Page 9 of 21 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 207

Thread: Schiff Targets Political Rival, Journalist

  1. #81
    tWebber Teallaura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    In my house.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    16,060
    Amen (Given)
    10796
    Amen (Received)
    5968
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam View Post
    It was nothing, really. Just some blah blah blahs.
    So I gathered.

  2. #82
    tWebber Teallaura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    In my house.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    16,060
    Amen (Given)
    10796
    Amen (Received)
    5968
    Quote Originally Posted by Watermelon View Post
    How many people knew the details before the release? The whistleblower initially lodged the complaint to CIA counsel who then discussed it with a colleague who had already heard about multiple complaints regarding the call. They then discussed it with a head of a justice department branch who decided to go to the White House in order to read the call transcript to see if it warranted escalation. Then it seems like after the transcript was read every justice department head was called.

    It looks like a lot of people already knew of the details before the whistle blower even approached Schiffs office. Isn’t it possible anyone of them could have leaked?

    I really don’t know how the whistle blowing procedure works but what would the consequences be if Schiff really did lie about having prior knowledge of the reports contents?
    It violates the whistle blower statutes - the source of the complaint loses whistle blower status. Now he's just a leaker subject to firing and criminal investigation.

    Further, Schiff is implicated (again) in spying on the administration. Which makes Schiff an interested party - who is now (legally?) conducting the investigation bringing the whole thing into question.

    Fruit of the poisonous tree.

    FYI: Schiff has admitted the complainant had contact with Schiff's staff prior to the complaint being filed. Schiff has now been implicated in spying activity that predates the inquiry (the phone records).

    And just as the House gets to make up its own rules, so does the Senate, so you better believe this will come up at trial. I think you can imagine how the blame game goes from there.

  3. #83
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    55,308
    Amen (Given)
    1170
    Amen (Received)
    20390
    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    It violates the whistle blower statutes - the source of the complaint loses whistle blower status. Now he's just a leaker subject to firing and criminal investigation.

    Further, Schiff is implicated (again) in spying on the administration. Which makes Schiff an interested party - who is now (legally?) conducting the investigation bringing the whole thing into question.

    Fruit of the poisonous tree.

    FYI: Schiff has admitted the complainant had contact with Schiff's staff prior to the complaint being filed. Schiff has now been implicated in spying activity that predates the inquiry (the phone records).

    And just as the House gets to make up its own rules, so does the Senate, so you better believe this will come up at trial. I think you can imagine how the blame game goes from there.
    00000000000000ab000-00aaag.jpg

    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

  4. #84
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,821
    Amen (Given)
    158
    Amen (Received)
    730
    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    It violates the whistle blower statutes - the source of the complaint loses whistle blower status. Now he's just a leaker subject to firing and criminal investigation.
    This is not true; there's nothing in the statute (or relevant case law) that forbids a person making a complaint to ICIG from sharing non-classified information with other parties. And a "leak" would involve sharing detailed or classified information and no evidence suggests that the whistleblower shared detailed or classified information with HPSCI.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    Further, Schiff is implicated (again) in spying on the administration. Which makes Schiff an interested party - who is now (legally?) conducting the investigation bringing the whole thing into question.

    Fruit of the poisonous tree.
    That's not what "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine means. There's no evidence suggesting that details of whistleblower's complaint or subsequent information was obtained illegally.

    But if we want to start talking about the conduct of the investigation being called into question, one would expect people here to be really upset that the ranking member did not disclose his prior phone conversations and/or meetings with key targets of the investigation. Instead, we're talking about this in a threat that accuses the chairman of "targeting" the ranking member by including those call logs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    FYI: Schiff has admitted the complainant had contact with Schiff's staff prior to the complaint being filed. Schiff has now been implicated in spying activity that predates the inquiry (the phone records).

    And just as the House gets to make up its own rules, so does the Senate, so you better believe this will come up at trial. I think you can imagine how the blame game goes from there.
    That's not "spying". You're not spying when you subpoena call records from Parnas and Giuliani during the investigation and the ranking member happens to show up in those logs in calls that predate the inquiry.

    When we're getting to the point where linear time itself is a matter of debate, it's a pretty grim indication of the road ahead or behind.

    --Sam
    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"


  5. #85
    tWebber Teallaura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    In my house.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    16,060
    Amen (Given)
    10796
    Amen (Received)
    5968
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam View Post
    This is not true; there's nothing in the statute (or relevant case law) that forbids a person making a complaint to ICIG from sharing non-classified information with other parties. And a "leak" would involve sharing detailed or classified information and no evidence suggests that the whistleblower shared detailed or classified information with HPSCI.



    That's not what "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine means. There's no evidence suggesting that details of whistleblower's complaint or subsequent information was obtained illegally.

    But if we want to start talking about the conduct of the investigation being called into question, one would expect people here to be really upset that the ranking member did not disclose his prior phone conversations and/or meetings with key targets of the investigation. Instead, we're talking about this in a threat that accuses the chairman of "targeting" the ranking member by including those call logs.



    That's not "spying". You're not spying when you subpoena call records from Parnas and Giuliani during the investigation and the ranking member happens to show up in those logs in calls that predate the inquiry.

    When we're getting to the point where linear time itself is a matter of debate, it's a pretty grim indication of the road ahead or behind.

    --Sam
    Yeah you'll support Schiff no matter what because destroying Trump is more important than the country. Got it.

  6. Amen RumTumTugger amen'd this post.
  7. #86
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    6,942
    Amen (Given)
    457
    Amen (Received)
    1809
    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    Yeah you'll support Schiff no matter what because destroying Trump is more important than the country. Got it.
    That isn't what he said, nor is it an implication of what he said.

    That comment is nothing more than a petty jab at sam.
    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"

  8. #87
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,821
    Amen (Given)
    158
    Amen (Received)
    730
    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    Yeah you'll support Schiff no matter what because destroying Trump is more important than the country. Got it.
    Well, right now we're dealing with allegations against Schiff that are either

    Not factual (demonstrably false)
    Unsourced (not evidenced)
    Not-even-wrong (based on misunderstanding or misrepresentation of legal matters)

    In the post above, we're talking about whether Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine applies to evidence collected by the committee and whether Schiff engaged in spying activity to obtain call records including Nunes and Solomon.

    To the first allegation, it's just a misrepresentation of what FotPT doctrine entails: the evidence has been obtained through lawful means with the ICIG sending the whistleblower complaint and through subsquent subpoenas (which some folks here imagined for awhile were without force of law but have since moved on).

    But while the committees subpoenas were unlawful, we know that the whistleblower complaint was unlawfully withheld from Congress and security funding for Ukraine was unlawfully withheld (since the lawful holds that could be placed on the aid require notification to Congress that didn't occur).

    To the second allegation, it's also in the not-even-wrong category: the committee lawfully obtained call records of key investigative interests, including Lev Parnas (indicted) and Rudy Giuliani (a likely co-conspirator to Parnas and central figure in the main investigation). That's not "spying", which is a clandestine acquisition of contemporaneous information, typically outside the existence of a law enforcement framework.

    That Devin Nunes and John Solomon have been found, through an examination of call records, to have had direct conversations with those two figures at key moments in the investigative time line isn't spying so I stand on good ground to support Schiff against a false charge.

    The question is why several of y'all feel the need to falsely attack Schiff for finding and releasing information that strongly suggests Nunes and Solomon had knowledge of one or more conspiracies as they were occurring and not only said nothing but actively engaged in a disinformation campaign during the investigation. What about Nunes or Solomon, to you, screams that everything there was on the up-and-up?

    --Sam
    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"


  9. #88
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,318
    Amen (Given)
    1899
    Amen (Received)
    1580
    Quote Originally Posted by Teallaura View Post
    For the sixth time, prove it.
    Oh, that's easy. Schiff didn't have access to the data in the complaint, and the data in the complaint was substantiated, so the only one that could possibly have had anything to do with facts contained in the complaint itself, was the whistleblower himself. What do you think, that Schiff made the whole thing up and then it just happened to turn out to be true?

  10. #89
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    59,074
    Amen (Given)
    12761
    Amen (Received)
    27228
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    Oh, that's easy. Schiff didn't have access to the data in the complaint, and the data in the complaint was substantiated, so the only one that could possibly have had anything to do with facts contained in the complaint itself, was the whistleblower himself. What do you think, that Schiff made the whole thing up and then it just happened to turn out to be true?
    Even the NYTimes calls Schiff out on this....

    Schiff Got Early Account of Accusations as Whistle-Blower’s Concerns Grew

    WASHINGTON — The Democratic head of the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, learned about the outlines of a C.I.A. officer’s concerns that President Trump had abused his power days before the officer filed a whistle-blower complaint, according to a spokesman and current and former American officials.

    The early account by the future whistle-blower shows how determined he was to make known his allegations that Mr. Trump asked Ukraine’s government to interfere on his behalf in the 2020 election. It also explains how Mr. Schiff knew to press for the complaint when the Trump administration initially blocked lawmakers from seeing it.

    The C.I.A. officer approached a House Intelligence Committee aide with his concerns about Mr. Trump only after he had had a colleague first convey them to the C.I.A.’s top lawyer. Concerned about how that initial avenue for airing his allegations through the C.I.A. was unfolding, the officer then approached the House aide. In both cases, the original accusation was vague.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  11. #90
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,318
    Amen (Given)
    1899
    Amen (Received)
    1580
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Even the NYTimes calls Schiff out on this....

    Schiff Got Early Account of Accusations as Whistle-Blower’s Concerns Grew

    WASHINGTON — The Democratic head of the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, learned about the outlines of a C.I.A. officer’s concerns that President Trump had abused his power days before the officer filed a whistle-blower complaint, according to a spokesman and current and former American officials.

    The early account by the future whistle-blower shows how determined he was to make known his allegations that Mr. Trump asked Ukraine’s government to interfere on his behalf in the 2020 election. It also explains how Mr. Schiff knew to press for the complaint when the Trump administration initially blocked lawmakers from seeing it.

    The C.I.A. officer approached a House Intelligence Committee aide with his concerns about Mr. Trump only after he had had a colleague first convey them to the C.I.A.’s top lawyer. Concerned about how that initial avenue for airing his allegations through the C.I.A. was unfolding, the officer then approached the House aide. In both cases, the original accusation was vague.
    What about it? How is that "calling Schiff out?"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •