Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schiff didn't do anything wrong. You are willfully distracting from an illegal phone conversation the President had with another country, one that he admitted to and that he has provided summaries to, and that others have confirmed.

Schiff is another distraction, like Biden, UraniumOne, Pizzagate, her emails and the list goes on.

And you will fall for the Mifsud story too, when Barr and Pompeo come running back with it.

There was no "illegal phone conversation."

Imagine Obama called Netanyahu in July 2011 and told him he was witholding funds to israel unless he made up a story about Mitt Romney. Hillary listened in on the call and when it became public, Eric Holder covered it up.

What would your reaction be?

That would be bad.
Trump didn't say he was withholding funds.
And, he didn't ask anyone to make up a story about anyone.
And, nobody covered it up.
So, your analogy sucks.

So you think Ukraine didn't know it hadn't received U.S. promised and approved funds yet? Because trump didn't tell them so? Bwahahahahah

Based on NYTimes reporting, they didn't know that funds had been withheld until a month after the phone call.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schiff didn't do anything wrong. You are willfully distracting from an illegal phone conversation the President had with another country, one that he admitted to and that he has provided summaries to, and that others have confirmed.

Schiff is another distraction, like Biden, UraniumOne, Pizzagate, her emails and the list goes on.

And you will fall for the Mifsud story too, when Barr and Pompeo come running back with it.

There was no "illegal phone conversation."

Imagine Obama called Netanyahu in July 2011 and told him he was witholding funds to israel unless he made up a story about Mitt Romney. Hillary listened in on the call and when it became public, Eric Holder covered it up.

What would your reaction be?

That would be bad.
Trump didn't say he was withholding funds.
And, he didn't ask anyone to make up a story about anyone.
And, nobody covered it up.
So, your analogy sucks.

So you think Ukraine didn't know it hadn't received U.S. promised and approved funds yet? Because trump didn't tell them so? Bwahahahahah

That is correct. Ukraine did not know until well after the phone call...

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/christopherm51/ukraine-unaware-aid-holdup-month-after-trump-call

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schiff didn't do anything wrong. You are willfully distracting from an illegal phone conversation the President had with another country, one that he admitted to and that he has provided summaries to, and that others have confirmed.

Schiff is another distraction, like Biden, UraniumOne, Pizzagate, her emails and the list goes on.

And you will fall for the Mifsud story too, when Barr and Pompeo come running back with it.

There was no "illegal phone conversation."

Imagine Obama called Netanyahu in July 2011 and told him he was witholding funds to israel unless he made up a story about Mitt Romney. Hillary listened in on the call and when it became public, Eric Holder covered it up.

What would your reaction be?

That would be bad.
Trump didn't say he was withholding funds.
And, he didn't ask anyone to make up a story about anyone.
And, nobody covered it up.
So, your analogy sucks.

So you think Ukraine didn't know it hadn't received U.S. promised and approved funds yet? Because trump didn't tell them so? Bwahahahahah

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schiff didn't do anything wrong. You are willfully distracting from an illegal phone conversation the President had with another country, one that he admitted to and that he has provided summaries to, and that others have confirmed.

Schiff is another distraction, like Biden, UraniumOne, Pizzagate, her emails and the list goes on.

And you will fall for the Mifsud story too, when Barr and Pompeo come running back with it.

There was no "illegal phone conversation."

Imagine Obama called Netanyahu in July 2011 and told him he was witholding funds to israel unless he made up a story about Mitt Romney. Hillary listened in on the call and when it became public, Eric Holder covered it up.

What would your reaction be?

That would be bad.
Trump didn't say he was withholding funds.
And, he didn't ask anyone to make up a story about anyone.
And, nobody covered it up.
So, your analogy sucks.

But...he did withhold funds. And no one has given any explanation, good or bad, reasonable or nonsense, for why. You seem to be disputing it, somehow. Why?
"I'd like to ask a favor though". That's in the summary transcript, not the word-for-word transcript. Are you curious what that might say?
And "nobody covered it up" doesn't seem to fit with the past few weeks, where lots of people have endeavored to cover up lots of things, mostly unsuccessfully.

And, you know what followed right after, "I'd like to ask a favor?"
A statement about Ukraine's possible involvement in our election and the corruption there.

Telling a client country to do favors for a person is no way to president.

You would easily be able to see that if Trump retained the D after his name that he had so long, before switching parties when he started seriously campaigning.

He has harmed our relationship with our strategic ally, harming our country. He has harmed Zelensky's standing in his own country. He has abused his position.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schiff didn't do anything wrong. You are willfully distracting from an illegal phone conversation the President had with another country, one that he admitted to and that he has provided summaries to, and that others have confirmed.

Schiff is another distraction, like Biden, UraniumOne, Pizzagate, her emails and the list goes on.

And you will fall for the Mifsud story too, when Barr and Pompeo come running back with it.

There was no "illegal phone conversation."

Imagine Obama called Netanyahu in July 2011 and told him he was witholding funds to israel unless he made up a story about Mitt Romney. Hillary listened in on the call and when it became public, Eric Holder covered it up.

What would your reaction be?

That would be bad.
Trump didn't say he was withholding funds.
And, he didn't ask anyone to make up a story about anyone.
And, nobody covered it up.
So, your analogy sucks.

But...he did withhold funds. And no one has given any explanation, good or bad, reasonable or nonsense, for why. You seem to be disputing it, somehow. Why?
"I'd like to ask a favor though". That's in the summary transcript, not the word-for-word transcript. Are you curious what that might say?
And "nobody covered it up" doesn't seem to fit with the past few weeks, where lots of people have endeavored to cover up lots of things, mostly unsuccessfully.

And, you know what followed right after, "I'd like to ask a favor?"
A statement about Ukraine's possible involvement in our election and the corruption there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whistleblower followed the proper procedure. Trump illegally tried to use public money to persuade a foreign power to interfere in our elections on his behalf.

Apparently these facts have to be repeated over and over so the ADHD kids don't lose the thread.

That is YOUR narrative.
Nothing in the transcript indicated he was witholding money.
And, this was not about the elation. At least, not the one coming up.
It was about finding out the role Ukraine played in the 2016 election, though.

Huh? Biden wasn't in the 2016 election. And that Crowdstrike stuff is just a 4chan internet rumor. You weren't taken in by that. Were you taken in?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schiff didn't do anything wrong. You are willfully distracting from an illegal phone conversation the President had with another country, one that he admitted to and that he has provided summaries to, and that others have confirmed.

Schiff is another distraction, like Biden, UraniumOne, Pizzagate, her emails and the list goes on.

And you will fall for the Mifsud story too, when Barr and Pompeo come running back with it.

There was no "illegal phone conversation."

Imagine Obama called Netanyahu in July 2011 and told him he was witholding funds to israel unless he made up a story about Mitt Romney. Hillary listened in on the call and when it became public, Eric Holder covered it up.

What would your reaction be?

That would be bad.
Trump didn't say he was withholding funds.
And, he didn't ask anyone to make up a story about anyone.
And, nobody covered it up.
So, your analogy sucks.

But...he did withhold funds. And no one has given any explanation, good or bad, reasonable or nonsense, for why. You seem to be disputing it, somehow. Why?
"I'd like to ask a favor though". That's in the summary transcript, not the word-for-word transcript. Are you curious what that might say?
And "nobody covered it up" doesn't seem to fit with the past few weeks, where lots of people have endeavored to cover up lots of things, mostly unsuccessfully.

Anonymous wrote:Whistleblower followed the proper procedure. Trump illegally tried to use public money to persuade a foreign power to interfere in our elections on his behalf.

Apparently these facts have to be repeated over and over so the ADHD kids don't lose the thread.

That is YOUR narrative.
Nothing in the transcript indicated he was witholding money.
And, this was not about the elation. At least, not the one coming up.
It was about finding out the role Ukraine played in the 2016 election, though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schiff didn't do anything wrong. You are willfully distracting from an illegal phone conversation the President had with another country, one that he admitted to and that he has provided summaries to, and that others have confirmed.

Schiff is another distraction, like Biden, UraniumOne, Pizzagate, her emails and the list goes on.

And you will fall for the Mifsud story too, when Barr and Pompeo come running back with it.

There was no "illegal phone conversation."

Imagine Obama called Netanyahu in July 2011 and told him he was witholding funds to israel unless he made up a story about Mitt Romney. Hillary listened in on the call and when it became public, Eric Holder covered it up.

What would your reaction be?

That would be bad.
Trump didn't say he was withholding funds.
And, he didn't ask anyone to make up a story about anyone.
And, nobody covered it up.
So, your analogy sucks.

Whistleblower followed the proper procedure. Trump illegally tried to use public money to persuade a foreign power to interfere in our elections on his behalf.

Apparently these facts have to be repeated over and over so the ADHD kids don't lose the thread.

President Donald Trump’s phone call with Ukraine’s president came the same day Fox News reported Joe Biden ahead by 10 points in a head-to-head matchup.

The president complained bitterly about the report the next morning on Twitter, but the conservative network reported the results of its own poll on July 25 — which has been revealed as the day Trump alarmed his national security staff by asking Ukraine to investigate Biden for alleged corruption.

“@FoxNews is at it again,” Trump griped on July 26. “So different from what they used to be during the 2016 Primaries, & before – Proud Warriors! Now new Fox Polls, which have always been terrible to me (they had me losing BIG to Crooked Hillary), have me down to Sleepy Joe.”

Another Trump lie.

The panel's staff advised the whistleblower to contact the intelligence community inspector general and seek legal counsel but did not receive the complaint in advance, wrote Patrick Boland, a spokesman for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, in a statement released on Wednesday.

Schiff "learned about the outlines" of the whistleblower's concerns before the whistleblower filed the complaint, The New York Times first reported. The whistleblower reportedly turned to the House panel only after a colleague brought vague concerns to the CIA's top lawyer, and became unsatisfied with that path.

Meanwhile, “former Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko says that Joe Biden never asked him to open or close any criminal cases, adding to the list of Ukrainian officials saying they never saw him do anything improper involving his son.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2019-10-02/ukraine-s-ex-president-says-biden-never-asked-to-close-cases?__twitter_impression=true

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schiff is now a fact witness and needs to recuse.

No, this is a part of the procedural process outlined in the statue, not a fact of the underlying complaint.

I believe the procedural process states to go to the IG.

Questions I have:

1. What was the actual date the WB went to Schiff's aide?
2. If Schiff did nothing wrong, why didn't he admit to this weeks ago when he knew about it instead of saying that "we" had no contact with the WB?
3. Isn't Schiff supposed to share information he receives with the committee, or at least the ranking member?
4. Why did the WB go ONLY to the House Intelligence and not the Senate as well?

I have to say - this is progressing much the same as the bogus Kavanaugh charges.

Whistleblowers are permitted under statute to disclose to Congressional Intelligence committees. https://twitter.com/BradMossEsq/status/1179472717856333824?s=20

Whistleblowers often contact Congress first. Here is HISC statement https://twitter.com/Olivia_Gazis/status/1179469423293423618?s=20

Whistleblower's attorney is the same lawyer who represented the anti-Clinton/Obama "Benghazi 5" whistleblowers who actually approached Rep Darrel Issa first https://twitter.com/Theonlyhonest/status/1179495304506294273?s=20

If you really care about our country, stop this BS. If you don't, then just sit this one out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schiff is now a fact witness and needs to recuse.

No, this is a part of the procedural process outlined in the statue, not a fact of the underlying complaint.

I believe the procedural process states to go to the IG.

Questions I have:

1. What was the actual date the WB went to Schiff's aide?
2. If Schiff did nothing wrong, why didn't he admit to this weeks ago when he knew about it instead of saying that "we" had no contact with the WB?
3. Isn't Schiff supposed to share information he receives with the committee, or at least the ranking member?
4. Why did the WB go ONLY to the House Intelligence and not the Senate as well?

I have to say - this is progressing much the same as the bogus Kavanaugh charges.

Republican Senator Burr said what Schiff's office did was proper. Are you saying he is wrong?