It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Schiff Directing Witnesses Not To Answer GOP Questions

page: 7
48
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Either way the article is BS and the OP Source ACTUAL Fake News.

The whistleblower has not and will not testify.

The GOP did ask Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman to list who he spoke with about his concerns apart from WH Oficials and Counsel...aka Anyone at CIA?

Vindman was very likely one of the Whistle Blowers 12+ people he cited. The GOP are trying to triangulate.



One question that Schiff barred a witness from answering reportedly came from Ohio Republican Congressman Jim Jordan who attempted to asked the initial anonymous “whistleblower” who they spoke with following the infamous July phone call between Trump and Ukrainian president.


He didn't ask the Whistleblower anything. The WB never testified.
edit on 31-10-2019 by Extorris because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Someone answer me this: Why is the "whistleblower" coming forward with 2nd or 3rd hand information supposedly on behalf of someone else?

And why hasn't the entire department tasked with transcribing these calls come forward with concerns?



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Chance321

It is a sham. People in the left are forgetting the President executes and enforces the laws of the land, and the President is the one presiding over it. Democrats don't want the President to investigate an actual crime in which Democrats/the DNC, Hillary, Obama, and Biden worked with the Ukrainian government to affect the U.S. elections in 2016. We didn't make it up, the current Ukrainian authorities told us so, and had been trying to bring their evidence of this corruption, which includes Biden's bribery to get his son off an investigation into the corruption he was involved with at Burisma Holdings.

Since the President's executive branch is supposed to execute, and enforce the laws of these United States, that's what he has been trying to do. But Democrats, including Biden, Obama, Hillary, and the majority of the DNC don't want that investigation to occur because they would be found guilty.

The Ukrainians themselves have said that the former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine was not giving them visas to bring that evidence to us. That same ambassador was put in her job by Obama, and has been anti-Trump from the start. The President can fire and replace whomever he wants, but Democrats now want to claim that by him firing that ambassador that he broke a law that only exists in the minds of Democrats... OBAMA FIRED EVERYONE, and replaced them with loyalists to him, which is why POTUS Trump has been having problems with so many "Obama officials."

How easy do leftists forget that the Obama administration used LIES to spy on the Trump campaign, and on EVERYONE close to Trump without any evidence of any crime. People like Manafort were sentenced for crimes committed before he was part of the Trump campaign, and Rosestein himself had stated in 2005 that the state was not going to prosecute Manafort for these same crimes... Not to mention that everyone linked to Clinton was given immunity by Mueller for doing THE SAME CRIMES MANAFORT COMMITTED...

But now that there is real evidence that the Obama administration, the DNC, Biden and Hillary Clinton all colluded with Ukraine and committed REAL CRIMES, of course no one in the left wants the POTUS to investigate these crimes, and punish those responsible...





edit on 31-10-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

I gave a direct link to what the form said before it was changed. The RINOs can claim whatever they want, the part about what was required CLEARLY states "FIRST -HAND INFORMATION REQUIRED.." Throughout that section it CLEARLY stated FIRST -HAND KNOWLEDGE IS A REQUIREMENT...

Did the syntax of the English language suddenly changed just because the Obamatrons still embedded in government say so?... Did somehow "requirements" become "non-requirements" simply because Trump is POTUS?...

"In order to find an urgent concern "credible," the IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee's second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing.
..."



Icwpa Form 401 (24may18)

Throughout the entirely of that section does it clearly state what was required, and what couldn't be viewed as a whistleblower concern...

To me it seems that since Trump has been POTUS the left, and RINO globalists want to claim that the syntax of the English language has changed, and somehow "requirements" no longer means "requirements" in the English language...



edit on 31-10-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 07:51 PM
link   

...
One question that Schiff barred a witness from answering reportedly came from Ohio Republican Congressman Jim Jordan, who asked Vindman to disclose the individuals with whom he shared information about the July 25 phone call between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky.
...

thefederalist.com...

The "original whistleblower" was the one whom shared his claims with Vindman, but it seems Vindman then shared those claims with others. Those other individuals were the ones that Jim Jordan asked about, and not about the original "whistleblower..." Why is it that democrats don't want to give to republicans the identities of those other people either?... This means those other people can't be questioned by Republicans.

This is nothing but a sham. If Republicans can't question those people IN CLOSED DOOR INVESTIGATIONS, which means the identity of those people can be kept from the public, there is no way to corroborate or refute these claims...



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 08:35 PM
link   
After going through my head what could have gone wrong about the differences in the comments by Jim Jordan, it seems that the mistake was mine. I heard this news on tv and looked it up online. The first links that came up in my search seemed to have had the comment by Jim Jordan wrong. I wasn't aware of this, but copied the wrong comment and kept looking online for other links. When i saw the Federalist link I thought it was the exact same comment. I though I had copied it from the Federalist, but since I had several websites open it seems that i did not copy the comment as it was on the Federalist. So, yes, the mistake was mine. However, it was an honest mistake and I don't appreciate the claims by some members, those same members whom never admit when they are themselves wrong, that i must have done it on purpose.

So my apologies for the mistake.



posted on Oct, 31 2019 @ 10:47 PM
link   
Um...third world countries and banana republics do this


Am I still living in the States?



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 12:29 AM
link   
Kangaroo court through and through.

Anyone participating in, supporting, or defending this travesty is actively engaging in the destruction of the United States of America.

This charade is an act of war.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: GenerationGap

Even if it gets to it, an impeachment is not an act of war. Nor will it result in the destruction of the USA.

There was an impeachment about 20 years ago. No war. The nation survived.

edit on 11/1/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 02:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Even if it gets to it?... You have been behind the "let's impeach the POTUS" and you have swallowed every lie told to you by left-wing leaders and the left-wing media... Since Trump became POTUS the left were already talking about "we should impeach him" and have been using lies, exaggerations, and more lies.

What you are rooting for is to affect the U.S. elections and depose a duly elected POTUS with LIES...
We have the transcript of the call, and NOWHERE did he make a "quid pro quo" like Biden made. Yet you all want to ignore real crimes committed by the DNC, Obama, Biden, Hillary, et al, and instead want to depose the duly elected POTUS by using lies...

I have asked every left-winger in these forums whom claimed "he made quid pro quo to the Ukrainian President" when we have the transcript of the call, to excerpt from the transcript the "quid pro quo," and no one has done that. The Ukrainian president himself even stated he wasn't forced and they didn't even know that the SALE OF Javelin MISSILES had been put on hold. BTW, the Obama administration made PERMANENT the hold up of the sale of those same Javelin missiles.

Trump Gave Ukraine What Obama Withheld

You want to depose the duly elected POTUS simply because you don't like his politics, and that is not okay, and yes it can lead to a new civil war if socialists passing for democrats get their way.




edit on 1-11-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
To me it seems that since Trump has been POTUS the left, and RINO globalists want to claim that the syntax of the English language has changed, and somehow "requirements" no longer means "requirements" in the English language.

Are you seriously not able to understand that form is not the law? The underlying law that the form relies on does not require first-hand knowledge.

That is a serious problem, and should be addressed - but it is the reality.

The form was actually asking for more than the law actually required.
edit on 1-11-2019 by tanstaafl because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: GenerationGap

Even if it gets to it, an impeachment is not an act of war. Nor will it result in the destruction of the USA.

There was an impeachment about 20 years ago. No war. The nation survived.


Democracy Dies in Darkness.

Secret witnesses. Secret hearings. Secret rules.

You've got to impeach before you can see the evidence.

Impeachment is not the problem. The way this kangaroo process is being carried out is the act of war. Defending this charade... Sorry Phage, you're too smart to claim ignorance. You're a traitor. You're a seditionist. You're a tool in the overthrow of this nation.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 08:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl
...
That is a serious problem, and should be addressed - but it is the reality.

The form was actually asking for more than the law actually required.


blah, blahblah, blahblah... Show us PROOF of that law you claim required less instead of inventing what you claim... So, the whistleblower form was asking more than a law, that exists only in your head, required?...





edit on 1-11-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Vindman's boss, Tim Morrison testified (yesterday), and he did hear the call unlike Vindman, and stated that he didn't hear anything bad, but was "concerned" someone could leak the call, as democrats have been doing as they seek anything they can use to try to depose the duly elected POTUS.

Donald Trump thanks Tim Morrison for his 'honesty' after he told impeachment inquiry he didn't think there was anything wrong with the Ukraine phone call

Vindman was working with Biden on Ukraine, conflict of interest anyone?


...
Michael Atkinson, the Intelligence Community's inspector general, told members of Congress that the whistleblower had a "professional tie" to a 2020 Democratic candidate. He had written earlier that while the whistleblower's complaint was credible, he had shown "some indicia of an arguable political bias ... in favor of a rival political candidate."

A retired CIA officer told the Washington Examiner, “From everything we know about the whistleblower and his work in the executive branch then, there is absolutely no doubt he would have been working with Biden when he was vice president."

As an experienced CIA official on the NSC with the deep knowledge of Ukraine that he demonstrated in his complaint, it is probable that the whistleblower briefed Biden and likely that he accompanied him on Air Force Two during at least one of the six visits the 2020 candidate made to the country.
...


Joe Biden worked with whistleblower when he was vice president, officials reveal

Is it possible Vindman, whom was born in Ukraine alongside his twin brother, also have ties to the corruption in which Joe and Hunter Biden were involved in? Could that be the reason why Vindman claims "he is concerned about what POTUS Trump said wanting to investigate a U.S. citizen"? Is Vindman linked to the corruption of Ukraine and Joe/Hunter Biden"? There is no evidence POTUS Trump said what Vindman claims, and Vindman's boss, who did listen to the whole call, said he didn't hear what Vindman claims happened.






edit on 1-11-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 09:15 PM
link   
a reply to: GenerationGap

These people want to hide the so called "whistleblower" because they don't want Republicans asking him questions. Since this whistleblower's claims are being used to illegally impeach the POTUS, he should not be a hidden witness. Instead he should be questioned by republicans because the POTUS has a right to due process, and to know whom is accusing him of these claims so the POTUS's defense can prepare.



posted on Nov, 2 2019 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: tanstaafl
...
That is a serious problem, and should be addressed - but it is the reality.

The form was actually asking for more than the law actually required.


blah, blahblah, blahblah... Show us PROOF of that law you claim required less instead of inventing what you claim... So, the whistleblower form was asking more than a law, that exists only in your head, required?

Had you asked nicely, I'd have been happy to provide a link proving this.

In fact I was planning on coming back and doing so.

But after that rude nonsensical rant, nah, I'll just let you razzle in your own dazzle.



posted on Nov, 2 2019 @ 10:09 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

Naa, you are only making more excuses not to have to provide evidence. Nice try.



posted on Nov, 3 2019 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: tanstaafl

Naa, you are only making more excuses not to have to provide evidence. Nice try.

You do realize that it is pretty easy to look this up, right? You might wanna go easy on the self-righteous denigrations, before you end up looking even more foolish than you do already.



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join