Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How could anything typed as the discussion transpired be a verbatim transcript? The transcribers obviously left out sneezes and passages where Trump repeated himself or was at a loss for words. The didn't record every "uhm" and pause in the conversation.He already has, dumbass.It's not a summary, moron. The boilerplate at the bottom is that the transcript is not made from a recording and is not guaranteed to be 100% accurate. However, it's the most accurate record available.No, he didn't. He released a summary, and it even says that it's a summary of the call at the bottom of the first page.
And, I wish people would quit calling it a "transcript". Transcripts are word for word accurate, whereas summaries aren't.
Wrong. The most accurate record is on the classified server. All Trump has to do is declassify it, and release it.
Post 32 has a copy of the summary of the call that was released. It even says that it's not a verbatim transcript of the call. And, if it's not verbatim, it's not accurate. Look up verbatim yourself, I'm tired of teaching you.
You're such a desperate asshole.
Yeah, it doesn't record every time Trump repeated himself or cleared his throat.He already has, dumbass.It's not a summary, moron. The boilerplate at the bottom is that the transcript is not made from a recording and is not guaranteed to be 100% accurate. However, it's the most accurate record available.Didn’t he release the actual call?
No, he didn't. He released a summary, and it even says that it's a summary of the call at the bottom of the first page.
And, I wish people would quit calling it a "transcript". Transcripts are word for word accurate, whereas summaries aren't.
Wrong. The most accurate record is on the classified server. All Trump has to do is declassify it, and release it.
Post 32 has a copy of the summary of the call that was released. It even says that it's not a verbatim transcript of the call. And, if it's not verbatim, it's not accurate. Look up verbatim yourself, I'm tired of teaching you.
Prove the phone call was recorded.How could anything typed as the discussion transpired be a verbatim transcript? The transcribers obviously left out sneezes and passages where Trump repeated himself or was at a loss for words. The didn't record every "uhm" and pause in the conversation.He already has, dumbass.It's not a summary, moron. The boilerplate at the bottom is that the transcript is not made from a recording and is not guaranteed to be 100% accurate. However, it's the most accurate record available.
Wrong. The most accurate record is on the classified server. All Trump has to do is declassify it, and release it.
Post 32 has a copy of the summary of the call that was released. It even says that it's not a verbatim transcript of the call. And, if it's not verbatim, it's not accurate. Look up verbatim yourself, I'm tired of teaching you.
You're such a desperate asshole.
Easy. They record the phone call (yes, they do do that, matter of fact, the recording is on the classified server), then they have typists put on headphones, and type out the conversation. How do I know this? I've had to do it before as a Personnelman in the Navy.
And, you're right, sneezes wouldn't be included, nor would coughs, but every word that was said, even when he repeated himself, would be recorded in a real transcript. But, it wasn't a transcript that was released, it was a summary.
Let’s release all of Obie’s calls at the same time. And from now on all presidential phone calls should be broadcast live and unfiltered.Why is the "original" transcript locked in a classified server? Releasing it could clear up the confusion. If Trump is going to read it publicly in a fireside chat - he should be reading from the ORIGINAL transcript - not from a partial summary. If Americans could see and hear the ORIGINAL transcript - they could make up their own minds as to whether they think it was a clear-cut quid pro quo.
White House lawyer John Eisenberg locked the ORIGINAL transcript in a classified server after Lt. Col. Vindman said it wasn't accurate? Eisenberg told Vindman not to discuss the phone call with ANYONE. Why?
Yeah, it doesn't record every time Trump repeated himself or cleared his throat.He already has, dumbass.It's not a summary, moron. The boilerplate at the bottom is that the transcript is not made from a recording and is not guaranteed to be 100% accurate. However, it's the most accurate record available.No, he didn't. He released a summary, and it even says that it's a summary of the call at the bottom of the first page.
And, I wish people would quit calling it a "transcript". Transcripts are word for word accurate, whereas summaries aren't.
Wrong. The most accurate record is on the classified server. All Trump has to do is declassify it, and release it.
Post 32 has a copy of the summary of the call that was released. It even says that it's not a verbatim transcript of the call. And, if it's not verbatim, it's not accurate. Look up verbatim yourself, I'm tired of teaching you.
No, I have never had to do a transcript.Yeah, it doesn't record every time Trump repeated himself or cleared his throat.He already has, dumbass.It's not a summary, moron. The boilerplate at the bottom is that the transcript is not made from a recording and is not guaranteed to be 100% accurate. However, it's the most accurate record available.
Wrong. The most accurate record is on the classified server. All Trump has to do is declassify it, and release it.
Post 32 has a copy of the summary of the call that was released. It even says that it's not a verbatim transcript of the call. And, if it's not verbatim, it's not accurate. Look up verbatim yourself, I'm tired of teaching you.
Throat clearing, probably not. Repeating himself? Definitely would be included. I'm guessing you never had to do paperwork or make a transcript before. I have.
/—-/ It’s been released and when played backwards you can hear “Paul’s dead. Paul’s dead.”Why is the "original" transcript locked in a classified server? Releasing it could clear up the confusion. If Trump is going to read it publicly in a fireside chat - he should be reading from the ORIGINAL transcript - not from a partial summary. If Americans could see and hear the ORIGINAL transcript - they could make up their own minds as to whether they think it was a clear-cut quid pro quo.
White House lawyer John Eisenberg locked the ORIGINAL transcript in a classified server after Lt. Col. Vindman said it wasn't accurate? Eisenberg told Vindman not to discuss the phone call with ANYONE. Why?
sure conservatives have no problem with Trump re releasing the transcript !! and why we are at it if the transcript is different from what Schift read and lied about do you have a problem with charging Schift with treason against the United States of America for attempting to overthrow an election with lies ??Why is the "original" transcript locked in a classified server? Releasing it could clear up the confusion. If Trump is going to read it publicly in a fireside chat - he should be reading from the ORIGINAL transcript - not from a partial summary. If Americans could see and hear the ORIGINAL transcript - they could make up their own minds as to whether they think it was a clear-cut quid pro quo.
White House lawyer John Eisenberg locked the ORIGINAL transcript in a classified server after Lt. Col. Vindman said it wasn't accurate? Eisenberg told Vindman not to discuss the phone call with ANYONE. Why?
Why is the "original" transcript locked in a classified server? Releasing it could clear up the confusion. If Trump is going to read it publicly in a fireside chat - he should be reading from the ORIGINAL transcript - not from a partial summary. If Americans could see and hear the ORIGINAL transcript - they could make up their own minds as to whether they think it was a clear-cut quid pro quo.
White House lawyer John Eisenberg locked the ORIGINAL transcript in a classified server after Lt. Col. Vindman said it wasn't accurate? Eisenberg told Vindman not to discuss the phone call with ANYONE. Why?
I'd prefer the audio of the phone call (though I suspect the audio would have missing spaces like Nixon's tapes).
There is no audio, you fucking moron.
sure conservatives have no problem with Trump re releasing the transcript !! and why we are at it if the transcript is different from what Schift read and lied about do you have a problem with charging Schift with treason against the United States of America for attempting to overthrow an election with lies ??Why is the "original" transcript locked in a classified server? Releasing it could clear up the confusion. If Trump is going to read it publicly in a fireside chat - he should be reading from the ORIGINAL transcript - not from a partial summary. If Americans could see and hear the ORIGINAL transcript - they could make up their own minds as to whether they think it was a clear-cut quid pro quo.
White House lawyer John Eisenberg locked the ORIGINAL transcript in a classified server after Lt. Col. Vindman said it wasn't accurate? Eisenberg told Vindman not to discuss the phone call with ANYONE. Why?
No, I have never had to do a transcript.Yeah, it doesn't record every time Trump repeated himself or cleared his throat.He already has, dumbass.Wrong. The most accurate record is on the classified server. All Trump has to do is declassify it, and release it.
Post 32 has a copy of the summary of the call that was released. It even says that it's not a verbatim transcript of the call. And, if it's not verbatim, it's not accurate. Look up verbatim yourself, I'm tired of teaching you.
Throat clearing, probably not. Repeating himself? Definitely would be included. I'm guessing you never had to do paperwork or make a transcript before. I have.
he lied in a congressional hearing when he read the transcript !!! he used the lie to legitimize moving forward with impeachment [removing a duly elected president ] with A FALSE STATEMENT ! Or are you trying to say that shift read the actual transcript word for word ....and what in the Ukraine transcript is illegal ??? it never said do what we want or we will not give aide to the Ukraine !!! or is asking a country to look into corruption illegal now !sure conservatives have no problem with Trump re releasing the transcript !! and why we are at it if the transcript is different from what Schift read and lied about do you have a problem with charging Schift with treason against the United States of America for attempting to overthrow an election with lies ??Why is the "original" transcript locked in a classified server? Releasing it could clear up the confusion. If Trump is going to read it publicly in a fireside chat - he should be reading from the ORIGINAL transcript - not from a partial summary. If Americans could see and hear the ORIGINAL transcript - they could make up their own minds as to whether they think it was a clear-cut quid pro quo.
White House lawyer John Eisenberg locked the ORIGINAL transcript in a classified server after Lt. Col. Vindman said it wasn't accurate? Eisenberg told Vindman not to discuss the phone call with ANYONE. Why?
Treason? You have no clue when you post such a stupid comment.
No, I have never had to do a transcript.Yeah, it doesn't record every time Trump repeated himself or cleared his throat.He already has, dumbass.
Post 32 has a copy of the summary of the call that was released. It even says that it's not a verbatim transcript of the call. And, if it's not verbatim, it's not accurate. Look up verbatim yourself, I'm tired of teaching you.
Throat clearing, probably not. Repeating himself? Definitely would be included. I'm guessing you never had to do paperwork or make a transcript before. I have.
So, you never have had to type a transcript, and from your posts, it's pretty apparent you didn't know what they were. Summaries don't have to be word for word, but transcripts are required to be accurate word for word, as quite often they are filed as official documents. So, do we agree that what was released was a summary and not a transcript?
i would immigine that the most important aspects of the conversation were put into the Transcripts ..... and if Trump threatened the Ukraine with a do what i want or else it would have been recorded !!! and besides the Ukrainian president said their was no quid pro quo !!if the supposed victim and primary witness of a crime says there was no crime or wrong doing committed against them then the prosecution has no case !No, I have never had to do a transcript.Yeah, it doesn't record every time Trump repeated himself or cleared his throat.He already has, dumbass.
Post 32 has a copy of the summary of the call that was released. It even says that it's not a verbatim transcript of the call. And, if it's not verbatim, it's not accurate. Look up verbatim yourself, I'm tired of teaching you.
Throat clearing, probably not. Repeating himself? Definitely would be included. I'm guessing you never had to do paperwork or make a transcript before. I have.
So, you never have had to type a transcript, and from your posts, it's pretty apparent you didn't know what they were. Summaries don't have to be word for word, but transcripts are required to be accurate word for word, as quite often they are filed as official documents. So, do we agree that what was released was a summary and not a transcript?
We already have the original.Why is the "original" transcript locked in a classified server? Releasing it could clear up the confusion. If Trump is going to read it publicly in a fireside chat - he should be reading from the ORIGINAL transcript - not from a partial summary. If Americans could see and hear the ORIGINAL transcript - they could make up their own minds as to whether they think it was a clear-cut quid pro quo.
White House lawyer John Eisenberg locked the ORIGINAL transcript in a classified server after Lt. Col. Vindman said it wasn't accurate? Eisenberg told Vindman not to discuss the phone call with ANYONE. Why?
No, I have never had to do a transcript.Yeah, it doesn't record every time Trump repeated himself or cleared his throat.Post 32 has a copy of the summary of the call that was released. It even says that it's not a verbatim transcript of the call. And, if it's not verbatim, it's not accurate. Look up verbatim yourself, I'm tired of teaching you.
Throat clearing, probably not. Repeating himself? Definitely would be included. I'm guessing you never had to do paperwork or make a transcript before. I have.
So, you never have had to type a transcript, and from your posts, it's pretty apparent you didn't know what they were. Summaries don't have to be word for word, but transcripts are required to be accurate word for word, as quite often they are filed as official documents. So, do we agree that what was released was a summary and not a transcript?i would immigine that the most important aspects of the conversation were put into the Transcripts ..... and if Trump threatened the Ukraine with a do what i want or else it would have been recorded !!! and besides the Ukrainian president said their was no quid pro quo !!if the supposed victim and primary witness of a crime says there was no crime or wrong doing committed against them then the prosecution has no case !No, I have never had to do a transcript.Yeah, it doesn't record every time Trump repeated himself or cleared his throat.Post 32 has a copy of the summary of the call that was released. It even says that it's not a verbatim transcript of the call. And, if it's not verbatim, it's not accurate. Look up verbatim yourself, I'm tired of teaching you.
Throat clearing, probably not. Repeating himself? Definitely would be included. I'm guessing you never had to do paperwork or make a transcript before. I have.
So, you never have had to type a transcript, and from your posts, it's pretty apparent you didn't know what they were. Summaries don't have to be word for word, but transcripts are required to be accurate word for word, as quite often they are filed as official documents. So, do we agree that what was released was a summary and not a transcript?
We already have the original.Why is the "original" transcript locked in a classified server? Releasing it could clear up the confusion. If Trump is going to read it publicly in a fireside chat - he should be reading from the ORIGINAL transcript - not from a partial summary. If Americans could see and hear the ORIGINAL transcript - they could make up their own minds as to whether they think it was a clear-cut quid pro quo.
White House lawyer John Eisenberg locked the ORIGINAL transcript in a classified server after Lt. Col. Vindman said it wasn't accurate? Eisenberg told Vindman not to discuss the phone call with ANYONE. Why?
