Trump Administration Whistleblower Cover-Up

[Juvenal]

Yeah, it's still WAY early, but...

A little context.

Rasmussen is an IVR, i.e., Interactive Voice Response aka Robocall survey. Given the methodology, they are hugely prolific, providing the second largest sample of polls tracked by 538 after SurveyUSA, which is likewise a robocaller, but also includes live response polls and adheres to higher industry standards.

2019-09-22_07-34-46.jpg2019-09-22_07-41-55.jpg

[Mountain Man]

Dude, give it up. For one thing the investigation into Burisma was already shelved at the time of Bidens visit and Hunter Biden himself was not even investigated at that time.

False.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...obe-is-revived

And I note again that the Ukrainian government was troubled enough by this episode that they have repeatedly asked the US government to look into the matter.

[Mountain Man]

And now we learn from CNN of all places that the "whistleblower" had no direct knowledge and was basing his complaint entirely on rumor and supposition.

The whistleblower didn't have direct knowledge of the communications, an official briefed on the matter told CNN. Instead, the whistleblower's concerns came in part from learning information that was not obtained during the course of their work, and those details have played a role in the administration's determination that the complaint didn't fit the reporting requirements under the intelligence whistleblower law, the official said.

Naturally, CNN buried this important revelation 22 paragraphs below their provocative headline.

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/09/20/pol...wer/index.html

[Mountain Man]

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019...-point-person/

[JimL]

So you're saying that Biden was sent over to the Ukraine by the Obama Administration to directly interfere with that country's internal politics?

No, where did I say anything about their politics?

[JimL]

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019...-point-person/

Why does it warrant investigation, do you have any actual evidence of wrong doing. No you don't. All you have is, "oh, Hunter Biden made a lot of money while employed by a companey that was under investigation. Personally I couldn't care less if he is investigated or found guilty of something. But to extort another country during a political campaign in an attempt to smear your probable opponent is abuse of power and impeachable. But of course it is only one more of the many impeachable offenses already committed by this President which you supporters of his are obviously too biased to recognize, at least openly.

Besides that, consider your sources!

[Mountain Man]

Why does it warrant investigation, do you have any actual evidence of wrong doing. No you don't. All you have is, "oh, Hunter Biden made a lot of money while employed by a companey that was under investigation. Personally I couldn't care less if he is investigated or found guilty of something. But to extort another country during a political campaign in an attempt to smear your probable opponent is abuse of power and impeachable. But of course it is only one more of the many impeachable offenses already committed by this President which you supporters of his are obviously too biased to recognize, at least openly.

Besides that, consider your sources!

What are you talking about? President Trump didn't extort anyone. The Ukrainian government suspects that US laws were broken and has been trying to get the US to investigate this shady business for nearly two-years, and to the best of our knowledge, the only thing Trump has done is honor their request, and the only reason we even know that much is because someone inside the Trump administration (perhaps illegally) leaked details of privileged communications despite not having any firsthand knowledge of the situation.

[Mountain Man]

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...dent-zelensky/

[Adrift]

When you think of all the hammering Trump has had day in and day out from all sides, including a media that admits it's even given up any pretense of objectivity, the guy should be at about 29%.

It's directly related to the economy. It's hard to hate a president, even one who opens himself to criticism as often as Trump does, when unemployment is at an all time low, and people aren't so worried about how to put food on the table. Whether Trump is directly responsible for that is likely up for debate, but it definitely works in his favor.

FiveThirtyEight's criticism of Rasmussen is interesting, but I imagine an argument from the right might be that FiveThirtyEight themselves lean left, and so their criticism of Rasmussen is unsurprising, but I don't know enough (or really care enough) about politics and polling data to say if that argument might have teeth.

[rogue06]

No, where did I say anything about their politics?

So, I know how badly you want to implicate Biden even though you know nothing, but the VP was actually sent to Ukraine by the Obama Administration because the Prosecutor General, Shokin, wasn't prosecuting the rampant corruption taking place there in Ukraine.

You proclaimed that Biden was sent by the Obama Administration because they didn't think that a prosecutor was moving quick enough at prosecuting corruption cases. And Biden threatened to cut off aid to the country unless the prosecutor they didn't like was fired.

[rogue06]

It's directly related to the economy. It's hard to hate a president, even one who opens himself to criticism as often as Trump does, when unemployment is at an all time low, and people aren't so worried about how to put food on the table. Whether Trump is directly responsible for that is likely up for debate, but it definitely works in his favor.

FiveThirtyEight's criticism of Rasmussen is interesting, but I imagine an argument from the right might be that FiveThirtyEight themselves lean left, and so their criticism of Rasmussen is unsurprising, but I don't know enough (or really care enough) about politics and polling data to say if that argument might have teeth.

Whatever the case Rasmussen was the most accurate of the major pollsters during the 2016 presidential race.

[Juvenal]

Whatever the case Rasmussen was the most accurate of the major pollsters during the 2016 presidential race.

I follow these things, and I've seen no analysis that makes that claim.

[rogue06]

What are you talking about? President Trump didn't extort anyone. The Ukrainian government suspects that US laws were broken and has been trying to get the US to investigate this shady business for nearly two-years, and to the best of our knowledge, the only thing Trump has done is honor their request, and the only reason we even know that much is because someone inside the Trump administration (perhaps illegally) leaked details of privileged communications despite not having any firsthand knowledge of the situation.

If there is a case for extortion it would be Biden threatening to hold back something like a billion dollars in aid unless the prosecutor that was just happening to be investigating his son and the company he worked for was fired.

[rogue06]

I follow these things, and I've seen no analysis that makes that claim.

It was right after the election when everyone was talking about how off the mark the pollsters were.

[Juvenal]

FiveThirtyEight's criticism of Rasmussen is interesting, but I imagine an argument from the right might be that FiveThirtyEight themselves lean left, and so their criticism of Rasmussen is unsurprising, but I don't know enough (or really care enough) about politics and polling data to say if that argument might have teeth.

538 is the brainchild of a sports nut who turned his stats geekdom over to polling analysis. All of the data are accessible to download at the link I provided. Accusations of underlying partisanship might as well be leveled at MS Excel.