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.
See more
See less

Whistleblower identified

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by JimL View Post
    You are assuming he is lying, because that's what you've been told.
    No, Jim, I am assuming he's lying because it's almost impossible to believe he does not know the identity. Even Ox granted that.

    You have no clue,
    Actually, I do - and it's rather obvious in the way Schiff was trying to keep witnesses from referring to the alleged whistle blower --- if Schiff doesn't know who it is, how can he protect him?

    and it gets hand waved away because it's irrelevant.
    So, lying is irrelevant when it's done by the guy whom makes himself both judge and chief prosecutor, and calls for bathroom breaks so he can run out to the cameras and give the latest spin?

    Schiff is a political hack. IF this goes to trial in the Senate, perhaps he'll be a witness under oath.
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by JimL View Post
      Fake news? Is that what you call watching the hearings and the testimony itself? Apparently you should try it, you might learn the difference between fake and real news.

      http://apnews.com/e6b5c1b4adbc40dda0bb4f7fba8bae1d

      Morrison, along with Taylor, was told by Sondland on September 1 of the quid pro quo, i.e. an exchange of the military aid for investigations into the Bidens and Burisma. Sondland admitted to the quid pro quo himself, in his own testimony on Wednesday.
      Sondland 'admitted' to his presumption yet again. This does not qualify as proof of Trump's intent. Not even remotely.
      "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

      "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

      My Personal Blog

      My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

      Quill Sword

      Comment


      • Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
        Was he a Marine (there’s no such thing as a former Marine, simply a Marine that’s no longer in the corps)? That’s the difference between the Air Force and the other branches. The Air Force is like being part of a big corporation, the Army and Navy is ‘true military’, and the Marines are sort of like a cult group.
        No, he was a retired Air Force colonel.
        "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

        "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

        My Personal Blog

        My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

        Quill Sword

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          So clarify, please.... if Schiff knows the identity, and he repeatedly claims he does not, he's lying. Is that acceptable to you?
          Nah - you answer my question first:

          Are you going to tell the cartel where the fellow they are looking for is hiding if you happen to know? Or will you 'lie' and say 'nope, don't know where he is'.
          My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

          If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

          This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

          Comment


          • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
            Nah - you answer my question first:
            Playing games, instead of answering the question, I see.

            Are you going to tell the cartel where the fellow they are looking for is hiding if you happen to know?
            It's a really dumb analogy, Jim, as the entire world already knows who the alleged whistle blower is.

            Or will you 'lie' and say 'nope, don't know where he is'.
            Again, dumb analogy. Your desperation to defend Schiff's outright lie is duly noted.
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
              Of course he's lying. He at first claimed that he had no contact with the whistle blower whatsoever, and then he admitted that the whistle blower actually had been in contact with his office but that he knew nothing about it -- as if his staff wouldn't have told him that a CIA operative was looking to dish dirt on Trump and wanted help filling out the paperwork. Then there's the incident with Vindman's testimony...

              Republicans: "Who did you talk to about the phone call?"
              Vindman: "I spoke with two people: Kent, and someone in the CIA named-"
              Schiff: "Don't say the whistle blower's name!"

              Which begs he question: How did Schiff know who's name Vindman was about to reveal?
              Maybe Schiff had heard Vindmans testimony before? Vindman could’ve said “Kent and the whistleblower” in the previous version.

              Maybe Schiff hadn’t heard this before and didn’t know whose names would be named and stopped it just in case?

              Unless Schiff previously claimed he knew who the whistleblower is then it’s still an assumption.

              Is there a reason for Schiff to lie about this?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                Does it matter given that the whistle-blower's complaints have been corroborated by numerous people. Besides he/she is protected by the Whistleblower Protection Act.
                Eric Ciaramella is NOT a whistleblower no matter how much the left and MSM try to change the definition. He is a leaker plain and simple.

                Now, having got that out of the way, his hearsay gossip has not been corroborated as a simple look at the transcript reveals.

                Trump, as Ciaramella claimed, was not obsessed with talking about Biden constantly bringing him up seven or eight times. In reality, Trump brought Biden up once and that was near the end of the conversation and almost as an afterthought.

                Further, the transcript clearly shows that his claim that Trump demanded that Zelensky "dig up some dirt" on Biden if he ever wanted to get any aid is not even remotely based on reality. It simply never happened.

                And Ciaramella's claim that Trump told Zelensky that the latter wouldn't get any aide unless he complied with this never made demand is likewise nothing short of a falsehood. The fact that the Ukrainians never even opened up an investigation much less dug up dirt and still got their aid verifies the claim is false.

                Likewise his claim that at the end of the call Trump told Zelensky not to call back until he did what Trump demanded of also never happened. Not even remotely close. In reality, Trump congratulated him on his victory

                Those are just four or five of the myriad of major inaccuracies that plague the supposed whistleblower's story[1] -- which would be more than sufficient to get him branded as being an unreliable witness that no lawyer would want to go near in any court of law. Well at least lawyers who would use him as a witness since those cross-examining him would regard him as a God send and would be chomping at the bit in anticipation of tearing him to shreds.








                1. I hesitate at calling them deliberate lies only because that implies that Ciaramella had actual knowledge of the call which he did not have. All he had was second and third hand gossip.
                Last edited by rogue06; 11-23-2019, 02:16 AM. Reason: Left out part in red

                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 Watermelon View Post
                  Maybe Schiff had heard Vindmans testimony before? Vindman could’ve said “Kent and the whistleblower” in the previous version.

                  Maybe Schiff hadn’t heard this before and didn’t know whose names would be named and stopped it just in case?

                  Unless Schiff previously claimed he knew who the whistleblower is then it’s still an assumption.
                  The fact that Schiff made it clear that if anyone mentioned Ciaramella's name he would immediately jump in and put a stop to it is impossible unless Schiff knew the supposed whistleblowers name.

                  Originally posted by Watermelon View Post
                  Is there a reason for Schiff to lie about this?
                  Yes. For one, he's still trying to pretend that he and/or his staff didn't coordinate things with Ciaramella. But then Schiff still maintains to have a "mountain" of evidence proving that Trump colluded with the Russians to rig the 2016 election -- supposed evidence that he refused to share with Mueller and still, for some bizarre reason, still won't release.

                  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 Mountain Man View Post
                    I've gotten a little better.
                    Took me quite some time before I could say the same.

                    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 Watermelon View Post
                      Maybe Schiff had heard Vindmans testimony before? Vindman could’ve said “Kent and the whistleblower” in the previous version.
                      As in "and the whistle blower", not named? Or as in "Kent and ___________", actually naming the whistle blower?

                      Maybe Schiff hadn’t heard this before and didn’t know whose names would be named and stopped it just in case?
                      You honestly think that's plausible?

                      Unless Schiff previously claimed he knew who the whistleblower is then it’s still an assumption.
                      Sure, but it's an absolutely strong assumption with no reason to believe it's not true.

                      Is there a reason for Schiff to lie about this?
                      Because Schiff has woven a web of deceit about his office having no contact with the whistle blower, then having to back down when it was show that the whistle blower did, indeed, have contact with his office, so he Schiffted to "I did not PERSONALLY have contact...."

                      How would it be possible for everybody in DC to know who the whistle blower is --- EXCEPT Schiff, who has made himself the chief prosecutor and judge and jury of this impeachment show?
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                        Took me quite some time before I could say the same.
                        workin on it
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          The fact that Schiff made it clear that if anyone mentioned Ciaramella's name he would immediately jump in and put a stop to it is impossible unless Schiff knew the supposed whistleblowers name.


                          Yes. For one, he's still trying to pretend that he and/or his staff didn't coordinate things with Ciaramella. But then Schiff still maintains to have a "mountain" of evidence proving that Trump colluded with the Russians to rig the 2016 election -- supposed evidence that he refused to share with Mueller and still, for some bizarre reason, still won't release.
                          Fair enough.

                          I’m guessing you didn’t make much of the testimonies either, but are you doubting they had acted in good faith?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            Yes. For one, he's still trying to pretend that he and/or his staff didn't coordinate things with Ciaramella. But then Schiff still maintains to have a "mountain" of evidence proving that Trump colluded with the Russians to rig the 2016 election -- supposed evidence that he refused to share with Mueller and still, for some bizarre reason, still won't release.
                            The guy is a serial liar, and this is who the Democrats have chosen to be their point man as chief prosecutor, judge and media spokesperson.

                            And the liberals defend him "at every turn".
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              The guy is a serial liar, and this is who the Democrats have chosen to be their point man as chief prosecutor, judge and media spokesperson.
                              Which is why I wonder if Pelosi tried to deliberately sabotage any impeachment.

                              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 Post
                                Which is why I wonder if Pelosi tried to deliberately sabotage any impeachment.
                                That's an interesting thought! She's not stupid, and she hasn't wanted the impeachment, but HAD to appear to be gung ho over it ---- she can blame Schiff for blowing it, and her fingerprints are not all over it.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                45 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                230 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                173 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                72 responses
                                283 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X