Deep State swamp rat blocks rand paul question

[B. Kidd]

No F'in wonder the Dimms want RINO Roberts' to have the final say on witnesses!

But too bad, it don't work dat'z way....

Roberts was one of Bush’s proudest achievements

Goodie for Bush....and, you.

 

[rightwinger]

It means whistleblower has protections
One of those protections is remaining anonymous and protection against retribution

Wrong.

ANALYSIS: Despite Schiff’s claims, whistleblower has no 'statutory right' to anonymity

Keeping him anonymous keeps him safe

Why do Republicans want to out him?

 

[rightwinger]

No F'in wonder the Dimms want RINO Roberts' to have the final say on witnesses!

But too bad, it don't work dat'z way....

Roberts was one of Bush’s proudest achievements

Goodie for Bush....and, you.

Dems will be happy to replace him for ya

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Yeah, Trump is not allowed to know his accuser. . . The Deep State is in charge of the nation now, the Constitution is just a damn piece of paper that is meaningless.


"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

Impeachment isn't a criminal prosecution. There are laws that protect whistleblowers.

That law protects their jobs not their identities

 

[Olde Europe]

The law cannot deny trump the right to face his accuser

that is every Americans right

Trump's accuser is the American people, as represented by the House of Representatives, a role currently delegated to the House Managers.

Trump had both the right and the opportunity to face his accusers, but the coward chickened out when he declined the invitation by the House Judiciary Committee.

Bullshit

the accuser is the spy who conspired with the democrats to launch this witch hunt

You know, dullard, it may be big words and all, but think about it.

The "accuser" is the person, group, or entity injured due to the perpetrator's criminality - in Trump's case, the injured is the American people who suffer the consequences of Trump's corruption.

Now, things get a bit more complicated, as the state, usually in the form of prosecutors, takes up the case and "accuse" the suspect of the criminal deeds alleged by either those injured or witnesses or both. In this case, it's the House Judiciary Committe, the House voting on the Articles of Impeachment, and the House Managers representing the American people as "accusers".

Either way, the whistleblower is a witness, or an informant, but not the "accuser".

As I said:

Trump's accuser is the American people, as represented by the House of Representatives, a role currently delegated to the House Managers.

Trump had both the right and the opportunity to face his accusers, but the coward chickened out when he declined the invitation by the House Judiciary Committee.

Savvy now?

 

[Muhammed]

No one said that 'draining the swamp' was gonna be purty.

Or easy. In fact, Trump specifically mentioned that the most difficult part would be finding good people who are willing to physically relocate to the disgusting moonbatshitholeland known as Washington DC. So the administration has been moving to decentralize and relocate federal jobs outside the beltway.

 

[B. Kidd]

No F'in wonder the Dimms want RINO Roberts' to have the final say on witnesses!

But too bad, it don't work dat'z way....

Roberts was one of Bush’s proudest achievements

Goodie for Bush....and, you.

Dems will be happy to replace him for ya

Win an election for a change and a chance.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yeah, Trump is not allowed to know his accuser. . . The Deep State is in charge of the nation now, the Constitution is just a damn piece of paper that is meaningless.


"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

Impeachment isn't a criminal prosecution. There are laws that protect whistleblowers.

But he's not a true whistleblower. It's just what they've been calling him. And even if he was, there is no law that protects his anonymity.

In what way is he not a true whistleblower?

For one, a whistleblower has to be somebody that directly heard or read something and outed a person. This spy got second hand information. He's not a whistleblower.

Manifestly untrue.

Very true. He can file a complaint, but is not considered an actual whistleblower.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It means whistleblower has protections
One of those protections is remaining anonymous and protection against retribution

Wrong.

ANALYSIS: Despite Schiff’s claims, whistleblower has no 'statutory right' to anonymity

Keeping him anonymous keeps him safe

Why do Republicans want to out him?

So if the suspected whistleblower is not the actual whistleblower, doesn't it put him at jeopardy if he's not? And wouldn't it make it safer instead of people who might act on suspicion, to know who is who to keep the innocent safe?

This safety issues is nothing more than a red herring so that he can't out Schiff Face. Nobody is threatening the whistleblower, and it's a made-up story to actually protect Schiff.

 

[Dragonlady]

No one said that 'draining the swamp' was gonna be purty.

Or easy. In fact, Trump specifically mentioned that the most difficult part would be finding good people who are willing to physically relocate to the disgusting moonbatshitholeland known as Washington DC. So the administration has been moving to decentralize and relocate federal jobs outside the beltway.

Yeah, like relocating all of those climate science people in the middle of the midwest, where they will never be heard from again.

 

[B. Kidd]

No one said that 'draining the swamp' was gonna be purty.

Or easy. In fact, Trump specifically mentioned that the most difficult part would be finding good people who are willing to physically relocate to the disgusting moonbatshitholeland known as Washington DC. So the administration has been moving to decentralize and relocate federal jobs outside the beltway.

Yeah, like relocating all of those climate science people in the middle of the midwest, where they will never be heard from again.

Do you know that you're not well?

 

[Mac-7]

The law cannot deny trump the right to face his accuser

that is every Americans right

Trump's accuser is the American people, as represented by the House of Representatives, a role currently delegated to the House Managers.

Trump had both the right and the opportunity to face his accusers, but the coward chickened out when he declined the invitation by the House Judiciary Committee.

Bullshit

the accuser is the spy who conspired with the democrats to launch this witch hunt

You know, dullard, it may be big words and all, but think about it.

The "accuser" is the person, group, or entity injured due to the perpetrator's criminality - in Trump's case, the injured is the American people who suffer the consequences of Trump's corruption.

Now, things get a bit more complicated, as the state, usually in the form of prosecutors, takes up the case and "accuse" the suspect of the criminal deeds alleged by either those injured or witnesses or both. In this case, it's the House Judiciary Committe, the House voting on the Articles of Impeachment, and the House Managers representing the American people as "accusers".

Either way, the whistleblower is a witness, or an informant, but not the "accuser".

As I said:

Trump's accuser is the American people, as represented by the House of Representatives, a role currently delegated to the House Managers.

Trump had both the right and the opportunity to face his accusers, but the coward chickened out when he declined the invitation by the House Judiciary Committee.

Savvy now?

There is no need for name calling just because you are losing the debate

It may sound poetic to you by claiming the American people accuse trump but to me its just stupid

his accusers are slimy swamp rats in washington and nothing more

 

[basquebromance]

Republicans give zero fucks about what the american people think. they only care about what their base thinks. they're not even trying.

only Romney asked good questions!

nevertheless, watch for Thillis & McSally, & Gardner...they may vote against Trump

 

[rightwinger]

No F'in wonder the Dimms want RINO Roberts' to have the final say on witnesses!

But too bad, it don't work dat'z way....

Roberts was one of Bush’s proudest achievements

Goodie for Bush....and, you.

Dems will be happy to replace him for ya

Win an election for a change and a chance.

You are the guys unhappy with Roberts

You picked him

 

[rightwinger]

It means whistleblower has protections
One of those protections is remaining anonymous and protection against retribution

Wrong.

ANALYSIS: Despite Schiff’s claims, whistleblower has no 'statutory right' to anonymity

Keeping him anonymous keeps him safe

Why do Republicans want to out him?

So if the suspected whistleblower is not the actual whistleblower, doesn't it put him at jeopardy if he's not? And wouldn't it make it safer instead of people who might act on suspicion, to know who is who to keep the innocent safe?

This safety issues is nothing more than a red herring so that he can't out Schiff Face. Nobody is threatening the whistleblower, and it's a made-up story to actually protect Schiff.

So if Republicans get the wrong guy, it is somehow the whistleblowers fault?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It means whistleblower has protections
One of those protections is remaining anonymous and protection against retribution

Wrong.

ANALYSIS: Despite Schiff’s claims, whistleblower has no 'statutory right' to anonymity

Keeping him anonymous keeps him safe

Why do Republicans want to out him?

So if the suspected whistleblower is not the actual whistleblower, doesn't it put him at jeopardy if he's not? And wouldn't it make it safer instead of people who might act on suspicion, to know who is who to keep the innocent safe?

This safety issues is nothing more than a red herring so that he can't out Schiff Face. Nobody is threatening the whistleblower, and it's a made-up story to actually protect Schiff.

So if Republicans get the wrong guy, it is somehow the whistleblowers fault?

Who said anything about Republicans? If something did happen to Ciaramella, and Schiff did nothing but allow the rumor to continue without correction, then he would be responsible for not making the correction in the first place.

 

[Dragonlady]

It means whistleblower has protections
One of those protections is remaining anonymous and protection against retribution

Wrong.

ANALYSIS: Despite Schiff’s claims, whistleblower has no 'statutory right' to anonymity

Keeping him anonymous keeps him safe

Why do Republicans want to out him?

So if the suspected whistleblower is not the actual whistleblower, doesn't it put him at jeopardy if he's not? And wouldn't it make it safer instead of people who might act on suspicion, to know who is who to keep the innocent safe?

This safety issues is nothing more than a red herring so that he can't out Schiff Face. Nobody is threatening the whistleblower, and it's a made-up story to actually protect Schiff.

So if Republicans get the wrong guy, it is somehow the whistleblowers fault?

Who said anything about Republicans? If something did happen to Ciaramella, and Schiff did nothing but allow the rumor to continue without correction, then he would be responsible for not making the correction in the first place.

No Trump would be responsible for telling his followers that the whistleblower should be sentenced to death for treason.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wrong.

ANALYSIS: Despite Schiff’s claims, whistleblower has no 'statutory right' to anonymity

Keeping him anonymous keeps him safe

Why do Republicans want to out him?

So if the suspected whistleblower is not the actual whistleblower, doesn't it put him at jeopardy if he's not? And wouldn't it make it safer instead of people who might act on suspicion, to know who is who to keep the innocent safe?

This safety issues is nothing more than a red herring so that he can't out Schiff Face. Nobody is threatening the whistleblower, and it's a made-up story to actually protect Schiff.

So if Republicans get the wrong guy, it is somehow the whistleblowers fault?

Who said anything about Republicans? If something did happen to Ciaramella, and Schiff did nothing but allow the rumor to continue without correction, then he would be responsible for not making the correction in the first place.

No Trump would be responsible for telling his followers that the whistleblower should be sentenced to death for treason.

Trump never said anything like that. Schiff Face made the claim he doesn't know who the WB is, but we all know that's a lie, because the man is a renown liar. So it's up to him to protect Ciaramella if he is not the WB. Apparently he is, or I'm sure an upstanding man like Schiff would have said something.

 

[rightwinger]

It means whistleblower has protections
One of those protections is remaining anonymous and protection against retribution

Wrong.

ANALYSIS: Despite Schiff’s claims, whistleblower has no 'statutory right' to anonymity

Keeping him anonymous keeps him safe

Why do Republicans want to out him?

So if the suspected whistleblower is not the actual whistleblower, doesn't it put him at jeopardy if he's not? And wouldn't it make it safer instead of people who might act on suspicion, to know who is who to keep the innocent safe?

This safety issues is nothing more than a red herring so that he can't out Schiff Face. Nobody is threatening the whistleblower, and it's a made-up story to actually protect Schiff.

So if Republicans get the wrong guy, it is somehow the whistleblowers fault?

Who said anything about Republicans? If something did happen to Ciaramella, and Schiff did nothing but allow the rumor to continue without correction, then he would be responsible for not making the correction in the first place.

It is conservatives trying to lynch the poor guy

Don’t blame Schiff

 

[Muhammed]

No one said that 'draining the swamp' was gonna be purty.

Or easy. In fact, Trump specifically mentioned that the most difficult part would be finding good people who are willing to physically relocate to the disgusting moonbatshitholeland known as Washington DC. So the administration has been moving to decentralize and relocate federal jobs outside the beltway.

Yeah, like relocating all of those climate science people in the middle of the midwest, where they will never be heard from again.

Perhaps they would develop a more objective, rational and less biased and unscientific opinion if they were were not constantly having DC swamp gas (aka political hot air) blown up their corrupt collective asses.