Whistleblower complaint released

[Anonymous]

This grifter's "presidency" is going down like a ring of burning fire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm watching the hearing now on Lawfare even though I should be asleep already. It occurred to me:

Isn't quid pro quo Latin for reciprocity?

Yes. Literally this for that.

[Anonymous]

I think any other president would be resigning right about now. There’s no path forward for him. After all we have learned, I can’t have imagine him ever being able to go back to what he was doing before. Even if he’s not removed from office, it is over for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thing I don't like about the whistleblower complaint is that it's all hearsay.

But it sounds like the people that the whistleblower heard from were interviewed so hopefully there is a LOT of corroboration.

I would think that the actual transcript can and will be retrieved from the secret server.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Republican and the list of all of Trump’s misdeeds from lying, misinformation, operating a bogus university, operating a bogus charity, steering govt business to his personal interests, having his kids involved in running the govt, his love and adoration for ruthless and murderous dictators, his obvious complicity with Putin, his racist comments, his hiding of his taxes, and now this. Isn’t all the enough to demonstrate to any human being of normal intelligence that something isn’t right with this guy? And yet they continue to defend his actions as purely innocent and in furtherance of him being the best President ever.

Most people agree with you. The rest watch Fox News, and since Fox News is starting to have doubts about Trump, I think they will come round too.

What makes you say that?

NP here - this is anecdotal, but my folks who have been Fox News fans/Hannity fans/used to listen to Rush Limbaugh radio show recently told me they aren't tuning into Fox anymore since the network's not as conservative as it used to be. They now watch One America News Network.

God, I first heard of that on a visit to my brother's/ His wife (who is a lunatic hoarder) watches that network, on the basis of which she claims 400,000 illegals crossing the border daily. Which would mean the US population doubled in the last 2 years and we didn't even notice it. My brother is a yokel farmer but a solid Democrat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think any other president would be resigning right about now. There’s no path forward for him. After all we have learned, I can’t have imagine him ever being able to go back to what he was doing before. Even if he’s not removed from office, it is over for him.

I think it would be over for any other president. I’m not sure it’s over for Trump. Republicans seem to hold him to a different standard, and we are never going to learn the full truth here which will give them an out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing I don't like about the whistleblower complaint is that it's all hearsay.

But it sounds like the people that the whistleblower heard from were interviewed so hopefully there is a LOT of corroboration.

I would think that the actual transcript can and will be retrieved from the secret server.

The thing is, Giuliani and Trump have already admitted to the contours of the issue, even of the whistleblower complaint is ALL heresay and has details wrong.

Facts: Trump used Congressionally authorized funds as leverage to conduct personal campaign gains. That is illegal on two fronts. Giulianii has been serving as an unpaid government envoy to conduct said policy. That is 2 or 3 counts of illegality. Giuliani is implicating the Pompeo State Department. Mulvaney illegally withheld the funds; Pence met with the Ukrainian president to reaffirm the con and Barr has been systemic in the cover-up.

All of this is either admitted to or prima facia.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing I don't like about the whistleblower complaint is that it's all hearsay.

But it sounds like the people that the whistleblower heard from were interviewed so hopefully there is a LOT of corroboration.

I would think that the actual transcript can and will be retrieved from the secret server.

The thing is, Giuliani and Trump have already admitted to the contours of the issue, even of the whistleblower complaint is ALL heresay and has details wrong.

Facts: Trump used Congressionally authorized funds as leverage to conduct personal campaign gains. That is illegal on two fronts. Giulianii has been serving as an unpaid government envoy to conduct said policy. That is 2 or 3 counts of illegality. Giuliani is implicating the Pompeo State Department. Mulvaney illegally withheld the funds; Pence met with the Ukrainian president to reaffirm the con and Barr has been systemic in the cover-up.

All of this is either admitted to or prima facia.

That is not a fact at all. That is what the left is pushing. There is no evidence of that whatsoever. And, even the Ukrainian president denied it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing I don't like about the whistleblower complaint is that it's all hearsay.

But it sounds like the people that the whistleblower heard from were interviewed so hopefully there is a LOT of corroboration.

I would think that the actual transcript can and will be retrieved from the secret server.

The thing is, Giuliani and Trump have already admitted to the contours of the issue, even of the whistleblower complaint is ALL heresay and has details wrong.

Facts: Trump used Congressionally authorized funds as leverage to conduct personal campaign gains. That is illegal on two fronts. Giulianii has been serving as an unpaid government envoy to conduct said policy. That is 2 or 3 counts of illegality. Giuliani is implicating the Pompeo State Department. Mulvaney illegally withheld the funds; Pence met with the Ukrainian president to reaffirm the con and Barr has been systemic in the cover-up.

All of this is either admitted to or prima facia.

That is not a fact at all. That is what the left is pushing. There is no evidence of that whatsoever. And, even the Ukrainian president denied it.

You're lost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing I don't like about the whistleblower complaint is that it's all hearsay.

But it sounds like the people that the whistleblower heard from were interviewed so hopefully there is a LOT of corroboration.

I would think that the actual transcript can and will be retrieved from the secret server.

The thing is, Giuliani and Trump have already admitted to the contours of the issue, even of the whistleblower complaint is ALL heresay and has details wrong.

Facts: Trump used Congressionally authorized funds as leverage to conduct personal campaign gains. That is illegal on two fronts. Giulianii has been serving as an unpaid government envoy to conduct said policy. That is 2 or 3 counts of illegality. Giuliani is implicating the Pompeo State Department. Mulvaney illegally withheld the funds; Pence met with the Ukrainian president to reaffirm the con and Barr has been systemic in the cover-up.

All of this is either admitted to or prima facia.

Also, there’s the memo that the WH released that corroborated it all ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If Nancy Pelosi or Adam Schiff had taken the time to look at the criteria for complaints, they would understand why this was not passed on.
This complaint should not have ever made it to Congress based on these criteria.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If Nancy Pelosi or Adam Schiff had taken the time to look at the criteria for complaints, they would understand why this was not passed on.
This complaint should not have ever made it to Congress based on these criteria.

To me, that is evidence the criteria need to be a loosened a bit. One cannot have a corrupt President protected by his immediate witnesses who because of a stupid these rules escapes from all consequences of his corruption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If Nancy Pelosi or Adam Schiff had taken the time to look at the criteria for complaints, they would understand why this was not passed on.
This complaint should not have ever made it to Congress based on these criteria.

You are ignoring everything that is stated in the report.

Read it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If Nancy Pelosi or Adam Schiff had taken the time to look at the criteria for complaints, they would understand why this was not passed on.
This complaint should not have ever made it to Congress based on these criteria.

To me, that is evidence the criteria need to be a loosened a bit. One cannot have a corrupt President protected by his immediate witnesses who because of a stupid these rules escapes from all consequences of his corruption.

Nah, PP has it wrong. The report is a credible urgent concern. We can all read it and see why.