Page 21 of 72 FirstFirst ... 1119202122233171 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 712

Thread: Trump Administration Whistleblower Cover-Up

  1. #201
    radical strawberry
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Humanist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,345
    Amen (Given)
    450
    Amen (Received)
    990
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post


    The Times actually corrects their errors, and fires the folks who don't meet their standards. The guys who pushed the muslim madrasa story, picked up from the woo graveyard the Moonie Times fills with stories even they won't publish ... are currently hosting Fox and Friends, providing the president with his morning briefing.

    But as I've offered again and again, give me a better source and I'll use it.

    In clear English please. I don't speak crickets.

  2. #202
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    52,270
    Amen (Given)
    1110
    Amen (Received)
    19033
    My initial assertion

    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    Whatever the case Rasmussen was the most accurate of the major pollsters during the 2016 presidential race.

    This is based on analysis of the major pollsters by Real Clear Politics (RCP). Here are two news articles covering with the second from the angle of Rasmussen tooting their own horn because of it.



    A few things should be noted.

    Rasmussen was actually the second best of those tracked but Investor's Business Daily polls are not among those that get cited in the news. This was pretty much what I meant when I said major pollsters although a good case could be made for including them based on their accuracy. Still, Rasmussen was the most accurate of the major pollsters.

    Second, even with that Rasmussen failed to predict a Trump victory. A prediction of a razor-thin win for someone is still a prediction of their being victorious. And as the prodder of beef (or someone else) says Hillary isn't SCOTUS. Still, polling might be better compared to archery or target shooting. If everyone fails to hit the bullseye then the closest one to it is the winner.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" -- starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)

  3. #203
    tWebber Teallaura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    In my house.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    14,991
    Amen (Given)
    8943
    Amen (Received)
    5543
    Rasmussen 2016 Evaluation

    Real Clear Politics 2016 Evaluation

    Rasmussen correctly predicted that the race was much closer than other polls were indicating.

  4. #204
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    52,270
    Amen (Given)
    1110
    Amen (Received)
    19033
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    My initial assertion


    This is based on analysis of the major pollsters by Real Clear Politics (RCP). Here are two news articles covering with the second from the angle of Rasmussen tooting their own horn because of it.



    A few things should be noted.

    Rasmussen was actually the second best of those tracked but Investor's Business Daily polls are not among those that get cited in the news. This was pretty much what I meant when I said major pollsters although a good case could be made for including them based on their accuracy. Still, Rasmussen was the most accurate of the major pollsters.

    Second, even with that Rasmussen failed to predict a Trump victory. A prediction of a razor-thin win for someone is still a prediction of their being victorious. And as the prodder of beef (or someone else) says Hillary isn't SCOTUS. Still, polling might be better compared to archery or target shooting. If everyone fails to hit the bullseye then the closest one to it is the winner.


    Forgot to include the American Research Group's analysis "2016 US Presidential Election Pollster Ratings"

    The following table lists the accuracy of pollsters in the November 8, 2016 US Presidential election using the measure of polling accuracy proposed by Martin, Traugott, and Kennedy.

    An accuracy measure of 0.00 indicates that the odds ratio of the survey results matches the odds ratio of the actual results (the closer to 0.00, the better).



    [*More analysis in original article*]
    Last edited by rogue06; 09-22-2019 at 12:47 PM.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" -- starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)

  5. #205
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    52,270
    Amen (Given)
    1110
    Amen (Received)
    19033
    Quote Originally Posted by Juvenal View Post

    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 00000000000000ab000-00aac.jpg XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    A master troll should not be this easy.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" -- starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)

  6. #206
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    17,362
    Amen (Given)
    5750
    Amen (Received)
    6113
    Quote Originally Posted by Juvenal View Post
    The Times actually corrects their errors...
    ...quietly and with no fanfare several days after the original false story already made its rounds through the news cycle.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  7. Amen Teallaura amen'd this post.
  8. #207
    tWebber firstfloor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    invalid value
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,157
    Amen (Given)
    21
    Amen (Received)
    374
    Maybe Barr will be impeached afore Trump.
    “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
    “You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” ― Anne Lamott
    “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell

  9. #208
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    17,362
    Amen (Given)
    5750
    Amen (Received)
    6113
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtfloor View Post
    Maybe Barr will be impeached afore Trump.
    And maybe I'll win the lottery.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  10. #209
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,287
    Amen (Given)
    145
    Amen (Received)
    623
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    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.
    The "prosecutor they didn't like" was notoriously corrupt and had quashed an investigation into the Burisma Group. How, exactly, does Biden help his son do corrupt things by getting a corrupt prosecutor who's already passed on investigating the company Hunter Biden worked with/for fired? Wouldn't the smart play be to push back on the international effort to get this prosecutor removed, to use the office of VP to protect him?

    But, really, look. This week has been newsworthy for two things:

    1) The President (first allegedly then confirmed by the President himself) pushed the Ukrainian government to specifically investigate his likely 2020 political rival, sending his personal attorney to meet with Ukrainian officials and withholding $250m in Congressionally-appropriated funds without public explanation.

    2) The President or someone high up in WH/DOJ unlawfully directed that a whistleblower complaint that includes but may not be limited to the above be withheld from Congress.

    Both are impeachable acts. The second isn't even a matter of debate. And the first? Well, that's exactly the kind of "coordination" that Trump, Republicans, and several folks on here have said was the "real" illegal collusion of 2016. They've said that "Hillary" (really a DNC contractor working independently of the DNC or the Clinton campaign) tried to get Ukraine to dig up "dirt" on Paul Manafort to use against Trump. Whatever one wants to believe about that episode, it's explicitly happening here ... only Trump has used the office of the President in soliciting the thing of value; even apparently going so far as to put a price tag on its value ($250m + $140m that just ... showed up for some unexplained reason).

    Maybe Hunter Biden got real rich trading off his father's name and position. That's routine network-lobbyist grifting that goes on all the time through both Republican and Democratic administrations. If we want to make it illegal, great, let's do it. But it's not illegal and there's zero evidence that Hunter Biden committed corrupt acts or that Joe Biden facilitated anything illegal. And if folks here weren't raising red flags about Kusher getting a mega-bailout by Qatari investors after the Trump administration helped Saudi Arabia launch a major crackdown on Qatari commerce/travel routes or with Ivanka Trump suddenly winning some long-sought Chinese trademarks ... well, I'm not sure it's really the underlying conduct that is of concern.

    I'm not sure what to call folks who dissemble about the President soliciting a thing of immense personal/campaign value from a foreign government, demanding that government meet with his personal attorney, then blocking needed and allocated funding right up until Congress sent over a investigative preservation request. Nor do I know what to call the same folks who dissemble about the President violating the law to prevent a whistleblower complaint about his conduct from reaching Congress.

    But whatever one can call 'em, they're not good citizens of the Republic. And, with that, I'll return to the infrequent lurkings.

    --Sam
    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"


  11. #210
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    17,362
    Amen (Given)
    5750
    Amen (Received)
    6113
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam View Post
    The "prosecutor they didn't like" was notoriously corrupt and had quashed an investigation into the Burisma Group. How, exactly, does Biden help his son do corrupt things by getting a corrupt prosecutor who's already passed on investigating the company Hunter Biden worked with/for fired? Wouldn't the smart play be to push back on the international effort to get this prosecutor removed, to use the office of VP to protect him?
    This is not consistent with what we actually know.

    The general prosecutor’s official file for the Burisma probe — shared with me by senior Ukrainian officials — shows prosecutors identified Hunter Biden, business partner Devon Archer and their firm, Rosemont Seneca, as potential recipients of money.

    Shokin told me in written answers to questions that, before he was fired as general prosecutor, he had made “specific plans” for the investigation that “included interrogations and other crime-investigation procedures into all members of the executive board, including Hunter Biden.”

    So not only was it an active investigation, but Hunter Biden was explicitly named. But then Papa Joe comes to the rescue, and...

    Most of the general prosecutor’s investigative work on Burisma focused on three separate cases, and most stopped abruptly once Shokin was fired. [...] As a result, the Biden family appeared to have escaped the potential for an embarrassing inquiry overseas in the final days of the Obama administration and during an election in which Democrat Hillary Clinton was running for president in 2016.

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


    Quote Originally Posted by Sam View Post
    1) The President (first allegedly then confirmed by the President himself) pushed the Ukrainian government to specifically investigate his likely 2020 political rival, sending his personal attorney to meet with Ukrainian officials and withholding $250m in Congressionally-appropriated funds without public explanation.
    Again, this is not consistent with what we know.

    Here's my summary from earlier in the thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    The short version is that the Ukrainian government has reason to believe that US laws were broken by members of the Obama administration and the Democrat party, but their efforts to pass the information to US officials was repeatedly rebuffed, first by the US embassy in Kiev, and then by Federal prosecutors in New York. Then Rudy Giuliani caught wind of it and started his own investigation, but when the Ukrainian government told the media he was planning to visit the country, Giuliani backed away, fearing that his involvement would appear political. The Ukrainian government, fearing they had damaged US relations, reached out to the US State Department who in turn requested Giuliani's continued involvement. And now Trump, at Ukraine's request, has given his official blessing to the investigation.

    https://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...erture-to-rudy

    So I was wrong about it being a nothing-burger. It's just not the something-burger the liberal media said it was. To be fair, President Trump did warn them not to get their hopes up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sam View Post
    2) The President or someone high up in WH/DOJ unlawfully directed that a whistleblower complaint that includes but may not be limited to the above be withheld from Congress.
    And this (say it with me) is not consistent with what we know.

    Since you're apparently playing catch-up, here's my post from a couple pages back explaining the details:

    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    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
    And to add to this, everything I'm reading about whistleblower laws says that the "whistleblower" must have independent knowledge of the act in question, so no blowing the whistle based on rumors or second/third/X-hand information.

    Those are the facts as we know them. Not speculation. Not guesswork. Facts.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  12. Amen Teallaura amen'd this post.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •