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.

 

Who is the whistleblower?

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Lumenari

Maybe you are right, I don't know. I am sure if it went to Senate right now he will not be impeached. That may change as the inquiry continues.

From what I have seen he looks guilty, but I know there is a lot that hasn't come out yet. I will just wait and see before I make any predictions on how it will turn out.


From what I have seen there is no crime that he can be charged with yet... the best they have so far is that some people in the diplomatic community disagreed with what Trump did because he didn't do what they told him to do.

Although from someone on the outside looking in, the Democrats have just invested all of their political capital on this venture.

Makes me wonder why.




edit on 5-11-2019 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Bigburgh

He thinks that eventually I will give up on that argument.

I'm a woman.




posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

As someone from the outside, it looks like bribery and extortion.

There was an article about the Trump administration pressuring Ukraine govt to drop 4 investigations on Paul Manifort with promise of Javelin missiles something like a year before.

If that is substantiated then the premise that Trump was after corruption will be completely blown away. So at this time I think it is all fluid as to which way it will go.



posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:50 PM
link   
Too bad the prez of Ukraine has said otherwise.
You know
The one actually involved in the conversation.



posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Lumenari

As someone from the outside, it looks like bribery and extortion.

There was an article about the Trump administration pressuring Ukraine govt to drop 4 investigations on Paul Manifort with promise of Javelin missiles something like a year before.

If that is substantiated then the premise that Trump was after corruption will be completely blown away. So at this time I think it is all fluid as to which way it will go.


Then I guess we will see.

But to the heart of the matter and what caused all this in the first place...

Biden actually DID a quid pro quo deal with the Ukraine and then bragged about it... video evidence is available.

So shouldn't that be investigated?

Because that's all Trump wanted.




posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:52 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody




Too bad the prez of Ukraine has said otherwise.


Actually he didn't.



posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: shooterbrody




Too bad the prez of Ukraine has said otherwise.


Actually he didn't.

No push
No corruption
No pressure

He actually did



posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

Did Obama’s quid pro quo benefit one side of an American election?

Because, like so many have said here, there’s nothing illegal about quid pro quo.

Right?



posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:55 PM
link   
a reply to: opethPA

You're so right...so why is the left leaking what they want to the MSM?



posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

Pretty sure that has been disproved on here several times, but the issue isn't my hill to die on.

I am all for burning down every single dirty politician out there. Left, right, and middle.



posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: shooterbrody




Too bad the prez of Ukraine has said otherwise.


Actually he didn't.


SoOo... got some new news?

Please link for me where the new Ukrainian President said that he felt pressured to reopen the investigation.

Interesting new twist!




posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Lumenari

Did Obama’s quid pro quo benefit one side of an American election?

Because, like so many have said here, there’s nothing illegal about quid pro quo.

Right?


Does something that Obama does that makes him look good mean that he is influencing elections?

Because, like the few leftists left on ATS say, that's an FEC violation.

Right?




posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:58 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

Probably for the same reasons Devin Nunes did, and Trey Gowdy, and the rest of the Republican Yuk-Yuk Gang.

Politics.

/shrug



posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Lumenari

Pretty sure that has been disproved on here several times, but the issue isn't my hill to die on.

I am all for burning down every single dirty politician out there. Left, right, and middle.



Wise of you to walk away from that.

I agree with your second line completely.




posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 08:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

Was Obama running for President in 2016? No?

I’ll take your word on the “leftist/rightest” crap. It’s nonsense to me.

Glad your keeping score. Maybe they’re rename ATS to All Trump Supporters if you’re right, eh?

Do better.




posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 08:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

Not my hill to die on.

Besides I gave up on posting links on here a while back unless it is something mundane like rule of law.

Maybe not you but most people on here refuse to even open them.



posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 08:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Lumenari

Was Obama running for President in 2016? No?

I’ll take your word on the “leftist/rightest” crap. It’s nonsense to me.

Glad your keeping score. Maybe they’re rename ATS to All Trump Supporters if you’re right, eh?

Do better.



Was Hillary running in 2016? Was she a Democrat? No?

Sorry... I was researching the impeachment inquiry the Republicans were doing to Obama for his quid pro quo.

Turning up nothing so far...

Perhaps they didn't see it as an impeachable offense.

As for doing better, I don't have to with you.

I mean, why bother?

I just let you go and you burn your own reputation on ATS...

I don't even have to reply and you keep going and going and going...




posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

What law broken?

Edit to add: I see you already answered this question earlier.

You realize the DOJ/FEC already weighed in on that right? Apparently they didn't agree with you.
edit on 5-11-2019 by elDooberino because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 08:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: elDooberino
a reply to: dfnj2015

What law broken?


He stole the Precious from Queen Hillary.




posted on Nov, 5 2019 @ 11:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: Scepticaldem
Eric Ciaramella.
Skip to 4 min if you want.

"Blowing the Whistle on the Whistleblower"
RealClearPolitics
Error pointed out by AM. Link to TheAmericanSpectator


Ciaramella graduated from a high school that costs $30,000 a year to attend, received his undergraduate degree from Yale, and obtained a master’s from Harvard. A few years after graduation from that tony private high school, the youngster estimated to its alumni magazine of trips to 28 different countries (he admits he lost count).

When others provide you with the best education and pricey junkets to obscure parts of the globe, not getting the president you asked for might come as a terrible blow. So Ciaramella sought to rectify this injustice by anonymously peddling secondhand gossip — false in large part — designed to instigate another round of impeachment discussions. He did so by first going to Congressman Adam Schiff. When you seek to report a federal crime, go to the FBI. When you seek to gin up political trouble, go to Adam Schiff.

This came as the latest instance of the 33-year-old CIA employee using his government position for partisan, political ends.

Ciaramella absconded from the National Security Council after widespread suspicion arose that he leaked information for the purpose of damaging the president he ostensibly served. At that time, Mike Cernovich wrote in an article that Medium.com later removed that “Ciaramella helped draft Susan Rice’s anti-Trump talking points before the Inauguration.” Cernovich described him as “the main force pushing Trump-Russia conspiracy theories.”

Paul Sperry notes that Ciaramella circumvented his chain of command in telling another agency of a meeting between Trump and Russians in the Oval Office a day after James Comey’s firing. This email, referenced in the Mueller report, effectively launched a “Putin fired Comey” narrative depicting the president of the United States as a marionette controlled by the Kremlin.

“And Ciaramella worked with a Democratic National Committee operative who dug up dirt on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election,” Sperry reports, “inviting her into the White House for meetings, former White House colleagues said. The operative, Alexandra Chalupa, a Ukrainian-American who supported Hillary Clinton, led an effort to link the Republican campaign to the Russian government. ‘He knows her. He had her in the White House,’ said one former co-worker, who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter.”

Since it is 100% partisan I believe the whole scam should be exposed.

Seems you are correct
Per Adam Schiff and his threat



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join