Whistleblower complaint released

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now we know that Schiff had advanced knowledge of this whistleblower's complaint makes it even more curious at why one of his staffers traveled to Ukraine in late August.
Was this the same staffer that the whistleblower contacted? We need to know.
And, we need to know the purpose for the trip.

If nothing wrong was done, why was the "transcript" of the call placed into the super-secret NSC server? If nothing was done wrong, why is everyone lying about it now?

There was no quid pro quo. Zelensky and the Ukrainians did not know about the withheld funds until a month [u]after the phone call[/u]. Period.

What you underline is not true. the funds were supposed to be released in February and then in May. By June 25th, they still hadn't been released despite public authirization of release and public statements of release. They knew they didn't have the funds but they didn't know why. Trump and Rudy made it clear why. Once this news broke, poof, the funds were released. It was like magic.

The underlined is 100% true. Read paragraph 5 of the article. The first two sentences of that paragaph reads "Ukraine finally learned about the holdup in late August, nearly a month after the call, according to Olena Zerkal, the deputy foreign minister who was acting minister at the time of the call. And they only found out from a “letter sent to us from our Washington Embassy” that provided no explanation for the move, she said."

[Anonymous]

Loophole Lucy is busy this morning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now we know that Schiff had advanced knowledge of this whistleblower's complaint makes it even more curious at why one of his staffers traveled to Ukraine in late August.
Was this the same staffer that the whistleblower contacted? We need to know.
And, we need to know the purpose for the trip.

If nothing wrong was done, why was the "transcript" of the call placed into the super-secret NSC server? If nothing was done wrong, why is everyone lying about it now?

There was no quid pro quo. Zelensky and the Ukrainians did not know about the withheld funds until a month [u]after the phone call[/u]. Period.

What you underline is not true. the funds were supposed to be released in February and then in May. By June 25th, they still hadn't been released despite public authirization of release and public statements of release. They knew they didn't have the funds but they didn't know why. Trump and Rudy made it clear why. Once this news broke, poof, the funds were released. It was like magic.

The underlined is 100% true. Read paragraph 5 of the article. The first two sentences of that paragaph reads "Ukraine finally learned about the holdup in late August, nearly a month after the call, according to Olena Zerkal, the deputy foreign minister who was acting minister at the time of the call. And they only found out from a “letter sent to us from our Washington Embassy” that provided no explanation for the move, she said."

Nobody is this stupid. They expected the funds. They didn't have the money. They knew this during the phone call.

[Anonymous]

Omg just stop.

Ukraine just gave up a chunk of land because of trump being a criminal.if you saw the press conference with the Ukraine president then you saw trump tell him to work if out with Russia.

Wake up and smell the vodka. Trump is a grifter AND a Russian asset.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now we know that Schiff had advanced knowledge of this whistleblower's complaint makes it even more curious at why one of his staffers traveled to Ukraine in late August.
Was this the same staffer that the whistleblower contacted? We need to know.
And, we need to know the purpose for the trip.

If nothing wrong was done, why was the "transcript" of the call placed into the super-secret NSC server? If nothing was done wrong, why is everyone lying about it now?

There was no quid pro quo. Zelensky and the Ukrainians did not know about the withheld funds until a month [u]after the phone call[/u]. Period.

What you underline is not true. the funds were supposed to be released in February and then in May. By June 25th, they still hadn't been released despite public authirization of release and public statements of release. They knew they didn't have the funds but they didn't know why. Trump and Rudy made it clear why. Once this news broke, poof, the funds were released. It was like magic.

The underlined is 100% true. Read paragraph 5 of the article. The first two sentences of that paragaph reads "Ukraine finally learned about the holdup in late August, nearly a month after the call, according to Olena Zerkal, the deputy foreign minister who was acting minister at the time of the call. And they only found out from a “letter sent to us from our Washington Embassy” that provided no explanation for the move, she said."

So if you were expecting a paycheck in February and were told again in May that it was coming, and then in June was told you needed to jump through a hoop, you wouldn't realize what was happening?

[Anonymous]

Hmmm, this would seem to undermine the entire premise of the "biden" controversey

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/03/politics/gop-senators-echoed-biden-on-ukraine-reforms-kfile/index.html

A bi-partisan condemnation of the corrupt Ukrainian official.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now we know that Schiff had advanced knowledge of this whistleblower's complaint makes it even more curious at why one of his staffers traveled to Ukraine in late August.
Was this the same staffer that the whistleblower contacted? We need to know.
And, we need to know the purpose for the trip.

If nothing wrong was done, why was the "transcript" of the call placed into the super-secret NSC server? If nothing was done wrong, why is everyone lying about it now?

There was no quid pro quo. Zelensky and the Ukrainians did not know about the withheld funds until a month [u]after the phone call[/u]. Period.

What you underline is not true. the funds were supposed to be released in February and then in May. By June 25th, they still hadn't been released despite public authirization of release and public statements of release. They knew they didn't have the funds but they didn't know why. Trump and Rudy made it clear why. Once this news broke, poof, the funds were released. It was like magic.

The underlined is 100% true. Read paragraph 5 of the article. The first two sentences of that paragaph reads "Ukraine finally learned about the holdup in late August, nearly a month after the call, according to Olena Zerkal, the deputy foreign minister who was acting minister at the time of the call. And they only found out from a “letter sent to us from our Washington Embassy” that provided no explanation for the move, she said."

So if you were expecting a paycheck in February and were told again in May that it was coming, and then in June was told you needed to jump through a hoop, you wouldn't realize what was happening?

That should be a question for the Ukrainians that were quoted in the Buzzfeed article.

[Anonymous]

Occam's Razor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now we know that Schiff had advanced knowledge of this whistleblower's complaint makes it even more curious at why one of his staffers traveled to Ukraine in late August.
Was this the same staffer that the whistleblower contacted? We need to know.
And, we need to know the purpose for the trip.

If nothing wrong was done, why was the "transcript" of the call placed into the super-secret NSC server? If nothing was done wrong, why is everyone lying about it now?

There was no quid pro quo. Zelensky and the Ukrainians did not know about the withheld funds until a month [u]after the phone call[/u]. Period.

What you underline is not true. the funds were supposed to be released in February and then in May. By June 25th, they still hadn't been released despite public authirization of release and public statements of release. They knew they didn't have the funds but they didn't know why. Trump and Rudy made it clear why. Once this news broke, poof, the funds were released. It was like magic.

The underlined is 100% true. Read paragraph 5 of the article. The first two sentences of that paragaph reads "Ukraine finally learned about the holdup in late August, nearly a month after the call, according to Olena Zerkal, the deputy foreign minister who was acting minister at the time of the call. And they only found out from a “letter sent to us from our Washington Embassy” that provided no explanation for the move, she said."

So if you were expecting a paycheck in February and were told again in May that it was coming, and then in June was told you needed to jump through a hoop, you wouldn't realize what was happening?

That should be a question for the Ukrainians that were quoted in the Buzzfeed article.

Actually, this is a question for our president who was the one who made the decision to withhold the funds, against the directive from Congress and against the universal approval of the military aid from the Pentagon and others.

We don't need to drag Ukraine more into our mess than we already have. Trump and Giuliani between them have already done a lot of damage to Ukraine internally and to our relationship, strategically. For personal gain.

I care about that, even if you don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now we know that Schiff had advanced knowledge of this whistleblower's complaint makes it even more curious at why one of his staffers traveled to Ukraine in late August.
Was this the same staffer that the whistleblower contacted? We need to know.
And, we need to know the purpose for the trip.

If nothing wrong was done, why was the "transcript" of the call placed into the super-secret NSC server? If nothing was done wrong, why is everyone lying about it now?

There was no quid pro quo. Zelensky and the Ukrainians did not know about the withheld funds until a month [u]after the phone call[/u]. Period.

What you underline is not true. the funds were supposed to be released in February and then in May. By June 25th, they still hadn't been released despite public authirization of release and public statements of release. They knew they didn't have the funds but they didn't know why. Trump and Rudy made it clear why. Once this news broke, poof, the funds were released. It was like magic.

The underlined is 100% true. Read paragraph 5 of the article. The first two sentences of that paragaph reads "Ukraine finally learned about the holdup in late August, nearly a month after the call, according to Olena Zerkal, the deputy foreign minister who was acting minister at the time of the call. And they only found out from a “letter sent to us from our Washington Embassy” that provided no explanation for the move, she said."

So if you were expecting a paycheck in February and were told again in May that it was coming, and then in June was told you needed to jump through a hoop, you wouldn't realize what was happening?

That should be a question for the Ukrainians that were quoted in the Buzzfeed article.

The Ukrainians can answer however they like. They have no reason to be honest or forthcoming. In fact, quite the opposite.

[Anonymous]

We have a President who has apparently said such egregious things to Putin and MBS that the records weren't given out to the usual folks, and Trump released the *comparatively safe* Ukraine convo.

Nobody cares how/when the whistle-blowing rules changed, since the focus will be on getting to the bottom of the Ukraine thing, and perhaps getting those sensitive transcripts to the Intelligence committee.

Meanwhile, this sounds threatening from Putin:

“Putin says he wouldn’t oppose his conversations with Trump being made public. “My previous life taught me that any of my conversations can be published.”
https://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-no-longer-opposes-releasing-transcripts-of-his-meetings-with-trump-11570033302?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/Y6Pg2GB4yU

[Anonymous]

Regarding the call transcript:
Reports are that the leaker confirmed in a memo to himself the day after the phone call with Ukraine, that the transcript of the call memorializes the call and that it is not a summary. The transcript ended up completely destroying the narrative the leaker put forth.

Regarding the changing of the documents:

In tense testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) on Friday, the inspector general for federal spy agencies refused to disclose why his office backdated secret changes to key whistleblower forms and rules in the wake of an anti-Trump whistleblower complaint filed in August, sources told The Federalist.

As The Federalist reported and the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) confirmed, the spy watchdog secretly changed its whistleblower forms and internal rules in September to eliminate a requirement that whistleblowers provide first-hand evidence to support any allegations of wrongdoing. In a press release last week, the ICIG confessed that it changed its rules in response to an anti-Trump complaint filed on August 12. That complaint, which was declassified and released by President Donald Trump in September, was based entirely on second-hand information, much of which was shown to be false following the declassification and release of a telephone conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/07/intel-community-ig-stonewalling-congress-on-backdated-whistleblower-rule-changes/

The whistleblower did not complete a section of the form indicating he went to Schiff's office first. And, the ICIG was unaware of this detail. He was also unable to explain the 18 day window between the Ukraine calll and filing the complaint:

The embattled ICIG also admitted on Friday that the anti-Trump complainant lied on his whistleblower complaint form by concealing the complainant’s previous secret interactions with House Democratic staff prior to submitting the complaint. Atkinson never even bothered investigating potential coordination between the complainant, whom DOJ said showed evidence of partisan political bias, and House Democrats prior to the filing of the anti-Trump complaint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Regarding the call transcript:
Reports are that the leaker confirmed in a memo to himself the day after the phone call with Ukraine, that the transcript of the call memorializes the call and that it is not a summary. The transcript ended up completely destroying the narrative the leaker put forth.

Regarding the changing of the documents:

In tense testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) on Friday, the inspector general for federal spy agencies refused to disclose why his office backdated secret changes to key whistleblower forms and rules in the wake of an anti-Trump whistleblower complaint filed in August, sources told The Federalist.

As The Federalist reported and the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) confirmed, the spy watchdog secretly changed its whistleblower forms and internal rules in September to eliminate a requirement that whistleblowers provide first-hand evidence to support any allegations of wrongdoing. In a press release last week, the ICIG confessed that it changed its rules in response to an anti-Trump complaint filed on August 12. That complaint, which was declassified and released by President Donald Trump in September, was based entirely on second-hand information, much of which was shown to be false following the declassification and release of a telephone conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/07/intel-community-ig-stonewalling-congress-on-backdated-whistleblower-rule-changes/

The whistleblower did not complete a section of the form indicating he went to Schiff's office first. And, the ICIG was unaware of this detail. He was also unable to explain the 18 day window between the Ukraine calll and filing the complaint:

The embattled ICIG also admitted on Friday that the anti-Trump complainant lied on his whistleblower complaint form by concealing the complainant’s previous secret interactions with House Democratic staff prior to submitting the complaint. Atkinson never even bothered investigating potential coordination between the complainant, whom DOJ said showed evidence of partisan political bias, and House Democrats prior to the filing of the anti-Trump complaint.

So?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regarding the call transcript:
Reports are that the leaker confirmed in a memo to himself the day after the phone call with Ukraine, that the transcript of the call memorializes the call and that it is not a summary. The transcript ended up completely destroying the narrative the leaker put forth.

Regarding the changing of the documents:

In tense testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) on Friday, the inspector general for federal spy agencies refused to disclose why his office backdated secret changes to key whistleblower forms and rules in the wake of an anti-Trump whistleblower complaint filed in August, sources told The Federalist.

As The Federalist reported and the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) confirmed, the spy watchdog secretly changed its whistleblower forms and internal rules in September to eliminate a requirement that whistleblowers provide first-hand evidence to support any allegations of wrongdoing. In a press release last week, the ICIG confessed that it changed its rules in response to an anti-Trump complaint filed on August 12. That complaint, which was declassified and released by President Donald Trump in September, was based entirely on second-hand information, much of which was shown to be false following the declassification and release of a telephone conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/07/intel-community-ig-stonewalling-congress-on-backdated-whistleblower-rule-changes/

The whistleblower did not complete a section of the form indicating he went to Schiff's office first. And, the ICIG was unaware of this detail. He was also unable to explain the 18 day window between the Ukraine calll and filing the complaint:

The embattled ICIG also admitted on Friday that the anti-Trump complainant lied on his whistleblower complaint form by concealing the complainant’s previous secret interactions with House Democratic staff prior to submitting the complaint. Atkinson never even bothered investigating potential coordination between the complainant, whom DOJ said showed evidence of partisan political bias, and House Democrats prior to the filing of the anti-Trump complaint.

So?

Makes the whistleblower appear to be a partisan with a grudge. Especially since we now know he had a "working relationship" with a prominent Democratic politician.
As a result, his motives are in question. .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regarding the call transcript:
Reports are that the leaker confirmed in a memo to himself the day after the phone call with Ukraine, that the transcript of the call memorializes the call and that it is not a summary. The transcript ended up completely destroying the narrative the leaker put forth.

Regarding the changing of the documents:

In tense testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) on Friday, the inspector general for federal spy agencies refused to disclose why his office backdated secret changes to key whistleblower forms and rules in the wake of an anti-Trump whistleblower complaint filed in August, sources told The Federalist.

As The Federalist reported and the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) confirmed, the spy watchdog secretly changed its whistleblower forms and internal rules in September to eliminate a requirement that whistleblowers provide first-hand evidence to support any allegations of wrongdoing. In a press release last week, the ICIG confessed that it changed its rules in response to an anti-Trump complaint filed on August 12. That complaint, which was declassified and released by President Donald Trump in September, was based entirely on second-hand information, much of which was shown to be false following the declassification and release of a telephone conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/07/intel-community-ig-stonewalling-congress-on-backdated-whistleblower-rule-changes/

The whistleblower did not complete a section of the form indicating he went to Schiff's office first. And, the ICIG was unaware of this detail. He was also unable to explain the 18 day window between the Ukraine calll and filing the complaint:

The embattled ICIG also admitted on Friday that the anti-Trump complainant lied on his whistleblower complaint form by concealing the complainant’s previous secret interactions with House Democratic staff prior to submitting the complaint. Atkinson never even bothered investigating potential coordination between the complainant, whom DOJ said showed evidence of partisan political bias, and House Democrats prior to the filing of the anti-Trump complaint.

So?

Makes the whistleblower appear to be a partisan with a grudge. Especially since we now know he had a "working relationship" with a prominent Democratic politician.
As a result, his motives are in question. .

Not really. From the beginning, the whistleblower has been considered "biased" but not inaccurate.