Schiff withholding transcript that exposes his prior contact with whistleblower

[Crepitus]

Intel Committee Member Muses Why Schiff Is Blocking IG Atkinson's Transcript
Intel Committee Member Muses Why Schiff Is Blocking IG Atkinson's Transcript

A much more reasonable explanation is that it compromises the whistleblower identity.

Not sure what his identity has to do with jack shit?

Who cares?

Find for me ANYWHERE in here, that requires a Whistle-blower remain anonymous?

The Whistleblower Protection Programs | Whistleblower Protection Program

OTH. . . There is, enshrined in our culture, the exact reverse. You will find not much sympathy for keeping an anonymous accuser in this case. I am continually astounded how the corporate media just brainwash and program the masses to things that are simply NOT TRUE.

"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."
Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

His/her life has been threatened by the *president* himself. Anonymity is his/her best defense.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Setup?
What evidence is there of a "setup"?

Subsequent testimony has only corroborated the WB.

how about schiff tweeting about it a month ahead of time.

let's just start there and see if you're after the truth, or trump. different goals entirely.

You didn't answer my question. When Schiff became aware of a WB complaint does not change the substance of that complaint or the subsequent testimony corroborating that substance.

Where is the setup?

that's where it started. why not come forward there and say "we need to look into this". instead he used it to attack trump and build a complete case created from hearsay.

would you allow hearsay evidence against your family? if not, why is it ok here?

it's a setup. trump is coming after them for milking taxpayers for billions it would seem and you don't even seem to care about that. just getting rid of trump. you ever stop to think...what is trump is right? they WERE laundering money!

You're not making a case for a setup. You're bitching about the process.

How did they "setup" the corroborating testimony from the witnesses?

well since the process itself is changing to suit the needs of the setup, they've been combined by the left. tell them to stop combining things and it won't be as confusing.

It's not confusing at all. You're confused because you're incompetent.

You still have not made a case for a setup.
How did they "setup" the corroborating testimony from the witnesses?

 

[Crepitus]

Why is the WB so important at this time in your mind?

cause it is like "ground 0" for the setup. how can someones testimony suddenly be not valid or needed? didn't hold up? wasn't true? tell me, why do you not need your original complaint? got a lot of other crap you thew on the wall to confuse things?

Setup?
What evidence is there of a "setup"?

Subsequent testimony has only corroborated the WB.

That Is why an investigation....we have the transcript that Vindman tried to alter! And who is he a d why did he try to alter what the president said...A Russisn Agent?

Who is he?
The Director for European Affairs for the United States National Security Council (NSC).

How is Vindman doing his job evidence of a "setup"?

and how is trump doing his job to find corruption in our gov NOT doing HIS job?

the corrupt don't like him it would seem.

tRump doesn't find corruption, he creates it.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Why is the WB so important at this time in your mind?

cause it is like "ground 0" for the setup. how can someones testimony suddenly be not valid or needed? didn't hold up? wasn't true? tell me, why do you not need your original complaint? got a lot of other crap you thew on the wall to confuse things?

Setup?
What evidence is there of a "setup"?

Subsequent testimony has only corroborated the WB.

That Is why an investigation....we have the transcript that Vindman tried to alter! And who is he a d why did he try to alter what the president said...A Russisn Agent?

Who is he?
The Director for European Affairs for the United States National Security Council (NSC).

How is Vindman doing his job evidence of a "setup"?

and how is trump doing his job to find corruption in our gov NOT doing HIS job?

the corrupt don't like him it would seem.

That is not what the evidence has shown.

Please explain the importance of the WB.

 

[easyt65]

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff has released 15 transcripts of closed-door testimony in the Democrats' impeachment investigation, but one remains under lock and key. It's the transcript of the more than eight hours of testimony of Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson on Oct. 4, noted investigative reporter Paul Sperry in a tweet.

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...

------------

That transcript will never see the light of day.

Unless they push this to a Senate trial and they subpoena it.

Wouldn't that be a perjury charge for the sack of Schitt!

'Obstruction'.

Schiff is already an undeniable compromised US politician, having accepted quite a lot of money from a Russian-born arms dealer who conducted business with corrupt former Ukraine officials AND having taken money from Burisma / Burisma-associated companies.

He has proven himself 'guilty' of Sedition by intentionally falsely claiming for 2+ years that he had DIRECT 'evidence' of crimes committed by the President in an attempt to create both political / public uprisings to affect the unwarranted removal of the President of the United States from office.

He has undeniably, publicly declared he and his office had contact with the non-qualifying whistle blower and even attempted to justify it...until it was pointed out that such contact made him a CONTACT WITNESS which disqualifies him not only from leading these Impeachment proceedings but from even taking part in them.

Pelosi is more than happy to allow Nadler and Schiff disgrace their positions as elected US House members, break laws, violate citizens' Constitutional rights, and undermine and attack a US President while attending a NATO Summit meeting abroad, claiming 'I don't attack a US President while he is conducting business abroad'...but allows Schiff to do so. I thought she was Speaker of the House, that she LED her fellow Democrats in the House.

Claiming to not attack a US President abroad while allowing her fellow House members to undermine the US President who is out of the country attending a NATO Summit meeting is evidence that she really believes the American people are stupid and buys her BS.

 

[Lysistrata]

As a side note: I'm looking forward to the ethics investigation of Nunes. How can he have taken a little trip to Ukraine to meet with the ex-prosecutor there, and then fail to disclose this trip to the intelligence committee while serving as the ranking republican on the committee during the impeachment investigation?

 

[MisterBeale]

Intel Committee Member Muses Why Schiff Is Blocking IG Atkinson's Transcript
Intel Committee Member Muses Why Schiff Is Blocking IG Atkinson's Transcript

A much more reasonable explanation is that it compromises the whistleblower identity.

Not sure what his identity has to do with jack shit?

Who cares?

Find for me ANYWHERE in here, that requires a Whistle-blower remain anonymous?

The Whistleblower Protection Programs | Whistleblower Protection Program

OTH. . . There is, enshrined in our culture, the exact reverse. You will find not much sympathy for keeping an anonymous accuser in this case. I am continually astounded how the corporate media just brainwash and program the masses to things that are simply NOT TRUE.

"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."
Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

This is not a criminal trial, just an investigation, and impeachment at any stage is not a criminal proceeding. The only detrimental result that it could possibly have is trump hearing his own magic words: "you're fired."

Whistleblowers are protected from retaliation, including threats of physical harm.

Shut up Canuck, you don't know what you are talking about.

You are just parroting talking points of the corporate media. . .. talking points which are patently wrong I might add.

All folks are protected from retaliation, that is a given. Whether it is office politics, or a corporate grievance needing arbitration. None the less, everyone is entitled to confront their accuser, as this eliminates that appearance of conflict of interest.

Naturally, we live in a civilized society where everyone is protected from not only physical harm, but all sorts of other actualized harm as well. If you had bothered to investigate that whistle-blower link, you would have been educated on this.

IOW, whistle-blowers ARE protected, just not entitled to confidentiality.

 

[easyt65]

[QUOTE="Crepitus, post: 23594495, member: 69759
tRump doesn't find corruption, he creates it.[/QUOTE]
4 years

No crimes found / proven

No evidence of crimes found

Every false accusation has been debunked

Not he or any member of his team found to have committed crimes of which they have been falsely accused

The US IG recommended co-conspirators former FBI Director Comey, former Deputy FBI Director McCabe, and former FBI Agent Strzok be indicted for proven crimes.

The US IG reported that at least 1 FBI agent broke the law by altering the transcripts / reports of an interview

The US IG recently rebuked the FBI in their last report for gross negligence and mismanagement of foreign Intel sources - failing to update background checks / investigate foreign sources to confirm they are still trustworthy and still working for the benefit of our national security, specifically citing their complete failure to heed State Department warnings that Steele was not to be trusted after lying and revealing a personal anti-Trump agenda during a State Department interview.

The US IG has already released its report on Obama administration Agency reps / FBI FISA Court Abuses, which is soon to be released.

Obama Cabinet Members / Agency Directors Clapper (NSA), Rosenstein (Deputy US AG), Brennan (CIA), & Comey (FBI) all lied by claiming President Trump and his team members had NOT been spied upon....only to have it exposed that they DID spy on Trump and his team.

Every accusation, every attempt to manufacture crimes against the President during their multiple failed coup attempts, have backfired on the Democrats, exposing more and more conspiracy, sedition, and other crimes perpetrated by DEMOCRATS.

The Democrats have been exposed for having perpetrated the largest scandal in US history and proven they are the largest Criminal Organization in the US, if not the world....

...yet you continue to claim, without any evidence, President Trump 'creates corruption'.

You are a very special kind of 'stupid'.....

 

[Crepitus]

Intel Committee Member Muses Why Schiff Is Blocking IG Atkinson's Transcript
Intel Committee Member Muses Why Schiff Is Blocking IG Atkinson's Transcript

A much more reasonable explanation is that it compromises the whistleblower identity.

Not sure what his identity has to do with jack shit?

Who cares?

Find for me ANYWHERE in here, that requires a Whistle-blower remain anonymous?

The Whistleblower Protection Programs | Whistleblower Protection Program

OTH. . . There is, enshrined in our culture, the exact reverse. You will find not much sympathy for keeping an anonymous accuser in this case. I am continually astounded how the corporate media just brainwash and program the masses to things that are simply NOT TRUE.

"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."
Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

This is not a criminal trial, just an investigation, and impeachment at any stage is not a criminal proceeding. The only detrimental result that it could possibly have is trump hearing his own magic words: "you're fired."

Whistleblowers are protected from retaliation, including threats of physical harm.

Shut up Canuck, you don't know what you are talking about.

You are just parroting talking points of the corporate media. . .. talking points which are patently wrong I might add.

All folks are protected from retaliation, that is a given. Whether it is office politics, or a corporate grievance needing arbitration. None the less, everyone is entitled to confront their accuser, as this eliminates that appearance of conflict of interest.

Naturally, we live in a civilized society where everyone is protected from not only physical harm, but all sorts of other actualized harm as well. If you had bothered to investigate that whistle-blower link, you would have been educated on this.

IOW, whistle-blowers ARE protected, just not entitled to confidentiality.

He's correct, no matter where he's from.

And are they still "talking points" if they are true?

 

[kyzr]

if schiff is so honest, why won't he let the whistleblower speak up? never have seen anyone work so hard to "protect" one before.

but then, that would mess up your emotional agenda.

Why is the WB so important at this time in your mind?

cause it is like "ground 0" for the setup. how can someones testimony suddenly be not valid or needed? didn't hold up? wasn't true? tell me, why do you not need your original complaint? got a lot of other crap you thew on the wall to confuse things?

Setup?
What evidence is there of a "setup"?

Subsequent testimony has only corroborated the WB.

"setup" is like allowing "hearsay evidence" to impeach in the House, when it's not allowed in the senate.
"setup" is allowing hearsay evidence when the WB law doesn't even allow it, i.e. its not "credible" and not intended for whining about the president
"setup" is like not allowing the WB to be cross-examined when he will be in the senate (hint: the WB law protects the WB's job, not ID)
"setup" is trying to impeach a president even though no crime has been committed
Trump's Ukraine transcript: Unwise words but no proof of a crime

Fear not, the senate trial should be even more entertaining than the Schiff show.

Why is the WB important in your mind?

The WB is important because of the furor he caused. Ciaramella, a low level nobody (CIA plant?) writes a letter that only has 2nd or 3rd hand info, and that somehow gets past the ICIG as "credible" (when its not) because it doesn't have 1st hand knowledge, as required. Was the WB one of Brennan's plants? Who actually wrote the letter? Was it Ciaramella or Schiff's staff? The WB law was supposed to only be for the DNI and his underlings, not for the president, so there are a lot of questions as to what happened and did it comply with the WB law. Was the WB coached by Schiff or his staff?

 

[iceberg]

As a side note: I'm looking forward to the ethics investigation of Nunes. How can he have taken a little trip to Ukraine to meet with the ex-prosecutor there, and then fail to disclose this trip to the intelligence committee while serving as the ranking republican on the committee during the impeachment investigation?

while you're at it, please tell me why schiff gave $50mil to THINK about making a blimp.

 

[Crepitus]

[QUOTE="Crepitus, post: 23594495, member: 69759
tRump doesn't find corruption, he creates it.

4 years

No crimes found / proven

No evidence of crimes found

Every false accusation has been debunked

Not he or any member of his team found to have committed crimes of which they have been falsely accused

The US IG recommended co-conspirators former FBI Director Comey, former Deputy FBI Director McCabe, and former FBI Agent Strzok be indicted for proven crimes.

The US IG reported that at least 1 FBI agent broke the law by altering the transcripts / reports of an interview

The US IG recently rebuked the FBI in their last report for gross negligence and mismanagement of foreign Intel sources - failing to update background checks / investigate foreign sources to confirm they are still trustworthy and still working for the benefit of our national security, specifically citing their complete failure to heed State Department warnings that Steele was not to be trusted after lying and revealing a personal anti-Trump agenda during a State Department interview.

The US IG has already released its report on Obama administration Agency reps / FBI FISA Court Abuses, which is soon to be released.

Obama Cabinet Members / Agency Directors Clapper (NSA), Rosenstein (Deputy US AG), Brennan (CIA), & Comey (FBI) all lied by claiming President Trump and his team members had NOT been spied upon....only to have it exposed that they DID spy on Trump and his team.

Every accusation, every attempt to manufacture crimes against the President during their multiple failed coup attempts, have backfired on the Democrats, exposing more and more conspiracy, sedition, and other crimes perpetrated by DEMOCRATS.

The Democrats have been exposed for having perpetrated the largest scandal in US history and proven they are the largest Criminal Organization in the US, if not the world....

...yet you continue to claim, without any evidence, President Trump 'creates corruption'.

You are a very special kind of 'stupid'.....[/QUOTE]
Yes, I know that is what the propagandists would have you believe.

It's not true though.

 

[easyt65]

Yes, I know that is what the propagandists would have you believe. It's not true though.

1. Calm down - your emotional state caused you to rush so much that you f*ed-up using the 'Quote' Feature'

2. All of what I posted has been substantiated, proven, reported, backs up with links, testimony under oath, official documents, videotaped Democrat confessions, etc....

 

[DOTR]

I'm thinking that a few Republican congressmen should vote for impeachment just to get the MFs on the stand in the Senate.

That's why it might not be put up for a vote.

The Dems might look stupid, but they are savvier than people give them credit for.

They look stupid because their followers are. These people dont care what you or other normal Americans think of them and their own supporters are amoral enough to ignore their shenanigans.
You dont grasp and hold power like these elites do by being stupid. You do it by being amoral.
They are a very cunning people.

 

[Lysistrata]

I'm thinking that a few Republican congressmen should vote for impeachment just to get the MFs on the stand in the Senate.

That's why it might not be put up for a vote.

The Dems might look stupid, but they are savvier than people give them credit for.

They look stupid because their followers are. These people dont care what you or other normal Americans think of them and their own supporters are amoral enough to ignore their shenanigans.
You dont grasp and hold power like these elites do by being stupid. You do it by being amoral.
They are a very cunning people.

And what would a "normal American" be? Would he or she be someone who is crazy enough to support a known misogynist slut, conman, and Russian puppet, and a sexually-obsessed clown who hates women and LGBTs, and probably everyone else?

 

[White 6]

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff has released 15 transcripts of closed-door testimony in the Democrats' impeachment investigation, but one remains under lock and key. It's the transcript of the more than eight hours of testimony of Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson on Oct. 4, noted investigative reporter Paul Sperry in a tweet.

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...

------------

That transcript will never see the light of day.

Unless they push this to a Senate trial and they subpoena it.

Wouldn't that be a perjury charge for the sack of Schitt!

Factcheck: Adam Schiff wrong on whistleblower contact

Apparently, the whistleblower contacted an aide to the Intelligence Committee because s/he was concerned about the CIA lawyer's handling of his internal complaint, not Schiff personally. Atkinson was required by law to turn over the whistleblower's complaint to Congress. This does not show any personal involvement by Schiff.

In any event, there can be no perjury charge, as Schiff never testified under oath about anything, so he could not have committed perjury.

Hope you are right. Before this mess is over, I think we will know for sure.

 

[Lysistrata]

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff has released 15 transcripts of closed-door testimony in the Democrats' impeachment investigation, but one remains under lock and key. It's the transcript of the more than eight hours of testimony of Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson on Oct. 4, noted investigative reporter Paul Sperry in a tweet.

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...

------------

That transcript will never see the light of day.

Unless they push this to a Senate trial and they subpoena it.

Wouldn't that be a perjury charge for the sack of Schitt!

Factcheck: Adam Schiff wrong on whistleblower contact

Apparently, the whistleblower contacted an aide to the Intelligence Committee because s/he was concerned about the CIA lawyer's handling of his internal complaint, not Schiff personally. Atkinson was required by law to turn over the whistleblower's complaint to Congress. This does not show any personal involvement by Schiff.

In any event, there can be no perjury charge, as Schiff never testified under oath about anything, so he could not have committed perjury.

Hope you are right. Before this mess is over, I think we will know for sure.

One has to have testified under oath to be charged with perjury. Nunes, on the other hand, is getting interesting. Acting as a part of a conspiracy to cover up an enemy's attack on the U.S., while a member of Congress, and then sitting as a member of a committee investigating the conspiracy and failing to disclose his own conduct does not look good. He's the one who should be under oath.

 

[iceberg]

how about schiff tweeting about it a month ahead of time.

let's just start there and see if you're after the truth, or trump. different goals entirely.

You didn't answer my question. When Schiff became aware of a WB complaint does not change the substance of that complaint or the subsequent testimony corroborating that substance.

Where is the setup?

that's where it started. why not come forward there and say "we need to look into this". instead he used it to attack trump and build a complete case created from hearsay.

would you allow hearsay evidence against your family? if not, why is it ok here?

it's a setup. trump is coming after them for milking taxpayers for billions it would seem and you don't even seem to care about that. just getting rid of trump. you ever stop to think...what is trump is right? they WERE laundering money!

You're not making a case for a setup. You're bitching about the process.

How did they "setup" the corroborating testimony from the witnesses?

well since the process itself is changing to suit the needs of the setup, they've been combined by the left. tell them to stop combining things and it won't be as confusing.

It's not confusing at all. You're confused because you're incompetent.

You still have not made a case for a setup.
How did they "setup" the corroborating testimony from the witnesses?

OK now you are just back to being insulting. later.

 

[kyzr]

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff has released 15 transcripts of closed-door testimony in the Democrats' impeachment investigation, but one remains under lock and key. It's the transcript of the more than eight hours of testimony of Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson on Oct. 4, noted investigative reporter Paul Sperry in a tweet.

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...

------------

That transcript will never see the light of day.

Unless they push this to a Senate trial and they subpoena it.

Wouldn't that be a perjury charge for the sack of Schitt!

Factcheck: Adam Schiff wrong on whistleblower contact

Apparently, the whistleblower contacted an aide to the Intelligence Committee because s/he was concerned about the CIA lawyer's handling of his internal complaint, not Schiff personally. Atkinson was required by law to turn over the whistleblower's complaint to Congress. This does not show any personal involvement by Schiff.

In any event, there can be no perjury charge, as Schiff never testified under oath about anything, so he could not have committed perjury.

Hope you are right. Before this mess is over, I think we will know for sure.

One has to have testified under oath to be charged with perjury. Nunes, on the other hand, is getting interesting. Acting as a part of a conspiracy to cover up an enemy's attack on the U.S., while a member of Congress, and then sitting as a member of a committee investigating the conspiracy and failing to disclose his own conduct does not look good. He's the one who should be under oath.

LOL! How about you follow the money to the Biden's bank accounts and then get back to me on the conspiracy.

 

[Diver Diva]

His/her life has been threatened by the *president* himself. Anonymity is his/her best defense.

His name is Eric Ciaramella. Everybody in D.C. knows it.