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.

 

BOOM! Mollie Hemingway named the whistleblower Eric Ciamella on FOX News! Fist time on MSM?

page: 3
27
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 06:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Goedhardt

GOOD!

More openness, never less.

So they can shoot the messenger?
This is like disputing the amount of your water bill based on who your mail carrier is.




posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 06:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Goedhardt

GOOD!

More openness, never less.

So they can shoot the messenger?
This is like disputing the amount of your water bill based on who your mail carrier is.


It would be more like finding out the guy that broke into your house and stole your dog was the city pound patrol.

Lolz🤪



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa
Yeah about first hand knowledge...
Ya know, trump had some lawyers read the "transcript" and he is telling us they say its perfect.
Did you happen to catch that? I saw it on one of those chopper in the background mad rush answer some questions with crazy nonsense moments. He said those lawyers said the call was perfect
These lawyers that he hired have no first hand knowledge of the call either but their opinion is good while everybody else's is wrong?
Yeah that's logic.

That's so idiotic because there were people who were working in the white house who talked to people who were listening to the call and the transcripts of the depositions from these staffers are saying exactly the same thing.
So no its not important that this person is endangered just to prove a point.
How bout he answers the information that is being revealed by his own staff who work there every day whether they actually heard the call first hand or not?
You seem to think that everybody is lying for some reason even though these are trump's people.
Why?"




edit on 11122019 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 06:57 AM
link   
The whistleblower’s statement was examined and determined to be credible by the ICIG, was passed to Congress as required by law, and is protected by anonymity, again, by law.

Anything to the contrary here is false.



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 06:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Lt. Col. Vindman has direct knowledge of the call between Trump and Zelensky and confirms the statements of the whistleblower.



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 07:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Sillyolme

Lt. Col. Vindman has direct knowledge of the call between Trump and Zelensky and confirms the statements of the whistleblower.


So does that confirm that Vindman is the illegal leaker?

Why wont Schiff let Vindman testify in public??????

Lolz🤪



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

The whistleblowers attorney has filed a cease and desist order with the white house legal council saying that if any harm comes to his client the responsibility rests squarely on trump's shoulders.



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 07:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Scepticaldem

You cant read his transcripts from his deposition?

That's out there.

Oh I know... they doctored the transcripts. Like that is how this process has always gone. Everyone is a liar and a cheat these days right?

Two people who have already been deposed will be re-interviewed on tv starting tomorrow.
Are you going to watch?



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 07:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I've seen the comments on his testimony I have not read it but its over a thousand pages so I probably wont read it.
The summation from legal experts is good enough. If I need to really make a point I can read it. I've read books that were over a thousand pages before. Takes about a week though.
Point is if his testimony said anything other than what is being reported I think he would have spoken up by now.



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 07:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Gryphon66

I've seen the comments on his testimony I have not read it but its over a thousand pages so I probably wont read it.
The summation from legal experts is good enough. If I need to really make a point I can read it. I've read books that were over a thousand pages before. Takes about a week though.
Point is if his testimony said anything other than what is being reported I think he would have spoken up by now.


I’ve read a significant portion of it. He is a good and honorable American. Those who criticize him for telling the truth, less so.



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 07:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Scepticaldem

Where are you getting that he doesnt plan on having him testify publicly?
Maybe I missed something, but I've only heard who they are planning to have this week.



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 08:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

It's hard for me to get my head around this trashing of people who were always looked up to as shining examples of humanity.
It confuses me.



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 08:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66
Yes. The summation of this is anyone who testifies under oath before congress is lying and anyone who refuses to testify under subpoena of congress are protecting the truth.
That and

Its not perfect but its not impeachable.



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Krakatoa
Yeah about first hand knowledge...
Ya know, trump had some lawyers read the "transcript" and he is telling us they say its perfect.
Did you happen to catch that? I saw it on one of those chopper in the background mad rush answer some questions with crazy nonsense moments. He said those lawyers said the call was perfect
These lawyers that he hired have no first hand knowledge of the call either but their opinion is good while everybody else's is wrong?
Yeah that's logic.

That's so idiotic because there were people who were working in the white house who talked to people who were listening to the call and the transcripts of the depositions from these staffers are saying exactly the same thing.
So no its not important that this person is endangered just to prove a point.
How bout he answers the information that is being revealed by his own staff who work there every day whether they actually heard the call first hand or not?
You seem to think that everybody is lying for some reason even though these are trump's people.
Why?"



Let me simplify this for your silly mind.

If you are accused of some high crime or misdemeanor, by someone you don't know and cannot question, we should accept that accusation as true and not let you or your legal defense team question them at all. So, in this case you need to prove your innocence instead of the accuser needing to prove your guilt.


Yeah, uhmm, that is not how the system should work.


edit on 11/12/2019 by Krakatoa because: fixed spelling errors



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha




And, what if one his supporters retaliates? Will Trump go down for that?

What if one of his supporters retaliates against one of this man's family members? Will Trump go down for that?


The left should've asked themselves these questions 3 years ago before they started attacking anyone with a different political opinion than themselves. The hypocrisy from the left has been shocking it's so in your face, so I wasn't to surprised by your worries of retaliation. If it happens, I'll chalk it up as the left getting a dose of their own medicine.



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 08:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: tinner07
Why does the WB even matter now?

You are all caught up in that...why? cuz you have nothing else.


Sounds like someone finally learned the whistleblowers background...

The whistleblower is everything sport. It shows the Democrats are trying to impeach Trump because they have no hope of winning in 2020 and not because of corruption.

Just last week you all said he was everything and wouldn't even mention his name like Voldemort. Yet it was still public knowledge.

This week he "doesn't matter"?
He started this whole fiasco!

This is why you all have zero credibility. You all can't stick with one argument because your goalposts keep moving.

One more thing. It's clear Eric isn't a whistleblower. He's just another disgruntled Democrats. Therefore Trump should have the opportunity to face his accusers like every other American....
edit on 12-11-2019 by JAY1980 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Remember when it took actual first hand knowledge to be a whistleblower. Funny how the rules were changed in order to allow a documented political adversary to provide second or third hand knowledge, and be considered a whistleblower. Then the adversarial political party attempts to protect the individual, and even make statements that the other party wouldn't be permitted to question the individual. If you're using the statements of an individual as backing for the impeachment of a president of the U.S.A., then they should be required to provide their proof, and not just continue to receive cover (and concealment, though whistleblowers are not entitled to anonymity) in order to continue to drum up "News Stories" for their friendly media backers!

It really does seem that the rules of law do not exist for some, but are followed to the smallest detail for others!



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: pyguy
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Remember when it took actual first hand knowledge to be a whistleblower. Funny how the rules were changed in order to allow a documented political adversary to provide second or third hand knowledge, and be considered a whistleblower. Then the adversarial political party attempts to protect the individual, and even make statements that the other party wouldn't be permitted to question the individual. If you're using the statements of an individual as backing for the impeachment of a president of the U.S.A., then they should be required to provide their proof, and not just continue to receive cover (and concealment, though whistleblowers are not entitled to anonymity) in order to continue to drum up "News Stories" for their friendly media backers!

It really does seem that the rules of law do not exist for some, but are followed to the smallest detail for others!


There’s plenty of first-hand knowledge of the contents of Trump’s call to Zelensky. What are you talking about?

Besides that EVERYTHING THE WHISTLEBLOWER and other witnesses have claimed is TRUE based on what the White House and President Trump have said THEMSELVES??

Where do you guys get these paltry arguments?



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 10:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Gryphon66

It's hard for me to get my head around this trashing of people who were always looked up to as shining examples of humanity.
It confuses me.

except for general flynn.......right.....

lol
caw caw cough.....



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Gryphon66

It's hard for me to get my head around this trashing of people who were always looked up to as shining examples of humanity.
It confuses me.

except for general flynn.......right.....

lol
caw caw cough.....


You do remember that General Flynn got fired by his own bosses, right?



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join