D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
Sorry, but your whistleblower is already outed as a disgruntled leaker and Democratic operative. Too late to babble and whine about anonymity.
The scam has been exposed.
Demand the identity of
- Thread starter Wahbooz
- Start date
The scam has been exposed.
BobbyT
Governor
The WBA doesn't say anything about whistle blower anonymity being contingent on the motivations of the whistle blower.
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
Facts and reality always matter.
ObamacareForever
Senator
The whistleblower's identity doesn't.
Wahbooz
Governor
First off, you can't address the law, which is what the TP is about, and you are trying to high jack the post. Not going to work.Stop the fluff. It's him. Now are you going to answer my question or is this guy's track record causing you and Schitt to schit your pants?
Second, edited, the top post has nothing to do with who the whistle blower is, and I don't give a shit about your questions. You can't stay on topic so edited off.
Last edited by a moderator:
Wahbooz
Governor
Apparently you are another one who can't comprehend the TP, so you go off topic. Pitiful.
Sorry, but he is not my whistle blower. But I say you're only assuming who he is, since I haven't seen anything about the IG releasing his name.
And you read like your avatar. "Duhhhhhhh"
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
Huh???? YOU just posted about whistleblowers! I give a direct response to the material YOU posted (about whistleblowers) and you're babbling about ME being off topic posting about whistleblowers????
By the way, you need to read the INTELLIGENCE Whistleblower Act before babbling about anonymity protections- you know, speaking of INTELLIGENCE.
Last edited by a moderator:
Nutty Cortez
Dummy (D) NY
Already know who he is . And after the Schiff mess- he's not going to testify. Why ? He doesn't wish to go to jail for lying.
The whistleblower, whose complaint launched impeachment proceedings against @realDonaldTrump, is unlikely to testify to Congress, as talks have ceased between his legal team and @RepAdamSchiff's staff. https://t.co/MCmUh7UjVh
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) October 31, 2019
The whistleblower, whose complaint launched impeachment proceedings against @realDonaldTrump, is unlikely to testify to Congress, as talks have ceased between his legal team and @RepAdamSchiff's staff. https://t.co/MCmUh7UjVh
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) October 31, 2019
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
Yes, obviously it does. Him being a DemocRAT operative and disgruntled, rejected employee are obviously relevant facts.
Wahbooz
Governor
The top post was about the law, not the whistle blower, get that?
So you read it? Great. Once you stop barfing, perhaps you could share with me what I got wrong out of the law. Can you do that?
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
Wow, now I see why you include BOOZ in your alias. Again, it was YOU who mentioned whistleblowers. I responded about whistleblowers. Sorry, but YOU don't get to decide to go off topic then criticize others for responding to your posts. Thankfully, you're sleeping it off by now.
Wahbooz
Governor
No, edited, I mentioned the fact so many have demanded the name of the whistle blower. You and Mick are trying to highjack the thread.
My top post was about the law and why that persons name has NOT been released. Now I hope you'll take some classes in cognitive reading.
And speaking of the law, where is your claim about the law? You're the one who said I didn't read it.
Booz? You have no idea what it means, because you only speak English and poorly at that.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
No, you're lying. You derailed your own thread. And you can't even read. And of course, given you are engaging in constant personal attacks, you know you're losing the argument. Stop posting while drunk.
ObamacareForever
Senator
Ad hominems are a sign of a lost debate. Ad hominems don't refute the allegations in the complaint.
Since the "transcript" released is damning enough, why are you still trying to expose the whistle blower?Federal documents reveal that the 33-year-old Ciaramella, a registered Democrat held over from the Obama White House, previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan, a vocal critic of Trump who helped initiate the Russia “collusion” investigation of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.
Further, Ciaramella (pronounced char-a-MEL-ah) left his National Security Council posting in the White House’s West Wing in mid-2017 amid concerns about negative leaks to the media. He has since returned to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.
“He was accused of working against Trump and leaking against Trump,” said a former NSC official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.
Also, Ciaramella huddled for “guidance” with the staff of House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, including former colleagues also held over from the Obama era whom Schiff’s office had recently recruited from the NSC. Schiff is the lead prosecutor in the impeachment inquiry.
And Ciaramella worked with a Democratic National Committee operative who dug up dirt on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election, inviting her into the White House for meetings, former White House colleagues said. The operative, Alexandra Chalupa, a Ukrainian-American who supported Hillary Clinton, led an effort to link the Republican campaign to the Russian government. “He knows her. He had her in the White House,” said one former co-worker, who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter.
--------------------------------------------
Now you know why your ilk tried to keep his identity secret. He's corrupt.
But I'm not surprised you are creating a phony defense against a cretin like this. Your the guy that was outraged that a 6 time felon was deported. The same guy who was also wanted on charges in El Salvador. Edited
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
The motives of an accuser are always scrutinized.
ObamacareForever
Senator
Nobody's motives have any bearing on the truth.
Zam-Zam
Senator
The Sixth Amendment:
The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right…to be confronted with the witnesses against him." Generally, the right is to have a face-to-face confrontation with witnesses who are offering testimonial evidence against the accused in the form of cross-examination during a trial. The Fourteenth Amendment makes the right to confrontation applicable to the states and not just the federal government.[1] The right only applies to criminal prosecutions, not civil cases or other proceedings.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confrontation_Clause
Ergo, if there is to be a criminal prosecution, the sixth amendment guarantees the accused the right to confront the accuser.
So there's that.
ObamacareForever
Senator
Impeachment isn't a criminal prosecution. So there's that.
Bugsy McGurk
President
You talk about the law - a very quaint concept in our lawless Trump era.
Not only do Trump and his toadies demand that the whistleblower be outed in violation of law, but it’s also entirely illogical. A red herring. The whistleblower’s significance to the probe ended after he blew the whistle. He had no first hand knowledge of the Ukrainegate crimes. He pointed the way to the witnesses who do have first hand knowledge, and they are the witnesses of significance. Trump wants the guy outed only so they can slime him and discourage other potential whistleblowers.
Deplorable, as always.
