Trump Administration Whistleblower Cover-Up

[seer]

Well the Dems are getting a two for - taint Trump, and get rid of Biden who the left doesn't want...

[rogue06]

The person is called a "whistleblower" because they issued a complaint about government malfeasance through the mechanism defined in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act.

A "leak" goes to the public (e.g., Woodward and Bernstein/Deep Throat), though that can still be whistleblowing, since the term refers to exposure of corruption within one's own company or administration.

The whole thing about "this isn't really a whistleblower" is just the dumbest sort of talking point to diffuse and deflect. Anyone who finds themselves using it needs to take that as a signal to reevaluate how they're consuming and processing news.

--Sam

Yeah, we should be focusing much more on how the claims of this "whistleblower" (who unlike others had no personal knowledge of anything but was instead merely passing on gossip and hearsay) made about the phone conversation don't line up very well at all with what we now know actually took place.

[rogue06]

If that's the standard used for when someone is "done", what does it say about Trump, whose children are currently getting favorable business deals around the globe?

In Trump's case his kids had actually established reputations of their own in the business world whereas the only thing that Biden's kids brought to the job was who there father is.

Still, I'd have no problem monitoring with who and for what Trump's children are doing business.

[rogue06]

Or not:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ed/2438970001/

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...t-impeachment/


The polling is not surprisingly mixed and showing a slight uptick - but were done last weekend before the document releases. Even so, one showed a downturn and none were done by major pollsters.

Too early - and way too early to assume a ground swell of support.

John Kasich, who is a dyed-in-the-wool Never Trumper was on CNN today saying that (aside from the media) "nobody [is] talking about this." That the public is reacting with a massive yawn -- which I seriously doubt is the reaction that the Democrats/MSM either expected or want.

[seer]

John Kasich, who is a dyed-in-the-wool Never Trumper was on CNN today saying that (aside from the media) "nobody [is] talking about this." That the public is reacting with a massive yawn -- which I seriously doubt is the reaction that the Democrats/MSM either expected or want.

Of course it is a yawn, it is just another in a long series of made up allegations. The cry wolf thing...

[rogue06]

Of course it is a yawn, it is just another in a long series of made up allegations. The cry wolf thing...

Not to mention that as the transcript of the conversation reveals, once again the facts don't match up to the hysterical, overwrought claims.

[Sam]

Yeah, we should be focusing much more on how the claims of this "whistleblower" (who unlike others had no personal knowledge of anything but was instead merely passing on gossip and hearsay) made about the phone conversation don't line up very well at all with what we now know actually took place.

What I said before about good citizens still applies. At some point back in time, none of y'all would've tolerated the idea of a President strong-arming a foreign government into launching partisan investigations against his opponents in exchange for military aid. Somewhere along the way, people got sick and addled and let their civic character go to pot. Now we've got a President, already implicated in numerous felonies perpetuated over the course of his campaign and term, enlisting the United States Department of Justice and State Department to help his new "personal attorney" commit felonies to help his election campaign (since the old one's in prison for felonies committed at the President's direction during the last campaign).

Being a good citizen means a lot of different things to different people. But there are boundaries, fence lines that good citizens don't go past.

--Sam

[Bill the Cat]

If that's the standard used for when someone is "done", what does it say about Trump, whose children are currently getting favorable business deals around the globe?

I mean his campaign is done. Dems will not want the "you did it too" on their radar.

[Bill the Cat]

The person is called a "whistleblower" because they issued a complaint about government malfeasance through the mechanism defined in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act.

A "leak" goes to the public (e.g., Woodward and Bernstein/Deep Throat), though that can still be whistleblowing, since the term refers to exposure of corruption within one's own company or administration.

The whole thing about "this isn't really a whistleblower" is just the dumbest sort of talking point to diffuse and deflect. Anyone who finds themselves using it needs to take that as a signal to reevaluate how they're consuming and processing news.

--Sam

It's reality Sam. This person, as evidenced by their complaint, is not legally a whistleblower. He is dealing in hearsay and innuendo. Every bit of his testimony would be dismissed in a court of law.

[Bill the Cat]

Bidens son is simply a Trump/GOP ploy to shift the focus, it isn't going to change the facts concerning Trumps impeachable actions in his dealings with Ukraine and Congress isn't going to lose that focus either.

Yeah, no he isn't. He is a clear example of the corruption that was rampant in the Ukraine, and one of many corruption instances that necessitated withholding funds until promises to handle said corruption were made. All legal and normal diplomacy.

[seer]

At some point back in time, none of y'all would've tolerated the idea of a President strong-arming a foreign government into launching partisan investigations against his opponents in exchange for military aid....

--Sam

Where did Trump do this?

[Bill the Cat]

You are really confusing terms, here.

No I am not. It's you who doesn't seem to understand the terms "whistleblower", "Intelligence Community", or "retaliation"...

PPD-19 doesn't have anything to do with whether the content of a complaint can be shared, declassified, whatever.

I never said it did. It protects someone in the IC from having their clearance yanked for sharing classified information.

It's a prohibition against retaliation for protected disclosures. PPD-19 protects the whistleblower from retaliation even when the subject of the complaint is not "inside" the IC community.

Retaliation, yes. Meaning someone in the Executive Branch can't force them to be fired or have their clearance revoked (which has to be done inside their agency/command/service). Trump did none of these things, so there is no whistleblower retaliation here.

Neither the ICIG nor the DNI have made any sort of suggestion that the complaint is not legitimately within the purview of the ICIG. Specifically, the complaint deals with the "administration of an intelligence activity involving classified information" and deals directly with the DNI's responsibility to protect US elections.

But the Executive Office is not an "intelligence activity". That's why the DNI said it was outside of the purview of the Intelligence Community.

Arguing that this person isn't a "legal whistleblower" moves the goalposts away from the original claim

When more information becomes available, and claims can be refined, that is not moving the goalposts.

("Since the whistleblower worked for the intelligence community, they are only legally protected when blowing the whistle against the intelligence community. The President is not a member of that community.") but is, even so, very far afield from how the ICIG and the DNI understand both the complaint and the protections given to the whistleblower.

--Sam

No it isn't. It is the specific reason the DNI gave for not forwarding the complaint to Congress originally.

[Bill the Cat]

... At some point back in time, none of y'all would've tolerated the idea of a President strong-arming a foreign government into launching partisan investigations against his opponents in exchange for military aid. ...

You have evidence that military aid was held as collateral to the investigation into Hunter Biden continuing? Perhaps you should email your evidence to Mdm. Pelosi.

[Teallaura]

I actually expect it to run fairly even in the near future - especially with the media's full court press.

It'll be at least two weeks before we get the first meaningful results.

[oxmixmudd]

That's a statement from Rep. Scalise.

?

I'm talking about the actual content of Scalise's statements and their implications. Breightbart picked it up because of their bias, not because it has any real substance. So I'll wait to see if what he has to say is born out by other sources.

Jim