doesn’t meet the legal requirements for ‘whistleblower.’ ”

      Where anyone else is concerned, no. But apparently the rules are a bit different when the target is Donald Trump. Funny, that…

Leave a Reply to Ronald O'Dowd Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*