Whistleblower identified

[Tassman]

They never argued that at all.

Nevertheless team Trump behaves as though he's above the law.

[Cow Poke]

And you cutting of discussion over me simply making inferences that implied by almost every word you speak is one of the things that makes having discussions with you so frustrating.

Why don't you ASK, instead of assuming, then launch your diatribe on what you decided I think. All I was saying was that Mueller could have saved a whole lot of angst by being more clear - Like Starr, he simply could have presented his case that there was enough evidence for an impeachment inquiry - which is NOT an indictment as you kept arguing.

Really, it's so bad that if yousaid 'I like like the sea' you would then throw a fit and stop the conversation if later I said in response to that 'CP likes the water'

That's just dumb.

I'm cutting off discussion with you because I'm tired of you assuming what others are saying and building your argument on that, and continually lumping me in with others with whom you are at war.

You seem to have FAR more in common with the anti-Christian bigots here than you do your fellow Christians.

You don't need me for your discussions, Jim --- Just go on assuming what I think and argue that.

I'm done with you.

[RumTumTugger]

First of all, it's only a summary transcript, which is bad enough in its redacted self. But, remember, don't focus solely on the transcript, which is what Trump and his minions would like you to focus on. The transcript, which Trump lawyers decided to hide in a super secure server after being informed of the contents of the call by the whistleblower, that transcript was just the alarm bell which led to the investigation, but it's what the investigation itself revealed that's led to the impeachment. You're going to get to see all of that evidence being testified to now that the inquirey is about to be opened to the public.

Sorry JimL the transcript is by 2 people who listened in to the phone call and transcribed what they heard it is their job to do that so, no, it is not a summary it is as accurate you can get to the actual recording of the call since they were there. If all you are going by is Adam Schiff's "parody" of the call, or the Whistleblower's third hand information or even the leaked opinion of the someone who thinks what he did was wrong that does not do it. Give me where in that actual transcribed transcript we have from Trump that he did what you and your leftist handlers are asserting.

[rogue06]

Sorry JimL the transcript is by 2 people who listened in to the phone call and transcribed what they heard it is their job to do that so, no, it is not a summary it is as accurate you can get to the actual recording of the call since they were there. If all you are going by is Adam Schiff's "parody" of the call, or the Whistleblower's third hand information or even the leaked opinion of the someone who thinks what he did was wrong that does not do it. Give me where in that actual transcribed transcript we have from Trump that he did what you and your leftist handlers are asserting.

As I've said, the left needs to disparage the transcript of the call since it contradicts the narrative that they want to put out so you get this sort of nonsense about it and the continuous stream of folks to recall their "impressions" about the call.

[rogue06]

And they wonder why the President decries them as fake news.

As we've been told that is far worse then actually siccing the federal government on them

[Tassman]

Sorry JimL the transcript is by 2 people who listened in to the phone call and transcribed what they heard it is their job to do that so, no, it is not a summary it is as accurate you can get to the actual recording of the call since they were there. If all you are going by is Adam Schiff's "parody" of the call, or the Whistleblower's third hand information or even the leaked opinion of the someone who thinks what he did was wrong that does not do it. Give me where in that actual transcribed transcript we have from Trump that he did what you and your leftist handlers are asserting.

In the summary, Zelensky asks Trump for an increase in military aid — specifically, to purchase more anti-tank missiles, needed for Ukraine’s ongoing conflict with Russian-backed separatists. And Trump responds by saying, “I would like you to do us a favor though.” That's damning enough without the addition of Vindman's testimony that the White House omitted Trump's reference to Biden tapes in transcript of Zelensky call.

[JimL]

They never argued that at all.

And you wonder why I don't always go through the trouble of citing my sources. Did you even read it? Did you read the judges response to that argument? Apparently not. Go back and read it, and then tell me that the lawyer for the President never argued that the President could not be investigated.

[JimL]

Sorry JimL the transcript is by 2 people who listened in to the phone call and transcribed what they heard it is their job to do that so, no, it is not a summary it is as accurate you can get to the actual recording of the call since they were there. If all you are going by is Adam Schiff's "parody" of the call, or the Whistleblower's third hand information or even the leaked opinion of the someone who thinks what he did was wrong that does not do it. Give me where in that actual transcribed transcript we have from Trump that he did what you and your leftist handlers are asserting.

When Zelensky requests military equipment to fend of our common adversary who is waging war with them and the President in response says, "but I would like you to do us a favor though" that's what you call a quid pro quo. In other words we'll give you the assistance you need, but first we need something in return. That's the implication. But the implication is backed up by the corraborating evidence, and the corraborating evidence, the witness testimony and the revealed activities of Trumps shadow government working in Ukraine backs up that implication. It's the corraborating evidence you need to worry about now, not the redacted transcript. Although it would be nice to see the complete, unredacted transcript, don't you think?

[oxmixmudd]

That's just dumb.

It would be of it were not true. Cp, you act as if what you think about things is some grand mystery and that your words can not possibly be used to derive your point of view

While at the same time you make the very same inferences, or even worse, from my posts. And believe me, your capacity to understand what I'm actually thinking about these things is hardly stellar. And yet I'm not throwing a fit everytime you misrepresent or misunderstand some comment I've made. From now on I'm just going to ignore your protests on this matter until and unless you can stop making wild eyed misrepresentations of my own positions. On this issue you are just as afflicted, if not more so.

I'll reply to any other other elements of this post ithat address substance in a separate post.

[oxmixmudd]

As I've said, the left needs to disparage the transcript of the call since it contradicts the narrative that they want to put out so you get this sort of nonsense about it and the continuous stream of folks to recall their "impressions" about the call.

1) It is not a transcript- which is itself a problem. It should be a word for word transcript. But Trump doesnt want that. And we all know why.

2) It is itself damning enough that people aware of its implications but who wanted to protect Trump had it stashed on a server for classified or highly sensitive data

3) key elements specific to the content of Trumps 'favor' were purposefully omitted as we have been informed by eyewitness testimony. These elements show even more clearly the intent to condition the aid in an investigation of biden, not general corruption.

4)there is significant evidence outside the call itself which shows the investigation of the bidens was a precondition to the aid and to critical shows of support for ukraine and its new president by our president.

These are the simple facts rogue. And they show illegal quid pro quo for personal gain by Trump

[oxmixmudd]

It would be of it were not true. Cp, you act as if what you think about things is some grand mystery and that your words can not possibly be used to derive your point of view

While at the same time you make the very same inferences, or even worse, from my posts. And believe me, your capacity to understand what I'm actually thinking about these things is hardly stellar. And yet I'm not throwing a fit everytime you misrepresent or misunderstand some comment I've made. From now on I'm just going to ignore your protests on this matter until and unless you can stop making wild eyed misrepresentations of my own positions. On this issue you are just as afflicted, if not more so.

I'll reply to any other other elements of this post ithat address substance in a separate post.

ETA, I hadn't read your last words yet. If I cut off conversations with every person here I believed misunderstood a statement of mine, there would be no one left to talk to. Hopefully youll eventually figure out the problem on this front is more in your court than mine.

[Cow Poke]

And you wonder why I don't always go through the trouble of citing my sources.

I don't.

[Cow Poke]

It would be of it were not true. Cp, you act as if what you think about things is some grand mystery and that your words can not possibly be used to derive your point of view

While at the same time you make the very same inferences, or even worse, from my posts. And believe me, your capacity to understand what I'm actually thinking about these things is hardly stellar. And yet I'm not throwing a fit everytime you misrepresent or misunderstand some comment I've made. From now on I'm just going to ignore your protests on this matter until and unless you can stop making wild eyed misrepresentations of my own positions. On this issue you are just as afflicted, if not more so.

I'll reply to any other other elements of this post ithat address substance in a separate post.

done a.png

[Cow Poke]

ETA, I hadn't read your last words yet. If I cut off conversations with every person here I believed misunderstood a statement of mine, there would be no one left to talk to. Hopefully youll eventually figure out the problem on this front is more in your court than mine.

all done.jpg

[Juvenal]

This thread features a notable dearth of condemnation of these attempts to out a whistleblower who was already receiving death threats, so let's fix that.

I condemn this attempt to out a whistleblower who was already subject to death threats.

People of good conscience needn't hang back on joining me.

I'll add that it is near certain that the whistleblower will eventually be named, and that the name cited in the o/p has not been confirmed (but is likely correct).


Now, on with the taunting ...

Unfortunately I cannot think of any particular source that everyone would likely agree are completely nonpartisan and aboveboard. Imagine, for instance, finding a news source that seer, MM and lilpix on the one hand, and tass, star and little jimmyL on the other, both agree was always fair and balanced.

Just today, I found seer citing pewforum.org authoritatively, a source I've described as the premiere source on religious belief in America.

So there,

If you're gonna pick your own standard, why does it even matter what Jesus said?

As if you didn't choose to pick Jesus' standard.

Pshh.

Or better, the standard that's been reported as coming from Jesus, by folks who don't seem otherwise more than middlin' honest in their reporting. Not that that matters if what they're reporting checks out.



A lot of the stuff reported from Jesus makes good sense, without needing to weigh it down with petty fallacies, like arguments from authority. "Love one another" is good advice for folks looking to get things done cooperatively.

Other stuff needs to be re-interpreted to get past the head-scratching.

A "brood of vipers" isn't evil, just dangerous, and even then only if mishandled, and its emphasis in Matthew likely tells us more about Matthew's penchant for hyperbole and fear of snakes than anything of actual import other than the possible lesson that even a god can have a bad day. Hardly news, or necessary though, as Leda'd likely agree.



There are things that one tradition does much better than another, though. No one does inner peace and tranquility better than the four noble truths of Buddhism. No one does healing better than the repentance and forgiveness of the Christians. No one does unity of humanity better than the Brahman of the Hindus.

Don't worry about me, I'll just sit here in the dark.

Nobody does guilt better than Jewish mothers.

And nobody does baking better than the Jerk™.

cookies.jpg

Come over to the dark side. We've got cookies.