US President Donald J. Trump Impeachment Megathread - Democrats commit mass political suicide

On September 24th, 2019, Nanci Pelosi did what everyone expected was some exceptional political posturing -- initiating a formal impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.

The initial "charge," such as it was, was "betraying his oath of office and the nation's security by seeking to enlist a foreign power to tarnish a rival for his own political gain." This, amusingly, was after it was discovered and widely reported on that the DNC had contacted the very same foreign power to attempt to tarnish Trump.

Specifically, this was all based on a rumor that Trump had asked the Ukraine to investigate how a prosecutor investigating Joe Biden's son for corruption had gotten fired, and withheld foreign aid until they had agreed. (He did ask the leader of the Ukraine to investigate what happened with the prosecutor, but did not hold up any foreign aid nor threaten anything of the like.)

Around this time, Trump did something they could not, and still cannot, understand: He publicly turned over all the documents. The transcript of the phone call they claimed showed him committing the crime of blackmailing the Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden for him was released, showing that Trump did nothing wrong. The only reaction the radical left had was arguing over the definition of "transcript" and spouting off a conspiracy theory about official state documents being edited.

At the same time, old video evidence of Joe Biden publicly bragging about blackmailing the Ukraine into NOT investigating his son came to light. Yes, this is exactly what they're accusing Trump of doing. The left is nothing if not subtle. Right after this, evidence came to light that Pelosi, Kerry, and Romney's kids had similar fake jobs in the Ukraine, getting paid ungodly amounts of money and embezzling US foreign aid to the Ukraine -- all things that Trump's Attorney General has openly discussed investigating.

By releasing the transcripts, the DNC was tripped up. Instead of being able to leak information from their secret investigation until November 2020, they were forced to play their hand publicly.

And they had no hand to play. The impeachment accusations came from second and third hand sources -- watercooler talk from Unelected Deep State Analysts with Trump Derangement Syndrome, outraged that President Trump refused to obey them when they felt they had a better idea as to how to run Foreign Affairs. Other allegations included that supposedly, the telepathic DNC members working in the state department knew what Trump was thinking (despite him literally saying the exact opposite) or could tell that Trump would do something even worse -- maybe something actually illegal -- in the future, and boy howdy, the imaginary Trump in their minds was a right bastard.

(As an aside, the name of the whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, has been censored across pretty much all social media, a test run of whatever censorship they're going to enact in the next few months to try and swing the election.)

At the same time, the DNC performed significant amounts of partisan political fuckery to do this all publicly, but unofficially -- preventing the GOP from bringing forth witnesses or questioning the DNC's witnesses, or even reading the double plus secret evidence the DNC supposedly had. Those GOP that did get access to the evidence have confirmed it's a 3 pound 5 ounce nothingburger.

The charges have since mutated, with them initially being changed to "bribery" -- as "bribery" focus groups easier and is easier to spew out on Twitter.

On December 18th, 2019, along party lines and with bipartisan opposition, they finally drafted their articles of impeachment -- first for "Abuse of Power" and second for "Obstruction of Congress." Neither are actually crimes nor are they impeachable offenses, even if they were true -- which the DNC has provided no evidence of, explaining that it's the Senate's job to investigate and find the evidence.

Narrator: It is not the Senate's job to investigate and find the evidence.

The "Obstruction of Congress" charge is particularly egregious, as they are claiming that Trump, by reaching out to the courts to act as mediators in his dispute over the rules with Pelosi, was obstructing her. In other words, Pelosi's stance is that the President must obey her, even if she's being a batshit insane drunk. Many legal scholars, including Alan Dershowitz, have pointed out that this is absolute bullshit.

The latest development as of this writing on December 21th, 2019, is that Pelosi is demanding that the GOP recuse itself, allowing the DNC to reshape the Senate in order to make the process "fair" -- by creating a Kangaroo court. The GOP is refusing outright, as the Senate's role during this is very specifically to take the charges and all the evidence gathered from the house -- which is none -- and vote yes or no on impeachment. They need 2/3rd majority to vote yes, and the DNC does not have the votes.

Pelosi is refusing to send over the articles of impeachment until the GOP allows her to stack the Senate against Trump, an act that Dershowitz as well as Noah Feldman, the DNC's own star legal expert witness, has said is unconstitutional and "a problem," as Trump isn't impeached until the articles have been filed. Meanwhile, the DNC has put the House on vacation until the new year, while the Senate is exploring options including forcing the articles over without Pelosi's ok. Trump and the Senate have both went to the SCOTUS to ask them if any of this is constitutional.

tl;dr: Trump may have found where the Swamp was embezzling US Foreign Aid. Many politician's children working fake jobs for huge amounts of money in the Ukraine, blatantly selling influence. This caused the DNC to freak out and try and headshot Trump. They missed. The Democrats appear to have committed political suicide, making Trump a Martyr and only realizing in the aftermath that they didn't actually get rid of him or even weaken him in any way. They also appear to realize they fucked up and are trying to slow walk it back, keeping the "he's impeached!" victory while not actually having to let anyone read the evidence or have a trial on it.


@Yotsubaaa did a great writeup here with links to various winner posts: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/nancy...kraine-phone-call.61583/page-135#post-5606264

And @Yotsubaaa did a new version very late on the 21st of December: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/presi...chment-megathread.61583/page-260#post-5754920

Which are too big to quote here.



https://archive.fo/oVGIv

WASHINGTON — Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced on Tuesday that the House would initiate a formal impeachment inquiry against President Trump, charging him with betraying his oath of office and the nation’s security by seeking to enlist a foreign power to tarnish a rival for his own political gain.

Ms. Pelosi’s declaration, after months of reticence by Democrats who had feared the political consequences of impeaching a president many of them long ago concluded was unfit for office, was a stunning turn that set the stage for a history-making and exceedingly bitter confrontation between the Democrat-led House and a defiant president who has thumbed his nose at institutional norms.

“The actions taken to date by the president have seriously violated the Constitution,” Ms. Pelosi said in a brief speech invoking the nation’s founding principles. Mr. Trump, she added, “must be held accountable — no one is above the law.”

She said the president’s conduct revealed his “betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security and betrayal of the integrity of our elections.”

Ms. Pelosi’s decision to push forward with the most severe action that Congress can take against a sitting president could usher in a remarkable new chapter in American life, touching off a constitutional and political showdown with the potential to cleave an already divided nation, reshape Mr. Trump’s presidency and the country’s politics, and carry heavy risks both for him and for the Democrats who have decided to weigh his removal.

Though the outcome is uncertain, it also raised the possibility that Mr. Trump could become only the fourth president in American history to face impeachment. Presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were both impeached but later acquitted by the Senate. President Richard M. Nixon resigned in the face of a looming House impeachment vote.

It was the first salvo in an escalating, high-stakes standoff between Ms. Pelosi, now fully engaged in an effort to build the most damning possible case against the president, and Mr. Trump, who angrily denounced Democrats’ impeachment inquiry even as he worked feverishly in private to head off the risk to his presidency.

Mr. Trump, who for months has dared Democrats to impeach him, issued a defiant response on Twitter while in New York for several days of international diplomacy at the United Nations, with a series of fuming posts that culminated with a simple phrase: “PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT!” Meanwhile, his re-election campaign and House Republican leaders launched a vociferous defense, accusing Democrats of a partisan rush to judgment.

“Such an important day at the United Nations, so much work and so much success, and the Democrats purposely had to ruin and demean it with more breaking news Witch Hunt garbage,” Mr. Trump wrote. “So bad for our Country! For the past two years, talk of impeachment had centered around the findings of the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, who investigated Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections and Mr. Trump’s attempts to derail that inquiry. On Tuesday, Ms. Pelosi, Democrat of California, told her caucus and then the country that new revelations about Mr. Trump’s dealings with Ukraine, and his administration’s stonewalling of Congress about them, had finally left the House no choice but to proceed toward a rarely used remedy.

“Right now, we have to strike while the iron is hot,” she told House Democrats in a closed-door meeting in the basement of the Capitol. Emerging moments later to address a phalanx of news cameras, Ms. Pelosi, speaking sometimes haltingly as she delivered a speech from a teleprompter, invoked the Constitution and the nation’s founders as she declared, “The times have found us” and outlined a new stage of investigating Mr. Trump.

At issue are allegations that Mr. Trump pressured the president of Ukraine to open a corruption investigation of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., a leading contender for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, and his son. The conversation is said to be part of a whistle-blower complaint that the Trump administration has withheld from Congress. And it occurred just a few days after Mr. Trump had ordered his staff to freeze more than $391 million in aid to Ukraine.

Mr. Trump has confirmed aspects of his conversation with the Ukrainian leader in recent days, but he continues to insist he acted appropriately.

The president said on Tuesday that he would authorize the release of a transcript of the conversation, part of an effort to pre-empt Democrats’ impeachment push. But Democrats, after months of holding back, were unbowed, demanding the full whistle-blower complaint and other documentation about White House dealings with Ukraine, even as they pushed toward an expansive impeachment inquiry that could encompass unrelated charges.

President Trump’s personal lawyer. The prosecutor general of Ukraine. Joe Biden’s son. These are just some of the names mentioned in the whistle-blower’s complaint. What were their roles? We break it down.

Ms. Pelosi told fellow Democrats that Mr. Trump told her in a private call on Tuesday morning that he was not responsible for withholding the whistle-blower complaint from Congress. But late Tuesday, the White House and intelligence officials were working on a deal to allow the whistle-blower to speak to Congress and potentially even share a redacted version of the complaint in the coming days, after the whistle-blower expressed interest in talking to lawmakers.

Although Ms. Pelosi’s announcement was a crucial turning point, it left many unanswered questions about exactly when and how Democrats planned to push forward on impeachment.
 
Last edited:
OH. MY. GOD.

This shit really is the russian collusion all over again.

Step 1: Get a theory going that Drfumbbth is making deals with a country in eastern europe to win an election, demand impeachment.
Step 2: Get an "insider" that has "proof" of said dealings. Don't ask questions, just trust him.
Step 3: Rally up the blue checkmarks. Sharpen those pitchforks and eliminate all disenters.
Step 4: Mass protests in the streets because you are the good guys.
Step 5: "This is for real you guys! We're making history! Bernie can still win!" (YOU ARE HERE)
Step 6:
Lose your shit when nobody believes you. Blame white people.
Step 7: Find hidden sex tape of Drrramphf and use it as black mail. Post to Buzzfeed.
Step 8: MSNBC does a thing. The whole bus claps.
Step 9: Slow news week. Make shit up.
Step 10: More protests. More impeachment. More yelling. More Drubfh.
Step 11: In a desparate attempt to actually win the upcoming election cycle, put the collusion theory to rest for a moment and shake hands with republicans and claim yourself to be more center leaning then you actually are.
Step 12: "This is for real you guys! We're making history! Bernie can still win!"

And congratulations! You lost the election cycle.
 
OH. MY. GOD.

This shit really is the russian collusion all over again.

Step 1: Get a theory going that Drfumbbth is making deals with a country in eastern europe to win an election, demand impeachment.
Step 2: Get an "insider" that has "proof" of said dealings. Don't ask questions, just trust him.
Step 3: Rally up the blue checkmarks. Sharpen those pitchforks and eliminate all disenters.
Step 4: Mass protests in the streets because you are the good guys.
Step 5: "This is for real you guys! We're making history! Bernie can still win!" (YOU ARE HERE)
Step 6:
Lose your shit when nobody believes you. Blame white people.
Step 7: Find hidden sex tape of Drrramphf and use it as black mail. Post to Buzzfeed.
Step 8: MSNBC does a thing. The whole bus claps.
Step 9: Slow news week. Make shit up.
Step 10: More protests. More impeachment. More yelling. More Drubfh.
Step 11: In a desparate attempt to actually win the upcoming election cycle, put the collusion theory to rest for a moment and shake hands with republicans and claim yourself to be more center leaning then you actually are.
Step 12: "This is for real you guys! We're making history! Bernie can still win!"

And congratulations! You lost the election cycle.

You've just described perfectly how corruption works. It's very very effective, but it rots your credibility. At some point you'll have hollowed out all the structures sufficiently, where practically no people on your side care about truth anymore, everyone is habituated to try and take advantage of optics and smearing. Your lies are so habitual, but because they are so comparable, like each artist's creativity being somewhat predictable, their own style apparent.

The same way how metokurs and redpanels of the net can't shake back into anonymity and grab a new persona, as whatever they do is colored by their own style and perspective. And so the familiar lies become transparent simply for rhyming with their previous lies. It's like a guy injecting synthol to look like he has big muscles; he might be able to intimidate people at first, but it only takes one gust of wind or challenge and the hollow structure underneath is laid bare and naked.
 
Well, well.

Fuck this asshole.

When you look at the "complaint", it's all based on hearsay. This fuck didn't see or hear a single thing himself. Not a single thing. What the fuck! Hearsay evidence isn't admissable in court and if the cocksuckers trying to impeach President Trump believe this "complaint" will help them, guess again. This "complaint" won't take any of the growing heat off Biden. Thanks to the Internet, stuff keeps coming up.

Now, legally retaliatory action cannot be taken against a whistleblower. But if your whistleblowing is based entirely on hearsay, which may or may not even all be true or correct, it would seem this whistleblowing is malicious. Either way, my guess is this sack of shit is in for some unpleasant times, and well-deserved.

Telling the truth based on what you read, heard, or saw is one thing. Spouting hearsay is something else. Americans know the difference. This "whistleblower's" "complaint" should be dismissed, having no basis in fact.
It's an absolute shit show. The worthless simpletons have been planning this move and when it came time to close the trap they come back with zero proof. Perhaps I should give Nancy some pointers on how you fuck up a politician?

Because last time I checked, my target is laying in a pool of blood. Hers is still shitposting and eating toilet burgers.
 
That is something that I could frankly buy being a thing with 90% of people, but This is Trump we are talking about..do you really think he is subtle enough for "Reading between the lines" threats? This is the guy who I think would honestly put giant letters Spelling out TRUMP on the white house lawn if he could.

It still amazes me that the Dems, and in particular the media simply take Trump at face value. It somehow never dawns on them that the boorish buffoon Trump that they See is merely a character that he plays. A mask he puts on because people, particularly those he negotiates with, tend to underestimate the buffoon character and give him clear advantages, which he takes all the way to the bank. In this case literally. Has anybody noticed the haul Trump’s campaign and the RNC have been raking in over the Dems impeachment sperg out? And once again for those that missed it, Trump is out fundraising the Dems, in California. He pulled in more in a weekend than the Dem front runners have gotten all year combined.


Wisdom, and she can 3d print her own bikini’s and wire up undercarriage lighting for her vagina! What more could you look for in a woman?

The dumbest lie / cognitive dissonance seen so far in this mess is this ludicrous assertion that conversations between heads of state have no good reason to be classified, ever, and doing so is prima fascia evidence of something nefarious....

Let’s not forget that they moved all the conversations between heads of state to the ultra secure servers, because members of the Inteligence community kept treasonously leaking them to the Washington Post in order to undermine the sitting President and US foreign relations. Remember ow badly damaged the UK was when Theresa May’s conversations got dumped? All of the Western leadership started securing things better.
 
Screenshot_2019-09-3.png
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_2019-09-26.png
    Screenshot_2019-09-26.png
    48.3 KB · Views: 69
  • Screenshot_2019-09-26_2.png
    Screenshot_2019-09-26_2.png
    33.8 KB · Views: 65
  • Screenshot_2019-09-4.png
    Screenshot_2019-09-4.png
    56.6 KB · Views: 57
  • Screenshot_2019-09-26_5.png
    Screenshot_2019-09-26_5.png
    22.8 KB · Views: 55
Last edited:
Well that's the beauty of it. It doesn't even have to make it past the Senate for it to have its intended effect. When Nixon was undergoing impeachment proceedings he resigned once he learned Republicans wouldn't support him once it reached the Senate. One of the most important parts of any impeachment process is that it allows the House to form investigation committees to uncover and dig through all the dirt a President might be sitting on.

During the investigation into Nixon for example the watergate tapes were uncovered, and due to a Supreme court ruling they were turned over and exposed to the public eye. In a similar manner Trump's dealings will be investigated thoroughly and then it'll be decided by a House vote whether things move forward to a trial in the senate.

So you should look forward to the weeks ahead, things are gonna get REALLY fun!

You really are clueless, aren’t you? Quick history lesson, since they no longer actually teach that subject. There has never been a successful impeachment attempt against a US President. Every time Impeachment has been voted on by Congress it has caused the impeaching political party to get curbstomped in elections for the next 10+ years. That is the traditional effect of impeachment. And this one seems even lamer than the previous 3 attempts. Historically the American people have no tolerance for a political party that attempts this. Even in the case of Nixon, who resigned before being impeached, while under threat of impeachment during the ‘72 election, he won 49 states, scoring the second highest electoral vote margin in ?US history. (Only being beaten by Reagan in ‘84, who similarly won 49 states but got more electoral votes.)
 
So, what's your defense for Hunter Biden and ol Sleepy Joe literally saying on live TV that he used his influence to get his son out of trouble?
Hunter Biden is a self-admitted literal crackhead who was separated from the naval reserve (a direct commission daddy Biden secured despite Junior being past the age cut-off) in an other-than-honorable discharge and then there was that weird marriage to his brother's widow right after he died. He's been getting Hunter out of trouble for years. I hope they both crash and burn tbh.
 
1569548839484.png


Yup. None of this shit is trending at all in the US anymore. Not even in the extended trends. Cancel NYT is 12, but that's it.

I can't say with impunity that this is Twitter suppressing discussion of it since the Dems are getting BTFO'd something hardcore about it, but, well, I'm THINKING it real fucking hard.
 
View attachment 950318

Yup. None of this shit is trending at all in the US anymore. Not even in the extended trends. Cancel NYT is 12, but that's it.

I can't say with impunity that this is Twitter suppressing discussion of it since the Dems are getting BTFO'd something hardcore about it, but, well, I'm THINKING it real fucking hard.

The only people who are remotely talking about this is the circlejerk on CNN, who today, are still lying about the contents within that document and how they think that Tramp is admitting his corruption within the transcript, and yet not once tonight did they show the transcript or even mention the details of it on screen. They are completely running, full-force, with the narrative that Tramp should be impeached while really only explaining vague reasons like "Oh what he's doing is not in the interests of the American people" or whatnot without actually showing evidence or any detailed explanation as to why. Just vague declarations that are satisfying enough for people to parrot around as PERFECT reasoning and just stupid enough for people to accept. They brought Beto and MULTIASS' favorite person, Maxine Waters, on today to say that the president should be impeached and if you don't see the reason that he should, then you aren't paying attention, which is dumb.

I'm pretty sure Tramp has been involved with some corrupt affairs over the many years he has been in business (in the TDS thread, we revealed that he BTFO'd the mafia; as well as the fact that there's also Trump tying his name to Trump University without the proper adjustments), but every time they try to get him, they get him on stuff that is not corrupt, both technically and literally within the legislations of the Constitution as well as other Acts and Treaties that have been passed by previous administrations. The fact that the news media isn't using this as an opportunity to teach the masses about whether or not this is legal by bringing ACTUAL LEGAL EXPERTS and not any shills for any side or not instead of skipping right to impeachment shows further that the news media's goal is not to inform, but to persuade.
 
Not all whistleblowers are created equal. For instance, take Bradley Manning.

And if it glows, I don't accept the blow, though I do like to see the NYT getting more grief. Come to think of it, this is probably the best possible outcome, where everyone involved leaves covered in shit.
Everyone except Trump, somehow. I still haven’t seen any convincing arguments that he actually did anything improperly or against regulation.
 
This is how you decided to start off one of the craziest, meth-fueled slackjaw rants of the decade. In the future, when they've classified Trump Derangement Syndrome it won't be because of a screeching liberal in a pussy hat, but because of literally insane boomers like you fueled by what is possibly a literal hard-on for Donald Trump.

Your post sounds like it was meant for Senator Armstrong from Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance but got cut for being too cartoonish and over-the-top. You didn't just drink the MAGA koolaid, you took a fucking MAGA suppository. Whoever didn't put you in a home when they had the chance should be tried for senior citizen abuse.

Imagine being so consumed with extreme left-wing zealotry that you're triggered by an obvious bait post that reads like a copypasta...

Look, I get that you don't like Trump. As it is, I'm not that enthralled with him either and I'm only supporting him since I think he's the least shitty choice when compared to Biden, Warren, or The Squad.

But you've got to face the facts that even if the impeachment proceedings are passed through the House, it will fail in the Republican-controlled Senate and if by some miracle Trump does get convicted, that does not automatically mean he'll be removed from office. That has to go to a vote too.

Any attempt to impeach Trump will fail the moment it gets to the Senate. Thanks to the rabid secular puritan zealots on the Millennial Left branding anything marginally to the right of Lenin as "fascist" and the toll it's taken on the public with all the cancel culture bullshit and the witch hunts directed at Brett Kavanaugh, The Covington Catholic schoolboys, and countless others, the political climate is way too polarized and tribal right now.

Unless Trump was caught on video sacrificing orphans to Satan and blowing up a bus full of nuns while swearing loyalty to ISIS, he's pretty much indestructible at this point. Nothing seems to stick to him and nothing can break him.

He's like Adamantium coated in Teflon at this point.

Nothing will stick to him at this point, especially with the polarized social and political climate working against the Democrats combined with their nebulous accusations backed up by weaksauce attempts at evidence.

If the Left could've found a surefire way to remove Trump from office before the 2020 Election, they would've done it by now.

C'mon, we all know that Ashy is a low effort troll like OG Dynastia (PBUH) or Rand/Ron /pol/.

Just negrate the chaser and leave 'em be.

Eh, at least Dynastia and Rand /pol/ were actually funny and would be contrarian shitposters in every thread they took part in.

Ashy just parrots the SJW/Antifa playbook and tries his best to embody every spoiled Millennial Anarcho-Communist stereotype and is a furry to boot.

If he's trying to troll the Farms with some kind of Deagle Nation-esque fake persona, it's coming off as one of those "I was pretending to be an idiot" moments for him.

@Ashy the Angel is no Jace Connors.
 
"After the initial pleasantries, the President used the remainder of the call to advance his personal interests."

This is a lie. Any segment of the transcript that could be interpreted as furthering his personal interests would have been the snippet regarding the Biden ordeal over the prosecutor, but as I'd mentioned earlier: Biden himself was the one publicly offering that information, Trump was only passing it along in a sort of, "So about that thing Biden said..." sort of way. Even then, this didn't come until much later into the call.

"[...] with a specific request that the Ukrainian leader locate and turn over servers used by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and examined by the U.S. cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike.”

This is also a lie. At no point did Trump request that Zelenskyy locate or turn over even the Crowdstrike server, let alone multiple servers. One could reasonably argue that Trump was inferring that by bringing up Crowdstrike and the server in the Ukraine, but this 'whistleblower' is presenting this as a statement of fact and a matter of plurality, and neither of these are true. He never made such a request about locating and turning over multiple servers to the U.S.

“The President also praised Ukraine’s Prosecutor General, Mr. Yuriy Lutsenko, and suggested that Mr. Zelensky might want to keep him in his position."
No such suggestion was made to Zelensky. Trump did say that it was “unfair” that a prosecutor who was “very good” was “shut down,” but it’s not expressly stated that Trump was even referring to Lutsenko. A previous prosecutor named Viktor Shokin was fired after he opened the investigations into Burisma holdings. Again, this complaint is presenting this as a statement of fact, and it never happened. Trump even directly references Shokin later in the call: “There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that."

408212c687197773d70351478bc56aae.png

In this footnote, the 'whistleblower' is alleging that the classification of the transcripts of world leaders is in itself an illegal act. Hopefully I don't need to retread as to why that's completely absurd. Their conversation also included no concealment of violations of laws, inefficiencies, administrative errors, nor were they attempting to prevent embarrassment to a person, organization or agency through this classification. They were classified due to the national security concerns mentioned further upthread.

You could seriously sit here and just poke holes through this thing all night if you wanted to, but there's something else about this complaint that's really unusual: It's written incredibly clerically. It looks like it was written by a law professor and includes legal references and detailed footnotes. It also has an unusual reference on how this complaint should be classified. I'm still 100% convinced that this 'whistleblower' had outside help when it came to writing this complaint. This isn't normally how they're structured.

More-over, the content and transcripts of these calls, due to being SECRET/ORCON/NOFORN would be highly restricted, and yet this 'whistleblower' is making it clear that they weren't directly involved with the call, the transcript of the call, nor did they listen in to the call or even read the transcript. He was told about this by other people, and from the sounds of it, a lot of other people. If that's the case, then the entire department is routinely and grossly violating the rules in a horrifyingly-casual manner, and yet the 'whistleblower' seems to be... Completely disinterested in blowing the whistle on that behaviour?

This person isn't remotely interested in even mentioning that highly-restricted information is apparently being passed around like candy at Halloween, and instead chooses to laser-focus on these clearly incorrect allegations. It seems a little bit strange that they wouldn't even mention that, doesn't it?
 
Where are Woodward and Bernstein when you need them? It took over 30 years for the identity of the Watergate whistleblower (who worked for the FBI) to be revealed and he was the one who revealed it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: heathercho
View attachment 950297
Wow that one is pretty good.

The profile picture makes me worry though. This person claims to be a doctor? And their picture looks like they are in some sort of medical type of situation. So why is a cellphone anywhere near that? People bring their phones into the bathroom with them.
 
Back