Rand Paul Unleashes LIVE On Senate Floor – Names Whistleblower Eric Ciaramella 5 Times

[Yarddog]

A very wrong thing to do.

Why?

Because it was unnecessary, potentially illegal, put's his life and his family in jeopardy. Everything in the report was independently verified. The only reason to do this is to ruin a man's life for doing the right thing and reporting on something even his superiors agreed was credible.

You guys are just nuts.

Think of precedents - if we can't protect whistle blowers reporting on unethical conduct from our government - who will take the risk of reporting?

What is so weird is it's typically the RIGHT that takes the position of checks and balance on the government. Things have certainly changed.

He never saw anything wrong occur, he simply repeated a version of something someone told him. The fact that the FBI had already lied and falsified information to get warrants previously in the Russian Collussion investigation, warrants looking into the actions of all these people.
There also needs to be checks and balances on a certain segment of the intel-community that has been trying to take down a sitting president from the very beginning. When a President can be taken down by an unknown CIA operative based on second hand info, you have entered into a Soviet style of governing.

 

[Coyote]

Other than trying to get the guy killed, what possible purpose does it serve?

For crying out loud, you people were bitching for five years because McConnell stated he wanted to see DumBama as a one-term President. Here you have a guy trying to undermine the Trump presidency, and no problem at all. Why? Because he's a Republican.

I could only imagine if we did anything like this to Obama. There would have been riots in the street.

Why?

Because it was unnecessary, potentially illegal, put's his life and his family in jeopardy. Everything in the report was independently verified. The only reason to do this is to ruin a man's life for doing the right thing and reporting on something even his superiors agreed was credible.

You guys are just nuts.

Think of precedents - if we can't protect whistle blowers reporting on unethical conduct from our government - who will take the risk of reporting?

What is so weird is it's typically the RIGHT that takes the position of checks and balance on the government. Things have certainly changed.

Precedents? Those got thrown out the window after they violated Trump's lawyer/client confidentiality. Now anything goes

Anything.

Seems like THAT is what happened. There was no "Original Crime" here to merit the Muller farce. With Nixon there was a burglary. With Whitewater there was a Land Fraud deal. Here? Nothing.

Investigations don't start out with the assumption of a crime - they start out to investigate whether or not a crime took place or, for that matter, wrong doing of some sort. Given that Russian interference was confirmed, multiple times, and weakness' in our electoral systems and that of other nations, exposed - an investigation was absolutely merited. It did not have to find a crime, but it did need to occur.

So you agree Quid Pro Joe and his crackhead son need to be investigated for the millions crackhead was paid for a no-show job he was unqualified for while Quid Pro was in charge of billions of our tax dollars going to the corrupt regime in the Ukraine, right

Or are you a ginormous hypocrite?

IF there is evidence to support an investigation, go for it. But do it legally through appropriate channels (Congress, DoJ). Just like any normal investigation is done outside of Trumpworld.

 

[bripat9643]

Eric put his own ass in peril, nobody else did it to him nor for him.
Snowflakes always demand shielding from the repercussions of their illicit acts.

So reporting on the President puts your ass in peril?

Yes being a partisan snitch who lies can do that

his info was corroborated.

It was proven false, moron.

 

[playtime]

A very wrong thing to do.

Why?

Because it was unnecessary, potentially illegal, put's his life and his family in jeopardy. Everything in the report was independently verified. The only reason to do this is to ruin a man's life for doing the right thing and reporting on something even his superiors agreed was credible.

You guys are just nuts.

Think of precedents - if we can't protect whistle blowers reporting on unethical conduct from our government - who will take the risk of reporting?

What is so weird is it's typically the RIGHT that takes the position of checks and balance on the government. Things have certainly changed.

The report was 90% lies. The idea that any Republican is going to assassinate this douchebag doesn't pass the laugh test. Democrats do that kind of thing, not Republicans.

When did Obama protect whistleblowers reporting on his administration?

Answer: never.

the IG stated that the WB was credible & the info they gave was corroborated.

The IG is a member of the coup against Trump. 90% of the Whistleblower's report was proven to be false.

oh for fuck's sake - he is a trump appointee. cough up a legit link that says 90% was false. you can't cause it doesn't exist. stop lying.

 

[Coyote]

A very wrong thing to do.

Why?

Because it was unnecessary, potentially illegal, put's his life and his family in jeopardy. Everything in the report was independently verified. The only reason to do this is to ruin a man's life for doing the right thing and reporting on something even his superiors agreed was credible.

You guys are just nuts.

Think of precedents - if we can't protect whistle blowers reporting on unethical conduct from our government - who will take the risk of reporting?

What is so weird is it's typically the RIGHT that takes the position of checks and balance on the government. Things have certainly changed.

He never saw anything wrong occur, he simply repeated a version of something someone told him. The fact that the FBI had already lied and falsified information to get warrants previously in the Russian Collussion investigation, warrants looking into the actions of all these people.
There also needs to be checks and balances on a certain segment of the intel-community that has been trying to take down a sitting president from the very beginning. When a President can be taken down by an unknown CIA operative based on second hand info, you have entered into a Soviet style of governing.

Except the President isn't being "taken down" by an unknown operative.

He reported, legally, what he had heard. The checks and balances lie in the IG who checks to make sure it is credible, not just malicious. If it is deemed credible, by law it must go to Congress to handle. There is nothing nefarious - the checks and balances are right there.

What you seem to be saying is that - despite the fact that what he reported has been independently corroborated - he shouldn't have done it.

So essentially - you are not allow to report on any wrong doing by the President if you are a whistle blower?

 

[bodecea]

Eric put his own ass in peril, nobody else did it to him nor for him.
Snowflakes always demand shielding from the repercussions of their illicit acts.

So....let get this straight.

Whistle blowers, who credibly report on Trump, legally, are fair targets for retribution?

That's a special kind of crazy right there.

Moles who lie in order to undermine the President do in fact put their own self in rightful danger.
Then demanding anonymity worsens the situation

This is not America anymore, is it?

 

[Coyote]

Eric put his own ass in peril, nobody else did it to him nor for him.
Snowflakes always demand shielding from the repercussions of their illicit acts.

So reporting on the President puts your ass in peril?

Yes being a partisan snitch who lies can do that

his info was corroborated.

It was proven false, moron.

Specifically what was proven false?

 

[playtime]

Eric put his own ass in peril, nobody else did it to him nor for him.
Snowflakes always demand shielding from the repercussions of their illicit acts.

So reporting on the President puts your ass in peril?

Yes being a partisan snitch who lies can do that

his info was corroborated.

It was proven false, moron.

wrong. lol... prove it.

 

[Coyote]

Eric put his own ass in peril, nobody else did it to him nor for him.
Snowflakes always demand shielding from the repercussions of their illicit acts.

So....let get this straight.

Whistle blowers, who credibly report on Trump, legally, are fair targets for retribution?

That's a special kind of crazy right there.

Moles who lie in order to undermine the President do in fact put their own self in rightful danger.
Then demanding anonymity worsens the situation

This is not America anymore, is it?

Up is down, wrong is right. That's Trumpworld today.

 

[Nostra]

For crying out loud, you people were bitching for five years because McConnell stated he wanted to see DumBama as a one-term President. Here you have a guy trying to undermine the Trump presidency, and no problem at all. Why? Because he's a Republican.

I could only imagine if we did anything like this to Obama. There would have been riots in the street.

Undermining?

He reported on potentially illegal acts. Every item was independently confirmed. He did so through the right channels, and his report was deemed credible by his superiors.

But wait - it's Trump. Any whistle blower complaints about Trump is automatically "illicit".

You are essentially saying there can be no checks and balances on this presidents behavior from any quarter: from Congress, from the media, from civil servants. Checks and balances are now "coups".

He had zero first hand knowledge.

& the IG investigated the people he named & found him & them to be credible.

So? He isn't a whistleblower without first hand knowledge.

Oh? Show me the law that says that.

Your ignorance isn't my responsibility.

 

[playtime]

Other than trying to get the guy killed, what possible purpose does it serve?

To call out your phoney assholes in congress and their ILLEGAL, unconstitutional acts you dumbass, why the hell else.

Again again, serves no other purpose than to try to get the whistleblower killed

He’s going to be killed?? Huh

Why else would Paul consider it necessary to reveal who he is?

Sends a message to future whistleblowers

He does not meet the standard for a whistle blower.

Accusers cannot hide behind their accusations.

.

the WB met every standard.

https://www.dni.gov/files/ICIG/Docu...on Processing of Whistleblower Complaints.pdf

 

[Nostra]

Other than trying to get the guy killed, what possible purpose does it serve?

For crying out loud, you people were bitching for five years because McConnell stated he wanted to see DumBama as a one-term President. Here you have a guy trying to undermine the Trump presidency, and no problem at all. Why? Because he's a Republican.

I could only imagine if we did anything like this to Obama. There would have been riots in the street.

Undermining?

He reported on potentially illegal acts. Every item was independently confirmed. He did so through the right channels, and his report was deemed credible by his superiors.

But wait - it's Trump. Any whistle blower complaints about Trump is automatically "illicit".

You are essentially saying there can be no checks and balances on this presidents behavior from any quarter: from Congress, from the media, from civil servants. Checks and balances are now "coups".

He reported Rumors, and 2nd hand information which was incorrect which means he filed a fraudulent report, which is a felony.

wrong.
https://www.dni.gov/files/ICIG/Documents/News/ICIG News/2019/September 30 - Statement on Processing of Whistleblower Complaints/ICIG Statement on Processing of Whistleblower Complaints.pdf

And there is nothing wrong with second hand info - that is why they have to mark it as either first or second hand, and why the reports are checked for credibility before there is any action.

Hmmmm................I read someone post something that says you like to diddle goats, which is illegal in most states. Should I be able to get you indicted and taken to trial off my testimony?

 

[Nostra]

To call out your phoney assholes in congress and their ILLEGAL, unconstitutional acts you dumbass, why the hell else.

Again again, serves no other purpose than to try to get the whistleblower killed

He’s going to be killed?? Huh

Why else would Paul consider it necessary to reveal who he is?

Sends a message to future whistleblowers

He does not meet the standard for a whistle blower.

Accusers cannot hide behind their accusations.

.

the WB met every standard.

https://www.dni.gov/files/ICIG/Documents/News/ICIG News/2019/September 30 - Statement on Processing of Whistleblower Complaints/ICIG Statement on Processing of Whistleblower Complaints.pdf

Revised Sept 30, 2019.

How convenient..........and AFTER he filed is report.

Oops!

 

[Yarddog]

The faggot is a "whistleblower" in the sense that "whistle" = "stiff c*ck"

Here's the message: You're not going to take down a sitting president and thwart the will of 63 million voters while hiding behind your blankie.

The message was well delivered by Rand Paul and hopefully the c*ckblower will continue to have uncontrolled, ill-timed bowel evacuations until it is locked up with its own kind for treason/sedition.

Did 63 million voters vote to allow Trump to extort foreign governments in return for personal favors?

extortion is not one of the impeachment charges. If the House wasn't ready to impeach, they should have held off with their vote. We know they only wanted to extend the circus into the Senate proceedings. Good for the Republicans not allowing them to play their games.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

To call out your phoney assholes in congress and their ILLEGAL, unconstitutional acts you dumbass, why the hell else.

Again again, serves no other purpose than to try to get the whistleblower killed

He’s going to be killed?? Huh

Why else would Paul consider it necessary to reveal who he is?

Sends a message to future whistleblowers

He does not meet the standard for a whistle blower.

Accusers cannot hide behind their accusations.

.

the WB met every standard.

https://www.dni.gov/files/ICIG/Documents/News/ICIG News/2019/September 30 - Statement on Processing of Whistleblower Complaints/ICIG Statement on Processing of Whistleblower Complaints.pdf

Thanks for the link. On the top of page 2:

Similarly, speculation about the existence of wrongdoing does not provide sufficient basis to meet the statutory requirements of the ICWPA. If you think wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than second- hand or unsubstantiated assertions, IC IG will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA.

 

[Coyote]

A very wrong thing to do.

Why?

Because it was unnecessary, potentially illegal, put's his life and his family in jeopardy. Everything in the report was independently verified. The only reason to do this is to ruin a man's life for doing the right thing and reporting on something even his superiors agreed was credible.

You guys are just nuts.

Think of precedents - if we can't protect whistle blowers reporting on unethical conduct from our government - who will take the risk of reporting?

What is so weird is it's typically the RIGHT that takes the position of checks and balance on the government. Things have certainly changed.

The report was 90% lies. The idea that any Republican is going to assassinate this douchebag doesn't pass the laugh test. Democrats do that kind of thing, not Republicans.

When did Obama protect whistleblowers reporting on his administration?

Answer: never.

the IG stated that the WB was credible & the info they gave was corroborated.

The IG is a member of the coup against Trump. 90% of the Whistleblower's report was proven to be false.

AH....I see. It gets increasingly complicated as more and more people, with no evidence what so ever, become members of this Conspiracy Theory Coupe when their findings refuse to support the President.

This is assuming the magnitude of the Obama Birth Certificate Conspiracy Theory

 

[Zander]

How did John Roberts know that CIAramella was the whistleblower? This is the worst kept secret in the world.......Fauxtrageous!!

 

[playtime]

Other than trying to get the guy killed, what possible purpose does it serve?

For crying out loud, you people were bitching for five years because McConnell stated he wanted to see DumBama as a one-term President. Here you have a guy trying to undermine the Trump presidency, and no problem at all. Why? Because he's a Republican.

I could only imagine if we did anything like this to Obama. There would have been riots in the street.

Undermining?

He reported on potentially illegal acts. Every item was independently confirmed. He did so through the right channels, and his report was deemed credible by his superiors.

But wait - it's Trump. Any whistle blower complaints about Trump is automatically "illicit".

You are essentially saying there can be no checks and balances on this presidents behavior from any quarter: from Congress, from the media, from civil servants. Checks and balances are now "coups".

He had zero first hand knowledge.

& the IG investigated the people he named & found him & them to be credible.

So? He isn't a whistleblower without first hand knowledge.

which is why he's irrelevant now & doesn't need to come fwd since the info he gave was substantiated.

 

[bripat9643]

Other than trying to get the guy killed, what possible purpose does it serve?

For crying out loud, you people were bitching for five years because McConnell stated he wanted to see DumBama as a one-term President. Here you have a guy trying to undermine the Trump presidency, and no problem at all. Why? Because he's a Republican.

I could only imagine if we did anything like this to Obama. There would have been riots in the street.

Because it was unnecessary, potentially illegal, put's his life and his family in jeopardy. Everything in the report was independently verified. The only reason to do this is to ruin a man's life for doing the right thing and reporting on something even his superiors agreed was credible.

You guys are just nuts.

Think of precedents - if we can't protect whistle blowers reporting on unethical conduct from our government - who will take the risk of reporting?

What is so weird is it's typically the RIGHT that takes the position of checks and balance on the government. Things have certainly changed.

Precedents? Those got thrown out the window after they violated Trump's lawyer/client confidentiality. Now anything goes

Anything.

Seems like THAT is what happened. There was no "Original Crime" here to merit the Muller farce. With Nixon there was a burglary. With Whitewater there was a Land Fraud deal. Here? Nothing.

Investigations don't start out with the assumption of a crime - they start out to investigate whether or not a crime took place or, for that matter, wrong doing of some sort. Given that Russian interference was confirmed, multiple times, and weakness' in our electoral systems and that of other nations, exposed - an investigation was absolutely merited. It did not have to find a crime, but it did need to occur.

So you agree Quid Pro Joe and his crackhead son need to be investigated for the millions crackhead was paid for a no-show job he was unqualified for while Quid Pro was in charge of billions of our tax dollars going to the corrupt regime in the Ukraine, right

Or are you a ginormous hypocrite?

IF there is evidence to support an investigation, go for it. But do it legally through appropriate channels (Congress, DoJ). Just like any normal investigation is done outside of Trumpworld.

There's nothing illegal about what Trump did. The DOJ is infested with coup plotters. You would scream bloody murder if Trump did exactly what you propose.

 

[Coyote]

Again again, serves no other purpose than to try to get the whistleblower killed

He’s going to be killed?? Huh

Why else would Paul consider it necessary to reveal who he is?

Sends a message to future whistleblowers

He does not meet the standard for a whistle blower.

Accusers cannot hide behind their accusations.

.

the WB met every standard.

https://www.dni.gov/files/ICIG/Documents/News/ICIG News/2019/September 30 - Statement on Processing of Whistleblower Complaints/ICIG Statement on Processing of Whistleblower Complaints.pdf

Thanks for the link. On the top of page 2:

Similarly, speculation about the existence of wrongdoing does not provide sufficient basis to meet the statutory requirements of the ICWPA. If you think wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than second- hand or unsubstantiated assertions, IC IG will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA.

Exactly. The IG checks it for credibility. Checks and balances. Therefore it wasn't based solely on unsubstantiated or second hand information. It was deemed credible enough to go forward.