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.

 

The whistleblower

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: AttitudeProblem
a reply to: dfnj2015

How dare Trump use his power to expose corruption ... orange man bad




Look up Paul Manafort and Javelin missiles. Some reports are coming out that will also be an issue in the impeachment. It looks like Trump used his powers to cover up corruption. There was 4 separate investigations ongoing into Maniforts dealings in Ukraine. They were all dropped and an official said it was because they didn't want to anger US top government officials. Yada yada, something about witholding Javelin missiles.



Please, I'm begging you Republicans to indict any Democrat. Please stop being so incompetent and put the people breaking our laws in jail!




posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015
had you opened with that truth many would not have participated in this sham

why bother



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: shooterbrody

If fines were paid then justice was served. Do you agree if someone is found breaking the law they should pay for their crimes?


then wait for the fec to fine him

fair is fair
except when the dems go after trump


I think the FEC should fine Trump the same way they did for Obama. We agree.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: underwerks



Correct. Using funds allocated by Congress to force a foreign nation to look into something involving a political opponent is, though.

perhaps your timeline is confused?
were those funds held at the time of the call?

textbook......right?







Yes they were. Specifically on orders from Donald Trump.


President Trump told his acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, to hold back almost $400 million in military aid for Ukraine at least a week before a phone call in which Trump is said to have pressured the Ukrainian president to investigate the son of former vice president Joe Biden, according to three senior administration officials.


Link

It isn’t me who has my timeline confused. Also we aren’t even touching on the laws that were violated if Donald Trump hid a politically damaging phone call on that classified server. Specifically EO 13526 Part 1 and 28 CFR 17:22.

If you don’t care that Trump violates the law because he’s a Republican, just be honest and say it. Trying to obfuscate the timeline of events and arguing that he didn’t break the law isn’t a winnable argument for you guys.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: dfnj2015
had you opened with that truth many would not have participated in this sham
why bother


I am open to the truth. You are the one who denying the evidence. Do you deny the people below did said what is quoted under oath:

Sullivan: "Soliciting investigations into a domestic political opponent, I don't think that would be in accord with our values"

A week later, Taylor was even more concerned, texting Sondland: "As I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."

Vindman: "I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine"

Vindman: "I am a patriot, and it is my sacred duty and honor to advance and defend OUR country, irrespective of party or politics"

People said these quotes under oath. This is NOT left wing spin propaganda. This is documentary evidence for what was actually said.

Now we may have different conclusions about what this means. I think it means Trump is guilty of classic quid pro quo corruption which we have federal laws against. But it is not for you or me to judge. The Senate will be the judge if the evidence is strong enough. Again, my opinion, it is.


edit on 4-11-2019 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: shooterbrody

If fines were paid then justice was served. Do you agree if someone is found breaking the law they should pay for their crimes?


then wait for the fec to fine him

fair is fair
except when the dems go after trump


I think the FEC should fine Trump the same way they did for Obama. We agree.

so then you agree the impeachment investigation is a sham?

nice



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

I think the timeline is important. Again, Trump may be found completely innocent. Or Trump broke federal law.

April and May
Through his personal emissary, Rudy Giuliani, Donald Trump applies pressure on Ukraine to announce investigations tied to Joe Biden and his son Hunter. The Ukrainian president-elect, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, meets with subordinates on 7 May to discuss how to stay out of it.

10 July
At a dramatic White House meeting, Trump emissaries ask top Ukrainian officials to investigate Biden, shocking US national security officials. According to multiple accounts, after ambassador Gordon Sondland makes the Biden ask, the then national security adviser, John Bolton, abruptly terminates the meeting, later calling it a “drug deal”.

Mid-July
The Office of Management of the Budget informs the Pentagon and state department that Trump has suspended $391m in military aid for Ukraine.

25 July Trump speaks on the phone with Zelenskiy
Trump reminds Zelenskiy that “the United States has been very, very good to Ukraine” and then asks for a “favor”. Trump wants Ukraine to announce investigations designed to make Joe Biden look bad and to cast doubt on Russian tampering in the 2016 US election.

Early August
High-level Ukrainian officials are made aware of the suspension of US military aid meant to help them in their fight against Russian forces, according to a New York Times report.

12 August
A whistleblower complaint against Trump is secretly filed to the office of the inspector general of the intelligence community. For six weeks, the Trump administration will block Congress from obtaining the complaint.

1 September
Bilateral meetings in Warsaw, Poland. Sondland tells Zelenskiy assistant Andriy Yermak “that the security assistance money would not come until President Zelenskiy committed to pursue the Burisma investigation”, diplomat Bill Taylor testified. Burisma is a gas company that formerly employed Hunter Biden.

9 September
Taylor texts ambassador Gordon Sondland: “As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign.”

11 September
The military aid for Ukraine is released.

24 September
Pelosi announces a formal impeachment inquiry, accusing Trump of “a betrayal of his oath of office, a betrayal of our national security and betrayal of the integrity of our elections”.

www.theguardian.com...



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

www.vox.com...


The Trump administration initially told Congress it was releasing the aid to Ukraine on February 28. It repeated that assertion to Congress again on May 23, but failed to explain to lawmakers but struggled to explain — both publicly and to the lawmakers who approved the aid — exactly why the funds were withheld.

long before the call

nice try tho.....



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: shooterbrody

If fines were paid then justice was served. Do you agree if someone is found breaking the law they should pay for their crimes?


then wait for the fec to fine him

fair is fair
except when the dems go after trump


I think the FEC should fine Trump the same way they did for Obama. We agree.

so then you agree the impeachment investigation is a sham?

nice


No, that is not what I said. I said anyone who breaks the law should not get away from it. I think justice is important.

Please, if any Democrat has broken the law put the effer in jail. I am begging you to!



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:14 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Who are you calling a republican?



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: dfnj2015
had you opened with that truth many would not have participated in this sham
why bother


I am open to the truth. You are the one who denying the evidence. Do you deny the people below did said what is quoted under oath:

Sullivan: "Soliciting investigations into a domestic political opponent, I don't think that would be in accord with our values"

A week later, Taylor was even more concerned, texting Sondland: "As I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."

Vindman: "I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine"

Vindman: "I am a patriot, and it is my sacred duty and honor to advance and defend OUR country, irrespective of party or politics"

People said these quotes under oath. This is NOT left wing spin propaganda. This is documentary evidence for what was actually said.

Now we may have different conclusions about what this means. I think it means Trump is guilty of classic quid pro quo corruption which we have federal laws against. But it is not for you or me to judge. The Senate will be the judge if the evidence is strong enough. Again, my opinion, it is.


none of those people get to make the actual decisions
potus does
their opinions of direction of foreign policy do not make his actions illegal

they sound like simple disgruntled employees
especially when the alledged "law" broken is usually dealt with by paying a fine
you dont even really have that

the money was decided to be released in feb
the call was in the summer

no matching time line

and then there is the issue of the "whistleblower" and schiff
as concerned as you are about "corruption" that meeting stinks like 3 day old left out fish



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: underwerks

www.vox.com...


The Trump administration initially told Congress it was releasing the aid to Ukraine on February 28. It repeated that assertion to Congress again on May 23, but failed to explain to lawmakers but struggled to explain — both publicly and to the lawmakers who approved the aid — exactly why the funds were withheld.

long before the call

nice try tho.....



Saying you are going to do something is much different than actually doing it. That was just buying time. The funds weren't released until Sept. 11. Two days after the whistleblower came to light.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: shooterbrody

If fines were paid then justice was served. Do you agree if someone is found breaking the law they should pay for their crimes?


then wait for the fec to fine him

fair is fair
except when the dems go after trump


I think the FEC should fine Trump the same way they did for Obama. We agree.

so then you agree the impeachment investigation is a sham?

nice


No, that is not what I said. I said anyone who breaks the law should not get away from it. I think justice is important.

Please, if any Democrat has broken the law put the effer in jail. I am begging you to!

and if he were fined and it was paid this would be over
so the impeachment is a sham



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: underwerks

www.vox.com...


The Trump administration initially told Congress it was releasing the aid to Ukraine on February 28. It repeated that assertion to Congress again on May 23, but failed to explain to lawmakers but struggled to explain — both publicly and to the lawmakers who approved the aid — exactly why the funds were withheld.

long before the call

nice try tho.....



Did you even read the article you linked? The first sentence:


Trump ordered the aid held just ahead of a call with Ukraine’s president.


Then it goes on to link the same article I linked by the WaPo in my comment above. To say:


But thanks to reports in the Washington Post and New York Times this week, we now have a little more information. Mick Mulvaney, the dual-hatted acting White House chief of staff and director of the Office of Management and Budget, told leaders at the State Department and Pentagon in mid-July that Trump wanted the money withheld because he had “concerns” about the aid’s necessity. Those departments were instructed to inform members of Congress with questions about the delay that the money was coming but that its disbursement had been held up by “interagency process.” Those questions did come, but lawmakers received little information.


Your link doesn’t back up what you say at all. I urge everyone to read it and marvel at the cognitive dissonance it requires to believe that supports your argument.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Admitted

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: underwerks

www.vox.com...


The Trump administration initially told Congress it was releasing the aid to Ukraine on February 28. It repeated that assertion to Congress again on May 23, but failed to explain to lawmakers but struggled to explain — both publicly and to the lawmakers who approved the aid — exactly why the funds were withheld.

long before the call

nice try tho.....



Saying you are going to do something is much different than actually doing it. That was just buying time. The funds weren't released until Sept. 11. Two days after the whistleblower came to light.


so then "saying you are going to do something" on a call should be treated the same?

or just when trump says it?

nice try



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Admitted

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: underwerks

www.vox.com...


The Trump administration initially told Congress it was releasing the aid to Ukraine on February 28. It repeated that assertion to Congress again on May 23, but failed to explain to lawmakers but struggled to explain — both publicly and to the lawmakers who approved the aid — exactly why the funds were withheld.

long before the call

nice try tho.....



Saying you are going to do something is much different than actually doing it. That was just buying time. The funds weren't released until Sept. 11. Two days after the whistleblower came to light.


so then "saying you are going to do something" on a call should be treated the same?

or just when trump says it?

nice try



He was actively withholding funds. That wasn't just talk.



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks



Trump ordered the aid held just ahead of a call with Ukraine’s president.

with NO evidence to back up that claim
or to disprove the announcements the money would be dispersed in feb and may



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks
Quick question...how is he a political rival to trump if nobody has been even selected to be the main person to run for president for the next election?

I dont think trump has even officially announced he is running yet, has he?

I try to stay out of the mud pit, but this always bugged me with the political rival thing...



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: shooterbrody

I get it Trump is your man. But there does seem to be pretty good evidence Trump broke the law. Check out the quotes below from people who have testified. This is not made-up left wing spin. These are actual quotes:

Sullivan: "Soliciting investigations into a domestic political opponent, I don't think that would be in accord with our values"

A week later, Taylor was even more concerned, texting Sondland: "As I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."

Vindman: "I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine"

Vindman: "I am a patriot, and it is my sacred duty and honor to advance and defend OUR country, irrespective of party or politics"

Holding back military aid, putting our country and troops at risk for personal political gain is the heart of the matter. From the evidence there seems to be a lot of quotes and testimony claiming this actually happened.

Trump may be found innocent from the hearings. But so far from the existing evidence it looks like he's going to be impeached.



Shouldn't these exact statements be cause for Obama, Clinton, and Biden to be investigated?

Considering that is exactly they did to Trump, and Ukraine.
edit on 4-11-2019 by Notoneofyou because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2019 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015


Or, what if Trump did use the "machinery of government" to help Trump influence the 2020 election?


Trump did his job. If doing his job helps the voters make a better choice, more power to us!


The laws states people in government cannot use government for their own personal gain.


So you think Biden is guilty as sin too, eh? In which case, it's all on Biden that his loss becomes Trump's personal gain.


Is Trump exempt from having to follow the law or not?


The Democrats apparently think so. They sure have a problem with Trump conducting the official business of the USA and enforcing the law regarding diplomatic relations with other heads of nations, as well as criminal corruption on behalf of the previous Vice Present.

And they certainly seem to think that Biden is exempt from having to follow the law, given their laser focus on their imagined wrongdoing on Trump's part, while protecting Biden from his criminal behavior.


It seems to me Republicans never answer the real question. If Trump is shown to have broken federal laws should he be held accountable and why not?


First things first... it seems that Democrats are obscuring the real question: If Biden is suspected of breaking federal laws, should he be investigated? Why not? And if Biden is shown to have broken federal laws, should Biden be held accountable? And why not?

Second, if Biden is shown to have broken federal laws, then did Trump break laws or did Trump ENFORCE laws? Why or why not?



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join