Surprise! The whistleblower is a democrat

The IG acknowledged the bias in his statement that said didn’t change the facts of the whistleblower complaint. 

No, him being a Democrat doesn’t change the facts; they are still made up and lies. Being a Democrat merely explains why he is lying.

How can this be true coming from CNN?

Hypocrisy has no bounds here does it?

But with Trump’s self-impeachment, continued violations and admissions on camera, and incriminating emails pouring in from Ukrainian officials, at this point, what difference does it make?

@Deplorable Me:

WHAT violations? WHAT “incriminating emails”?

Do you feel I owe you, my obsessive stalker, a tutorial on news updates?

And what links would you accept? Your very question indicates you neither read nor update yourself on current events outside the perimeters of this site.

But for funnies, a hint on the emails would be Kurt Volker. Can you take it from there? I mean, you did get this far online somehow so can you use those same tools to dig a bit and further your knowledge. I’m actually trying to feed a fish.

1 more hint- a cache of emails were released Thursday by House investigators after a 10-hour interview with one of the diplomats.

And the answer to your other question is also in yesterday’s news involving Trump-on what-he said-in front of cameras-live. Go ahead and try it.

I could give you a CNN link but as this page proves, that’s only true when it compliments a pro-trump agenda.

@Deplorable Me:

Oh… I wasn’t aware

Agreed.

No, it’s up to YOU to provide the backing for your lie…. er, accusations

No it isn’t. Nor do I have any obligations to take orders from the likes of you. It’s up to me to decide what I want to provide or not provide just as it’s up to you to conveniently ignored the 10 hour House investigation which led to the emails and was the “BASIS” (which you say I didn’t provide) of my argument.

And it’s unclear what “backing” you’d accept just as it’s unclear why you can’t acknowledge the daily events as they unfold—-unless of course there’s a glimmer that can be shifted for Trump and/or against Democrats .

@Ronald J. Ward: @Ronald J. Ward:

No it isn’t. Nor do I have any obligations to take orders from the likes of you.

Yes it does, but since you are lying, you can’t. And, yes, you should take orders from the likes of me because following the orders of the likes of Soros hasn’t served you well.

@kitt: Liberals don’t care if their leadership gets wealthy off their ignorance. Hell, they’re TOO IGNORANT! AJ is just a case in point.

@kitt: We would definitely see them running for the hills, especially if their media benefactors abandoned them.

Surprise! The whistleblower is a democrat

What would anyone expect, given that Republican Party membership is now contingent on demonstrating unquestioning belief in and loyalty to Donald Trump?

We expected nothing other than a Democrat. Only Democrats lie on this scale.

The only problem with your statement is that absolutely nothing the whistleblower said has turned out to be a lie.

All evidence strongly suggests that Donald Trump was in fact attempting to coerce the government of Ukraine into opening a politically useful investigation of his most likely 2020 presidential opponent by withholding much needed military aid. Quid pro quo was very much on the minds of those involved in the scheme.

It also appears that he was seeking to discredit U.S. intelligence community conclusions that Russia meddled in the 2016 election by having the blame shifted to someone inside Ukraine. He was looking for a means to lend credence to what is nothing more than a crack-brained right wing conspiracy theory.

It also appears that the Ukrainian government knew d-mn well that they were being pressured, and were trying to resist being drawn into U.S. domestic politics.

All of which requires yet another cover-up effort.

Bottom line? Trump is a crook, and is turning the GOP into his accomplice. He’ll attempt to maintain control by putting them in a position where he can take them all down with him. He’ll try to make it so that their political survival is contingent on his own.

It’s the Democratic Party, not the Democrat Party—another minor detail that the right can’t seem to get straight. You know, like the matter of quid pro quo actually having been discussed by Trump’s co-conspirators, both the willing and the unwilling.

I think the childish refusal to acknowledge the difference between nouns and adjectives is the right-wing indoctrination showing. It occurs along with a predictable constellation of mind sets and conspiracy theories, none of which—like Trump himself—were ever critically examined before wholehearted acceptance.

@kitt, #18:

In a footnote, the complainant even alleges that the mere classification of phone calls between world leaders was itself a corrupt act.

The complaint isn’t about “the mere classification of phone calls.” It’s about the elevation of an alleged “perfect conversation” that was supposedly in no way improper or incriminating to a status requiring its concealment in the most highly classified and inaccessible record-keeping system available to the White House.

@Greg: I have no problem; it is intentional. There is NOTHING democratic about the Democrats. That word applies to them as well as it applies to the Democratic Republic of North Korea. Same same.

The fact that Biden is a candidate is YOUR problem, not the problem of the US government. Biden himself bragged about what he did which as, to put it mildly, suspicious and troublesome. Trump would be negligent NOT to request the completion of the investigation and anyone supporting him should be appreciative. Unless, of course, you simply don’t mind having a corrupt idiot as your President.

The complaint isn’t about “the mere classification of phone calls.”

It damn sure is. He claims that Trump secured the calls in such a way as to hide them from people that should have access. No, he has to take special precautions to thwart Obama-era leakers and spies.

Who the hell is Giuliana—Trump’s personal attorney—to be engaging in negotiations and pressuring foreign governments on behalf of the United States? He’s neither an elected anything nor an appointed anything. He has no authority or power to be doing this. And if it isn’t on behalf of the United States, what is it he’s doing?

@Greg: lol doing what? Gathering information on how the IC was and is still running a coup against his client?
If it troubles you and your kind…Rock on Rudy!

@Deplorable Me: Volker, X CIA, an unpaid State Department official, asked Rudy Guliani to meet w/ Ukraine official, then filed a report he is shocked that Trump’s personal atty conduct an investigation w/ Ukraine official. They did not know Rudy documented all the messages that Volker asked him to conduct the meeting. They are caught in their lies.
Do they not know good attorneys note and document everything each step?

@Greg: My representative Ron didnt freak he called and asked Don point blank and got his answer. No blackmail, the president and his diplomats were handling the situation. Not Obama style, ie cause Joe said ha dont believe me call the President he is aware of this blackmail for a billion dollars and is all in. was Joe bluffing or did Obama approve of holding US tax dollars from Ukraine to stop internal corruption investigations?
Hang on to your panties there are 15 corruption probes now going on in the Ukraine.

@Deplorable Me: Trump treats taxpayer money like it’s HIS and protects it instead of throwing it away

True.
Just saw how our Ambassador to Germany, Grendell (sp?) saved us taxpayers $30 million just this year alone!
And Pres Trump has never taken a paycheck as president.
He prefers to send the money to a gov’t department that needs help or a charity.
But he’s really saved taxpayers the most by his de-regulations.
And, with the high employment numbers he’s managed to bring in the highest dollar amount of taxes EVER!
Yes, even with a tax cut.

Now I have a suggestion for saving even more money in gov’t.
Get rid of the “spend it each year or lose it,” and replace that with a reward for departments that have the most cash left over (proportionately) at the end of the year.

The testimony of Gordon Sondland will be interesting now that its a done deal.
They got a shock from the ex CIA spook.

@Greg: Fantasy, there is so much evidence so much sworn testimony, documentation. Choose to ignore it you are 1 little tiny vote, sane people no longer listen to the liars that for over 2 years screeched, they have become the sounding brass and the tinkling cymbal. We have been enjoying low unemployment raising wages, and watching the lying talking heads lose their minds.
This is another pathetic swat not enough people believe for a second the mindless collective of koolaid offering clowns.
So was Barry in on Bidens crime or was Biden bluffing?

The gossip monger is not only a Democrat but he/she/??? once worked for a Dem 2020 candidate for president!
Who is your guess?
Since Biden is suffering the blowback, I guess not his campaign.
I guess Swalwell because he’s stupid enough not to realize Biden would be hurt more than anyone else, and because he’s smarmy enough to encourage this sort of thing from his troops.
And, thus, his troops would be smarmy and dumb enough to give it a go.

@Greg:

This is a story about a European nation that’s trying to hold fast with Putin’s tanks ready to roll across its borders, and a corrupt U.S. president holding back approved military aid while secretly pressuring that nation to help him slander his opponent in the next presidential election.

No, buckaroo, HERE’S the story; Obama, who would not provide any military aid to Ukraine and sat back and watched Putin annex Crimea, had his Vice President threaten Ukraine that if they did not fire a Prosecutor that was going to cause his administration some embarrassment by finding the VP’s son was a shield from prosecution, they would withhold a loan guarantee. Further, Obama used Ukraine as an assisting source to provide dirt on Trump associates and, thus, attempt to alter the outcome of the 2016 election.

All this is what is REALLY at stake and Democrats are frantic and frightened it will be exposed so explosively that even their allies in the liberal propaganda media will not be able to suppress it all. The mention of Crowdstrike REALLY set them off because there, Trump will uncover who REALLY exposed the DNC and their duplicitous machinations.

I thought you didn’t like foreign countries interfering in our elections? Don’t you WANT Trump to find out if Ukraine did or if they have information on the Russians doing it? Or, like your Democrat turds, are you just so goddamn afraid of the FACTS that are going to be revealed that your are scrambling to destroy the government to try and shut it up?

Maybe if Ivanka made a $100K profit off a $1K investment in “cattle futures” it would be noteworthy. Or if she approved the sale of our uranium to Russia.

@Nan G: Democrats can’t worry about Biden right now; they are fighting to prevent their corrupt core from being exposed and it revealed that everything they have accused Trump and Republicans of, they only thought of it because THEY were doing it.

Soros, Soros, Soros. Whenever there is something nasty going on, Soros is involved.

@Deplorable Me:

The mention of Crowdstrike REALLY set them off because there, Trump will uncover who REALLY exposed the DNC and their duplicitous machinations.

Interesting comment. We are told, by the DNC, and the media, that the Russians were the ones to hack into the DNC computers. But wait, where actually is the proof of that. The DNC refused, that’s right, refused to hand over its server to the intel community instead hiring Crowdstrike to tell the FBI who hacked the servers, I.e. the Russians. And where is the server itself? Who knows?

So here is an interesting article addressing that very issue:

https://spectator.org/crowdstrike-and-the-impeachment-frenzy/

Now, before Comrade Greggie Goebbels goes all anal on me, and the article, let me say this: I became aware of the VIPS right after 9-11. I had issues with them because they were ruthless in going after Bush/Iraq/Afghanistan right after 9-11 (at that point, I was still a Bush fan). But it has become clear, they will go after anyone they disagree with. So there’s that.

I do not think that Russia hacked the DNC computers. I think that was the DNC claim to misdirect the attention from what the DNC, and Obama, was doing in Ukraine. There was a reason the DNC would NOT turn over its server to the FBI. And a reason the DNC got by with that action, an action that would have seen any other organization prosecuted. Eventually, G-d willing, all the sleeze that is the DNC will be revealed.

@Greg: The IC also supported the collusion farce, too, didn’t they? The sad fact is that the IC has been infected with the deep state as well and makes some assessments based on political need. This is dangerous for the nation and is just another part of Obama’s “legacy”.

There is a reason the DNC didn’t want the FBI to investigate and all options include the DNC suppressing dirty deeds. They wanted to control the outcome and the “facts”.

You need to come to grips with the FACT that none of the shit you’ve made up has stuck (and you’ve made it ALL up) and nothing you make up in the future will stick. You need the TRUTH to stick.

@Greg: Your article rehashes the horror of the press, asking Nato to stop ripping us off, attempting to de-escalate tensions caused by the pay for play, corrupt, gun running, terrorist funding administration.
But none of that caused horror invite BLM Cair and other garbage to the White House, no horror.
Greg pathetic. for weak minded article, right up your alley.

“The Party of Collusion – Trump asked a foreign government for help in an election. Republicans say that’s fine.”

Two years ago, in the early days of the Russia investigation, many Republican senators said collusion with a foreign government to influence an American election would be a betrayal of the United States. They didn’t believe Donald Trump had solicited campaign help from Russia. But they agreed that if he had, it was illegal and perhaps impeachable.

Today, some of those senators—notably, the committee chairmen responsible for protecting national security and the rule of law—have renounced that principle. They now assert, in the case of Ukraine, that collusion is OK.

Sen. James Risch of Idaho is the chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. In June 2017, he interrogated then–Attorney General Jeff Sessions at a hearing of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. “Collusion with the Russians—or any other government, for that matter, when it comes to our elections—certainly would be improper and illegal,” Risch stipulated. He asked Sessions, “Would that be a fair statement?” Sessions replied, “Absolutely.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina expressed a similar view. At a press conference earlier this year, Graham, who is now the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, explained, “The big thing for me, guys, has always been: Did Trump work with the Russians? And I told him to his face, almost two years ago: ‘If you did, that’s it between me and you. And anything that follows, you deserve.’ I will say that about any politician of any party.”

Sen. Ron Johnson, the chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, espoused the same rule. The pivotal question, the Wisconsin senator insisted, was whether “members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government.” The United States “should be investigating, ‘Was there collusion?’ ” said Johnson. In April, NBC’s Andrea Mitchell asked the senator whether he agreed with Trump’s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, that “it’s OK for Republican campaign members, for Republican candidates, to welcome support from a foreign adversary, from Russia. Do you feel the same way? Would you welcome support from Russia in your campaign?” Johnson replied decisively, “No.”

Then, on July 25, Trump flagrantly crossed that line. In a phone call, Trump reminded Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that his country, besieged and partially occupied by Russia, depended on U.S. military aid. “We do a lot for Ukraine,” said Trump. He complained that Ukraine wasn’t providing “reciprocal” help, and he asked Zelensky for “a favor”: to work with Giuliani and U.S. Attorney General William Barr on two investigations that could help Trump in 2020. Trump explicitly named former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, who was, at that point, the Democrat most likely to face Trump in the general election. “There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution” of him, said Trump. “A lot of people want to find out about that. So whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution. So if you can look into it … ”

The phone call was open-and-shut collusion. Trump had asked a foreign government to investigate his opponent, and the request was recorded in a White House transcript. When the transcript was released on Sept. 25, it put Republican senators in a bind. They had to choose between country and party, between abandoning Trump and defending collusion.

They chose to embrace collusion.

“I looked at the transcript,” Risch told an Idaho TV station. “This conversation that the president had with the head of Ukraine is a typical conversation.” The senator argued that Trump’s statements in the call “were absolutely normal, ordinary, regular things.” When a reporter asked Risch to address the incriminating parts of the transcript, the senator talked over him and shut the conversation down, insisting, “I saw nothing in the conversation that was inappropriate. We’re done here.”

Johnson, too, fell in line. After a meeting at the White House, at which he and other Republican lawmakers received the transcript and Trump’s talking points, the senator told reporters that the transcript showed nothing wrong with the call. “We all kind of looked at it and said, ‘There’s nothing here,’ ” said Johnson. The next day, he elaborated: “I never got any sense at all there was any kind of pressure [on Zelensky]. I just put the best construction on the call.” When a reporter for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel asked Johnson whether he was “troubled that—even absent a quid pro quo—the president would ask a foreign leader to investigate a political opponent of his,” Johnson dismissed the question. “Almost everybody who is saying that is just troubled that Donald Trump is president,” the senator scoffed.

Graham, like his colleagues, says the call is fine. On Sunday, in an interview with Margaret Brennan of CBS News, he defended it line by line. Graham described Trump’s pitch to Zelensky this way: “We are very generous to the Ukraine. Other countries, like Germany, should do more. And, oh, by the way, I have heard that this prosecutor that got fired, maybe he was a good guy, and they fired him because he was looking at Joe Biden’s son. Could you look into that?”

Graham’s paraphrase of the call was, by his own previous standard, collusion. But he defended Trump’s message to Zelensky, even when Brennan cited other incriminating parts of the call. She noted that Trump, in the transcript, “brings up the Biden family and the need for an investigation. He repeatedly lays that out. And also the aid package is mentioned.” She asked Graham, “You have no problem with any of this?” Graham replied, “I have zero problems with this phone call.” Brennan persisted: “Do you think it was ethical for the president to bring up Joe Biden?” Graham replied, “Yes, absolutely.”

The president thinks these declarations of innocence exonerate him. At the White House on Wednesday, he claimed that Graham privately told him the call was unimpeachable. “Lindsey Graham said, ‘I never knew you were that nice a person,’ ” Trump told reporters. “He said, ‘You never asked [Zelensky] for anything. You were really, really nice. … That was a perfect conversation.’ ”

It’s true that the chairman of the Judiciary Committee sees nothing wrong with the conversation. Nor do the chairmen of the committees on Homeland Security and Foreign Relations. But that doesn’t mean the conversation was perfect. It means that the Republican Party no longer believes it’s wrong to enlist the help of foreign governments to win an election. It has become the party of collusion.

What Trump has brought the GOP to is pathetic. He has dragged the party down to his level. Many don’t even have the perspective to realize where their party is now at. Those who do—like Mitt Romney—are instantly attacked if they dare to state the obvious.