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.
Gunny, you deserve a medal for standing up to the criminally insane Democrats who think this gunman was just some kind of nut. Hell, they've adopted half of his talking points for their behaviors this very week about getting Trump, no matter what it takes to get rid of him.You got no room to talk as I recall you want names of Trump donors released.Eric Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella.EricCiaramella.Eric Ciaramella.EricWait, 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?
Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella. Eric Ciaramella.EricCiaramella.Eric
Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella.EricCiaramella.
Eric Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella.EricCiaramella.Eric Ciaramella.Eric
Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella. Eric Ciaramella.EricCiaramella.Eric
Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella.EricCiaramella.
You are a good little parrot.
The whistleblower's lawyers are threatening Republicans. I'm fed up with Democrat dogma inciting Democrats to take out their hatred on Republicans and the First Family, who are seeking shelter elsewhere with rabid hating, cheating, lying Democrats and their associated Press supporters threatening more Republicans. Antifa almost killed a man recently with a blow to his head which will lead to dementia because that's what blows to the head do to people--early death due to dementia caused by a blow to the head. It's a crime that should be looked upon as murder.EVERYTHING that whistleblower complaint claimed was confirmed by testimony to Congress and public BY NUMEROUS ADMINISTRATION MEMBERS and White House released documents.
Conversations about whistleblower at this point is nothing but another deplorable Republican sideshow for their weak-in-the-head constituency.
You're a propaganda for murderers, and you better think that one over, buster. This guy was like you, a Democrat operative, and he took it seriously, just like you: EXCLUSIVE: Assassination List Found On James Hodgkinson’s BodyEric Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella.EricCiaramella.Eric Ciaramella.EricWait, 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?
Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella. Eric Ciaramella.EricCiaramella.Eric
Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella.EricCiaramella.
Eric Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella.EricCiaramella.Eric Ciaramella.Eric
Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella. Eric Ciaramella.EricCiaramella.Eric
Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella.Eric Ciaramella.EricCiaramella.
You are a good little parrot.
The whistleblower's lawyers are threatening Republicans.EVERYTHING that whistleblower complaint claimed was confirmed by testimony to Congress and public BY NUMEROUS ADMINISTRATION MEMBERS and White House released documents.
Conversations about whistleblower at this point is nothing but another deplorable Republican sideshow for their weak-in-the-head constituency.
Ahh yes secret testimony that only certain parts are leaked by unnamed sources. If these statement held water they would not be secret anymore. Get back to me when you have a viable link to a reliable source.First link to a witness that corroborates your whistle-blowers claims. You can not and keep lying about it. Further more if Trump did nothing ILLEGAL guess what RETARD HE as PRESIDENT DETERMINES Foreign policy and action.Makes more sense then the rubbish you are claiming.Yeah, that's a great story, I wonder if they would say the same under oath?
.
What did they change in the whistleblower laws?
You can now present hearsay evidence for one thing. Illegal in a Court of law, but totally okay in schitt for brains kangaroo court.
Show me exactly where the law was changed.
GOP argues whistleblower's name must be public
Democrats and the whistleblower’s attorney also note that other witnesses testifying in the investigation have confirmed allegations in the person’s initial complaint. Some have even offered new information that goes well beyond the whistleblower’s initial claims.
The foreign service officials who have testified privately in support of the whistleblower’s charges have eroded GOP arguments that the initial account is unreliable because it was learned secondhand, say Democrats, who contend the whistleblower's testimony is now superfluous to their investigation.
“Because we have corroborated everything the whistleblower has alleged, having the whistleblower testify would put the whistleblower's life in serious jeopardy,” Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, told CNN this week. “And so the question is, … is that person's life worth less than being redundant? And our position right now is that it's not.”
What We Know About the Trump-Ukraine Investigation
The messages, released by the House committees spearheading the impeachment investigation, appear to corroborate the account of the still anonymous whistleblower who touched off the impeachment inquiry into Trump’s alleged efforts to strong-arm Ukraine into investigating the president’s 2020 Democratic challenger, former Vice President Joe Biden.
Alexander Vindman is the latest impeachment inquiry witness to give damaging testimony for Trump
Overall, Vindman is just the latest in what’s become a parade of administration officials corroborating and elaborating on the complaint originally put forward by an anonymous whistleblower in August. He’s also a decorated veteran — and, apparently, Trump supporters are worried enough about what he’s saying to attack his background.
Are you one of those retards that think it is ok for a president to withhold congressional authorized military aid to a foreign country in an attempt to pressure them to publically announce they are “investigating” his personal political rival using a specially written script he provided?
Or...is it ok because it is your guy?
Foreign Policy or Abuse of Power?
Ahh yes secret testimony that only certain parts are leaked by unnamed sources. If these statement held water they would not be secret anymore. Get back to me when you have a viable link to a reliable source.First link to a witness that corroborates your whistle-blowers claims. You can not and keep lying about it. Further more if Trump did nothing ILLEGAL guess what RETARD HE as PRESIDENT DETERMINES Foreign policy and action.Makes more sense then the rubbish you are claiming.
What did they change in the whistleblower laws?
You can now present hearsay evidence for one thing. Illegal in a Court of law, but totally okay in schitt for brains kangaroo court.
Show me exactly where the law was changed.
GOP argues whistleblower's name must be public
Democrats and the whistleblower’s attorney also note that other witnesses testifying in the investigation have confirmed allegations in the person’s initial complaint. Some have even offered new information that goes well beyond the whistleblower’s initial claims.
The foreign service officials who have testified privately in support of the whistleblower’s charges have eroded GOP arguments that the initial account is unreliable because it was learned secondhand, say Democrats, who contend the whistleblower's testimony is now superfluous to their investigation.
“Because we have corroborated everything the whistleblower has alleged, having the whistleblower testify would put the whistleblower's life in serious jeopardy,” Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, told CNN this week. “And so the question is, … is that person's life worth less than being redundant? And our position right now is that it's not.”
What We Know About the Trump-Ukraine Investigation
The messages, released by the House committees spearheading the impeachment investigation, appear to corroborate the account of the still anonymous whistleblower who touched off the impeachment inquiry into Trump’s alleged efforts to strong-arm Ukraine into investigating the president’s 2020 Democratic challenger, former Vice President Joe Biden.
Alexander Vindman is the latest impeachment inquiry witness to give damaging testimony for Trump
Overall, Vindman is just the latest in what’s become a parade of administration officials corroborating and elaborating on the complaint originally put forward by an anonymous whistleblower in August. He’s also a decorated veteran — and, apparently, Trump supporters are worried enough about what he’s saying to attack his background.
Are you one of those retards that think it is ok for a president to withhold congressional authorized military aid to a foreign country in an attempt to pressure them to publically announce they are “investigating” his personal political rival using a specially written script he provided?
Or...is it ok because it is your guy?
Foreign Policy or Abuse of Power?
You know, you're ignoring the Republican mascot is an elephant. Not by coincidence, an elephant does not forget history and is one of the longest-living land animals on earth. We don't either.The whistleblower's lawyers are threatening Republicans.EVERYTHING that whistleblower complaint claimed was confirmed by testimony to Congress and public BY NUMEROUS ADMINISTRATION MEMBERS and White House released documents.
Conversations about whistleblower at this point is nothing but another deplorable Republican sideshow for their weak-in-the-head constituency.
That probably should be their cue to stop the deplorable breaking of whistleblower protection laws.
No evidence, but it has been shown that if this guy is the whistleblower, he has ties to biden, and some others. He also appears to be the one who orchestrated the russia collusion narrative, and he is a known leaker.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.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?
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.There is a good reason to keep the identity of whistle blowers confidential, and those folks who are viewing this through a very PARTISAN lens should really think about this. The next time it could be a whistle blower reporting on your opposition. Will you react the same way - insist on revealing the identity or will you suddenly come to your senses because it's YOUR guy?
Whistle blowers perform an incredibly important function. Demanding public exposure will have a chilling effect on the willingness of anyone to come forward and report perceived wrong doing. They put their jobs, families and lives on the line in this era of violent rhetoric, demands for retribution and character assassination.
The process of investigation itself, from the first person who see's the report to the end of the investigation is one of determining whether there is credibility or not, to the report. What is generally done is to find corroboration and first hand knowledge of what is claimed. If you have that, you don't need the whistle blower - you have enough evidence to go forward with the investigation or to NOT go forward without that person's involvement.
People want to undo the entire whistle blower protection process - but - only for THIS guy who reported on THEIR president. Seriously?
Dangerous times.
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.
Whistleblowers do not meet with their fellow propagandists to plot out a successful strategy to ensnare a sitting President who beat their candidate that they falsely lied to the public that she would win the election, when the real polls were telling the world Trump would win the Presidency. The polls used by the DNC were lies. They were arranged especially to make people think Hillary would win. They got enough dirty precinct chairmen to deliver votes from people ineligible to vote. That voter crap the Democrat Party has accelerated-prompting their voters to "vote and vote often" is going down. The precinct chairmen that are "losing" ballot boxes will go down, too, and I hope to jail where they belong for fixing votes to their satisfaction, and disenfranchising millions across the 50 states where they control a lot of numbers in big cities and caterwaul like hell about the Congress of incorporating states from coast to coast assured the small, but significantly rich in resource states they would have 2 senators just like every other state in the union.The whistleblower's lawyers are threatening Republicans.EVERYTHING that whistleblower complaint claimed was confirmed by testimony to Congress and public BY NUMEROUS ADMINISTRATION MEMBERS and White House released documents.
Conversations about whistleblower at this point is nothing but another deplorable Republican sideshow for their weak-in-the-head constituency.
That probably should be their cue to stop the deplorable breaking of whistleblower protection laws.
To anyone with half-a-brain (may exclude you) personal identity of the whistleblower means exactly nothing given the facts we have about the case already.
The intelligence committee is actually one of the official people to contact for such issues. The whistleblower was actually following the law by contacting them.Whistleblowers do not meet with their fellow propagandists to plot out a successful strategy to ensnare a sitting President who beat their candidate that they falsely lied to the public that she would win the election, when the real polls were telling the world Trump would win the Presidency. The polls used by the DNC were lies. They were arranged especially to make people think Hillary would win. They got enough dirty precinct chairmen to deliver votes from people ineligible to vote. That voter crap the Democrat Party has accelerated-prompting their voters to "vote and vote often" is going down. The precinct chairmen that are "losing" ballot boxes will go down, too, and I hope to jail where they belong for fixing votes to their satisfaction, and disenfranchising millions across the 50 states where they control a lot of numbers in big cities and caterwaul like hell about the Congress of incorporating states from coast to coast assured the small, but significantly rich in resource states they would have 2 senators just like every other state in the union.The whistleblower's lawyers are threatening Republicans.EVERYTHING that whistleblower complaint claimed was confirmed by testimony to Congress and public BY NUMEROUS ADMINISTRATION MEMBERS and White House released documents.
Conversations about whistleblower at this point is nothing but another deplorable Republican sideshow for their weak-in-the-head constituency.
That probably should be their cue to stop the deplorable breaking of whistleblower protection laws.
To anyone with half-a-brain (may exclude you) personal identity of the whistleblower means exactly nothing given the facts we have about the case already.
The Democrats have chosen to annoy the fairest of all people in the world--Republican citizens who choose to live peacefully in harmony with nature and their spiritual upbringings like their Christian forebears who were helped out by the Jewish financial community who gave General Washington the funds he needed to help his men out with uniforms and regular rations to beat the Bloody British back to across the pond where they came from.
He isn’t gossip. Or they would not have found it credible. And it has been corroborated through the testimony.He's a gossip. Do you really want to make a precedent based on gossip?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.There is a good reason to keep the identity of whistle blowers confidential, and those folks who are viewing this through a very PARTISAN lens should really think about this. The next time it could be a whistle blower reporting on your opposition. Will you react the same way - insist on revealing the identity or will you suddenly come to your senses because it's YOUR guy?
Whistle blowers perform an incredibly important function. Demanding public exposure will have a chilling effect on the willingness of anyone to come forward and report perceived wrong doing. They put their jobs, families and lives on the line in this era of violent rhetoric, demands for retribution and character assassination.
The process of investigation itself, from the first person who see's the report to the end of the investigation is one of determining whether there is credibility or not, to the report. What is generally done is to find corroboration and first hand knowledge of what is claimed. If you have that, you don't need the whistle blower - you have enough evidence to go forward with the investigation or to NOT go forward without that person's involvement.
People want to undo the entire whistle blower protection process - but - only for THIS guy who reported on THEIR president. Seriously?
Dangerous times.
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.
Biased testimony .............Can be challenged unless the prosecutors get to only call witnesses.........Which the lame leaders of the Dem party are trying to do..................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.There is a good reason to keep the identity of whistle blowers confidential, and those folks who are viewing this through a very PARTISAN lens should really think about this. The next time it could be a whistle blower reporting on your opposition. Will you react the same way - insist on revealing the identity or will you suddenly come to your senses because it's YOUR guy?
Whistle blowers perform an incredibly important function. Demanding public exposure will have a chilling effect on the willingness of anyone to come forward and report perceived wrong doing. They put their jobs, families and lives on the line in this era of violent rhetoric, demands for retribution and character assassination.
The process of investigation itself, from the first person who see's the report to the end of the investigation is one of determining whether there is credibility or not, to the report. What is generally done is to find corroboration and first hand knowledge of what is claimed. If you have that, you don't need the whistle blower - you have enough evidence to go forward with the investigation or to NOT go forward without that person's involvement.
People want to undo the entire whistle blower protection process - but - only for THIS guy who reported on THEIR president. Seriously?
Dangerous times.
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 best way to discredit a whistleblower is to call witnesses that know the guy.........find out he is a Democrat that has worked for Biden, and the DNC............a history of lying..........and destroy his creditability...........Proving Bias.............Finally, he never heard DIRECT evidence of anything.........he just heard that he heard someone say it.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.
Who changed the rules on the whistleblower laws just months before this happened..............There fixed it for you..............Now there is a possible investigation of bias and planned attack......Makes more sense then the rubbish you are claiming.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."
Yeah, that's a great story, I wonder if they would say the same under oath?
.
What did they change in the whistleblower laws?
Confrontation Clause - WikipediaFirst link to a witness that corroborates your whistle-blowers claims. You can not and keep lying about it. Further more if Trump did nothing ILLEGAL guess what RETARD HE as PRESIDENT DETERMINES Foreign policy and action.Makes more sense then the rubbish you are claiming.Yeah, that's a great story, I wonder if they would say the same under oath?
.
What did they change in the whistleblower laws?
You can now present hearsay evidence for one thing. Illegal in a Court of law, but totally okay in schitt for brains kangaroo court.
Show me exactly where the law was changed.
GOP argues whistleblower's name must be public
Democrats and the whistleblower’s attorney also note that other witnesses testifying in the investigation have confirmed allegations in the person’s initial complaint. Some have even offered new information that goes well beyond the whistleblower’s initial claims.
The foreign service officials who have testified privately in support of the whistleblower’s charges have eroded GOP arguments that the initial account is unreliable because it was learned secondhand, say Democrats, who contend the whistleblower's testimony is now superfluous to their investigation.
“Because we have corroborated everything the whistleblower has alleged, having the whistleblower testify would put the whistleblower's life in serious jeopardy,” Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, told CNN this week. “And so the question is, … is that person's life worth less than being redundant? And our position right now is that it's not.”
What We Know About the Trump-Ukraine Investigation
The messages, released by the House committees spearheading the impeachment investigation, appear to corroborate the account of the still anonymous whistleblower who touched off the impeachment inquiry into Trump’s alleged efforts to strong-arm Ukraine into investigating the president’s 2020 Democratic challenger, former Vice President Joe Biden.
Alexander Vindman is the latest impeachment inquiry witness to give damaging testimony for Trump
Overall, Vindman is just the latest in what’s become a parade of administration officials corroborating and elaborating on the complaint originally put forward by an anonymous whistleblower in August. He’s also a decorated veteran — and, apparently, Trump supporters are worried enough about what he’s saying to attack his background.
Are you one of those retards that think it is ok for a president to withhold congressional authorized military aid to a foreign country in an attempt to pressure them to publically announce they are “investigating” his personal political rival using a specially written script he provided?
Or...is it ok because it is your guy?
Foreign Policy or Abuse of Power?
You know, you're ignoring the Republican mascot is an elephant. Not by coincidence, an elephant does not forget history and is one of the longest-living land animals on earth. We don't either.The whistleblower's lawyers are threatening Republicans.EVERYTHING that whistleblower complaint claimed was confirmed by testimony to Congress and public BY NUMEROUS ADMINISTRATION MEMBERS and White House released documents.
Conversations about whistleblower at this point is nothing but another deplorable Republican sideshow for their weak-in-the-head constituency.
That probably should be their cue to stop the deplorable breaking of whistleblower protection laws.
Take for example, the Democrat operative who worked hard on electing a socialist in the Democrat Party run for president. When he died of return fire from a policeman he wounded in his many shots taken at Republican Congressmen, they found a little list on his body of Republicans he was set to kill. It read as follows:
The list was written out on notepad paper and found in the shooter’s pocket, according to multiple sources with intimate knowledge of the situation, who spoke on condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the investigation. The list of names included Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks, South Carolina Rep. Jeff Duncan and Arizona Rep. Trent Franks, TheDC has confirmed. Fox News reported after this story that Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, Tennessee Rep. Scott DesJarlais and Virginia Rep. Morgan Griffith are also on the list. All six congressmen are members of the House Freedom Caucus, which contains the lower chamber’s most conservative members. EXCLUSIVE: Assassination List Found On James Hodgkinson’s BodyOther notes he left on his facebook page about getting Donald Trump may not coincidentally be the end game on this impeachment shit going down behind closed doors: the idea is to get President Trump and disable him by any means you can. Are the creeps Hillary Clinton had write up a salacious lie about President Trump to help her win her election (through several foreign countries and executed with money laundered 5 times removed from its source in the Clinton Library Foundation heavily funded by nations Hillary gave away to Russia 20% of American's Uranium reserves, what the hell was that vituperative female creep thinking when she hurt our country by executing Obama's demands to hurt this country and give our enemies a nuclear material to weaponize against America's allies?
And they're worried President Trump will go after them with full arsenal of their former puppets in the CIA and FBI. They better damn worry. This little sideshow of an impeachment that is dead in the water is going down soon.
You and your fellow propagandists are not welcome to bring communism to our doorstep to put a free people in the chains communist citizens wear--constant fear of a KGB-like police state, retributive actions of sending people to Siberian labor camps for the duration of their lives, etc., for merely criticizing Putin.
Confrontation Clause - WikipediaFirst link to a witness that corroborates your whistle-blowers claims. You can not and keep lying about it. Further more if Trump did nothing ILLEGAL guess what RETARD HE as PRESIDENT DETERMINES Foreign policy and action.Makes more sense then the rubbish you are claiming.
What did they change in the whistleblower laws?
You can now present hearsay evidence for one thing. Illegal in a Court of law, but totally okay in schitt for brains kangaroo court.
Show me exactly where the law was changed.
GOP argues whistleblower's name must be public
Democrats and the whistleblower’s attorney also note that other witnesses testifying in the investigation have confirmed allegations in the person’s initial complaint. Some have even offered new information that goes well beyond the whistleblower’s initial claims.
The foreign service officials who have testified privately in support of the whistleblower’s charges have eroded GOP arguments that the initial account is unreliable because it was learned secondhand, say Democrats, who contend the whistleblower's testimony is now superfluous to their investigation.
“Because we have corroborated everything the whistleblower has alleged, having the whistleblower testify would put the whistleblower's life in serious jeopardy,” Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, told CNN this week. “And so the question is, … is that person's life worth less than being redundant? And our position right now is that it's not.”
What We Know About the Trump-Ukraine Investigation
The messages, released by the House committees spearheading the impeachment investigation, appear to corroborate the account of the still anonymous whistleblower who touched off the impeachment inquiry into Trump’s alleged efforts to strong-arm Ukraine into investigating the president’s 2020 Democratic challenger, former Vice President Joe Biden.
Alexander Vindman is the latest impeachment inquiry witness to give damaging testimony for Trump
Overall, Vindman is just the latest in what’s become a parade of administration officials corroborating and elaborating on the complaint originally put forward by an anonymous whistleblower in August. He’s also a decorated veteran — and, apparently, Trump supporters are worried enough about what he’s saying to attack his background.
Are you one of those retards that think it is ok for a president to withhold congressional authorized military aid to a foreign country in an attempt to pressure them to publically announce they are “investigating” his personal political rival using a specially written script he provided?
Or...is it ok because it is your guy?
Foreign Policy or Abuse of Power?
You are for the 6th Amendment now aren't you Coyote.............Trump has the right to face the accusers under the 6th Amendment. And when will they put a LEGAL CHALLENGE to the Congress on this subject................
If your side .........being Drama Queens......fear for his life...........then the Whistle Blower can be offered protection with armed escorts that is common for witnesses who's life MIGHT be in hazard............But the Whistle Blower HAS MADE ACCUSATIONS against Trump..................Has given information so called AGAINST TRUMP.
Trump under the 6th has a RIGHT to face his accusers.......to bring witnesses against him........and to cross examine him................Oh that's right.......the Congress is supposed to be the Grand Jury trying to find evidence for a trial in the Senate..........by basically conducting a trial...........LOL in the House........
This crap is Political BS....
Confrontation Clause - WikipediaFirst link to a witness that corroborates your whistle-blowers claims. You can not and keep lying about it. Further more if Trump did nothing ILLEGAL guess what RETARD HE as PRESIDENT DETERMINES Foreign policy and action.Makes more sense then the rubbish you are claiming.
What did they change in the whistleblower laws?
You can now present hearsay evidence for one thing. Illegal in a Court of law, but totally okay in schitt for brains kangaroo court.
Show me exactly where the law was changed.
GOP argues whistleblower's name must be public
Democrats and the whistleblower’s attorney also note that other witnesses testifying in the investigation have confirmed allegations in the person’s initial complaint. Some have even offered new information that goes well beyond the whistleblower’s initial claims.
The foreign service officials who have testified privately in support of the whistleblower’s charges have eroded GOP arguments that the initial account is unreliable because it was learned secondhand, say Democrats, who contend the whistleblower's testimony is now superfluous to their investigation.
“Because we have corroborated everything the whistleblower has alleged, having the whistleblower testify would put the whistleblower's life in serious jeopardy,” Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, told CNN this week. “And so the question is, … is that person's life worth less than being redundant? And our position right now is that it's not.”
What We Know About the Trump-Ukraine Investigation
The messages, released by the House committees spearheading the impeachment investigation, appear to corroborate the account of the still anonymous whistleblower who touched off the impeachment inquiry into Trump’s alleged efforts to strong-arm Ukraine into investigating the president’s 2020 Democratic challenger, former Vice President Joe Biden.
Alexander Vindman is the latest impeachment inquiry witness to give damaging testimony for Trump
Overall, Vindman is just the latest in what’s become a parade of administration officials corroborating and elaborating on the complaint originally put forward by an anonymous whistleblower in August. He’s also a decorated veteran — and, apparently, Trump supporters are worried enough about what he’s saying to attack his background.
Are you one of those retards that think it is ok for a president to withhold congressional authorized military aid to a foreign country in an attempt to pressure them to publically announce they are “investigating” his personal political rival using a specially written script he provided?
Or...is it ok because it is your guy?
Foreign Policy or Abuse of Power?
You are for the 6th Amendment now aren't you Coyote.............Trump has the right to face the accusers under the 6th Amendment. And when will they put a LEGAL CHALLENGE to the Congress on this subject................
If your side .........being Drama Queens......fear for his life...........then the Whistle Blower can be offered protection with armed escorts that is common for witnesses who's life MIGHT be in hazard............But the Whistle Blower HAS MADE ACCUSATIONS against Trump..................Has given information so called AGAINST TRUMP.
Trump under the 6th has a RIGHT to face his accusers.......to bring witnesses against him........and to cross examine him................Oh that's right.......the Congress is supposed to be the Grand Jury trying to find evidence for a trial in the Senate..........by basically conducting a trial...........LOL in the House........
This crap is Political BS....
The best way to discredit a whistleblower is to call witnesses that know the guy.........find out he is a Democrat that has worked for Biden, and the DNC............a history of lying..........and destroy his creditability...........Proving Bias.............Finally, he never heard DIRECT evidence of anything.........he just heard that he heard someone say it.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.
From the phone conversation............where is the evidence showing that a Grand Jury should be called for further evidence............Ukraine officials have denied being pressured.........The very people he was supposed to be pressuring...........say it never happened..........and in fact had a Court Room Decision that they had influenced an election by giving information to a Dem back in 2016. And they did in fact Fire a Prosecutor looking into the Oil Giant there via PRESSURE from Biden.
Trump looking into the 2016 election isn't illegal............Asking countries to cooperate with our DOJ isn't illegal............We have Treaties that require open cooperation between countries for legal matters......
If the people the Dems claimed were be pressured.........say...........No we were not being pressured.......then where is the sufficient evidence of proceeding with a Grand Jury investigation.......Oh that's right...........LEGAL DUE PROCESS is NOT REQUIRED in the Mickey Mouse Club Congress.............Nor is it even required to go through the proper channels of the Judiciary Committee..............who are the legal eagles of Congress....
This is a political attack.........using abuse of power to try and overturn an election and nothing more.
The Ukraine says they were not pressured..................They are the Victims according to the Dems.........The best way to discredit a whistleblower is to call witnesses that know the guy.........find out he is a Democrat that has worked for Biden, and the DNC............a history of lying..........and destroy his creditability...........Proving Bias.............Finally, he never heard DIRECT evidence of anything.........he just heard that he heard someone say it.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.
From the phone conversation............where is the evidence showing that a Grand Jury should be called for further evidence............Ukraine officials have denied being pressured.........The very people he was supposed to be pressuring...........say it never happened..........and in fact had a Court Room Decision that they had influenced an election by giving information to a Dem back in 2016. And they did in fact Fire a Prosecutor looking into the Oil Giant there via PRESSURE from Biden.
Trump looking into the 2016 election isn't illegal............Asking countries to cooperate with our DOJ isn't illegal............We have Treaties that require open cooperation between countries for legal matters......
If the people the Dems claimed were be pressured.........say...........No we were not being pressured.......then where is the sufficient evidence of proceeding with a Grand Jury investigation.......Oh that's right...........LEGAL DUE PROCESS is NOT REQUIRED in the Mickey Mouse Club Congress.............Nor is it even required to go through the proper channels of the Judiciary Committee..............who are the legal eagles of Congress....
This is a political attack.........using abuse of power to try and overturn an election and nothing more.
Dummy, how can you discredit facts established by the testimony of TRUMP ADMINISTRATION MEMBERS?
ZERO of the case against Trump relies on the credibility of the whistleblower.
