Ukraine Whistleblower May Not Testify In Person

[Coyote]

This is just about VENGEANCE the Trumpsters want ....

Indeed because "Trumpsters" are so angry and bitter about Shrillary's 2016 election victory and how well the country has done with her as POTUS.

No one should have to tell you what a flaming IDIOT you are so I'm not gonna bother.

The election was three years ago. Isn’t it time you guys quit blaming everything on it?

Only when you bitter Clintonettes stop whining about it and trying to nullify the results.

Haven’t whined about since 2016. However I do take corruption seriously enough not to give free passes.

How about you?

 

[SAYIT]

This is just about VENGEANCE the Trumpsters want ....

Indeed because "Trumpsters" are so angry and bitter about Shrillary's 2016 election victory and how well the country has done with her as POTUS.

No one should have to tell you what a flaming IDIOT you are so I'm not gonna bother.

The election was three years ago. Isn’t it time you guys quit blaming everything on it?

Only when you bitter Clintonettes stop whining about it and trying to nullify the results.

Haven’t whined about since 2016. However I do take corruption seriously enough not to give free passes.

How about you?

So you think the BIdens should be investigated, eh? Good on you.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Democrats are doing their damnedest to keep the inquiry illegitimate.

WASHINGTON—Lawyers for the CIA officer whose whistleblower complaint helped ignite an impeachment inquiry into President Trump have asked Congress whether their client could submit testimony in writing

Ukraine Whistleblower May Not Testify In Person

Democrats are trying to protect his/her life from deranged Trump supporters.

That is a real concern. It seems there are those who neither understand nor care about whistleblower laws. They are pissed because this time it happens to be theirs who’s tits are in the wringer.

The day the whistleblower testifies before the committee will be the day the name is leaked.

 

[Coyote]

This is just about VENGEANCE the Trumpsters want ....

Indeed because "Trumpsters" are so angry and bitter about Shrillary's 2016 election victory and how well the country has done with her as POTUS.

No one should have to tell you what a flaming IDIOT you are so I'm not gonna bother.

The election was three years ago. Isn’t it time you guys quit blaming everything on it?

Only when you bitter Clintonettes stop whining about it and trying to nullify the results.

Haven’t whined about since 2016. However I do take corruption seriously enough not to give free passes.

How about you?

So you think the BIdens should be investigated, eh? Good on you.

Should they? As of yet, the claims against them seem unsubstantiated.

Do you think Trump should be looked into?

 

[Coyote]

Democrats are doing their damnedest to keep the inquiry illegitimate.

WASHINGTON—Lawyers for the CIA officer whose whistleblower complaint helped ignite an impeachment inquiry into President Trump have asked Congress whether their client could submit testimony in writing

Ukraine Whistleblower May Not Testify In Person

Democrats are trying to protect his/her life from deranged Trump supporters.

That is a real concern. It seems there are those who neither understand nor care about whistleblower laws. They are pissed because this time it happens to be theirs who’s tits are in the wringer.

The day the whistleblower testifies before the committee will be the day the name is leaked.

I hope not, I really do. People need to look at this beyond a partisan lens.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Democrats are doing their damnedest to keep the inquiry illegitimate.

WASHINGTON—Lawyers for the CIA officer whose whistleblower complaint helped ignite an impeachment inquiry into President Trump have asked Congress whether their client could submit testimony in writing

Ukraine Whistleblower May Not Testify In Person

Democrats are trying to protect his/her life from deranged Trump supporters.

That is a real concern. It seems there are those who neither understand nor care about whistleblower laws. They are pissed because this time it happens to be theirs who’s tits are in the wringer.

The day the whistleblower testifies before the committee will be the day the name is leaked.

I hope not, I really do. People need to look at this beyond a partisan lens.

Objectively observed, the whole thing is a fraud. I would give no quarter.

 

[bripat9643]

You're ignoring two critical things here:

1. Where material statements of accused wrongdoing about a specific alleged perpetrator are made with a reasonable expectation that they would be used to investigate a crime and/or prosecute a crime, it is subject to the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause, and the denial of a defendant's right of cross-examination renders all information obtained as a result of an investigation arising from those statements inadmissible (fruit of the poisonous tree).

2. Some people are claiming that the transcript is incomplete (the so-called "missing 18 minutes" which has been popularized on this very forum), and the people who are advancing this theory are indeed relying on the substance of the whistleblower complaint as being evidence of statements not included in the transcript. Perhaps you are not one of them. If not, you should advise them of their erroneous rationale when they carry on about this while also contending that the whistleblower is not subject to cross-examination.

The transcript isn’t a verbatim transcript. It is a memo of a call. This administration stopped doing verbatim transcripts.

It's as close as you're ever going to get to a verbatim transcript, and it's a hell of a lot more credible than your memory challenged "whistleblower.

Your belief that Trump isn't following the same practice as Obama is supported by nothing.

No. It isn’t. Former administrations used to to do verbatim transcripts. This White House discontinued it.

That is just the facts. Why are you so defensive?

Trump's conversation with the Ukrainian president, annotated

How do you know they were verbatim, shit for brains? Did they put in every sniffle, sneeze, cough and stutter? I doubt it. Your claim is absurd on its face.

You can’t dispute it eh?

Wrong.

 

[Coyote]

Democrats are doing their damnedest to keep the inquiry illegitimate.

WASHINGTON—Lawyers for the CIA officer whose whistleblower complaint helped ignite an impeachment inquiry into President Trump have asked Congress whether their client could submit testimony in writing

Ukraine Whistleblower May Not Testify In Person

Democrats are trying to protect his/her life from deranged Trump supporters.

That is a real concern. It seems there are those who neither understand nor care about whistleblower laws. They are pissed because this time it happens to be theirs who’s tits are in the wringer.

The day the whistleblower testifies before the committee will be the day the name is leaked.

I hope not, I really do. People need to look at this beyond a partisan lens.

Objectively observed, the whole thing is a fraud. I would give no quarter.

Objectively observed, I disagree.

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about tbe next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

The thing is...it isn’t like a whistleblower can fabricate something and a get awZy with it. It is checked on multiple levels. And in this case it was taken seriously by men who were Trump appointees.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Democrats are trying to protect his/her life from deranged Trump supporters.

That is a real concern. It seems there are those who neither understand nor care about whistleblower laws. They are pissed because this time it happens to be theirs who’s tits are in the wringer.

The day the whistleblower testifies before the committee will be the day the name is leaked.

I hope not, I really do. People need to look at this beyond a partisan lens.

Objectively observed, the whole thing is a fraud. I would give no quarter.

Objectively observed, I disagree.

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about tbe next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

The thing is...it isn’t like a whistleblower can fabricate something and a get awZy with it.

If the enemy party and the media want it, and prevents the opposing party from participating, it can.

It is checked on multiple levels. And in this case it was taken seriously by men who were Trump appointees.

If you're going to take what you think is a legitimate shot at the king, at least have the spine to show your face.

Of what Trump appointees do you speak?

 

[Coyote]

That is a real concern. It seems there are those who neither understand nor care about whistleblower laws. They are pissed because this time it happens to be theirs who’s tits are in the wringer.

The day the whistleblower testifies before the committee will be the day the name is leaked.

I hope not, I really do. People need to look at this beyond a partisan lens.

Objectively observed, the whole thing is a fraud. I would give no quarter.

Objectively observed, I disagree.

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about tbe next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

The thing is...it isn’t like a whistleblower can fabricate something and a get awZy with it.

If the enemy party and the media want it, and prevents the opposing party from participating, it can.

It is checked on multiple levels. And in this case it was taken seriously by men who were Trump appointees.

If you're going to take what you think is a legitimate shot at the king, at least have the spine to show your face.

Of what Trump appointees do you speak?

Let’s agree to disagree on that for now. The more important point imo is this:

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about the next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The day the whistleblower testifies before the committee will be the day the name is leaked.

I hope not, I really do. People need to look at this beyond a partisan lens.

Objectively observed, the whole thing is a fraud. I would give no quarter.

Objectively observed, I disagree.

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about tbe next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

The thing is...it isn’t like a whistleblower can fabricate something and a get awZy with it.

If the enemy party and the media want it, and prevents the opposing party from participating, it can.

It is checked on multiple levels. And in this case it was taken seriously by men who were Trump appointees.

If you're going to take what you think is a legitimate shot at the king, at least have the spine to show your face.

Of what Trump appointees do you speak?

Let’s agree to disagree on that for now. The more important point imo is this:

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about the next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

First line, last post.

 

[bripat9643]

Democrats are trying to protect his/her life from deranged Trump supporters.

That is a real concern. It seems there are those who neither understand nor care about whistleblower laws. They are pissed because this time it happens to be theirs who’s tits are in the wringer.

The day the whistleblower testifies before the committee will be the day the name is leaked.

I hope not, I really do. People need to look at this beyond a partisan lens.

Objectively observed, the whole thing is a fraud. I would give no quarter.

Objectively observed, I disagree.

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about tbe next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

The thing is...it isn’t like a whistleblower can fabricate something and a get awZy with it. It is checked on multiple levels. And in this case it was taken seriously by men who were Trump appointees.

All the "checking" on this so-called "whistleblower" has been done by Schiff and his sleazy cronies.

 

[bripat9643]

The day the whistleblower testifies before the committee will be the day the name is leaked.

I hope not, I really do. People need to look at this beyond a partisan lens.

Objectively observed, the whole thing is a fraud. I would give no quarter.

Objectively observed, I disagree.

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about tbe next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

The thing is...it isn’t like a whistleblower can fabricate something and a get awZy with it.

If the enemy party and the media want it, and prevents the opposing party from participating, it can.

It is checked on multiple levels. And in this case it was taken seriously by men who were Trump appointees.

If you're going to take what you think is a legitimate shot at the king, at least have the spine to show your face.

Of what Trump appointees do you speak?

Let’s agree to disagree on that for now. The more important point imo is this:

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about the next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

That won't happen because the deep state only attacks Republicans.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Democrats are trying to protect his/her life from deranged Trump supporters.

That is a real concern. It seems there are those who neither understand nor care about whistleblower laws. They are pissed because this time it happens to be theirs who’s tits are in the wringer.

The day the whistleblower testifies before the committee will be the day the name is leaked.

I hope not, I really do. People need to look at this beyond a partisan lens.

Objectively observed, the whole thing is a fraud. I would give no quarter.

Objectively observed, I disagree.

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about tbe next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

The thing is...it isn’t like a whistleblower can fabricate something and a get awZy with it. It is checked on multiple levels. And in this case it was taken seriously by men who were Trump appointees.

Just because they are a "whistle blower" doesn't mean they did it legally, they are telling the truth or that they should be believed.

The fact that we know they talked to Schiff before making the report makes this highly suspect, even potentially illegal.

The fact that this information is 2nd hand means it might not be the truth.

The fact that they've been after Trump since before he took office brings into question whether or not they should be believed.

It absolutely doesn't mean they have a right to anonymity or are immune to being questioned under subpoena especially when it's about the president.

But the whole "whistle blower" statue has to do with the intelligence community of which Trump is not a part so it doesn't even pertain to Trump. So the whole thing should be thrown out but God knows it won't be.

 

[Coyote]

That is a real concern. It seems there are those who neither understand nor care about whistleblower laws. They are pissed because this time it happens to be theirs who’s tits are in the wringer.

The day the whistleblower testifies before the committee will be the day the name is leaked.

I hope not, I really do. People need to look at this beyond a partisan lens.

Objectively observed, the whole thing is a fraud. I would give no quarter.

Objectively observed, I disagree.

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about tbe next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

The thing is...it isn’t like a whistleblower can fabricate something and a get awZy with it. It is checked on multiple levels. And in this case it was taken seriously by men who were Trump appointees.

Just because they are a "whistle blower" doesn't mean they did it legally, they are telling the truth or that they should be believed.

Agree. That is why there is a system in place to determine whether it is credible.

It absolutely doesn't mean they have a right to anonymity or are immune to being questioned under subpoena especially when it's about the president.

Yes, per law it does mean they have a right to anonymity. Think about it. What whistle blower would dare raise his head if he could not be anonymous? Right or wrong - he'd be subject to firing, etc. by those who he was blowing the whistle on. Or death threats. Or murder.

But the whole "whistle blower" statue has to do with the intelligence community of which Trump is not a part so it doesn't even pertain to Trump. So the whole thing should be thrown out but God knows it won't be.

Trump is a part. He's the head of it all. And regardless - it does not change the law.

Let me ask you this: is the President exempt from whistle blowing?

 

[Coyote]

I hope not, I really do. People need to look at this beyond a partisan lens.

Objectively observed, the whole thing is a fraud. I would give no quarter.

Objectively observed, I disagree.

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about tbe next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

The thing is...it isn’t like a whistleblower can fabricate something and a get awZy with it.

If the enemy party and the media want it, and prevents the opposing party from participating, it can.

It is checked on multiple levels. And in this case it was taken seriously by men who were Trump appointees.

If you're going to take what you think is a legitimate shot at the king, at least have the spine to show your face.

Of what Trump appointees do you speak?

Let’s agree to disagree on that for now. The more important point imo is this:

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about the next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

That won't happen because the deep state only attacks Republicans.

Answer the question with something besides assholery. Whistle blowers have popped up in multiple administrations.

 

[airplanemechanic]

The day the whistleblower testifies before the committee will be the day the name is leaked.

I hope not, I really do. People need to look at this beyond a partisan lens.

Objectively observed, the whole thing is a fraud. I would give no quarter.

Objectively observed, I disagree.

And as an aside, if you take that route...what about tbe next whistleblower and the next...and the one that pops up when it is a Dem in the hot seat...what then?

The thing is...it isn’t like a whistleblower can fabricate something and a get awZy with it. It is checked on multiple levels. And in this case it was taken seriously by men who were Trump appointees.

Just because they are a "whistle blower" doesn't mean they did it legally, they are telling the truth or that they should be believed.

Agree. That is why there is a system in place to determine whether it is credible.

It absolutely doesn't mean they have a right to anonymity or are immune to being questioned under subpoena especially when it's about the president.

Yes, per law it does mean they have a right to anonymity.

Absolutely wrong. Show me in the statute where it guarantees anonymity. The statute only protects them from retaliation from their employer. It has NOTHING to do with remaining anonymous. Because of the 6th amendment, no statute can override the constitution.

It states the whistleblower can make their report anonymously but eventually their identity can be revealed through court action (cross examining the accuser). It is not accurate to say that a whistle blower is immune to being cross examined by the person they are accusing when it's the constitution that guarantees that right.

Whistleblower Protection Act - Wikipedia

The word "anonymous" isn't even mentioned.

Remaining Anonymous While Reporting Fraud

Can Whistleblowers Remain Anonymous During an Investigation?

"Whistleblowers who do come forward, anonymously or otherwise, often request that their identities be concealed. There are just too many headaches involved in continuing to work in an environment in which they are known to have been a “snitch”. But can a company agree to keep the person’s identity a secret and still conduct a thorough and fair investigation? Unfortunately, the answer may be no.

“The company can’t promise that the whistleblower’s identity won’t be revealed because there are certain instances in which it may need to be revealed,” says Lisa Noller, litigation partner with Foley and Lardner LLP. “For example, if the company is cooperating with the government, then the whistleblower’s identity may need to be disclosed because the government requires it.”

And then there’s the chance that others in the company may be able to guess the whistleblower’s identity. “You might need to disclose detail about the nature of the complaint, for example in an SEC filing, that somebody will be able to figure out who the whistleblower is,” says Noller."

 

[edthecynic]

Protected by the deep state

Your scumbag heroes are the deep state, moron

And you are with your hero Putin.

 

[Markle]

You can't get socked into a "perjury trap" if you don't lie!

Are you really that naive or are you throwing shade?

Why do you think Hillary, Bill and many others of both parties answer with, "I don't recall", I can't remember",

At just ONE of her hearings:
Here’s All 40 Times Hillary Clinton Told the FBI She Couldn’t Remember Something
By Alex Griswold Sep 2nd, 2016, 7:39 pm
Here's All 40 Times Hillary Clinton Told the FBI She Couldn't Remember Something

###

Hillary Clinton ‘Can’t Recall’ in 21 of 25 Answers to Judicial Watch Lawsuit
Updated 04.13.17 2:47PM ET / Published 10.14.16 1:00AM ET
Hillary Clinton ‘Can’t Recall’ in 21 of 25 Answers to Judicial Watch Lawsuit

###

Published September 10, 2018
Ken Starr says he considered perjury charges against Hillary Clinton, in explosive new memoir
[...]
Recalling the president’s answers during that interview, Starr writes, “Clinton bobbed and weaved, but was always pleasant as he avoided answering.”

The first lady, though, was a different story.

“In the space of three hours, she claimed, by our count, over a hundred times that she ‘did not recall’ or ‘did not remember,’” Starr wrote. “This suggested outright mendacity. To be sure, human memory is notoriously fallible, but her strained performance struck us as preposterous.”

Ken Starr says he considered perjury charges against Hillary Clinton, in explosive new memoir

###

Had President Trump followed the lead of the Clinton's, I wonder how loud Democrats would be screaming still?

 

[Markle]

Poor psycho. Donald and his lions need to be kept as far from
The whistleblower as possible.

Where are all the "suicides" surrounding President Donald Trump? You know, like all those surrounding the Clinton cabal.