Whistleblower Protection Act Does Not Apply to Ukraine Phone Call

[Bush92]

So they changed it this August just for this lying motherfucker so the Democrats could attempt to usurp democracy. This is some deep state shit. There will be blood.

 

[Natural Citizen]

You must have “reliable FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE” of wrong doing. This asshole heard it second hand. He does not qualify for protection under the law. Oh, that’s right, Democrats don’t care about the law. Republicans in Senate need to step-up hold hearings and get this traitors name.
Whistleblower Protection Act: An Overview - FindLaw

They removed that first hand knowledge thing back in June or July for some reason. Which is interesting.

 

[Bush92]

Impeach first, look for evidence later. Hasn't that been the Democrat strategy for the entire Presidency?

Same with Kavanaugh.

Another example of Democrats breaking the law. This prick needs to be exposed and prosecuted. He is a tool of the Democrats using second hand knowledge to stir shit. You can’t use “rumors” to try to impeach a President.

There is a new whistleblower act : Read and weep.
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33918.pdf

It was changed illegally. Too bad. Just saw it on TV. The new law allows contractors without first hand knowledge to make up wrongdoing. Its ridiculous.

What was illegal about the change?

They did it this August specifically to overthrow the elected President of the United States. Citizens will not stand for Democrats trying to overturn an election because they lost.
The Intelligence Community Secretly Removed The First-Hand Knowledge Of Wrongdoing Requirement For Whistleblower Reports

 

[Natural Citizen]

So they changed it this August just for this lying motherfucker so the Democrats could attempt to usurp democracy. This is some deep state shit. There will be blood.

Oh, sorry, didn't see this post.

 

[Coyote]

Impeach first, look for evidence later. Hasn't that been the Democrat strategy for the entire Presidency?

Same with Kavanaugh.

Another example of Democrats breaking the law. This prick needs to be exposed and prosecuted. He is a tool of the Democrats using second hand knowledge to stir shit. You can’t use “rumors” to try to impeach a President.

There is a new whistleblower act : Read and weep.
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33918.pdf

It was changed illegally. Too bad. Just saw it on TV. The new law allows contractors without first hand knowledge to make up wrongdoing. Its ridiculous.

What was illegal about the change?

They did it this August specifically to overthrow the elected President of the United States. Citizens will not stand for Democrats trying to overturn an election because they lost.

You have any evidence to support that?

 

[Bush92]

Another example of Democrats breaking the law. This prick needs to be exposed and prosecuted. He is a tool of the Democrats using second hand knowledge to stir shit. You can’t use “rumors” to try to impeach a President.

There is a new whistleblower act : Read and weep.
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33918.pdf

It was changed illegally. Too bad. Just saw it on TV. The new law allows contractors without first hand knowledge to make up wrongdoing. Its ridiculous.

What was illegal about the change?

They did it this August specifically to overthrow the elected President of the United States. Citizens will not stand for Democrats trying to overturn an election because they lost.

You have any evidence to support that?

Read the article.

 

[Bush92]

So they changed it this August just for this lying motherfucker so the Democrats could attempt to usurp democracy. This is some deep state shit. There will be blood.

Oh, sorry, didn't see this post.

Your cool.

 

[Bush92]

Another example of Democrats breaking the law. This prick needs to be exposed and prosecuted. He is a tool of the Democrats using second hand knowledge to stir shit. You can’t use “rumors” to try to impeach a President.

There is a new whistleblower act : Read and weep.
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33918.pdf

It was changed illegally. Too bad. Just saw it on TV. The new law allows contractors without first hand knowledge to make up wrongdoing. Its ridiculous.

What was illegal about the change?

They did it this August specifically to overthrow the elected President of the United States. Citizens will not stand for Democrats trying to overturn an election because they lost.

You have any evidence to support that?

How in the hell, with good conscious, can you support the bullshit the Democrats are pulling?

 

[Coyote]

There is a new whistleblower act : Read and weep.
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33918.pdf

It was changed illegally. Too bad. Just saw it on TV. The new law allows contractors without first hand knowledge to make up wrongdoing. Its ridiculous.

What was illegal about the change?

They did it this August specifically to overthrow the elected President of the United States. Citizens will not stand for Democrats trying to overturn an election because they lost.

You have any evidence to support that?

How in the hell, with good conscious support the bullshit the Democrats are pulling?

The whistle blowers complaint is serious. The IG took it seriously. He is a Trump appointee. No one knows who he is but you have already put him through the shredder.

 

[Bush92]

You must have “reliable FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE” of wrong doing. This asshole heard it second hand. He does not qualify for protection under the law. Oh, that’s right, Democrats don’t care about the law. Republicans in Senate need to step-up hold hearings and get this traitors name.
Whistleblower Protection Act: An Overview - FindLaw

I want to know who changed the standard two days ago to allow secondhand information in these reports. Who did that?

Schiff took it upon himself.

I hope Schiff, his family and children die slowly of some horribly painful disease. This disgraceful sonofabitch should be deported to North Korea where he belongs.

 

[Bush92]

It was changed illegally. Too bad. Just saw it on TV. The new law allows contractors without first hand knowledge to make up wrongdoing. Its ridiculous.

What was illegal about the change?

They did it this August specifically to overthrow the elected President of the United States. Citizens will not stand for Democrats trying to overturn an election because they lost.

You have any evidence to support that?

How in the hell, with good conscious support the bullshit the Democrats are pulling?

The whistle blowers complaint is serious. The IG took it seriously. He is a Trump appointee. No one knows who he is but you have already put him through the shredder.

Serious about what? Doing much, much, much, less than Biden did? Show me in the transcript where Trump extorted the Ukrainians? Where? This is just more bullshit by the Democrats who have been after Trump since day one. I voted for the man and now Democrats want to steal my vote. There will be blood if this coup d’tat happens. People who believe in liberty won’t stand for it.

 

[basquebromance]

what if Trump were to shoot the whistleblower and Bill Barr does nothing, what would we do then?

 

[HappyJoy]

You must have “reliable FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE” of wrong doing. This asshole heard it second hand. He does not qualify for protection under the law. Oh, that’s right, Democrats don’t care about the law. Republicans in Senate need to step-up hold hearings and get this traitors name.
Whistleblower Protection Act: An Overview - FindLaw

You must have “reliable FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE” of wrong doing. This asshole heard it second hand. He does not qualify for protection under the law. Oh, that’s right, Democrats don’t care about the law. Republicans in Senate need to step-up hold hearings and get this traitors name.
Whistleblower Protection Act: An Overview - FindLaw

Nope...FAIL

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...oints-used-discredit-whistleblower-complaint/

This really needs to be quoted.

Talking point No. 3: The whistleblower had only secondhand knowledge
This is also true. But it’s not enough to discredit the entire complaint. If we think of the whistleblower as a reporter, the whistleblower talked to a lot of people who had firsthand knowledge.

In one key instance, we have original source material to back up what the whistleblower has alleged. So far, this person nailed the call between Trump and Zelensky. This person correctly reported nuances about how Trump not only asked about the Bidens, but asked Zelensky for help about other election-related topics.

Notably, Trump is said to have asked Zelensky to “assist in purportedly uncovering that allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election originated in Ukraine, with a specific request that the Ukrainian leader locate and turn over servers used by the Democratic National Committee and examined by the U.S. cyber security firm CrowdStrike.”

That’s almost verbatim from the call:

TRUMP: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike ... I guess you have one of your wealthy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.

The whistleblower also talked to half a dozen U.S. officials over the course of months to put together this complaint.

Does this mean we should take everything in this whistleblower complaint as truth? No, of course not. But it’s worth noting that this person has multiple sources in the room of the president.

 

[Thinker101]

You must have “reliable FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE” of wrong doing. This asshole heard it second hand. He does not qualify for protection under the law. Oh, that’s right, Democrats don’t care about the law. Republicans in Senate need to step-up hold hearings and get this traitors name.
Whistleblower Protection Act: An Overview - FindLaw

You must have “reliable FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE” of wrong doing. This asshole heard it second hand. He does not qualify for protection under the law. Oh, that’s right, Democrats don’t care about the law. Republicans in Senate need to step-up hold hearings and get this traitors name.
Whistleblower Protection Act: An Overview - FindLaw

Nope...FAIL

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...oints-used-discredit-whistleblower-complaint/

This really needs to be quoted.

Talking point No. 3: The whistleblower had only secondhand knowledge
This is also true. But it’s not enough to discredit the entire complaint. If we think of the whistleblower as a reporter, the whistleblower talked to a lot of people who had firsthand knowledge.

In one key instance, we have original source material to back up what the whistleblower has alleged. So far, this person nailed the call between Trump and Zelensky. This person correctly reported nuances about how Trump not only asked about the Bidens, but asked Zelensky for help about other election-related topics.

Notably, Trump is said to have asked Zelensky to “assist in purportedly uncovering that allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election originated in Ukraine, with a specific request that the Ukrainian leader locate and turn over servers used by the Democratic National Committee and examined by the U.S. cyber security firm CrowdStrike.”

That’s almost verbatim from the call:

TRUMP: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike ... I guess you have one of your wealthy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.

The whistleblower also talked to half a dozen U.S. officials over the course of months to put together this complaint.

Does this mean we should take everything in this whistleblower complaint as truth? No, of course not. But it’s worth noting that this person has multiple sources in the room of the president.

Ok, so IF the whistleblower was a reporter, and ALMOST verbatim pretty much tells us you have a vivid imagination and trying like hell to make some bogus story fit your agenda.

 

[HappyJoy]

You must have “reliable FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE” of wrong doing. This asshole heard it second hand. He does not qualify for protection under the law. Oh, that’s right, Democrats don’t care about the law. Republicans in Senate need to step-up hold hearings and get this traitors name.
Whistleblower Protection Act: An Overview - FindLaw

You must have “reliable FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE” of wrong doing. This asshole heard it second hand. He does not qualify for protection under the law. Oh, that’s right, Democrats don’t care about the law. Republicans in Senate need to step-up hold hearings and get this traitors name.
Whistleblower Protection Act: An Overview - FindLaw

Nope...FAIL

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...oints-used-discredit-whistleblower-complaint/

This really needs to be quoted.

Talking point No. 3: The whistleblower had only secondhand knowledge
This is also true. But it’s not enough to discredit the entire complaint. If we think of the whistleblower as a reporter, the whistleblower talked to a lot of people who had firsthand knowledge.

In one key instance, we have original source material to back up what the whistleblower has alleged. So far, this person nailed the call between Trump and Zelensky. This person correctly reported nuances about how Trump not only asked about the Bidens, but asked Zelensky for help about other election-related topics.

Notably, Trump is said to have asked Zelensky to “assist in purportedly uncovering that allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election originated in Ukraine, with a specific request that the Ukrainian leader locate and turn over servers used by the Democratic National Committee and examined by the U.S. cyber security firm CrowdStrike.”

That’s almost verbatim from the call:

TRUMP: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike ... I guess you have one of your wealthy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.

The whistleblower also talked to half a dozen U.S. officials over the course of months to put together this complaint.

Does this mean we should take everything in this whistleblower complaint as truth? No, of course not. But it’s worth noting that this person has multiple sources in the room of the president.

Ok, so IF the whistleblower was a reporter, and ALMOST verbatim pretty much tells us you have a vivid imagination and trying like hell to make some bogus story fit your agenda.

Sorry, nutjob, you can't put the genie back in the bottle, this is going to be investigated.

 

[Thinker101]

You must have “reliable FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE” of wrong doing. This asshole heard it second hand. He does not qualify for protection under the law. Oh, that’s right, Democrats don’t care about the law. Republicans in Senate need to step-up hold hearings and get this traitors name.
Whistleblower Protection Act: An Overview - FindLaw

You must have “reliable FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE” of wrong doing. This asshole heard it second hand. He does not qualify for protection under the law. Oh, that’s right, Democrats don’t care about the law. Republicans in Senate need to step-up hold hearings and get this traitors name.
Whistleblower Protection Act: An Overview - FindLaw

Nope...FAIL

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...oints-used-discredit-whistleblower-complaint/

This really needs to be quoted.

Talking point No. 3: The whistleblower had only secondhand knowledge
This is also true. But it’s not enough to discredit the entire complaint. If we think of the whistleblower as a reporter, the whistleblower talked to a lot of people who had firsthand knowledge.

In one key instance, we have original source material to back up what the whistleblower has alleged. So far, this person nailed the call between Trump and Zelensky. This person correctly reported nuances about how Trump not only asked about the Bidens, but asked Zelensky for help about other election-related topics.

Notably, Trump is said to have asked Zelensky to “assist in purportedly uncovering that allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election originated in Ukraine, with a specific request that the Ukrainian leader locate and turn over servers used by the Democratic National Committee and examined by the U.S. cyber security firm CrowdStrike.”

That’s almost verbatim from the call:

TRUMP: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike ... I guess you have one of your wealthy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.

The whistleblower also talked to half a dozen U.S. officials over the course of months to put together this complaint.

Does this mean we should take everything in this whistleblower complaint as truth? No, of course not. But it’s worth noting that this person has multiple sources in the room of the president.

Ok, so IF the whistleblower was a reporter, and ALMOST verbatim pretty much tells us you have a vivid imagination and trying like hell to make some bogus story fit your agenda.

Sorry, nutjob, you can't put the genie back in the bottle, this is going to be investigated.

So we add another "failed attempt" to your column or would you like to wait?

 

[IM2]

Impeach first, look for evidence later. Hasn't that been the Democrat strategy for the entire Presidency?

Same with Kavanaugh.

Another example of Democrats breaking the law. This prick needs to be exposed and prosecuted. He is a tool of the Democrats using second hand knowledge to stir shit. You can’t use “rumors” to try to impeach a President.

There is a new whistleblower act : Read and weep.
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33918.pdf

It was changed illegally. Too bad. Just saw it on TV. The new law allows contractors without first hand knowledge to make up wrongdoing. Its ridiculous.

What was illegal about the change?

Nothing. He just made it up.

 

[IM2]

They need some sort of protection or the whistleblower will be found dead of twenty five self inflicted gunshot wounds.

Why does this piece of shit need protection. He is the scum of the earth.

Why?

Because he/she was actually concerned about America.

 

[IM2]

There is a new whistleblower act : Read and weep.
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33918.pdf

It was changed illegally. Too bad. Just saw it on TV. The new law allows contractors without first hand knowledge to make up wrongdoing. Its ridiculous.

What was illegal about the change?

They did it this August specifically to overthrow the elected President of the United States. Citizens will not stand for Democrats trying to overturn an election because they lost.

You have any evidence to support that?

How in the hell, with good conscious, can you support the bullshit the Democrats are pulling?

The democrats aren't doing anything. We have the transcripts from Trump that verifies the whistleblower.

 

[Contumacious]

You must have “reliable FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE” of wrong doing. This asshole heard it second hand. He does not qualify for protection under the law. Oh, that’s right, Democrats don’t care about the law. Republicans in Senate need to step-up hold hearings and get this traitors name.
Whistleblower Protection Act: An Overview - FindLaw

Exactly,

ASSUMING that the whistleblower exists , and that he works for the CIA then he can only whistleblow about events at the CIA - in the Whitehouse he is a SPY and the CIA has no authority to spy on Americans


.