Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's not a transcript. It is a Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation (TELCON), which is not a verbatim transcript of a telephone conversation.
What lie?
Adam Schiff seemed to believe that the transcript Trump declassified, was as close to verbatim as possible, since the text for the phone call was his justification for claiming we really don't need to hear from the whistleblower:
California Congressman Adam Schiff, the Democratic chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said congressional investigators leading the impeachment inquiry might not pursue testimony from the intelligence community whistleblower if doing so risks exposing the person's identity.
"Given that we already have the call record, we don't need the whistleblower, who wasn't on the call, to tell us what took place during the call," Schiff said on "Face the Nation" Sunday, referring to the July 25 call between President Trump and the Ukrainian president. "We have the best evidence of that."
The real scary part is if Trump had not been elected POTUS, this " deep state" population of Government Employees . Military and Intelligence Officers may not have been exposed for who and what they are.
They have their own set of values, ideology and policies, and in their minds, their " patriotism" is not centered on what is best for the people , but best for their way of life. They may actually consider themselves a Fourth Branch of Government , not elected by the people, but in their own minds, essential.
I think this is one of the reasons why Trump will be reelected, we have more "deep state" swamp to drain.
All this Ukraine-gate has been, is some low level pukes who have a difference of opinion as to how the president should conduct discussions with foreign leaders, regarding foreign policy. If these deep staters disagree with the president, in their eyes, it becomes a crime somehow.
If our DOJ is investigating US governmental corruption with foreign countries, and the 2016 election interference, and they view the shady dealings between Joe and Hunter Biden, may just be corrupt, and seeks to investigate it, then it gets investigated. Trump simply asked the new Ukraine president to assist with the investigation.
It's the left who view this as "digging up dirt on Biden," because they know in their hearts that it looks corrupt, and if we investigate we will find corruption, influence peddling, and Joe and Hunter using his position as VP as a way to get filthy rich.
The problem is, a lot of other corrupt politicians are probably engaging in similar activities, and they may just fear their money grubbing activities might be coming to a close, if Trump reveals what Biden was doing.
This Vindman guy claims he heard something, that was not said, on that phone call. Hmmm, I wish I had a dollar every time I attended some meeting, or a video conference, and when it was over, someone was upset about something they incorrectly thought was said.
Just because this guy thinks something was said, does not mean it was. And since we have the transcript of the call, we know Vindman is full of it.
This Vindman guy claims he heard something, that was not said, on that phone call. Hmmm, I wish I had a dollar every time I attended some meeting, or a video conference, and when it was over, someone was upset about something they incorrectly thought was said.
Just because this guy thinks something was said, does not mean it was. And since we have the transcript of the call, we know Vindman is full of it.
And even if Trump said what Vindman thinks he said, so what? I have no problem with it.
. . . and since we have the transcript of the call, we know Vindman is full of it.
We don't have the transcript. We have a Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation (TELCON), which is not a verbatim transcript of a telephone conversation.
This guy is the poster child for the partisan "deep state operative" that uses their position in government to try an subvert the president, if he belongs to the opposing political party of the deep stater.
Federal records show that Biden's office invited Ciaramella to an October 2016 state luncheon the vice president hosted for Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi. Other invited guests included Brennan, as well as then-FBI Director James Comey and then-National Intelligence Director James Clapper.
I don't understand the claim here. The testimony from Taylor, Hill, Sondland, Volker, and Vindman is all somehow negated because the person who originally reported the issue to the IG had lunch with Joe Biden in 2016?
This is beyond stupid, even when measured against the low standards set by the Trump sycophants on CD.
Several important points are made in this editorial.
After knowledge of the presidential holdup of the $391 million in aid to Ukraine became public, the president asked Barr for a formal legal opinion that dirt on a political opponent is not a thing of value.
Barr had his researchers and writers in the Office of Legal Counsel oblige. That legal opinion, which Trump has touted as a form of exoneration, has been so widely mocked in legal and political circles – because dirt on an opponent is the most valuable commodity for a political campaign, and candidates pay dearly for it – that congressional Republicans have stopped referring to it.
Baloney. The opinion is correct. And the Mueller team agreed, while pointing out at least three additional reasons why the notion that the solicitation or receipt of the alleged "value" cannot be a crime under campaign finance law, perhaps the most obvious of which is that it would preclude the mass media from talking about politics because of limits on the value of campaign contributions. When Savannah Guthrie says "Russia hacked the election", the value of that to the Democrats might run into the billions of dollars.
Additionally, there's a major First Amendment issue if you try to criminalize the reporting of facts (as you want to). And, finally, there is a scienter requirement for the crime you're talking about, which means you can't be punished unless you know you're breaking the law. And you can't very well know you're breaking the law if no one's ever been prosecuted for doing what you did and everyone from the attorney general to Robert Mueller says it's not a crime.
I don't understand the claim here. The testimony from Taylor, Hill, Sondland, Volker, and Vindman is all somehow negated because the person who originally reported the issue to the IG had lunch with Joe Biden in 2016?
No, the point is that it means that the Democrats do not themselves believe the narrative they're presenting to the public. Although it shouldn't matter, since the alleged quid pro quo is perfectly fine, the Dems are asking us to infer some sort of corrupt intent, and we're essentially asked to weigh credibility. And these actions undermine the Dems' credibility.
This Vindman guy claims he heard something, that was not said, on that phone call. Hmmm, I wish I had a dollar every time I attended some meeting, or a video conference, and when it was over, someone was upset about something they incorrectly thought was said.
Just because this guy thinks something was said, does not mean it was. And since we have the transcript of the call, we know Vindman is full of it.
I wonder what that slime ball Vindman is getting from the Dem's for LYING? The Dem's tried two other fake whistleblowers and that did not work. Pelosi, Schiff and Vindman need to BURN in their favorite place they are heading...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Dem's tried two other fake whistleblowers and that did not work. Pelosi, Schiff and Vindman need to BURN in their favorite place they are heading...
