Originally posted by Cow Poke
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Whistleblower identified
Collapse
X
-
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)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostWhat did anyone expect from someone who sicced the federal government on a couple reporters for having the temerity to break a story that Obama wanted to be the one to do so.
The hypocrisy is absolutely stunning.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by NorrinRadd View PostIs this the law in question? Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989.
There are various "Whistleblower" laws. Really, none that I've found seem to be a perfect fit. This one only specifically bars the "Special Counsel" from identifying Ciaramella, and no such entity is currently involved AFAIK.
I do wish people like The Great One Levin would make a practice of citing the actual statute, by official name, H.R. number, Senate number, whatever -- something specific -- rather than just saying, "Ciaramella doesn't qualify as a whistleblower under the statute" or "The statute does not require anonymity."
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)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostKen Star, who knows a thing or two about these things, said that Ciaramella does not qualify for whistleblower status since he went to Adam Schiff first before filing any sort of complaint. When he did that he became nothing more than a common leaker.
It amazes me how otherwise intelligent people can get duped into believing - and even defending - this crap.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostAND, we're to believe that Schiffty Adam doesn't have a clue who it is, or that maybe he does, but it's "ok" to lie about it because everybody else on the planet is clueless about who the alleged whistle blower is. You really can't make this stuff up.
It amazes me how otherwise intelligent people can get duped into believing - and even defending - this crap.
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)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostAnd let's be brutally honest, if this was a "whistleblower" who was seeking to get Obama impeached the MSM would have their name in headlines and by now...The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostKen Star, who knows a thing or two about these things, said that Ciaramella does not qualify for whistleblower status since he went to Adam Schiff first before filing any sort of complaint. When he did that he became nothing more than a common leaker.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Watermelon View PostHow does he know he went to Adam Schiff first?
Whistleblower spoke to Schiff aides before filing complaint
WASHINGTON (AP) — The whistleblower who raised concerns about President Donald Trump’s dealings with Ukraine spoke to staffers on the House Intelligence Committee before filing a formal complaint, giving Democrats advance warning of the accusations of wrongdoing that triggered their impeachment inquiry.
The whistleblower, a member of the intelligence community, contacted the committee for guidance on how to report “possible wrongdoing,” according to Patrick Boland, a spokesman for the Intelligence Committee’s chairman, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. Boland said that “at no point did the committee review or receive the complaint in advance” and that it is a regular occurrence for whistleblowers to seek guidance from the committee.
“Consistent with the committee’s longstanding procedures, committee staff appropriately advised the whistleblower to contact an inspector general and to seek legal counsel,” Boland said. Other congressional committees follow a similar process.
Why would the alleged whistleblower - presumably a really smart guy - go to a politician rather than legal counsel?
It's hard to believe that things went just like the "boiler plate language" suggests - that the committee (and or Schiff himself) didn't at least get a general layout of the complaint before passing him along.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostNo, it does not. I read the thing - go pull it yourself if you don't believe me.Last edited by JimL; 11-23-2019, 09:56 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostYes, that's the talkingpoints version.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostTalking points are either true or false, CP, they're not false just because you call them talking points.
In this case they're true, it's the job of Congress to oversee the executive, and that means to investigate alleged abuses of power, and then to impeach if it's deemed by them to be necessary. Simply saying "that's the talking points version" amounts to saying nothing.
I'm so glad he's on your side.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostIt's pretty common knowledge that the alleged whistle blower went to Schiff (and or his committee) before filing papers.
Whistleblower spoke to Schiff aides before filing complaint
WASHINGTON (AP) — The whistleblower who raised concerns about President Donald Trump’s dealings with Ukraine spoke to staffers on the House Intelligence Committee before filing a formal complaint, giving Democrats advance warning of the accusations of wrongdoing that triggered their impeachment inquiry.
The whistleblower, a member of the intelligence community, contacted the committee for guidance on how to report “possible wrongdoing,” according to Patrick Boland, a spokesman for the Intelligence Committee’s chairman, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. Boland said that “at no point did the committee review or receive the complaint in advance” and that it is a regular occurrence for whistleblowers to seek guidance from the committee.
“Consistent with the committee’s longstanding procedures, committee staff appropriately advised the whistleblower to contact an inspector general and to seek legal counsel,” Boland said. Other congressional committees follow a similar process.
Why would the alleged whistleblower - presumably a really smart guy - go to a politician rather than legal counsel?
It's hard to believe that things went just like the "boiler plate language" suggests - that the committee (and or Schiff himself) didn't at least get a general layout of the complaint before passing him along.
Based on the article the conversation could have just been:
Whistleblower - Hello! could I get some advice on how to report possible wrongdoing?
Staff - contact the the inspector general and seek legal counsel.
Whistleblower - thank you! bye!
Staff - bye!
---end---
Comment
-
Originally posted by Watermelon View PostI don't know if it's that hard to believe based on this.
Based on the article the conversation could have just been:
Whistleblower - Hello! could I get some advice on how to report possible wrongdoing?
Staff - contact the the inspector general and seek legal counsel.
Whistleblower - thank you! bye!
Staff - bye!
---end---
I suspect he got the information, then it was more like, "ok, this conversation never happened, take this complaint to ...."
I'm just not very trusting of partisan politicians.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostWhen the talking points are from a fringe perspective, Jim, they're not likely to be facts. Or, at best, very selective facts.
Jim, your Impeachment hopes are smashed, brother. Your hero, Schiff, is largely to blame, because he turned this "oversight" into an intensely partisan circus, making himself both chief prosecutor, judge, media commentator...
I'm so glad he's on your side.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
|
7 responses
65 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
Today, 08:33 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
|
42 responses
251 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by whag
Yesterday, 03:53 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
|
25 responses
108 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 08:36 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
|
33 responses
194 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Roy
Today, 07:43 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
|
73 responses
338 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 03:51 AM |
Comment