The Absurdity of the Trump Ukraine 'Scandal' Spelled Out for the Wokesters

[B. Kidd]

Dems have weaponized their holdovers in the intelligence community.
After all, it was Schumer who said that the intelligence community has 6 ways to Sunday to get back at you.

Welcome to the United States Republic of Bananas .......

 

[JimBowie1958]

Dems have weaponized their holdovers in the intelligence community.
After all, it was Schumer who said that the intelligence community has 6 ways to Sunday to get back at you.

Welcome to the United States Republic of Bananas .......

And Schumer will likely go down with the rest of them.

 

[JimBowie1958]

It will be interesting to see if any of the loony libs on this site can respond to this in an intelligent manner. My guess would be NO.

It's a "don't throw me in that briar patch" rope-a-dope. The Trump-haters think they found dirt on Trump, when it turns out to be a giant disinformation can of worms for Biden.

I think you nailed it.

Wokesters will never understand Trump because they start out with the presumption that Trump is an idiot, and Trump prefers them to think that.

 

[B. Kidd]

Dems have weaponized their holdovers in the intelligence community.
After all, it was Schumer who said that the intelligence community has 6 ways to Sunday to get back at you.

Welcome to the United States Republic of Bananas .......

And Schumer will likely go down with the rest of them.

I don't know about that. Pelosi ready to go the impeachment route which is their goal.

 

[joaquinmiller]

What is 'fake' about it?

1) The person in question does not fit the legal definition of a 'whistleblower' under intel guidelines and so does not have the same protections as a legal whistleblower would.

1) How about a link for that claim?

Um, it is in the OP.

2) The person in question did not witness the conversation, but is only repeating it, presumably, which makes it hearsay, not "ear witness" testimony, lol.

​

2) We don't know that the whistleblower complaint is limited to one telephone conversation or how he obtained his information. For all we know, he picked it up at the Ukranian Embassy. The ICIG found it credible, and it scared the administration enough for it to disobey the law in turning it over to Congress.

The point is it is hearsay and not admissible as evidence. If some intel dude was eavesdropping on the President that would be a bigger story than whatebver the President may have said to the Ukrainian President.

3) It is likely ginned up by Trump to indirectly bring attention to Biden family corruption. Trump is known for doing such things and this scandal is likely to destroy the campaign of joe Biden from the unwanted attention to his profiteering.

3) You should pass out tinfoil with this one. It requires me to believe the whistleblower is a Trump plant. You sure you want to go there?

My own theory is that Trump told the story to some intel guys who then repeated it. In part he is probably trying to cross index leakers, but also he could be going for a twofer distracting the media from a story that Trump really does not want covered and at the same time bring media attention to the Biden family's history of self enrichment.

And Trump has done things like this before.

When he started dating Martha Maples, he called some socialite reporters and pretended to be Trumps publicist and bragged indirectly about how Trump was so good at keeping Martha satisfied. just to get some chatter going about him being a stud.
Donald Trump Denies Posing as Publicist in 1991 Phone Call

Former People Reporter on 1991 'John Miller' Phone Call: It's 'Absolutely' Trump

Don’t be surprised if Trump himself leaked the story about prostitutes defiling a bed Obama once slept in

As someone who has covered Trump on and off for 25 years, I can heartily testify that he's a jerk. When he wanted to look good, he leaked favorable information about himself to the press — sometimes calling as himself and other times disguising his voice as a publicist named John Miller.

When he hooked up with Marla Maples, it wasn't enough for the public to know he was squiring the Georgia Peach around town. He leaked Maples' sexual satisfaction to the New York Post, which ran it under the headline, "Best sex I ever had."

Here's the problem: Trump was the source of the quote, not Maples. This is a guy who was such a monumental cad that he would not only kiss and tell — but then call the newspaper to exaggerate his skills on behalf of his girlfriend.​

And apparently I am not the only doofus who thinks Trump may be the ultimate source behind this whistleblower leak.

‘It’s Not Fake News’: Legal Experts Erupt as Trump Dismisses Whistleblower Complaint : politics

This is a list of pseudonyms Trump has used in the past.
Pseudonyms of Donald Trump - Wikipedia

1) Your claim referred to "legal definition" of a whistleblower, so I was hoping for a legal link. Oh, well.

2) Repeating myself, neither you nor I know the provenance of the whistleblower's info. We both know the IG deemed it credible and urgent, forwarded it to the DNI, then informed Congress when he realized the complaint had not been sent to Congress, as was required by law as he understood it. Tossing in words like 'rumor' is unfounded, and intended to be prejudicial.

3) Fine. Cue the extraterrestrial choir. Sure, that would be unhinged behavior. No one is arguing that.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I don't know about that. Pelosi ready to go the impeachment route which is their goal.

Trump WANTS the Democrats to impeach him, he knows it will give him about a 5% bump in the polls on election day and help return Republicans to the majority in the House.

 

[JimBowie1958]

2) Repeating myself, neither you nor I know the provenance of the whistleblower's info. We both know the IG deemed it credible and urgent, forwarded it to the DNI, then informed Congress when he realized the complaint had not been sent to Congress, as was required by law as he understood it. Tossing in words like 'rumor' is unfounded, and intended to be prejudicial.

All sides have admitted that the Whistleblower did not directly hear the conversation.

Whistleblower Had No ‘Direct Knowledge’ Of Trump Telephone Call — Just ‘Hearsay’

The anonymous White House whistleblower suggesting President Donald Trump had an inappropriate conversation with a foreign power now known to be Ukraine reportedly made that claim based on hearsay.

Fox News’ senior political analyst Brit Hume noted Saturday how CNN admitted that the political firestorm is all based on a whistleblower, thought to be a White House intelligence agent, with second-hand information.​

Whistleblower 'DID NOT actually hear the Trump Ukraine call' | Daily Mail Online

REVEALED: Whistleblower who claims Trump repeatedly pressured Ukraine president to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter for corruption during phone call 'DID NOT actually listen to the communication between the leaders'

• A source said the official 'didn't have direct knowledge of the communications'
• Instead they relied on 'information not obtained during the course of their work'
• Those details 'played a role in the determination the complaint didn't fit the reporting requirements under the intelligence whistleblower law', source says
• Trump has already denied doing anything improper, calling the chat 'routine'
• When Joe Biden was VP, son Hunter served as director of Ukrainian gas firm
• Then-VP Biden pressured Ukraine to fire prosecutor investigating firm's owner
• Fired prosecutor's successor closed the investigation into Burisma Holdings
• Biden said he had 'never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings'
• Hunter said in one chat his dad told him: 'I hope you know what you are doing'

https://www.worldtribune.com/whistleblower-didnt-hear-what-trump-allegedly-said/

The anonymous White House “whistleblower” cited by CNN and other leftist outlets as saying the Trump-Zelensky conversation was inappropriate did not actually have direct information on the conversation and was relying on hearsay evidence, weekend reports said.

Fox News’ senior political analyst Brit Hume said of CNN’s story: “It is hard to see how any of this ends well” but it doesn’t mention the whistleblower’s precarious grip on his inside information until the reader is deep within the report.

“The whistleblower didn’t have direct knowledge of the communications, an official briefed on the matter told CNN.”

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko said the conversation between Trump and Ukraine did not involve any sort of “pressure” from the president.​

Yep, Trump is playing the media like a fiddlemeister.

 

[longknife]

Isn't it amazing how the Libturds on here make claims and, when told to put up or shut up, disappear into the woodwork?

 

[Wapasha]

Um, it is in the OP.

​

The point is it is hearsay and not admissible as evidence. If some intel dude was eavesdropping on the President that would be a bigger story than whatever the President may have said to the Ukrainian President.

It's just more of the same, for fake-news media. All they need is second, third or fourth hand rumors and hearsay, that they think might reflect badly on Trump, and then it's off to the races.

All the media needs, are a few rumors, some innuendo, hearsay and gossip, and they will make up the rest. We saw them take the barest of information, then invited dozens of talking heads on their cable TV news shows. then spin, spin and spin the news to invent some conspiracy theories. Then they pick the conspiracy theory that has the best chance to stick, and run with it, 24/7.

Who needs the WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, HOW and WHY, of journalism, when the "who" is Trump; they can make up everything else.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Who needs the WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, HOW and WHY, of journalism, when the "who" is Trump; they can make up everything else.

Well, the 31 Democrat House members elected in 2018 that went for Trump in 2016 might want some facts, but that's only my best guess.

District Trumps margin of win
AZ-01........ just over 1 point.
GA-06...……….. by 1.5 points.
IL-14...………... nearly 4-point win
IL-17...............slim 0.7-point victory
IA-01...…………. about 3.5 points
IA-02......…...roughly 4-point margin.
IA-03....................by 3.5 points.
ME-02....……... more than 10 points.
MI-08............….nearly 7-point win
MI-11 ...............more than 3 points.
MN-02............little more than 1 point.
MN-07 ......….nearly 31-point victory
NV-03 ............…......1 point
NH-01 ............….narrowly won
NJ-02 ............….nearly 5 points.
NJ-03 .........…...more than 6 points
NJ-05 ...............narrow 1.1-point
NJ-11 ............….just under 1 point
NM-02.........…….roughly 10 points.
NY-11............…..nearly 10-points
NY-18............….less than 2 points.
NY-19............…..nearly 7 points.
NY-22............….15-point margin.
OK-05................13-point victory
PA-08............….nearly 10 points.
PA-17 ............…….2.6-point
SC-01............….about 13 points
UT-04.........…...nearly 7 points.
VA-02.........…..3.4-point victory
VA-07.........……....6.5 points
WI-03...…………..Solid Democrat, GOP doesn't have a snowballs chance in Hell with this one.

So, I count 11 seats the Democrats will likely keep, with Trump getting only about a <3% edge.
I count 8 seats likely to flip to the GOP based on Trump winning by close to or over 10%.
I count 12 seats that are definitely in play, and being able to explain why Democrats voted to impeach the 2016 VOTERS will need more facts than 'Cuz we wanted to!'.​