Demand the identity of

[Wahbooz]

OK, so let's recap. I responded directly to your post. You dodged, then whined that my reply was off topic and have spent the remainder of your posts whining about the quality of my posts. Seriously, you need to stop posting after the first drink.

Take a hike.

You're still lying. You made statements, so I went along and asked you to prove them. You never did, you danced and danced, just like you are now.

YOU take a hike.

 

[Wahbooz]

No I'm trying to get it through your skull that he isn't protected...else he wouldn't have been named in the Mueller report.

You really shouldn't take those phony right wing websites for real. He's listed in the Mueller Report? They claim his name is in the foot notes at the bottom of page 71. Really? Can you read??? Try either one, the 71st page or the actual page 71. You need to do a lot better than that.

https://www.openmuellerreport.org/page71

https://www.openmuellerreport.org/page79

They know you guys won't read the Mueller report so they can say anything they want. You're like the kitchen door, throw some pasta at it and see if it'll stick. Sheeesh.

 

[Wahbooz]

What is funny is Boca can't find on either page what he claimed. Proves the neocon sites lie about whatever they put out.

 

[Deleted member 21794]

What is funny is Boca can't find on either page what he claimed. Proves the neocon sites lie about whatever they put out.

Or it proves you're a bore.

 

[Boca]

What is funny is Boca can't find on either page what he claimed. Proves the neocon sites lie about whatever they put out.

Here ya go Wahloozer.....

SCR013_001088 (5/10/17 Email, Hemming to Cheung et al.) (internal White House email describing comments on the Comey termination by Vice President Pence).

468 SCR08_000353 (5/9/17 White House Document, “Working Visit with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov of Russia”);

SCR08_001274 (5/10/17 Email, Ciaramella to Kelly et al.). The meeting had been planned on May 2, 2017, during a telephone call between the President and Russian President Vladimir Putin, and the meeting date was confirmed on May 5, 2017, the same day the President dictated ideas for the Comey termination letter to Stephen Miller. SCR08_001274 (5/10/17 Email, Ciaramella to Kelly et al.).

That aside what's really funny is you saying this...

Now add to that, exposing a CIA employee also exposes anyone that person may have been in contact with.
​

So am I in danger for having been in contact with a cousin at a family reunion five years ago who is a secretary at Langley?

​

 

[ObamacareForever]

That is absurd! If, as you have suggested, the "Whistleblower's" claims of Ukraine corruption has been "corroborated" then the articles of impeachment should write themselves...

They are building an unassailable case so the Senate doesn't dismiss impeachment out of hand.

 

[Boca]

They are building an unassailable case so the Senate doesn't dismiss impeachment out of hand.

They are building a house of cards and living in it.

 

[Deleted member 21794]

They are building an unassailable case so the Senate doesn't dismiss impeachment out of hand.

When do you think they'll start doing that?

 

[ObamacareForever]

When do you think they'll start doing that?

Do you have any goals here besides trolling?

 

[Wahbooz]

Here ya go Wahloozer.....

SCR013_001088 (5/10/17 Email, Hemming to Cheung et al.) (internal White House email describing comments on the Comey termination by Vice President Pence).

468 SCR08_000353 (5/9/17 White House Document, “Working Visit with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov of Russia”);

SCR08_001274 (5/10/17 Email, Ciaramella to Kelly et al.). The meeting had been planned on May 2, 2017, during a telephone call between the President and Russian President Vladimir Putin, and the meeting date was confirmed on May 5, 2017, the same day the President dictated ideas for the Comey termination letter to Stephen Miller. SCR08_001274 (5/10/17 Email, Ciaramella to Kelly et al.).

That aside what's really funny is you saying this...

Now add to that, exposing a CIA employee also exposes anyone that person may have been in contact with.
​

So am I in danger for having been in contact with a cousin at a family reunion five years ago who is a secretary at Langley?

​

Now isn't that cute, 2017 and the Comey termination. Now how the hell did that connect him as being the whistle blower? And it exposed him as being what? You spend wayyyyy too much time sucking suds.

 

[Wahbooz]

Or it proves you're a bore.

That's cute, I'm a bore because I don't fall for your crap. It proves you clowns rely too much on lies.

 

[Deleted member 21794]

That's cute, I'm a bore because I don't fall for your crap. It proves you clowns rely too much on lies.

Wow, all this melting down because I gave a direct reply to your post. Amazing.

 

[Boca]

Now isn't that cute, 2017 and the Comey termination. Now how the hell did that connect him as being the whistle blower? And it exposed him as being what? You spend wayyyyy too much time sucking suds.

Too funny. Shoot your mouth off about the whistle blower not being named in the Mueller report. I give it to you and your mouth slams shut. Blow up your understanding that all CIA employees are protected and that anyone they contact is in danger and you tuck tail and start babbling about Comey??

Hilarious...

But since you are so entertaining let me return the favor with a little story of when I was in danger and didn't know it.

I was working in West Germany on a DoD contract back in early 80's. There was nothing secret about it.

I drove a little two seater sports car but had a couple of friends coming from stateside. Over drinks in the Officers Club a friend and co-worker offered his car, a nice big late model Mercedes, because he was being sent to Spain for a few weeks.

I took him up on it and the wife and I and our friends spent a week touring through Austria, France, Switzerland, and Italy.

Years later I learned my friend was a spook whose cover was working on our contract. That explained why he was sent to Spain given we had no operations there.

I often wonder what might have happened had he been a target of the bad guys. After all those were the Cold War days and "accidents" do happen.

 

[Wahbooz]

Too funny. Shoot your mouth off about the whistle blower not being named in the Mueller report. I give it to you and your mouth slams shut. Blow up your understanding that all CIA employees are protected and that anyone they contact is in danger and you tuck tail and start babbling about Comey??

Hilarious...

But since you are so entertaining let me return the favor with a little story of when I was in danger and didn't know it.

I was working in West Germany on a DoD contract back in early 80's. There was nothing secret about it.

I drove a little two seater sports car but had a couple of friends coming from stateside. Over drinks in the Officers Club a friend and co-worker offered his car, a nice big late model Mercedes, because he was being sent to Spain for a few weeks.

I took him up on it and the wife and I and our friends spent a week touring through Austria, France, Switzerland, and Italy.

Years later I learned my friend was a spook whose cover was working on our contract. That explained why he was sent to Spain given we had no operations there.

I often wonder what might have happened had he been a target of the bad guys. After all those were the Cold War days and "accidents" do happen.

Ok, dipstick, I'll play your silly damn game with you. Since the Trumpers claim he is in the footnotes on page 71, and that is false, which page does that come from? Show a link, because I already showed he does not appear on page 71.

https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5955997-Muellerreport

 

[Wahbooz]

Wow, all this melting down because I gave a direct reply to your post. Amazing.

Meltdown, hahahaha. Obviously you suffer from delusions of grandeur. Could be why that goofy thing is in the middle of your forehead, Eloi. You have not given one direct reply, not one.

 

[EatTheRich]

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.

Touché!

 

[EatTheRich]

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.

They also aren’t using the whistleblower complaint as evidence of Trump’s guilt.

 

[EatTheRich]

They are building an unassailable case so the Senate doesn't dismiss impeachment out of hand.

And to lay the groundwork for criminal prosecution afterward.

 

[Wahbooz]

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.

That's quite true, but the actual prosecution takes place in the Senate, not the House. That is where the defense has the right to cross examine the witnesses.

 

[Deleted member 21794]

That's quite true, but the actual prosecution takes place in the Senate, not the House. That is where the defense has the right to cross examine the witnesses.

And that is where it will be made clear the House goons conducted the witch hunt in contrast to values like facing your accuser, getting to call witnesses and other principles we hold dear as Americans. But unfortunately for deranged TDS wackos, they can't see that far in front of them.

I suspect you know the type.