Orange Duce

[Typical Lax Dad]

That’s priceless Gowdy. Rules apply to other guy. Nunes is a sphinx, I suppose. Trey should read the Mueller Report.

Nunes is supposedly a champion of whistle blowing or so it was claimed by Old Sycophants

[old salt]

That’s priceless Gowdy. Rules apply to other guy. Nunes is a sphinx, I suppose. Trey should read the Mueller Report.

Nunes is supposedly a champion of whistle blowing or so it was claimed by Old Sycophants

How many whistleblowers has Nunes burned ?
Schiff is offering up this whistleblower.
His career (& life) will never be the same again.

[a fan]

Step back & look at what you are demanding.

I'm demanding that they follow the law. They had 7 days to turn it over the intel committee. They didn't.

The fact that you look at that, and don't care is astonishing. You said, and more than once, that Comey should have followed the law rather than leak..

That's what the whistleblower did. And what was the reward? A Trump appointee BROKE the F ing law, and stonewalled. Which is typical Trump stupidity, because it's going to get out eventually.....with all the damage that comes with breaking that whistleblower law. Trump just announced to our intel community that your only relief is the press.

If you are going to act like you don't understand this massive problem, your words are utterly meaningless. Two and half years of your complaints about following the law surrounding intel are now nothing more than partisan complaints about someone being mean to Trump. You telling us that you don't care about the law. You only care about people being mean to Trump.

The whistleblower's concern could have been accommodated,

Dude. It WASN"T accommodated. So OF COURSE it's leaking now. Trump Admin. had their chance to play by the rules, and chose not to. Intel committee was, by law, supposed to have that complaint, unredacted, in their hands by the 14th of September. That ship has sailed.

So now, all bets are off, and you ain't seen nothing yet in terms of leaking. Everyone will do it now, because Trump has shown that there is no legal way to address problems.

And Trump has now proven that your Deep State was right to leak. The legal path is blocked by Trump and his cronies. You should be LIVID about this, and yet instead, you're mad at everyone but Trump.

Take a breath and think about what you're saying here.

And yep, violation of the whistleblower act is going to carry over to the next POTUS. And you think it's everyone's fault but Trumps. Just stop.

[a fan]

How many whistleblowers has Nunes burned ?
Schiff is offering up this whistleblower.
His career (& life) will never be the same again.

This is Schiff's fault? So the Director can break the law, not turn over the complaint, and you think a p*ssed off intel committee member is the problem?

FFS man. You are totally lost.

[Typical Lax Dad]

That’s priceless Gowdy. Rules apply to other guy. Nunes is a sphinx, I suppose. Trey should read the Mueller Report.

Nunes is supposedly a champion of whistle blowing or so it was claimed by Old Sycophants

How many whistleblowers has Nunes burned ?
Schiff is offering up this whistleblower.
His career (& life) will never be the same again.

Don’t know and don’t care.

[foreverlax]

That’s priceless Gowdy. Rules apply to other guy. Nunes is a sphinx, I suppose. Trey should read the Mueller Report.

Nunes is supposedly a champion of whistle blowing or so it was claimed by Old Sycophants

How many whistleblowers has Nunes burned ?
Schiff is offering up this whistleblower.
His career (& life) will never be the same again.

Burned?? What is the guys name?

Burned means outed, like Chaney and Scooter did.

Name the name or chose a different term.

[old salt]

That’s priceless Gowdy. Rules apply to other guy. Nunes is a sphinx, I suppose. Trey should read the Mueller Report.

Nunes is supposedly a champion of whistle blowing or so it was claimed by Old Sycophants

How many whistleblowers has Nunes burned ?
Schiff is offering up this whistleblower.
His career (& life) will never be the same again.

Burned?? What is the guys name?

Burned means outed, like Chaney and Scooter did.

Name the name or chose a different term.

It's been less than 24 hrs since Schiff ran to the cameras.
You think the whistleblower is not now known within the IC & Exec branch ?
What are the odds his ID remains undisclosed ?
Schiff wants a dog & pony tv hearing.
This ain't DeepThroat meeting W&B in a parking garage.

[a fan]

So what? That's not illegal.

[RedFromMI]

OS needs a refresher of who is doing what. Whistleblower makes complaint to IG (Inspector General). IG reviews claim, and deems that it fits within a law passed just for this purpose. Procedure is to submit to the DNI, who by law is given 7 days to attach comments if he/she so desires, and then is to (shall in the law) submit to the congressional ICs. Acting DNI lets DOJ know and gets told by someone (Barr and or Trump) to not submit and comes up with an extrajudicial reason for doing so). So far Schiff does not know about this, except that the IG sends him (and presumably the Senate committee chair) a letter explaining what happened - the existence of the whistleblower, and a very general sense of the topic. Schiff has no choice but to publicize, as otherwise this stays buried.

Schiff is NOT responsible for the illegal actions of the administration. So to blame him for ANYTHING here is quite a bit of a stretch, to say the least. But given Trump's behavior in the past, it is NOT surprising that reporters who have been following stories like this are able to pounce on them.

If true, this behavior fits exactly the "high crimes and misdemeanors" referred to in the impeachment clause.

[RedFromMI]

Background from WaPo on the whole past Ukrainian mess, and how the Trump/Giuliani claims don't really amount to anything):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... it-months/

[old salt]

OS needs a refresher of who is doing what. Whistleblower makes complaint to IG (Inspector General). IG reviews claim, and deems that it fits within a law passed just for this purpose. Procedure is to submit to the DNI, who by law is given 7 days to attach comments if he/she so desires, and then is to (shall in the law) submit to the congressional ICs. Acting DNI lets DOJ know and gets told by someone (Barr and or Trump) to not submit and comes up with an extrajudicial reason for doing so). So far Schiff does not know about this, except that the IG sends him (and presumably the Senate committee chair) a letter explaining what happened - the existence of the whistleblower, and a very general sense of the topic. Schiff has no choice but to publicize, as otherwise this stays buried.

Schiff is NOT responsible for the illegal actions of the administration. So to blame him for ANYTHING here is quite a bit of a stretch, to say the least. But given Trump's behavior in the past, it is NOT surprising that reporters who have been following stories like this are able to pounce on them.

If true, this behavior fits exactly the "high crimes and misdemeanors" referred to in the impeachment clause.

What is your source about the back & forth between Schiff & the DNI, beyond the letters ?

Run it up the impeachment flag pole & see who salutes.
After all -- that's the objective.

[foreverlax]

That’s priceless Gowdy. Rules apply to other guy. Nunes is a sphinx, I suppose. Trey should read the Mueller Report.

Nunes is supposedly a champion of whistle blowing or so it was claimed by Old Sycophants

How many whistleblowers has Nunes burned ?
Schiff is offering up this whistleblower.
His career (& life) will never be the same again.

Burned?? What is the guys name?

Burned means outed, like Chaney and Scooter did.

Name the name or chose a different term.

It's been less than 24 hrs since Schiff ran to the cameras.BFD - it all could have been avoided. Like most of the crap DOPUS complains about.
You think the whistleblower is not now known within the IC & Exec branch ? don't know, don't care...the WB made the call to blow the whistle, fully understanding the implications. We have no idea motivation, other then what the IG has indicated.
What are the odds his ID remains undisclosed ? Depends. If it's a nothing burger, it may. If they have to go to court, it's public record...unless he gets witness protection
Schiff wants a dog & pony tv hearing.Learned that from Trey, Jordan and the rest of the show boaters..on both sides.
This ain't DeepThroat meeting W&B in a parking garage.More balls of crystal - same as always, we don't know. I'll go with follow the law and process in place and let it play out.

[CU88]

So what? That's not illegal.

Strange, it is as if Old Salt is ignoring you...

[Typical Lax Dad]

OS needs a refresher of who is doing what. Whistleblower makes complaint to IG (Inspector General). IG reviews claim, and deems that it fits within a law passed just for this purpose. Procedure is to submit to the DNI, who by law is given 7 days to attach comments if he/she so desires, and then is to (shall in the law) submit to the congressional ICs. Acting DNI lets DOJ know and gets told by someone (Barr and or Trump) to not submit and comes up with an extrajudicial reason for doing so). So far Schiff does not know about this, except that the IG sends him (and presumably the Senate committee chair) a letter explaining what happened - the existence of the whistleblower, and a very general sense of the topic. Schiff has no choice but to publicize, as otherwise this stays buried.

Schiff is NOT responsible for the illegal actions of the administration. So to blame him for ANYTHING here is quite a bit of a stretch, to say the least. But given Trump's behavior in the past, it is NOT surprising that reporters who have been following stories like this are able to pounce on them.

If true, this behavior fits exactly the "high crimes and misdemeanors" referred to in the impeachment clause.

What is your source about the back & forth between Schiff & the DNI, beyond the letters ?

Run it up the impeachment flag pole & see who salutes.
After all -- that's the objective.

It’s not illegal.

[a fan]

Run it up the impeachment flag pole & see who salutes.
After all -- that's the objective.

You have no defense for this attitude.

You have gone on and on and on and on for years now about how bad leaking of intel is. You INSISTED that there were legal paths for Comey and others to take.

So this whistleblower takes the EXACT, proper, by the books, wholly legal path....and you are STILL acting like the IG (yet another Trump appointment) and a whistleblower---who you don't even freaking know-----is in on FoxNation's tinfoil hat made up conspiracy to bring Trump down.

Trump's crew broke the very whistleblower law that not only protects the the whistleblower, but the very freaking classified intel that was so important to you when it had to do with leaking about Trump's shenanigans. They are telling every Federal employee that there is no legal path available to them. Their only play is to leak classified info. to the Press.

You should be out of your mind over their breaking of the Whistleblower Act, because you've been insisting that the problem this whole time was the illegal leaks. And you should be cheering the whistleblower on for following the laws that for three years, you told us were so important.

I don't get it. I probably never will.

[old salt]

So what? That's not illegal.

Strange, it is as if Old Salt is ignoring you...

No wi-fi at the dog park. ...& I'm not going to be distracted from my first free weekend of Netflix (upgraded cable pkg @ lower fee).

Plz confine your hectoring of me to a single thread/topic or grievance. This redundancy is a waste of time.

Try not to blow a gasket over the weekend. We're just at the start of this story.

[seacoaster]

The Neal and George Show; tonight's episode: Impeachment Much? (or what YA calls ordinary, everyday oppo-research (while using the official functions of the White House and faux diplomacy)):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

"Simply put, the framers viewed the president as a fiduciary, the government of the United States as a sacred trust and the people of the United States as the beneficiaries of that trust. Through the Constitution, the framers imposed upon the president the duty and obligation to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” and made him swear an oath that he would fulfill that duty of faithful execution. They believed that a president would break his oath if he engaged in self-dealing — if he used his powers to put his own interests above the nation’s. That would be the paradigmatic case for impeachment

That’s exactly what appears to be at issue today. A whistleblower in U.S. intelligence lodged a complaint with the intelligence community’s inspector general so alarming that he labeled it of “urgent concern” and alerted the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Though the details remain secret, apparently this much can be gleaned: The complaint is against the president. It concerns a “promise” that the president made, in at least one phone call, to a foreign leader. And it involves Ukraine and possible interference with the next presidential election. The complaint is being brazenly suppressed by the Justice Department — in defiance of a whistleblower law that says, without exception, the complaint “shall” be turned over to Congress.

We also know this: As he admitted Thursday night on CNN, the president’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, has been trying to persuade the Ukrainian government to investigate, among other things, one of Trump’s potential Democratic opponents, former vice president Joe Biden, and Biden’s son Hunter about the latter’s involvement with a Ukrainian gas company.

Trump held up the delivery of $250 million in military assistance to Ukraine, which is under constant threat from neighboring Russia. He had a phone conversation on July 25 with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine. According to the Ukrainian government, the call included a discussion of Ukraine’s need to “complete investigation of corruption cases, which inhibited the interaction between Ukraine and the USA.”

So it appears that the president might have used his official powers — in particular, perhaps the threat of withholding a quarter-billion dollars in military aid — to leverage a foreign government into helping him defeat a potential political opponent in the United States.

If Trump did that, it would be the ultimate impeachable act. Trump has already done more than enough to warrant impeachment and removal with his relentless attempts, on multiple fronts, to sabotage the counterintelligence and criminal investigation by then-special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and to conceal evidence of those attempts. The president’s efforts were impeachable because, in committing those obstructive acts, he put his personal interests above the nation’s: He tried to stop an investigation into whether a hostile foreign power, Russia, tried to interfere with our democracy — simply because he seemed to find it personally embarrassing. Trump breached his duty of faithful execution to the nation not only because he likely broke the law but also because, through his disregard for the law, he put his self-interest first.

The current whistleblowing allegations, however, are even worse. Unlike the allegations of conspiracy with Russia before the 2016 election, these concern Trump’s actions as president, not as a private citizen, and his exercise of presidential powers over foreign policy with Ukraine. Moreover, with Russia, at least there was an attempt to get the facts through the Mueller investigation; here the White House is trying to shut down the entire inquiry from the start — depriving not just the American people, but even congressional intelligence committees, of necessary information.

It is high time for Congress to do its duty, in the manner the framers intended. Given how Trump seems ever bent on putting himself above the law, something like what might have happened between him and Ukraine — abusing presidential authority for personal benefit — was almost inevitable. Yet if that is what occurred, part of the responsibility lies with Congress, which has failed to act on the blatant obstruction that Mueller detailed months ago.

Congressional procrastination has probably emboldened Trump, and it risks emboldening future presidents who might turn out to be of his sorry ilk. To borrow John Dean’s haunting Watergate-era metaphor once again, there is a cancer on the presidency, and cancers, if not removed, only grow. Congress bears the duty to use the tools provided by the Constitution to remove that cancer now, before it’s too late. As Elbridge Gerry put it at the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, “A good magistrate will not fear [impeachments]. A bad one ought to be kept in fear of them.” By now, Congress should know which one Trump is."

[a fan]

The Neal and George Show; tonight's episode: Impeachment Much? (or what YA calls ordinary, everyday oppo-research (while using the official functions of the White House and faux diplomacy)):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

"Simply put, the framers viewed the president as a fiduciary, the government of the United States as a sacred trust and the people of the United States as the beneficiaries of that trust. Through the Constitution, the framers imposed upon the president the duty and obligation to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” and made him swear an oath that he would fulfill that duty of faithful execution. They believed that a president would break his oath if he engaged in self-dealing — if he used his powers to put his own interests above the nation’s. That would be the paradigmatic case for impeachment

That’s exactly what appears to be at issue today. A whistleblower in U.S. intelligence lodged a complaint with the intelligence community’s inspector general so alarming that he labeled it of “urgent concern” and alerted the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Though the details remain secret, apparently this much can be gleaned: The complaint is against the president. It concerns a “promise” that the president made, in at least one phone call, to a foreign leader. And it involves Ukraine and possible interference with the next presidential election. The complaint is being brazenly suppressed by the Justice Department — in defiance of a whistleblower law that says, without exception, the complaint “shall” be turned over to Congress.

We also know this: As he admitted Thursday night on CNN, the president’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, has been trying to persuade the Ukrainian government to investigate, among other things, one of Trump’s potential Democratic opponents, former vice president Joe Biden, and Biden’s son Hunter about the latter’s involvement with a Ukrainian gas company.

Trump held up the delivery of $250 million in military assistance to Ukraine, which is under constant threat from neighboring Russia. He had a phone conversation on July 25 with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine. According to the Ukrainian government, the call included a discussion of Ukraine’s need to “complete investigation of corruption cases, which inhibited the interaction between Ukraine and the USA.”

So it appears that the president might have used his official powers — in particular, perhaps the threat of withholding a quarter-billion dollars in military aid — to leverage a foreign government into helping him defeat a potential political opponent in the United States.

If Trump did that, it would be the ultimate impeachable act.

Even if this is true, there is ZERO chance that Republican voters or their leaders in Congress will care one whit. No chance they'll care.

Look at the reaction to Prestwick. They think it's funny to so much as mention the conflict. Trump has to shoot someone in full view of the public to get impeached. And even then, if the person that he killed was a liberal, neither Republican voters nor their leaders in Congress would care.

I thought conservatives would be livid over meeting with Russian spies. Nope. Waved through. Cheered on. And any protestations were mocked.

I'm counting the days before we get Trump's liberal counterpart with a Democratic Senate. Boy, will it be funny to watch him/her use emergency powers to totally dismantle our Military Industrial Complex, and shut every last overseas base. And then plow all that saved money into domestic socialism. Oh, and fire everyone in the upper management at the FBI and CIA, and replace them with Senate confirmed toadies.

So what? That's not illegal.

[Typical Lax Dad]

The Neal and George Show; tonight's episode: Impeachment Much? (or what YA calls ordinary, everyday oppo-research (while using the official functions of the White House and faux diplomacy)):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

"Simply put, the framers viewed the president as a fiduciary, the government of the United States as a sacred trust and the people of the United States as the beneficiaries of that trust. Through the Constitution, the framers imposed upon the president the duty and obligation to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” and made him swear an oath that he would fulfill that duty of faithful execution. They believed that a president would break his oath if he engaged in self-dealing — if he used his powers to put his own interests above the nation’s. That would be the paradigmatic case for impeachment

That’s exactly what appears to be at issue today. A whistleblower in U.S. intelligence lodged a complaint with the intelligence community’s inspector general so alarming that he labeled it of “urgent concern” and alerted the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Though the details remain secret, apparently this much can be gleaned: The complaint is against the president. It concerns a “promise” that the president made, in at least one phone call, to a foreign leader. And it involves Ukraine and possible interference with the next presidential election. The complaint is being brazenly suppressed by the Justice Department — in defiance of a whistleblower law that says, without exception, the complaint “shall” be turned over to Congress.

We also know this: As he admitted Thursday night on CNN, the president’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, has been trying to persuade the Ukrainian government to investigate, among other things, one of Trump’s potential Democratic opponents, former vice president Joe Biden, and Biden’s son Hunter about the latter’s involvement with a Ukrainian gas company.

Trump held up the delivery of $250 million in military assistance to Ukraine, which is under constant threat from neighboring Russia. He had a phone conversation on July 25 with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine. According to the Ukrainian government, the call included a discussion of Ukraine’s need to “complete investigation of corruption cases, which inhibited the interaction between Ukraine and the USA.”

So it appears that the president might have used his official powers — in particular, perhaps the threat of withholding a quarter-billion dollars in military aid — to leverage a foreign government into helping him defeat a potential political opponent in the United States.

If Trump did that, it would be the ultimate impeachable act.

Even if this is true, there is ZERO chance that Republican voters or their leaders in Congress will care one whit. No chance they'll care.

Look at the reaction to Prestwick. They think it's funny to so much as mention the conflict. Trump has to shoot someone in full view of the public to get impeached. And even then, if the person that he killed was a liberal, neither Republican voters nor their leaders in Congress would care.

I thought conservatives would be livid over meeting with Russian spies. Nope. Waved through. Cheered on. And any protestations were mocked.

I'm counting the days before we get Trump's liberal counterpart with a Democratic Senate. Boy, will it be funny to watch him/her use emergency powers to totally dismantle our Military Industrial Complex, and shut every last overseas base. And then plow all that saved money into domestic socialism. Oh, and fire everyone in the upper management at the FBI and CIA, and replace them with Senate confirmed toadies.

So what? That's not illegal.

It’s coming. Not sure when but it’s coming.

[cradleandshoot]

The Neal and George Show; tonight's episode: Impeachment Much? (or what YA calls ordinary, everyday oppo-research (while using the official functions of the White House and faux diplomacy)):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

"Simply put, the framers viewed the president as a fiduciary, the government of the United States as a sacred trust and the people of the United States as the beneficiaries of that trust. Through the Constitution, the framers imposed upon the president the duty and obligation to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” and made him swear an oath that he would fulfill that duty of faithful execution. They believed that a president would break his oath if he engaged in self-dealing — if he used his powers to put his own interests above the nation’s. That would be the paradigmatic case for impeachment

That’s exactly what appears to be at issue today. A whistleblower in U.S. intelligence lodged a complaint with the intelligence community’s inspector general so alarming that he labeled it of “urgent concern” and alerted the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Though the details remain secret, apparently this much can be gleaned: The complaint is against the president. It concerns a “promise” that the president made, in at least one phone call, to a foreign leader. And it involves Ukraine and possible interference with the next presidential election. The complaint is being brazenly suppressed by the Justice Department — in defiance of a whistleblower law that says, without exception, the complaint “shall” be turned over to Congress.

We also know this: As he admitted Thursday night on CNN, the president’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, has been trying to persuade the Ukrainian government to investigate, among other things, one of Trump’s potential Democratic opponents, former vice president Joe Biden, and Biden’s son Hunter about the latter’s involvement with a Ukrainian gas company.

Trump held up the delivery of $250 million in military assistance to Ukraine, which is under constant threat from neighboring Russia. He had a phone conversation on July 25 with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine. According to the Ukrainian government, the call included a discussion of Ukraine’s need to “complete investigation of corruption cases, which inhibited the interaction between Ukraine and the USA.”

So it appears that the president might have used his official powers — in particular, perhaps the threat of withholding a quarter-billion dollars in military aid — to leverage a foreign government into helping him defeat a potential political opponent in the United States.

If Trump did that, it would be the ultimate impeachable act.

Even if this is true, there is ZERO chance that Republican voters or their leaders in Congress will care one whit. No chance they'll care.

Look at the reaction to Prestwick. They think it's funny to so much as mention the conflict. Trump has to shoot someone in full view of the public to get impeached. And even then, if the person that he killed was a liberal, neither Republican voters nor their leaders in Congress would care.

I thought conservatives would be livid over meeting with Russian spies. Nope. Waved through. Cheered on. And any protestations were mocked.

I'm counting the days before we get Trump's liberal counterpart with a Democratic Senate. Boy, will it be funny to watch him/her use emergency powers to totally dismantle our Military Industrial Complex, and shut every last overseas base. And then plow all that saved money into domestic socialism. Oh, and fire everyone in the upper management at the FBI and CIA, and replace them with Senate confirmed toadies.

So what? That's not illegal.

It’s coming. Not sure when but it’s coming.

You actually believe Trump is a conservative??? What you been smoking?