Schiff: Whistleblower will testify soon

[Auld Phart]

You're taking someone else's word on the 'firsthand' information

Yes, the IC IG. Correct. I.E., the authority on the matter. I should take the word of you delusional cultists instead? Heh heh

Did the IG actually say that the whistle blower had first-hand information that is relevant to the inquiry?

.

He doesn't know what the 'first hand' information is, but is still backing it.

I find that funny.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

You're taking someone else's word on the 'firsthand' information

Yes, the IC IG. Correct. I.E., the authority on the matter. I should take the word of you delusional cultists instead? Heh heh

Did the IG actually say that the whistle blower had first-hand information that is relevant to the inquiry?

.

Nope...he said the information was 'credible' and 'urgent'--which is what he legally had to say to trigger the Congressional review provisions of the law.

 

[Claudette]

You're taking someone else's word on the 'firsthand' information

Yes, the IC IG. Correct. I.E., the authority on the matter. I should take the word of you delusional cultists instead? Heh heh

Did the IG actually say that the whistle blower had first-hand information that is relevant to the inquiry?

.

He doesn't know what the 'first hand' information is, but is still backing it.

I find that funny.

I agree. My question is where are the people this "whistleblower" got his info from. How come they aren't front and center rather that a guy who has nothing but hearsay??

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You're taking someone else's word on the 'firsthand' information

Yes, the IC IG. Correct. I.E., the authority on the matter. I should take the word of you delusional cultists instead? Heh heh

Did the IG actually say that the whistle blower had first-hand information that is relevant to the inquiry?

.

Nope...he said the information was 'credible' and 'urgent'--which is what he legally had to say to trigger the Congressional review provisions of the law.

Yes, and after the transcript was released, it suddenly became incredible and not urgent.

.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

You're taking someone else's word on the 'firsthand' information

Yes, the IC IG. Correct. I.E., the authority on the matter. I should take the word of you delusional cultists instead? Heh heh

Did the IG actually say that the whistle blower had first-hand information that is relevant to the inquiry?

.

He doesn't know what the 'first hand' information is, but is still backing it.

I find that funny.

I agree. My question is where are the people this "whistleblower" got his info from. How come they aren't front and center rather that a guy who has nothing but hearsay??

Perhaps they feel that the information is more important than revealing who uncovered it? As soon as we have a name...the smear machine goes into high gear..as the relevance of the info goes straight to the toilet.

 

[Claudette]

You're taking someone else's word on the 'firsthand' information

Yes, the IC IG. Correct. I.E., the authority on the matter. I should take the word of you delusional cultists instead? Heh heh

Did the IG actually say that the whistle blower had first-hand information that is relevant to the inquiry?

.

He doesn't know what the 'first hand' information is, but is still backing it.

I find that funny.

I agree. My question is where are the people this "whistleblower" got his info from. How come they aren't front and center rather that a guy who has nothing but hearsay??

Perhaps they feel that the information is more important than revealing who uncovered it? As soon as we have a name...the smear machine goes into high gear..as the relevance of the info goes straight to the toilet.

Hearsay is hearsay and means nothing in a court of law. This isn't a court of law but I would rather hear from the people who actually heard what they heard. Not some guy repeating gossip.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You're taking someone else's word on the 'firsthand' information

Yes, the IC IG. Correct. I.E., the authority on the matter. I should take the word of you delusional cultists instead? Heh heh

Did the IG actually say that the whistle blower had first-hand information that is relevant to the inquiry?

.

He doesn't know what the 'first hand' information is, but is still backing it.

I find that funny.

I agree. My question is where are the people this "whistleblower" got his info from. How come they aren't front and center rather that a guy who has nothing but hearsay??

Perhaps they feel that the information is more important than revealing who uncovered it? As soon as we have a name...the smear machine goes into high gear..as the relevance of the info goes straight to the toilet.

Perhaps this person can reveal who told him the information and we can go get it from the source.

Why haven't those people come forward? Why are we relying on what someone allegedly told this whistleblower?

.

 

[mudwhistle]

so, you're basing your comments on second hand information?

The whistleblower report and the transcript are second hand info?


And this is where you cultists are going to make your stand?

Hahahahaha

The whistleblower complaint and the phone call transcripts are two different types of evidence.

The whistleblower report is 3rd hand or hearsay whereas the transcript is firsthand.

Agreed..depending on which transcript you are referring to. The rough transcript provided by the White House was not verbatim....and thus removed from the source...the actual unredacted transcript is indeed, firsthand. What I'd love to hear..is the actual recordings..so we can measure nuance...the tone in the voices..the pauses for emphasis--that would be informative.

Whistle-blower's report is second-hand. Those who alerted the whistle-blower..were they to speak..would be 1st hand info.

Those persons..would be the actual leakers everyone is eager to hear..or not.

The transcripts the WH released was unredacted. The media claims the original transcript is close to being word for word what was discussed. That's BS. Another example of fake news by the press.

FYI, There were no redactions of any kind. Redactions would appear as blackened out dialog.

If there is a second transcript out there it is not an official transcript. It is highly suspicious and cannot be trusted.

 

[mudwhistle]

You're taking someone else's word on the 'firsthand' information

Yes, the IC IG. Correct. I.E., the authority on the matter. I should take the word of you delusional cultists instead? Heh heh

Did the IG actually say that the whistle blower had first-hand information that is relevant to the inquiry?

.

Nope...he said the information was 'credible' and 'urgent'--which is what he legally had to say to trigger the Congressional review provisions of the law.

No.....the claim wasn't credible because at the time they could not say it was credible. It was only urgent because it involves executive privilege.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You're taking someone else's word on the 'firsthand' information

Yes, the IC IG. Correct. I.E., the authority on the matter. I should take the word of you delusional cultists instead? Heh heh

Did the IG actually say that the whistle blower had first-hand information that is relevant to the inquiry?

.

Is your google broken? Helpless as a baby? Just make your point. I am not your assistant.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Yes, and after the transcript was released, it suddenly became incredible and not urgent.

.... to trump cultists.

 

[Claudette]

so, you're basing your comments on second hand information?

The whistleblower report and the transcript are second hand info?


And this is where you cultists are going to make your stand?

Hahahahaha

The whistleblower complaint and the phone call transcripts are two different types of evidence.

The whistleblower report is 3rd hand or hearsay whereas the transcript is firsthand.

Agreed..depending on which transcript you are referring to. The rough transcript provided by the White House was not verbatim....and thus removed from the source...the actual unredacted transcript is indeed, firsthand. What I'd love to hear..is the actual recordings..so we can measure nuance...the tone in the voices..the pauses for emphasis--that would be informative.

Whistle-blower's report is second-hand. Those who alerted the whistle-blower..were they to speak..would be 1st hand info.

Those persons..would be the actual leakers everyone is eager to hear..or not.

The transcripts the WH released was unredacted. The media claims the original transcript is close to being word for word what was discussed. That's BS. Another example of fake news by the press.

FYI, There were no redactions of any kind. Redactions would appear as blackened out dialog.

If there is a second transcript out there it is not an official transcript. It is highly suspicious and cannot be trusted.

Yup. The transcript I read wasn't redacted. No blackened out dialog anywhere.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You're taking someone else's word on the 'firsthand' information

Yes, the IC IG. Correct. I.E., the authority on the matter. I should take the word of you delusional cultists instead? Heh heh

Did the IG actually say that the whistle blower had first-hand information that is relevant to the inquiry?

.

Is your google broken? Helpless as a baby? Just make your point. I am not your assistant.

TRANSLATION: "I can't find shit, so you do it."

I'll help you out. There was NO ONE SINGLE SHREAD of first-hand knowledge. None. Zero.

The fact that the whistle blower failed to name names in his/her report is even MORE suspicious.

But, none of this matter. This is all window dressing to give the commie Dems political cover to impeach and appease their bat-shit crazy base.

.
.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'll help you out. There was NO ONE SINGLE SHREAD of first-hand knowledge. None. Zero.

The IC IG says otherwise.

Who to believe....the number one authority on the matter, or a bitchy little trump cultist, pulling things out of his ass?

Not a tough call.

 

[Zorro!]

WELL: Ukraine Mystery: Schiff Staffer Made August Visit for Think Tank Backed by Hunter Biden’s Old Employer.

 

[LeeOnLido]

So..in this day and age..can this person testify without anyone leaking his/her identity?

Whistleblower Is Expected to Testify Soon, House Intelligence Chairman Schiff Says

"The whistleblower at the center of the impeachment probe of President Trump will testify in the House “very soon,” though in a way that will protect his identity, the Democrat leading the probe said Sunday.
The whistleblower, whose identity hasn’t been made public, works for the Central Intelligence Agency, The Wall Street Journal confirmed last week.

“We’ll get the unfiltered testimony of that whistleblower,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Calif.), the House Intelligence Committee chairman, said on ABC’s “This Week.” “We are taking all the precautions” to protect his identity, Mr. Schiff added.
President Trump’s personal attorney, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, initially said on the same program that he wouldn’t cooperate with Mr. Schiff’s probe, accusing the congressman of lacking fairness.
But Mr. Giuliani quickly changed his position, saying he would consider testifying. “I have to be guided by my client,” Mr. Giuliani said. “Frankly, it’s his privilege, not mine. If he decides he wants me to testify I will testify.”
Mr. Giuliani is a key figure in the impeachment probe and is depicted in the whistleblower complaint released Thursday as eager to thrust himself into U.S. foreign policy. As the president’s personal attorney, Mr. Giuliani pressed Ukraine on pursuing an investigation of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden."

Leak Party concerned about leaking???

i wonder if the whistle blower will have a similar voice that of Christine Ford

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I'll help you out. There was NO ONE SINGLE SHREAD of first-hand knowledge. None. Zero.

The IC IG says otherwise.

Who to believe....the number one authority on the matter, or a bitchy little trump cultist, pulling things out of his ass?

Not a tough call.

Link?

He said it was urgent and credible BEFORE the transcript of the call was released.

Nowhere did anyone say that the whistle blower's knowledge was first hand.

If you are still going with the first-hand knowledge angle, link your evidence. It's not my duty to prove a negative. You prove it.


.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Nowhere did anyone say that the whistle blower's knowledge was first hand.

False. The IG IC said the whistleblower had first hand information.

 

[Zorro!]

Schiff Panics After Bombshell Reveal He Got Early Account of CIA Spy’s Accusations – Claims He Has Never Spoken to Whistleblower

Adam Schiff needs to resign from Congress for the crime of fraudulently fabricating a statement of the President of the United States and reading it to Congress.

Schiff will certainly need to recuse himself and be cross examined, under oath, by GOP Senators once the trail is underway.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

Shiff caught lying his szz off to camera

Congress caught proven corrupt by looking the other way

Now trump can get the military to change this proven corrupt congress and system of the unwise electing crooks