Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nothing has been debunked, moron. The form was changed, which means the rule was changed. Here are the two versions:No rule was changed. You are regurgitating a debunked talking point.The rule was changed, shit for brains.For the eleventieth time:What's "false,"
No rule change. Nothing pertinent.
Got it?
Did you read this in Giuliani's signed affidavits that he waved around on television?
The best way to discredit a whistleblower is to claim HE is the traiter instead of the person he is reporting on, isn’t?Best way to try and protect a traitorous, bullshit spy is to give him the magical cover of “whistleblower” Realty, just another safe space.
If we are going to be SPECIFIC let’s start with an accurate premise.Be specific and CITE with a link and a quote with the witness that corroborated that Trump did anything illegal.The political views of the whistleblower are irrelevant if it is corroborated.Yes one can the veracity and the political views held by a supposed whistle-blower are pertinent to the testimony given.He is a whistle blower, we can't do this cafeteria style and pick choose who we think should or not be considered a whistleblower. Dangerous precedent.He ain't a whistle blower. He is a brennan spy. He is a seditious bureaucrat who decided that he doesn't like the fact that the voters decided they don't like having a bureaucratic class who feel they are above the constitution, and the voters.
Why did you never care before?
The testimony given has supported what the whistle blower stated.
No one, included the whistleblower has made a determination of illegality. That is going to be up to others.
False. You really are not getting this.The form was changed, which means the rule was changed.
I just proved it beyond any reasonable doubt, moron.False. You really are not getting this.The form was changed, which means the rule was changed.
No, you just embarrassed yourself. No rule was changed.I just proved it beyond any reasonable doubt, moron.False. You really are not getting this.The form was changed, which means the rule was changed.
No, you just embarrassed yourself. No rule was changed.I just proved it beyond any reasonable doubt, moron.False. You really are not getting this.The form was changed, which means the rule was changed.
Oh, and the IC IG publicly said the whistleblower had first had information, and that the report was deemed credible and urgent.
So there's that...
I think that's what you want to believe. Nobody wants him dead, however, perhaps, if its found that this was all a planned event because of his ties with the democrats, I think perhaps he should at least be reprimanded.They do not care. If he is killed they will celebrate.It doesn't mean you're free to break the law.
It's very illegal for anyone to disclose the name of a whistleblower. Which is why no reputable news outlet will do such a thing. Nor would a reputable news outlet disclose the name of someone without proof.
There's no proof that this is the right person. He's getting death threats and may not even be involved.
Do you really believe that a totally innocent person should endure that?
Do you know what innocent until proven guilty means?
What if it wasn’t planned? No evidence to support that claim.
Yes they are specific and yes he does qualify. What specific law disqualifies him?He is a whistle blower, we can't do this cafeteria style and pick choose who we think should or not be considered a whistleblower. Dangerous precedent.He ain't a whistle blower. He is a brennan spy. He is a seditious bureaucrat who decided that he doesn't like the fact that the voters decided they don't like having a bureaucratic class who feel they are above the constitution, and the voters.
No, he's not. The whistleblower laws are very specific and he doesn't qualify in any respect.
What if it wasn’t planned? No evidence to support that claim.
The form was changed the same time the report was filed, and he contacted shitts staff prior to filing anything with the IG. He also had lawyers draft the report and included news reports. Also he hadn't worked in the WH since 2017, all coincidences, I think not, too well choreographed.
.
1. A FORM cannot change the law.
2. Lawyers did not draft the report.
3. He contacted the Intelligence Commitee, which is a normal procedure in regards to this.
Whistleblower drafted complaint 'entirely on their own,' attorney says
"The Whistleblower drafted the Complaint entirely on their own. Legal counsel Andrew Bakaj provided guidance on process but was not involved in the drafting of the document and did not review it in advance," Mark Zaid, an attorney for the whistleblower, told ABC News. "In fact, none of the legal team saw the Complaint until it was publicly released by Congress. To be unequivocally clear, no Member or congressional staff had any input into or reviewed the Complaint before it was submitted to the Intelligence Community Inspector General."
According to a spokesperson for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, the whistleblower contacted the committee before raising concerns about alleged wrongdoing with the intelligence community inspector general.
"Like other whistleblowers have done before and since under Republican and Democratic-controlled Committees, the whistleblower contacted the Committee for guidance on how to report possible wrongdoing within the jurisdiction of the Intelligence Community," Patrick Boland, the spokesman, wrote in a statement. "Consistent with the Committee's longstanding procedures, Committee staff appropriately advised the whistleblower to contact an Inspector General and to seek legal counsel."
A member of the press worried about these unproven communists.Wait, what happened to freedom of the press? If they have the name, they should release the name. Inquiring minds want to know. And I don't care about his family and friends. I do think he should be required to testify as a significant witness for this whole impeachment circus.
You mean like how National Enquirer should have published the interview with the Playboy model who had sex with married Donald Trump- but buried it at Trump's request?
You mean that free press?
Do you know what "free" means?
.
It doesn't mean you're free to break the law.
It's very illegal for anyone to disclose the name of a whistleblower. Which is why no reputable news outlet will do such a thing. Nor would a reputable news outlet disclose the name of someone without proof.
There's no proof that this is the right person. He's getting death threats and may not even be involved.
Do you really believe that a totally innocent person should endure that?
Do you know what innocent until proven guilty means?
Did you bother to read the gibberish I was responding to? And....
I do, perhaps you should explain the concept to your commie brethren.Do you know what innocent until proven guilty means?
.
I'm a member of that press you hate so much.
I know what freedom of the press is and I know that it doesn't include breaking federal law.
Freedom of the press doesn't protect anyone from violating any federal or state laws.
I'm not a communist.
It's really stupid to believe anyone who doesn't agree with your views is a communist. Especially since it's trump who has used communists to help him win the 2016 election and he's doing it again in the 2020 election with those same communists. He's not even pretending anymore.
I have been a registered Independent since 1978. I've voted a variety of parties and candidates through the decades.
I'm sure you can't say the same thing.
And I'm sure if the person you believe is the whistleblower is harmed or even killed, you would dance a happy dance of joy.
They changed the rules, asshole.The "whistle blower" isn't even a real "whistle blower" under the definition of "whistle blower," therefore isn't entitled to any of the legal protections a "whistle blower" might have.
Trump’s NSA Attorney General disagreed with you when he found the complaint credible and urgent.
Wow, you're doing the same thing as the leaker, inventing shit. Is the NSA Attorney General second cousin to Harvey the rabbit?
.
I’m just explaining how the whistleblower laws work for you ignoramuses.
So long as the legal process of filing the complaint was followed (and even according to high ranking Republicans like Grasley it was) the whistleblower protections fully apply.
Sorry you don’t like reality.
You could ALWAYS present hearsay evidence in the 2014 LAW!You can now present hearsay evidence for one thing. Illegal in a Court of law, but totally okay in schitt for brains kangaroo court.
Good grief, have you managed to toss the kitchen sink into this wild ass conspiracy theory of yours?I think that's what you want to believe. Nobody wants him dead, however, perhaps, if its found that this was all a planned event because of his ties with the democrats, I think perhaps he should at least be reprimanded.They do not care. If he is killed they will celebrate.
What if it wasn’t planned? No evidence to support that claim.
Yes they are specific and yes he does qualify. What specific law disqualifies him?He is a whistle blower, we can't do this cafeteria style and pick choose who we think should or not be considered a whistleblower. Dangerous precedent.
No, he's not. The whistleblower laws are very specific and he doesn't qualify in any respect.
What if it wasn’t planned? No evidence to support that claim.
The form was changed the same time the report was filed, and he contacted shitts staff prior to filing anything with the IG. He also had lawyers draft the report and included news reports. Also he hadn't worked in the WH since 2017, all coincidences, I think not, too well choreographed.
.
1. A FORM cannot change the law.
2. Lawyers did not draft the report.
3. He contacted the Intelligence Commitee, which is a normal procedure in regards to this.
Whistleblower drafted complaint 'entirely on their own,' attorney says
"The Whistleblower drafted the Complaint entirely on their own. Legal counsel Andrew Bakaj provided guidance on process but was not involved in the drafting of the document and did not review it in advance," Mark Zaid, an attorney for the whistleblower, told ABC News. "In fact, none of the legal team saw the Complaint until it was publicly released by Congress. To be unequivocally clear, no Member or congressional staff had any input into or reviewed the Complaint before it was submitted to the Intelligence Community Inspector General."
According to a spokesperson for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, the whistleblower contacted the committee before raising concerns about alleged wrongdoing with the intelligence community inspector general.
"Like other whistleblowers have done before and since under Republican and Democratic-controlled Committees, the whistleblower contacted the Committee for guidance on how to report possible wrongdoing within the jurisdiction of the Intelligence Community," Patrick Boland, the spokesman, wrote in a statement. "Consistent with the Committee's longstanding procedures, Committee staff appropriately advised the whistleblower to contact an Inspector General and to seek legal counsel."
Well now that's interesting.
So did this spy, Eric Ciaremella, have a law degree? I mean, he wrote the "complaint" as a legal brief. Pretty unusual for a spy to do. And this isn't just ANY spy, is it? This is the spy that helped Joe Biden with the Burisma mess, you know the one that Biden used extortion to stop the investigation into?
But there's more, isn't there? This is KGB John Brennan's boi. This is a confidant of the corrupt pig who has so much to lose by an investigation into the Ukraine and the shit that went on with the 2016 election.
The best way to discredit a whistleblower is to claim HE is the traiter instead of the person he is reporting on, isn’t?Best way to try and protect a traitorous, bullshit spy is to give him the magical cover of “whistleblower” Realty, just another safe space.
Comrade, is it normal to embed a CIA operative in the staff of the president to gather intel in an effort to remove (overthrow) that president? What if the Americans had done that with Obamugabe?
No, it doesn’t.Nothing has been debunked, moron. The form was changed, which means the rule was changed. Here are the two versions:No rule was changed. You are regurgitating a debunked talking point.The rule was changed, shit for brains.For the eleventieth time:What's "false,"
No rule change. Nothing pertinent.
Got it?
Did you read this in Giuliani's signed affidavits that he waved around on television?
Old Version:
New Version:
So how many death threats do you imagine this guy has gotten? I know practically all of them are just you keyboard commandos talking tough but there are some of you who would murder this guy with a smile.
So how many death threats do you imagine this guy has gotten? I know practically all of them are just you keyboard commandos talking tough but there are some of you who would murder this guy with a smile.
Well, let's see now - he engaged in espionage against the President of the United States for the express purpose of overthrowing the United States Government.
I'd say the 'death threat' he faces is following Tim McVeigh to the traitors reward - deservedly so.
Good grief, have you managed to toss the kitchen sink into this wild ass conspiracy theory of yours?I think that's what you want to believe. Nobody wants him dead, however, perhaps, if its found that this was all a planned event because of his ties with the democrats, I think perhaps he should at least be reprimanded.
What if it wasn’t planned? No evidence to support that claim.
Yes they are specific and yes he does qualify. What specific law disqualifies him?No, he's not. The whistleblower laws are very specific and he doesn't qualify in any respect.
What if it wasn’t planned? No evidence to support that claim.
The form was changed the same time the report was filed, and he contacted shitts staff prior to filing anything with the IG. He also had lawyers draft the report and included news reports. Also he hadn't worked in the WH since 2017, all coincidences, I think not, too well choreographed.
.
1. A FORM cannot change the law.
2. Lawyers did not draft the report.
3. He contacted the Intelligence Commitee, which is a normal procedure in regards to this.
Whistleblower drafted complaint 'entirely on their own,' attorney says
"The Whistleblower drafted the Complaint entirely on their own. Legal counsel Andrew Bakaj provided guidance on process but was not involved in the drafting of the document and did not review it in advance," Mark Zaid, an attorney for the whistleblower, told ABC News. "In fact, none of the legal team saw the Complaint until it was publicly released by Congress. To be unequivocally clear, no Member or congressional staff had any input into or reviewed the Complaint before it was submitted to the Intelligence Community Inspector General."
According to a spokesperson for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, the whistleblower contacted the committee before raising concerns about alleged wrongdoing with the intelligence community inspector general.
"Like other whistleblowers have done before and since under Republican and Democratic-controlled Committees, the whistleblower contacted the Committee for guidance on how to report possible wrongdoing within the jurisdiction of the Intelligence Community," Patrick Boland, the spokesman, wrote in a statement. "Consistent with the Committee's longstanding procedures, Committee staff appropriately advised the whistleblower to contact an Inspector General and to seek legal counsel."
Well now that's interesting.
So did this spy, Eric Ciaremella, have a law degree? I mean, he wrote the "complaint" as a legal brief. Pretty unusual for a spy to do. And this isn't just ANY spy, is it? This is the spy that helped Joe Biden with the Burisma mess, you know the one that Biden used extortion to stop the investigation into?
But there's more, isn't there? This is KGB John Brennan's boi. This is a confidant of the corrupt pig who has so much to lose by an investigation into the Ukraine and the shit that went on with the 2016 election.
The best way to discredit a whistleblower is to claim HE is the traiter instead of the person he is reporting on, isn’t?Best way to try and protect a traitorous, bullshit spy is to give him the magical cover of “whistleblower” Realty, just another safe space.
Comrade, is it normal to embed a CIA operative in the staff of the president to gather intel in an effort to remove (overthrow) that president? What if the Americans had done that with Obamugabe?
CIA officers are routinely detailed to the White House, including Obama’s. Their presence is not a secret.
So how many death threats do you imagine this guy has gotten? I know practically all of them are just you keyboard commandos talking tough but there are some of you who would murder this guy with a smile.
Well, let's see now - he engaged in espionage against the President of the United States for the express purpose of overthrowing the United States Government.
I'd say the 'death threat' he faces is following Tim McVeigh to the traitors reward - deservedly so.
Oh brother. You guys are effing delusional.
The "whistle blower" isn't even a real "whistle blower" under the definition of "whistle blower," therefore isn't entitled to any of the legal protections a "whistle blower" might have.
Trump’s NSA Attorney General disagreed with you when he found the complaint credible and urgent.
Wow, you're doing the same thing as the leaker, inventing shit. Is the NSA Attorney General second cousin to Harvey the rabbit?
.
I’m just explaining how the whistleblower laws work for you ignoramuses.
So long as the legal process of filing the complaint was followed (and even according to high ranking Republicans like Grasley it was) the whistleblower protections fully apply.
Sorry you don’t like reality.
