Page 38 of 56 FirstFirst ... 28363738394048 ... LastLast
Results 371 to 380 of 555

Thread: Whistleblower identified

  1. #371
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    17,872
    Amen (Given)
    5837
    Amen (Received)
    6374
    Quote Originally Posted by Watermelon View Post
    Vindman has testified that the transcript is missing some key points, specifically the parts where they talk about Biden and Burisma. Vindman also explained that the transcript was compiled by note takers, as the call was not recorded, of which he was one.

    So its alleged that the transcript is neither verbatim or complete. Whether this is true or made up would be something that a trial would determine. However, this is only one component to the claim. That Trump demanded the investigation for aid didn't start and end with this phone call and the whistleblowers report details dates and events that have been corroborated by multiple witness testimonies.

    The main fact, not contested and central to this claim, is that the aid was held up under instructions from Trump who can't seem to remember why.

    Any prosecutor would tell you that this is more than enough to warrant an investigation. 'Smoking gun' type of evidence is pretty rare, most crimes are established by linking one piece of circumstantial evidence to another, similar to how scientific experiments link together to support scientific theories, until theres only one reasonable explanation to account for everything. Before complaining about lack of evidence to convict remember that the investigation is the process to gather the evidence!
    Vindman is the only one to claim that there are omissions in the official transcript, and it's particularly notable that others with direct knowledge of the phonecall apparently rejected his attempted "corrections". Furthermore, he testified that the overall transcript is accurate despite the absence of the one or two words he unconvincingly claims were missing (he said something to the effect of "If you've read the transcript, then you know what was said during the phonecall.").

    Another fact that has never been contested is that nobody in the Ukrainian government knew that the military aid had been temporarily suspended, meaning it would have been impossible to use it as leverage, and they took no special action to have it restored.
    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

  2. Amen RumTumTugger, Teallaura amen'd this post.
  3. #372
    Department Head
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    4,048
    Amen (Given)
    18753
    Amen (Received)
    1497
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    Why would I give Trump the benefit of the doubt in this when the evidence is clear that is what he did?
    What evidence? So far All the Democrats have is third hand information based on peoples feelings or peoples feelings and opinions, presumptions on what was going on.

    Hatred - again you use that word, but clearly - you do not know what it means. I am against the wrong things Trump has done and is doing. That is not hatred. Hatred is something quite different.
    When someone accepts non evidence as evidence that wrong has been done because of what the person did in the past rather then wait for real evidence; or even hand waves the real evidence away presuming they know what a person really thinks happened but is afraid to say it, Is in my OPINION their showing hatred towards the person not what he's done.

    Oxmix, When have you ever acknowledged the good things trump has done without qualifying with but he's done this evil thing even if there is no basis to think he did it or that it was done with malice in his mind*? so please show me. show me my opinion is wrong about your bias being so bad agasint trump that you let it color your mind on what evil is.



    *and no I'm not saying that Trump hasn't done things I think are wrong I'm just saying I know human beings are not perfect and not all the things you say Trump did are things.
    1. he actually did
    or
    2 wrong.

  4. #373
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,533
    Amen (Given)
    2509
    Amen (Received)
    1824
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    False. He said he presumed it, but he can presume whatever he wants. That doesn't make it a fact. Also, his contemporaneous communication with Bill Taylor emphasized that the President was "crystal clear" that there was to be no quid pro quo.
    No. Gordon Sondland, has revised his testimony and has described an explicit quid pro quo. “Sondland admitted that he had told one of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s advisers that continuing to receive the U.S. aid was tied to their public announcement of two investigations sought by Trump”.

    https://time.com/5719342/trump-diplo...-quid-pro-quo/
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  5. #374
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    53,043
    Amen (Given)
    1125
    Amen (Received)
    19394
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    False. He said he presumed it, but he can presume whatever he wants. That doesn't make it a fact. Also, his contemporaneous communication with Bill Taylor emphasized that the President was "crystal clear" that there was to be no quid pro quo.
    And it was only after being told over and over by the MSM that it was quid pro quo that he suddenly decided "golly gee, they know better than me. It musta been quid pro quo"
    Last edited by rogue06; 11-09-2019 at 01:21 AM.

    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)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

  6. Amen NorrinRadd, Teallaura amen'd this post.
  7. #375
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    53,043
    Amen (Given)
    1125
    Amen (Received)
    19394
    Quote Originally Posted by Watermelon View Post
    Vindman has testified that the transcript is missing some key points, specifically the parts where they talk about Biden and Burisma. Vindman also explained that the transcript was compiled by note takers, as the call was not recorded, of which he was one.

    So its alleged that the transcript is neither verbatim or complete. Whether this is true or made up would be something that a trial would determine. However, this is only one component to the claim. That Trump demanded the investigation for aid didn't start and end with this phone call and the whistleblowers report details dates and events that have been corroborated by multiple witness testimonies.

    The main fact, not contested and central to this claim, is that the aid was held up under instructions from Trump who can't seem to remember why.

    Any prosecutor would tell you that this is more than enough to warrant an investigation. 'Smoking gun' type of evidence is pretty rare, most crimes are established by linking one piece of circumstantial evidence to another, similar to how scientific experiments link together to support scientific theories, until theres only one reasonable explanation to account for everything. Before complaining about lack of evidence to convict remember that the investigation is the process to gather the evidence!
    Nobody else seems to remember what Vindman does which is awfully strange don't you think? Moreover even the anti-Trump New York Times conceded that his additions didn't change anything.

    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)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

  8. Amen RumTumTugger, NorrinRadd, Teallaura amen'd this post.
  9. #376
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    17,872
    Amen (Given)
    5837
    Amen (Received)
    6374
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassmoron View Post
    No. Gordon Sondland, has revised his testimony and has described an explicit quid pro quo. “Sondland admitted that he had told one of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s advisers that continuing to receive the U.S. aid was tied to their public announcement of two investigations sought by Trump”.

    https://time.com/5719342/trump-diplo...-quid-pro-quo/
    Here's a look at Sondland's actual words:

    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Other sketchy statements from Sondland's "corrections" (again, emphasis mine):

    "I always believed that suspending aid to Ukraine was ill-advised, although I did not know (and still do not know) when, why, or by whom the aid was suspended. However, by the beginning of September 2019, and in the absence of any credible explanation for the suspension of aid, I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anti-corruption statement. As I said in my prepared testimony, security aid to Ukraine was in our vital national interest and should not have been delayed for any reason. [This is nothing but his opinion. -MM] And it would have been natural for me to have voiced what I had presumed to Ambassador Taylor, Senator Johnson, the Ukrainians, and Mr. Morrison."

    An awful lot of presuming going on. He also says "it would have been natural" for him to voice his concerns to interested parties, but pay attention to sleight of hand: He never says that he actually voiced his concerns!

    "Soon thereafter, I came to understand [Meaning he wasn't told. -MM] that, in fact, the public statement would need to come directly from President Zelensky himself. I do not specifically recall how I learned this [Again, the implication is that he wasn't told. -MM], but I believe that the information may have come either from Mr. Giuliani or from Ambassador Volkor, who may have discussed this with Mr. Giuliani."

    Remember, any time a witness says "may have", you can substitute "may not have" without changing the meaning of the statement.

    "In a later conversation with Ambassador Taylor, I told him that I had been mistaken about whether a public statement could come from the Prosecutor General; I had come to understand [The implication, again, is that this isn't something he was told. -MM] that the public statement would have to come from President Zelensky himself."

    Now see if you can follow along with this one:

    "Ambassador Taylor recalls that Mr. Morrison told Ambassador Taylor that I told Mr. Morrison that I had conveyed this message to Mr. Yermak..."

    That's like something out of a Marx Bros. skit!

    And on it goes. Taking apart testimony like this is like batting practice for defense attorneys.
    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. #377
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    13,992
    Amen (Given)
    1756
    Amen (Received)
    1496
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Here's a look at Sondland's actual words:
    "Presumptions" and "I came to understands" are simply ways of shielding the source out of which those beliefs were conveyed. Use your brain once in a while, MM. One doesn't just "presume" or "come to understand" the details of what someone else wants. Sondland didn't just presume that the president wanted investigations into the Bidens and crowdstrike, he didn't just presume that they wouldn't get their desperately needed military aid unless publicly opening investigations against the Bidens. Besides that, he at first denied he even knew or conveyed any such message to Ukraine only to revise his testimony after hearing the contradictory testimony of everyone else concerned who testified under oath. Don't be such a dumbell!

  11. #378
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    17,872
    Amen (Given)
    5837
    Amen (Received)
    6374
    Quote Originally Posted by JimLamebrain View Post
    "Presumptions" and "I came to understands" are simply ways of shielding the source out of which those beliefs were conveyed. Use your brain once in a while, MM. One doesn't just "presume" or "come to understand" the details of what someone else wants. Sondland didn't just presume that the president wanted investigations into the Bidens and crowdstrike, he didn't just presume that they wouldn't get their desperately needed military aid unless publicly opening investigations against the Bidens. Besides that, he at first denied he even knew or conveyed any such message to Ukraine only to revise his testimony after hearing the contradictory testimony of everyone else concerned who testified under oath. Don't be such a dumbell!
    Spin like that would make even Chuck Yaeger dizzy.
    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 NorrinRadd, Teallaura amen'd this post.
  13. #379
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    6,039
    Amen (Given)
    338
    Amen (Received)
    1655
    Quote Originally Posted by RumTumTugger View Post
    What evidence? So far All the Democrats have is third hand information based on peoples feelings or peoples feelings and opinions, presumptions on what was going on.
    That would be the line that is being pushed from the conservative news outlets. It simply does not line up with that actual evidence. I'm hearing this line from some republican senators, and from people like rogue who are normally capable of a reasoned evaluation of the evidence. And yet, I can see looking at the content of the transcripts that it simply is not true. And so I have no explanation for how intelligent people can believe that claim makes sense, but I am aware of the fact they, and apparently you, do. However, given you are intelligent and have access to information, I will assume you've read it. And given that, if you can accept that 'explanation' for the actual evidence, then I doubt very much there is anything I can say that will convince you otherwise.


    When someone accepts non evidence as evidence that wrong has been done because of what the person did in the past rather then wait for real evidence; or even hand waves the real evidence away presuming they know what a person really thinks happened but is afraid to say it, Is in my OPINION their showing hatred towards the person not what he's done.
    AFACT, that isn't what is happening here, at least not as a primary cause, but I doubt I can convince you that is the case.

    Oxmix, When have you ever acknowledged the good things trump has done without qualifying with but he's done this evil thing even if there is no basis to think he did it or that it was done with malice in his mind*?
    Not many times RTT. I have no reason to do so. And it is a false expectation. A double standard. Can you point me to the posts by Rogue, Sparko, MM, or CP that praise Obama or Hillary for the good they have done? If they exist, I would hazard a guess that their ratio of bad to good would be in the same ball park - at best - to my own as regards Donald Trump.

    The issue - especially the last few months - is that Trump is engaged in impeachable behavior. So even if there are things out there he is doing that are good, they are not the topic of discussion - anywhere. And especially not here.

    Right now the single most important element of this entire discussion to me is not Trump himself, but the fact that a large portion of the Evangelical Christian Church supports him. If you want to focus on what might be wrong with my thinking, or how I might be misguided, you need to either engage that issue directly, or provide actual evidence that the elements that rise to such a level of general badness that it would concern me a large part of the Evangelical Christian Church supports him are not what they appear to be.

    so please show me. show me my opinion is wrong about your bias being so bad agasint trump that you let it color your mind on what evil is.
    That would be impossible. Your opinion about me is not up for debate nor could it be changed by any words I could write.


    *and no I'm not saying that Trump hasn't done things I think are wrong I'm just saying I know human beings are not perfect and not all the things you say Trump did are things.
    1. he actually did
    or
    2 wrong.
    So far I've not seen any convincing evidence of what you say above. What I have seen is Trump doing some very bad things, and a lot of conservative and/or Christian people so angry at liberals and what they perceive as the bias of the main stream media that they are willing to compromise nearly every thing they believe in on the hope he will push back against those same liberals and MSM.

    That is what I see RTT.
    Last edited by oxmixmudd; 11-09-2019 at 08:56 AM.
    He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

    "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

  14. #380
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    53,043
    Amen (Given)
    1125
    Amen (Received)
    19394
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    That would be the line that is being pushed from the conservative news outlets. It simply does not line up with that actual evidence. I'm hearing this line from some republican senators, and from people like rogue who are normally capable of a reasoned evaluation of the evidence. And yet, I can see looking at the content of the transcripts that it simply is not true. And so I have no explanation for how intelligent people can believe that claim makes sense, but I am aware of the fact they, and apparently you, do. However, given you are intelligent and have access to information, I will assume you've read it. And given that, if you can accept that 'explanation' for the actual evidence, then I doubt very much there is anything I can say that will convince you otherwise.
    Considering the content of your posts over the past few months I'm no longer certain that you are capable of determining what actual evidence is. Don't believe me? Go back and look through some of it. You have consistently conflated rumors, suppositions and opinions with facts and evidence. You never would have done something like this previously.

    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)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

  15. Amen Mountain Man, RumTumTugger, NorrinRadd 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
  •