Gabbard claims ‘coordinated effort’ by intelligence community to advance narrative to impeach Trump

[M14 Shooter]

The law requires it to be an imminent threat...

You are lying.
No such legal or constitutional requirement exists.

 

[Lockback]

This is of course, a lie. as the law does not require the President to obtain congressional approval before he acts.

This is, of course, a lie, as the law says no such thing.

They're so ignorant. It's just jaw dropping.

 

[M14 Shooter]

They're so ignorant. It's just jaw dropping.

The only know what MSDNC and The View tells them.

 

[popscottpopscott]

DNI Tulsi Gabbard Exposes Conspiracy Used By Congress To Impeach President Trump | Office of the Director of National Intelligence
DNI Tulsi Gabbard Exposes Conspiracy Used By Congress To Impeach President Trump | Office of the Director of National Intelligence

April 13, 2026
The report effectively documents serious flaws and apparent bias in how the 2019 whistleblower complaint was processed and escalated. It reinforces the “impeachment hoax” narrative by showing the evidentiary weaknesses at the foundation.
Then House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) Chairman, Schiff (along with Nancy Pelosi) is accused of using the false, second-hand whistleblower narrative to generate media attention and lay the groundwork for Trump’s first impeachment in December 2019. Schiff was one of the key Congressional figures who helped escalate and weaponize the hearsay complaint into the impeachment process.

 

[Lockback]

The only know what MSDNC and The View tells them.

"We will tell you what to think about the so-called 'Constitution' and this so-called 'country'."

 

[Clipper]

Yes.
I believe it.
They are totally corrupt with absolutely no allegiance to the United States. They're Deep State creeps and Trump has really upset the apple cart. They knew it years ago when he jumped into the race in 2015 and they immediately gathered their forces to destroy him.
That's why I admire him so much, despite his very obvious personality flaws. He's taken those slings and arrows over and over and over and over again and STILL won the Presidency twice and has reduced the Democrat Party to children engaged in a constant Whine Fest.
P.S. I love Tulsi Gabbard. She's a person of integrity who left that shit party.

The transcript of Trump's phone call blackmailing Zelensky are "fake news".

 

[Care4all]

You are lying.
No such legal or constitutional requirement exists.

From my understanding thje constitution ONLY allows Congress to declare war silly one! Congress made some carve outs for the President to do such, only under certain conditions...imminent threat, is one of them....

War powers Resolution of 1973

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541–1548) is a federal law intended to limit the U.S. president's authority to commit armed forces to hostile situations without congressional consent. Passed over President Nixon’s veto, it requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying troops and mandates their withdrawal within 60-90 days unless Congress declares war or authorizes force.

Key Provisions and Requirements

• Consultation & Reporting: The President must consult with Congress before, and regularly after, introducing armed forces into hostilities or situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is indicated.
• 48-Hour Notification: A report must be submitted to Congress within 48 hours of deploying troops into combat or foreign territories.
• 60-Day Deadline: Armed forces must be withdrawn within 60 days unless Congress declares war, authorizes the action, or extends the deadline.
• 30-Day Withdrawal Extension: An additional 30 days is allowed for the safe withdrawal of troops.

Historical Context and Purpose

• Response to "Imperial Presidency": Congress passed the resolution to reassert its constitutional authority over war-making following the extensive, unauthorized engagement in the Korean and Vietnam conflicts.
• Secret Bombings: It was a direct reaction to President Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia, conducted without informing Congress or the public.
• Purpose: To "insure that the collective judgement of both the Congress and the President" applies to the use of U.S. forces abroad, as outlined on the Avalon Project at Yale University.

...

The resolution passed by a two-thirds vote in both houses to override President Nixon's veto, highlighting a significant conflict over war powers at the time

https://www.congress.gov/bill/93rd-congress/house-joint-resolution/542

 

[Robert W]

From my understanding thje constitution ONLY allows Congress to declare war silly one! Congress made some carve outs for the President to do such, only under certain conditions...imminent threat, is one of them....

War powers Resolution of 1973

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541–1548) is a federal law intended to limit the U.S. president's authority to commit armed forces to hostile situations without congressional consent. Passed over President Nixon’s veto, it requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying troops and mandates their withdrawal within 60-90 days unless Congress declares war or authorizes force.

Key Provisions and Requirements

• Consultation & Reporting: The President must consult with Congress before, and regularly after, introducing armed forces into hostilities or situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is indicated.
• 48-Hour Notification: A report must be submitted to Congress within 48 hours of deploying troops into combat or foreign territories.
• 60-Day Deadline: Armed forces must be withdrawn within 60 days unless Congress declares war, authorizes the action, or extends the deadline.
• 30-Day Withdrawal Extension: An additional 30 days is allowed for the safe withdrawal of troops.

Historical Context and Purpose

• Response to "Imperial Presidency": Congress passed the resolution to reassert its constitutional authority over war-making following the extensive, unauthorized engagement in the Korean and Vietnam conflicts.
• Secret Bombings: It was a direct reaction to President Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia, conducted without informing Congress or the public.
• Purpose: To "insure that the collective judgement of both the Congress and the President" applies to the use of U.S. forces abroad, as outlined on the Avalon Project at Yale University.

...

The resolution passed by a two-thirds vote in both houses to override President Nixon's veto, highlighting a significant conflict over war powers at the time

Trump has not deployed troops.

 

[Care4all]

Trump has not deployed troops.

President Trump deployed 10,000 additional troops to the middle east on top of the 50,000 troops already stationed there in the region due to Iran escalation.

 

[Robert W]

President Trump deployed 10,000 additional troops to the middle east on top of the 50,000 troops already stationed there in the region due to Iran escalation.

Well then, you know war has not been declared.

 

[Care4all]

Well then, you know war has not been declared.

So what are we doing there?

 

[alang1216]

So trump won because.Obama and xiden let a lot of fraud into the elections?

If our elections are so corrupt, why should I believe Trump was the legitimate winner? Hard to believe only the Dems would try to steal an election and not the GOP too.

 

[Billiejeens]

It's terribly disrespectful when a government official parodies other government officials.

Do you have a link proving that to be a parody and not an actual photo?

 

[candycorn]

"Gabbard claims ‘coordinated effort’ by intelligence community to advance narrative to impeach Trump

Whistleblower admitted on initial form they did not have direct knowledge of Trump's private communications

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released newly declassified testimony that she alleges shows a "coordinated effort" by the intelligence community to "manufacture a conspiracy" used as the basis of President Donald Trump first impeachment.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Monday released two declassified transcripts from closed-door House Intelligence Committee hearings that Gabbard’s office says show former Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson advanced as credible a whistleblower complaint based on secondhand information from an individual who had previously worked with then-Vice President Joe Biden in Ukraine. Gabbard’s office argued that, based on this and other testimony, Atkinson’s actions "weaponize[d] the whistleblower process and exceed[ed] his statutory jurisdiction."

Atkinson’s investigation helped trigger the first impeachment of Trump by advancing what he deemed a "credible" whistleblower complaint regarding a July 2019 phone call between the president and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy."

Gabbard claims ‘coordinated effort’ by intelligence community to advance narrative to impeach Trump

DNI Tulsi Gabbard releases declassified testimony she says exposes a coordinated effort to manufacture a narrative behind Trump's first impeachment.

www.foxnews.com

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Intelligence%20Reports/Supporting_Documents_v3_Redacted.pdf

They framed Trump with heresay from a Biden man. Can you believe this?

Poor Tulsi....

 

[Billiejeens]

Back to the topic -

Criminal referrals have been issued.

 

[struth]

If our elections are so corrupt, why should I believe Trump was the legitimate winner? Hard to believe only the Dems would try to steal an election and not the GOP too.

How did that happen on Obama and xiden’s watch?

Obviously we need the SAVE Act passed asap

 

[alang1216]

How did that happen on Obama and xiden’s watch?

Obviously we need the SAVE Act passed asap

What makes you think it happened on Obama and Biden’s watch and not on Trump's? Or Bush's. Or George Washington's?

Where was there election fraud that the SAVE act would have stopped?

 

[struth]

What makes you think it happened on Obama and Biden’s watch and not on Trump's? Or Bush's. Or George Washington's?

Where was there election fraud that the SAVE act would have stopped?

because you said Trump wasn't legit....he ran when Obama and Xiden were both in office.

So are you saying there was fraud or are you saying there wasn't? You keep flip flopping on me. If you think there was fraud, and Trump wasn't legit, then wouldn't you support any legislation to ensure that election are secure?

 

[Robert W]

So what are we doing there?

I appreciate you are curious. I just woke up to take care of nature's urging me and will deal with this later.

 

[alang1216]

because you said Trump wasn't legit....he ran when Obama and Xiden were both in office.

So are you saying there was fraud or are you saying there wasn't? You keep flip flopping on me. If you think there was fraud, and Trump wasn't legit, then wouldn't you support any legislation to ensure that election are secure?

SAVE is a solution in search of a problem. There was no fraud that could have changed the outcome of any Presidential election (at least in my lifetime). The fact that Trump continues to undermine the public's trust in our system makes him, IMHO, the worst and most dangerous president of my lifetime.