Jesus, I don’t even know where to start.
Donald Trump, guilty of yet ANOTHER concocted “scandal,” so say the “guilty before proven innocent” Democrats as they take another hit from their impeachment crack pipe.
HE CAN’T FIRE JIM COMEY!!! IMPEACH!!!
RUSSIAN COLLUSION!!! IMPEACH!!!
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE!!! IMPEACH!!!
MICHAEL COHEN AND STORMY DANIELS!!! IMPEACH!!!
HE VIOLATED THE EMOLUMENTS CLAUSE!!! IMPEACH!!!
Jesus, they’ve literally been trying to impeach The Donald BEFORE he was even inaugurated.
Mull that unhinged psychosis through your coconut a few times.
We ALL know the M.O….The Libs crap out some crazy, made-up impeachable offense…their submissive, hair-on-fire, hysterical, media bootlickers deliver their Democrat Party masters a political happy ending under the desk by consuming the next umpteen news cycles with wails of impeachment.
Then…like clockwork…the farcical accusations are debunked, and the glutton-for- punishment Dumbocrat Party is wonderfully humiliated as pathetic liars…AGAIN.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
I mean, the Democrat Party symbol IS the jackass, after all.
And like Animal House and Caddyshack…I’ve seen this movie 30 times before.
So, let me get this straight…
Impeach a sitting (or standing) President based on a whistleblower complaint with second and third hand information…who the IG has found to have political bias against the President…cited Trump-Hating “media reports”…and received his “information” from OTHER rat fink leakers who, dollars to f*cking donuts, are ALSO massively biased against the President.
Sounds about as solid as Michael Moore’s abs.
And the report is written like a legal brief…footnotes and all. Some very smart people have said there’s no way in Sam Hell the “whistleblower,” reportedly a CIA Officer…could have written it.
I DID hear Mueller’s gaggle of 18 angry Democrat lawyers were looking for work, so…
Anyway…think back to your high school or college days. This was a GROUP project.
So, the smoking gun itself…the phone call transcript…on its face contained no pressure (so said the Ukrainian Prez himself), no mention of money or impending aid, and nothing even in the vicinity of a “quid pro quo.”
Nobody disputes those facts.
C’mon…Trump simply…and brilliantly…releasing the transcript renders the phony, hyper-partisan “whistleblower” report completely moot, obsolete, and politically impotent.
It’s like you screwed around on your wife (just an illustration, honeybunch…PUT. THE. KNIFE. DOWN.), and your little floozy tried to blackmail you…but then you went crawling to your better half, spilled your guts, and begged for forgiveness…diamond earrings in tow, of course.
Bye Bye blackmail.
But in this case…Bye Bye whistleblower.
Ok, back to debunking and dismantling…
First, Trump expressed concerns about well known Ukrainian corruption as he’s about to give Ukraine a fortune in aid…as well as opining about other European countries not providing aid as well
Sound familiar?
Totally consistent message since Day 1. Concerns about giving zillions of dollars to corrupt nations? Europe not ponying up their fair share?
And no conditions were articulated as to the aid that has subsequently been given to Ukraine.
Secondly…ever hear of the “Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters?
Oh…little Chuckie Todd over at NBC didn’t share that with you? Shocker.
It was negotiated by Bill Clinton, signed by the U.S and Ukraine in 1998, and subsequently approved by the Senate in 1999.
The treaty obligates…OBLIGATES…Ukraine to provide, upon request by the U.S., assistance, “in connection with the investigation, prosecution, and prevention of offenses, and in proceedings related to criminal matters.”
To the great dismay of the Democrats, Trump referenced nothing in that call that isn’t related to ongoing criminal investigations by the Inspector General, Attorney General Barr, or U.S. Attorney John Durham, as it relates to the corrupt origins of the Russian collusion BS…the epicenter of which was NOT Russia…but Ukraine.
Perfectly legal, appropriate, and quite hunk dory under this treaty.
BUT WAIT!…I thought the Democrats were all about GETTING TO THE BOTTOM of election meddling by foreign nations? Oh, that’s right…just NOT when it exposes their own subversive corruption.
GOT IT!
Here’s another one you haven’t heard from the lying liberal lapdogs in the Fake News Media…
Literally days…DAYS…before the whistleblower complaint was submitted, the Intel community SECRETLY changed the whistleblower form to where FIRST HAND INFORMATION WAS NO LONGER REQUIRED.
My God.
What these Pinkos lack in shame…they more than compensate in balls.
So now, some White House janitor can overhear something in the shitter, and bring down a Presidency.
AWESOME!
Can’t make this stuff up folks.
OK, enough of the f*cking nonsense. Now that this thing has already been exposed for the Deep State fraud that it is, it’s going to die faster than Caitlyn Jenner’s testosterone level.
Hence, the warp speed at which Pelosi and that Bumbling Bug-Eyed Boob, House Intelligence (oxymoron intended) Committee Chairman Adam “Shifty” Schiff are trying to slam through hearings and subpoenas before the House of Cards fully collapses.
And Lastly….
My sources tell me that the whistleblower is rumored to be none other than REO Speedwagon frontman Kevin Cronin, who said in the complaint…”Heard it from a friend who…heard it from a friend who…heard it from another.”
Apologies to the under-45 crowd that is surely bewildered by that reference.
NEXT WEEK: BIDEN’S CAVALCADE OF CORRUPTION.
Given the state of war between the 2 mainstream political parties and divisiveness being promulgated by both, I think everyone should consider this candidate’s idea for 2020:
Adam Kokesh, a political activist who has announced plans to run for President in 2020 on the platform of an “orderly dissolution of the federal government”
It might be time to just start over.
Prediction: This post isn’t going to age well. The fact that your beloved President is tweeting in spastic denial over 50 times a day should even make you nervous. If this was a matter of a federal investigation, why was his personal lawyer involved? If he is so innocent, why is he making thinly veiled threats of witness retaliation and civil war? His three biggest arguments are all laughable.
1) “You can’t impeach because I’m popular.” Actually, yes we can.
2) “You can’t impeach me because I have gotten YUGE results.” If you have committed an offense, we most certainly can.
3) “You can’t impeach me because I lost the popular vote but was dominant in the Electoral College and was very popular in the largest and least populated counties in Montana and North Dakota.” Sorry Donnie, that doesn’t matter either, save yourself some oxygen.
Whether this is an impeachable offense remains to be seen, and getting 67 votes agreeing in a Republican is a long putt, even against our Golfer in Chief.
What is most telling is his continued willingness to personally engage in using foreign individuals to yield information for the purpose of impacting a US election, and his constant raging, bellowing of false information, and temper tantrums that prove he is so far below the minimal standards for this office. Impeach or not, anyone who still stands behind this nut job as President is just as delusional as he is, and that is saying something.
“The Libs crap out some crazy, made-up impeachable offense . . .” FACT: Judge Andrew Napolitano, *Fox News’s* senior judicial analyst, told Fox News host Shepard Smith (on 9/24/19) that President Trump committed a crime when he admitted pushing Ukrainian government leaders to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden: “It is a crime for the president to solicit aid for his campaign from a foreign government,” Napolitano told Smith.
“. . . based on a whistleblower complaint with second and third hand information…” This is true, BUT it’s not enough to discredit the entire complaint. If we think of the whistleblower as a reporter, the whistleblower talked to a lot of people who had firsthand knowledge.
In one key instance, we have original source material to back up what the whistleblower has alleged. So far, this person nailed the call between Trump and Zelensky. This person correctly reported nuances about how Trump not only asked about the Bidens, but asked Zelensky for help about other election-related topics.
Notably, Trump is said to have asked Zelensky to “assist in purportedly uncovering that allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election originated in Ukraine, with a specific request that the Ukrainian leader locate and turn over servers used by the Democratic National Committee and examined by the U.S. cyber security firm CrowdStrike.”
That’s almost verbatim from the call:
TRUMP: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.”
The whistleblower also talked to half a dozen U.S. officials over the course of months to put together this complaint.
Does this mean we should take everything in this whistleblower complaint as truth? No, of course not. But it’s worth noting that this person has multiple sources in the room of the president.
“The IG has found (the whistleblower) to have political bias against the President . . .” FACT: Page 5 of a report about the whistleblower by Michael Atkinson, the intelligence community inspector general, mentions that the whistleblower has “arguable political bias … in favor of a rival candidate.” But in the very next sentence, Atkinson also said he had determined that *that did not affect the credibility of the complaint.* “Such evidence did not change my determination that the complaint relating to the urgent concern ‘appears credible,’ particularly given the other information the [intelligence community inspector general] obtained during its preliminary review.”
In other words, Atkinson reviewed all angles of potential conflicts of interest by this whistleblower and still found his or her complaint to be credible, including by finding separate evidence.
FACT: In questioning on 9/26/19 in the House Intelligence Committee, acting director of national intelligence Joseph Maguire backed up the whistleblower’s credibility. (Maguire said he does not know who the whistleblower is, but read this exchange between him and Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.):
SCHIFF: “You don’t believe the whistleblower is a political hack?”
MAGUIRE: “I believe the whistleblower is operating in good faith and has followed the law.”
A few minutes later:
SCHIFF: “Do you have any reason to accuse him or her of disloyalty to the country or suggest he is beholden to anything else but the country?”
MAGUIRE: “Absolutely not. I believe the whistleblower followed the steps every way.”
“. . . the phone call transcript…on its face contained no pressure (so said the Ukrainian Prez himself) . . .” ASSUMPTION: Zelensky knows he risks losing U.S. aid again if he doesn’t say what Trump wants him to say. FACTS: (1) Days before the call, Trump froze bipartisan military aid to Ukraine. (2)Trump mentioned he needed a “favor” from the president right after Zelensky indicated he would like to buy more Javelin missiles from the United States. (3) Trump resisted a White House meeting with Zelensky, something Zelensky desperately wanted, for some time. After Zelensky appeared to agree to help Trump out, Zelensky suddenly got what he had long wanted. Trump said: “Good. Well, thank you very much, and I appreciate that. I will tell Rudy and Attorney General Barr to call. Thank you. Whenever you would like to come to the White House feel free to call. Give us a date, and we’ll work that out. I look forward to seeing you.”
Btw the Inspector General confirmed that “the form change” you are so hysterical about did NOT alter the requirements for first-hand information by a whistleblower. To quote the Liar in Chief, that’s just BS. Any more false claims from Breitbart we need to dispel?
Not looking to good for President Orange..
What I wrote was completely accurate. I specifically referred to the FORM that was apparently changed to accommodate this whistleblower complaint. Despite the fact the “statute” seems to be written to “accept” second hand information, the “policy” and “practice” that had been in place did not.
In a letter dated September 30, 2019 from Kevin McCarthy, Devin Nunes, and Jim Jordan, three senior Republican congressmen, to Inspector General of the Intelligence Community Michael Atkinson, the congressmen write, the “demonstrated lack of first-hand knowledge is why we are sending this letter. Until very recently, urgent concern disclosures were submitted to the ICIG using a form titled “Intelligence Community Whistleblower and Source Protection Program Urgent Concern Disclosure Form (ICWSP Form 401), published on May 24, 2018. Form 401 clearly states that a whistleblower must be in possession of reliable first-hand information to be deemed “credible” by the ICIG.
The letter then cites the actual verbiage from the form…a lengthy, approx. 125 word instruction, unequivocally explaining the requirement for first-hand information.
The letter continues…”Based on the language on this form, it appears that the requirement for first-hand information has been an IGIC policy regardless of how a whistleblower makes an urgent concern report….curiously, the urgent disclosure form that now appears on the Office of the Director of National Intelligence website has recently changed and no longer contains this explicit first-hand information requirement. The new form, labeled “Disclosure of Urgent Concern Form,” shows a revision date of August 2019 – but the specific date of revision – unlike the previous Form 401, is not listed. Further, the internal document properties of this new form appear to show that the document was created on September 24, 2019 at 4:25pm.”
As the letter then states, the $64,000 question is…”the timing of the removal of the first-hand information requirement [from the form] raises questions about potential connections to this whistleblower’s complaint.”
And that’s the main point…conveniently not addressed by the Trump-hating media lapdog so-called “fact-checkers.” Regardless of potential inconsistencies between “statute” and “policy/practice,”…BUT FOR THIS WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT…I submit nothing would have changed on this form.
This appears to be a total accommodation to this whistleblower, and THAT’s the point I was making. And there was surely no shortage of Trump-hating, unelected bureaucrats slithering around the Intelligence community ready, willing, and able to oblige. This thing stinks to high heaven.
As I began this dissertation…what I wrote was completely accurate.
In its Sept. 30 statement, the office of the ICIG said that ICWSP Form 401 and a few others had been under review since earlier this year and were recently modified to clarify language that could have been misinterpreted by would-be whistleblowers.
“In the process of reviewing and clarifying those forms, and in response to recent press inquiries regarding the instant whistleblower complaint, the ICIG understood that certain language in those forms and, more specifically, the informational materials accompanying the forms, could be read – ***incorrectly*** – as suggesting that whistleblowers must possess first-hand information in order to file an urgent concern complaint with the congressional intelligence committees,” the statement said.
“Consistent with the law, the new forms do not require whistleblowers to possess first-hand information in order to file a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern.”
The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998 defines an “urgent concern” as, among other things, “a serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of the law of Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operations of an intelligence activity involving classified information.”
So, not only was there no rule change for complaints based on hearsay, but those details from the ICIG also refute claims that the whistleblower “had no firsthand knowledge.”
Furthermore, the ICIG statement said that the whistleblower who filed the Aug. 12 complaint against Trump used the ***old*** form — not the new one — and checked the boxes indicating that the claims were based on both direct knowledge of events and information obtained from others. (The new form still asks similar questions.)
Again…BUT FOR THIS WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT…the form would not have been changed. That seems quite clear. And it’s all moot anyway. Trump’s release of the transcript renders the complaint itself completely worthless. Cryin’ Chuckie Schumer said it himself in January 2017…”Let me tell you: You take on the intelligence community…they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.” Quite prescient, huh? THE DEEP STATE LIVES!!!
Again… the ICIG statement said that the whistleblower who filed the Aug. 12 complaint against Trump used the ***OLD*** form. So your point about the form is IRRELEVANT.