Just a thought. How can the Whistleblower be receiving death threats, when he is anonymous?

[occupied]

Saying, for example, "I am going to kill the whistleblower" is still a death threat. Glad I could clear that up for you.

Of course, but we were told the person could testify from a remote location due to the fear for his life (remember the Kavanaugh Hearing and the same M.O?). So, if someone had the means to do harm to someone, how would they do it? Just randomly pick some unfortunate guy in D.C and do something and hope he (or she) is the Whistleblower? Is the Whistleblower hiding in some bunker somewhere?

The assumption is that he would be in harm at his home not at work unless a co-worker lost his shyte. If nobody knows who he is, who would the threat be addressed to, and/or carried out?

There's this thing called "character assassination". You cannot deny that an army of right wing operatives would dig deep into this persons life looking for anything to discredit them. This person and their family do not deserve to be raked over the coals for no other reason than for the right to cloud the issue and intimidate a witness.

Well, without scrutiny you are in fact supporting the very issue you are concerned about, but, this is an attack on a duly elected President! He cannot defend himself, people cannot ask questions and motivations because, well, the secret accuser must remain so?

In effect, the President, his supporters and the ability of his government to do their job for the people is impaired and harmed by what is, at this point, a groundless accusation.

In politics or in a courtroom, we can't operate on the "Honor System" where any allegation is accepted as fact. He needs to come out and stand by his allegation in the open. Of course he will be scrutinized, it's politics and he could simply be a political plant or hyper partisan. Just as in the Kavanaugh Hearing, motivate will be and should be flushed out.

You will one day have your chance to smear the whistle blower from coast to coast on TV and subject them to your towering rage but not yet. This person is allegedly an intelligence officer with a top security clearance. They are certainly clean enough to work the White House and have been judged to be credible by a Trump appointee and are entitled to protection as yet.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Saying, for example, "I am going to kill the whistleblower" is still a death threat. Glad I could clear that up for you.

Of course, but we were told the person could testify from a remote location due to the fear for his life (remember the Kavanaugh Hearing and the same M.O?). So, if someone had the means to do harm to someone, how would they do it? Just randomly pick some unfortunate guy in D.C and do something and hope he (or she) is the Whistleblower? Is the Whistleblower hiding in some bunker somewhere?

The assumption is that he would be in harm at his home not at work unless a co-worker lost his shyte. If nobody knows who he is, who would the threat be addressed to, and/or carried out?

There's this thing called "character assassination". You cannot deny that an army of right wing operatives would dig deep into this persons life looking for anything to discredit them. This person and their family do not deserve to be raked over the coals for no other reason than for the right to cloud the issue and intimidate a witness.

Well, without scrutiny you are in fact supporting the very issue you are concerned about, but, this is an attack on a duly elected President! He cannot defend himself, people cannot ask questions and motivations because, well, the secret accuser must remain so?

In effect, the President, his supporters and the ability of his government to do their job for the people is impaired and harmed by what is, at this point, a groundless accusation.

In politics or in a courtroom, we can't operate on the "Honor System" where any allegation is accepted as fact. He needs to come out and stand by his allegation in the open. Of course he will be scrutinized, it's politics and he could simply be a political plant or hyper partisan. Just as in the Kavanaugh Hearing, motivate will be and should be flushed out.

Trump will have every opportunity to answer any impeachment charges when it gets to trial in the Senate. Crooks don't get to have their lawyers involved while cops investigate a crime. They have to wait until it gets to court.

The House impeaches, not just the Democrats, dumbass!

 

[K9Buck]

You will one day have your chance to smear the whistle blower from coast to coast on TV and subject them to your towering rage but not yet. This person is allegedly an intelligence officer with a top security clearance. They are certainly clean enough to work the White House and have been judged to be credible by a Trump appointee and are entitled to protection as yet.

You love the "whistle blower" because they are, potentially, damaging to Trump. If they were reporting malfeasance regarding Nancy Pelosi, for instance, you would despise them.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I heard this more than once, on CNN and I think in an interview by someone. I just want to know, how is this possible when he is not even known?

Through his lawyers, who are not anonymous.

Whew, that was tough.

 

[BULLDOG]

Saying, for example, "I am going to kill the whistleblower" is still a death threat. Glad I could clear that up for you.

Of course, but we were told the person could testify from a remote location due to the fear for his life (remember the Kavanaugh Hearing and the same M.O?). So, if someone had the means to do harm to someone, how would they do it? Just randomly pick some unfortunate guy in D.C and do something and hope he (or she) is the Whistleblower? Is the Whistleblower hiding in some bunker somewhere?

The assumption is that he would be in harm at his home not at work unless a co-worker lost his shyte. If nobody knows who he is, who would the threat be addressed to, and/or carried out?

There's this thing called "character assassination". You cannot deny that an army of right wing operatives would dig deep into this persons life looking for anything to discredit them. This person and their family do not deserve to be raked over the coals for no other reason than for the right to cloud the issue and intimidate a witness.

Well, without scrutiny you are in fact supporting the very issue you are concerned about, but, this is an attack on a duly elected President! He cannot defend himself, people cannot ask questions and motivations because, well, the secret accuser must remain so?

In effect, the President, his supporters and the ability of his government to do their job for the people is impaired and harmed by what is, at this point, a groundless accusation.

In politics or in a courtroom, we can't operate on the "Honor System" where any allegation is accepted as fact. He needs to come out and stand by his allegation in the open. Of course he will be scrutinized, it's politics and he could simply be a political plant or hyper partisan. Just as in the Kavanaugh Hearing, motivate will be and should be flushed out.

Trump will have every opportunity to answer any impeachment charges when it gets to trial in the Senate. Crooks don't get to have their lawyers involved while cops investigate a crime. They have to wait until it gets to court.

The House impeaches, not just the Democrats, dumbass!

True, and the Democrats are in charge in the house. If republicans just hadn't changed the rules to block out the minority party during all those Benghazi Benghazi Benghazi hearings, they would have subpoena ability now. Can you say "OH SHIT!!' ?

 

[pyetro]

I heard this more than once, on CNN and I think in an interview by someone. I just want to know, how is this possible when he is not even known?

You cited no source for the claim that he's receiving death threats. Cons pretend they hate anonymous sources. But a thread in USMB is a reliable source to them.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Of course, but we were told the person could testify from a remote location due to the fear for his life (remember the Kavanaugh Hearing and the same M.O?). So, if someone had the means to do harm to someone, how would they do it? Just randomly pick some unfortunate guy in D.C and do something and hope he (or she) is the Whistleblower? Is the Whistleblower hiding in some bunker somewhere?

The assumption is that he would be in harm at his home not at work unless a co-worker lost his shyte. If nobody knows who he is, who would the threat be addressed to, and/or carried out?

There's this thing called "character assassination". You cannot deny that an army of right wing operatives would dig deep into this persons life looking for anything to discredit them. This person and their family do not deserve to be raked over the coals for no other reason than for the right to cloud the issue and intimidate a witness.

Well, without scrutiny you are in fact supporting the very issue you are concerned about, but, this is an attack on a duly elected President! He cannot defend himself, people cannot ask questions and motivations because, well, the secret accuser must remain so?

In effect, the President, his supporters and the ability of his government to do their job for the people is impaired and harmed by what is, at this point, a groundless accusation.

In politics or in a courtroom, we can't operate on the "Honor System" where any allegation is accepted as fact. He needs to come out and stand by his allegation in the open. Of course he will be scrutinized, it's politics and he could simply be a political plant or hyper partisan. Just as in the Kavanaugh Hearing, motivate will be and should be flushed out.

Trump will have every opportunity to answer any impeachment charges when it gets to trial in the Senate. Crooks don't get to have their lawyers involved while cops investigate a crime. They have to wait until it gets to court.

The House impeaches, not just the Democrats, dumbass!

True, and the Democrats are in charge in the house. If republicans just hadn't changed the rules to block out the minority party during all those Benghazi Benghazi Benghazi hearings, they would have subpoena ability now. Can you say "OH SHIT!!' ?

You are so full of shit! Why do you lie when it is so easily disproved?

 

[occupied]

You will one day have your chance to smear the whistle blower from coast to coast on TV and subject them to your towering rage but not yet. This person is allegedly an intelligence officer with a top security clearance. They are certainly clean enough to work the White House and have been judged to be credible by a Trump appointee and are entitled to protection as yet.

You love the "whistle blower" because they are, potentially, damaging to Trump. If they were reporting malfeasance regarding Nancy Pelosi, for instance, you would despise them.

I would at least understand why their identity has to remain secret through the investigation. You see I'm not like you, I respect the law as it applies to our leaders and find it much too lenient as it is.

 

[BULLDOG]

You will one day have your chance to smear the whistle blower from coast to coast on TV and subject them to your towering rage but not yet. This person is allegedly an intelligence officer with a top security clearance. They are certainly clean enough to work the White House and have been judged to be credible by a Trump appointee and are entitled to protection as yet.

You love the "whistle blower" because they are, potentially, damaging to Trump. If they were reporting malfeasance regarding Nancy Pelosi, for instance, you would despise them.

And you would love them if they were reporting on Pelosi. Big deal.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

I heard this more than once, on CNN and I think in an interview by someone. I just want to know, how is this possible when he is not even known?

The geotus picked it up

 

[K9Buck]

I heard this more than once, on CNN and I think in an interview by someone. I just want to know, how is this possible when he is not even known?

You cited no source for the claim that he's receiving death threats. Cons pretend they hate anonymous sources. But a thread in USMB is a reliable source to them.

FWIW...

BNL NEWS on Twitter

 

[K9Buck]

I respect the law as it applies to our leaders and find it much too lenient as it is.

Bullshit. Hillary committed innumerable felonies and you couldn't stop licking her snatch.

 

[BULLDOG]

There's this thing called "character assassination". You cannot deny that an army of right wing operatives would dig deep into this persons life looking for anything to discredit them. This person and their family do not deserve to be raked over the coals for no other reason than for the right to cloud the issue and intimidate a witness.

Well, without scrutiny you are in fact supporting the very issue you are concerned about, but, this is an attack on a duly elected President! He cannot defend himself, people cannot ask questions and motivations because, well, the secret accuser must remain so?

In effect, the President, his supporters and the ability of his government to do their job for the people is impaired and harmed by what is, at this point, a groundless accusation.

In politics or in a courtroom, we can't operate on the "Honor System" where any allegation is accepted as fact. He needs to come out and stand by his allegation in the open. Of course he will be scrutinized, it's politics and he could simply be a political plant or hyper partisan. Just as in the Kavanaugh Hearing, motivate will be and should be flushed out.

Trump will have every opportunity to answer any impeachment charges when it gets to trial in the Senate. Crooks don't get to have their lawyers involved while cops investigate a crime. They have to wait until it gets to court.

The House impeaches, not just the Democrats, dumbass!

True, and the Democrats are in charge in the house. If republicans just hadn't changed the rules to block out the minority party during all those Benghazi Benghazi Benghazi hearings, they would have subpoena ability now. Can you say "OH SHIT!!' ?

You are so full of shit! Why do you lie when it is so easily disproved?

You think the repubs didn't change the rules that are now blocking them from having subpoena power in the committees?

 

[Lesh]

Bullshit. Hillary committed innumerable felonies

In your mind

 

[BULLDOG]

I heard this more than once, on CNN and I think in an interview by someone. I just want to know, how is this possible when he is not even known?

The geotus picked it up

View attachment 283632

View attachment 283631

Yeah, He's pretty dumb to ask something like that, isn't he?

 

[K9Buck]

Bullshit. Hillary committed innumerable felonies

In your mind

Transmitting classified documents through a private server is a FELONY. No matter how much you want to spin it, it is a serious crime. You guys are delusional.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Well, without scrutiny you are in fact supporting the very issue you are concerned about, but, this is an attack on a duly elected President! He cannot defend himself, people cannot ask questions and motivations because, well, the secret accuser must remain so?

In effect, the President, his supporters and the ability of his government to do their job for the people is impaired and harmed by what is, at this point, a groundless accusation.

In politics or in a courtroom, we can't operate on the "Honor System" where any allegation is accepted as fact. He needs to come out and stand by his allegation in the open. Of course he will be scrutinized, it's politics and he could simply be a political plant or hyper partisan. Just as in the Kavanaugh Hearing, motivate will be and should be flushed out.

Trump will have every opportunity to answer any impeachment charges when it gets to trial in the Senate. Crooks don't get to have their lawyers involved while cops investigate a crime. They have to wait until it gets to court.

The House impeaches, not just the Democrats, dumbass!

True, and the Democrats are in charge in the house. If republicans just hadn't changed the rules to block out the minority party during all those Benghazi Benghazi Benghazi hearings, they would have subpoena ability now. Can you say "OH SHIT!!' ?

You are so full of shit! Why do you lie when it is so easily disproved?

You think the repubs didn't change the rules that are now blocking them from having subpoena power in the committees?

That was not the change. The rule change allowed committee chairman to issue subpoenas without the consent of the minority party, which was a result of the Obama administration stonewalling valid requests for documents. The Dems are only allowing committee chairman to issue subpoenas, under those new rules. The rules also allow for the ranking member and others in the minority to request subpoenas. The chairmen are ignoring them, and that is what is being done under the Dems. That cuts out the ability for the minority party in an impeachment inquiry to produce exculpatory evidence by testimony from individuals the Dems really don't want to have testify. It ruins their kangaroo court!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Bullshit. Hillary committed innumerable felonies

In your mind

James Comey seemed to think she did. He just refused to prosecute her.

Go sleep it off Lush! Make it an early night.

Say, isn't your AA meeting on Tuesday nights?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

James Comey seemed to think she did. He just refused to prosecute her.

Such nonsense. He literally said no prosecutor worth a **** (paraphrasing) would recommend charges or prosecute. You're making up stories.

I can't believe this is where you goobers still are. It's like being reunited a guy you graduated high school with 10 years ago, and he's still living with his mom and delivering papers. Grow up you fools...

 

[BULLDOG]

Trump will have every opportunity to answer any impeachment charges when it gets to trial in the Senate. Crooks don't get to have their lawyers involved while cops investigate a crime. They have to wait until it gets to court.

The House impeaches, not just the Democrats, dumbass!

True, and the Democrats are in charge in the house. If republicans just hadn't changed the rules to block out the minority party during all those Benghazi Benghazi Benghazi hearings, they would have subpoena ability now. Can you say "OH SHIT!!' ?

You are so full of shit! Why do you lie when it is so easily disproved?

You think the repubs didn't change the rules that are now blocking them from having subpoena power in the committees?

That was not the change. The rule change allowed committee chairman to issue subpoenas without the consent of the minority party, which was a result of the Obama administration stonewalling valid requests for documents. The Dems are only allowing committee chairman to issue subpoenas, under those new rules. The rules also allow for the ranking member and others in the minority to request subpoenas. The chairmen are ignoring them, and that is what is being done under the Dems. That cuts out the ability for the minority party in an impeachment inquiry to produce exculpatory evidence by testimony from individuals the Dems really don't want to have testify. It ruins their kangaroo court!

The rules change gave committee chairmen complete control of subpoena power. The ranking members requested subpoenas in the Benghazi Benghazi Benghazi investigations too----- those requests were ignored. Again. Trump will have his day in court ----- in the Senate trial