Previously anonymous whistleblower now testifying in front of Congress

[jc456]

Why? This thread is not about Adam.

Did my question stump you so you want to change topics?

It was to help you understand why you haven’t seen it yet. Tell the DOJ to investigate and it will be handed over. Got to have an investigation

 

[jc456]

ton-affiliated accounts and domains on the day Trump called on Russia to find her emails

They watched the news. How’s that direct contact?

 

[Catsnmeters]

They watched the news. How’s that direct contact?

Who said direct contact?

Did you reply to the wrong poster?

 

[Catsnmeters]

It was to help you understand why you haven’t seen it yet. Tell the DOJ to investigate and it will be handed over. Got to have an investigation

What is there to investigate?

Ask Weiss.

Find the documents with garlands signature.

That doesn't require an investigation.

 

[jc456]

Then within 24 hours Russia attempted to hack into Hillarys emails.

Yeah, funny joke.

How? The server wasn’t active, dummass. You’re really having issues with the topic

 

[jc456]

Who said direct contact?

Did you reply to the wrong poster?

Nope

 

[jc456]

Libtards are stupid little lemmings.

So fking stupid exactly

 

[Dragonlady]

Evidence is needed. The whistleblowers are the evidence

Whistleblowers are not “evidence”. Not without documents and proof of what they’re claiming. Without documentation to support their claims, whistleblowers are simply witnesses with no verification of anything they’re saying.

In particular, these “whistleblowers” are not whistleblowers at all. They have filed no claims with the whistleblowers office.

Every Tom, Dick, and Harry, with a complaint about the federal government, is not a “whistleblower”. A genuine “whistleblower” files their complaint with and seeks protection from “Whistleblower’s office”. Their complaint is moved forward by that office and the whistleblower remains anonymous. They don’t tell some partisan congressional hack with an axe to grind.

 

[jc456]

Whistleblowers are not “evidence”. Not without documents and proof of what they’re claiming. Without documentation to support their claims, whistleblowers are simply witnesses with no verification of anything they’re saying.

In particular, these “whistleblowers” are not whistleblowers at all. They have filed no claims with the whistleblowers office.

Every Tom, Dick, and Harry, with a complaint about the federal government, is not a “whistleblower”. A genuine “whistleblower” files their complaint with and seeks protection from “Whistleblower’s office”. Their complaint is moved forward by that office and the whistleblower remains anonymous. They don’t tell some partisan congressional hack with an axe to grind.

Hahaha first hand knowledge isn’t evidence, but third hand hearsay is!!! Only in demofk fantasy camp.

 

[jc456]

Whistleblowers are not “evidence”. Not without documents and proof of what they’re claiming. Without documentation to support their claims

What was the evidence of trump beating up his driver?

Post the video

 

[WEATHER53]

"Russia, if you're listening, maybe you can find Hillary's e-mais." was a FUCKING JOKE he said on stage at a rally.
IT WAS A FUCKING JOKE!!!!!!!!!!
That's the problem with you demented avenger subverted demoralized zombies, all these years you assholes took EVERYTHING Trump said as verbatim.
IDIOTS!!!!!!!

And they accuse us of reading words wrong

 

[Catsnmeters]

How? The server wasn’t active, dummass. You’re really having issues with the topic

What server wasn't active?

What are you talking about? Did you read the link?

 

[Catsnmeters]

Nope

Oh.

What post did I say direct contact?

 

[jc456]

Oh.

What post did I say direct contact?

Post #298

 

[Catsnmeters]

Post #298

I don't see the words direct contact in that post.

Are you ok?

 

[Coyote]

"
Zuckerberg seemed to suggest that Facebook’s handling of the initial New York Post story compared favorably to that of Twitter, which blocked users entirely from sharing it publicly or privately, via direct message."

Zuckerberg Admits Facebook Suppressed Hunter Biden Laptop Story ahead of 2020 Election

Facebook suppressed stories about Hunter Biden's laptop before the 2020 election after the FBI told the company they should look out for Russian "misinformation," Zuckerberg told Joe Rogan Thursday.

news.yahoo.com

"

FBI official tied to suppressing Hunter laptop story STILL involved in briefing Facebook and Twitter"​

MSN

www.msn.com

The FBI simply warned companies to be on the lookout for Russian disinformation…what “pressure” is that?

 

[The Duke]

The FBI simply warned companies to be on the lookout for Russian disinformation…what “pressure” is that?

So Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey squelched and banned all mentions and mentioners of Hunter Biden's laptop contents prior to the the 2020 election.

The same damn thing happened here.

That is putting a thumb on the scales of an American election, sister.

Do you want to try and explain how it's not? Because it isn't.