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 whistleblower is not an accuser. He is like someone who phones in a tip on a silent witness hotline. There is no right to challenge that person. That is utter nonsense. Evidence is gathered based on the tip and witnesses located and deposed as appropriate. He does have a right to confront the dozen or so witnesses who spoke to his bribery,..
Since there is already a transcript of the call what is the need for the whistleblower testimony?
It will help to track down the traitors involved in the attempt to remove the President (the plan discussed in Andy's office).
The exact history of when little Adam Shifty wrote the Whistle Liar memo through how the Whistle Liar became invovled and agreed to say what Adam wanted him to say....was he involved going back to the plan discussed in Andy's office (I think he was).
So, instead of addressing the issue, Graham is having a hissy fit about the process. He’s pretty much lost any credibility he ever had. Hasn’t he?
Exactly! People that heard 1st hand have already testified and said the same thing as the whistleblower. He is acting like a 3rd grader that can't get his own way.
I really find Trump's characterization of the whistleblower as a 'traitor" and the numerous supporters such as Graham referring to his as an accuser really troubling. This is not a case of someone who went to to the press with a bunch of spurious rumors. From all that has been described, he used an established procedure to report concerns to appropriate government personnel to be examined and handled appropriately. A proper whistleblower report, which everything indicates this was, seeks to initiate an internal investigation to determine if something improper was done. Where someone has a genuine concern, what would have been a better and more just course? It has obviously taken on a life of its own since then but that does not change the fact that the report itself seems to have been done entirely appropriately. Calls for the whistleblower to testify seem to be attempts to intimidate others within the administration who may have other concerns in the future. Given some of the threats our political figures on both sides of the aisle receive, the whistleblower should have genuine concerns for his safety given the way his actions are being unfairly characterized.
I really find Trump's characterization of the whistleblower as a 'traitor" and the numerous supporters such as Graham referring to his as an accuser really troubling. This is not a case of someone who went to to the press with a bunch of spurious rumors. From all that has been described, he used an established procedure to report concerns to appropriate government personnel to be examined and handled appropriately. A proper whistleblower report, which everything indicates this was, seeks to initiate an internal investigation to determine if something improper was done. Where someone has a genuine concern, what would have been a better and more just course? It has obviously taken on a life of its own since then but that does not change the fact that the report itself seems to have been done entirely appropriately. Calls for the whistleblower to testify seem to be attempts to intimidate others within the administration who may have other concerns in the future. Given some of the threats our political figures on both sides of the aisle receive, the whistleblower should have genuine concerns for his safety given the way his actions are being unfairly characterized.
I think it would make sense to ask questions about the whistleblower if there was strong evidence to suggest that the complaint was not reported in good faith. However, based on the information that has been made public thus far it appears that everything the whistleblower has reported is true and it seems more than likely it was reported in good faith. That being the case I see no value to bring him or her in to testify publicly in these proceedings.
The elevation of the whistleblower as a "needed" witness is prima facie absurd and clear evidence that Republicans are just looking to obstruct and make up nonsensical excuses to defend the maniac.
The whistleblower's info was second hard. There is no need for it any more when we now have many accounts from first hand participants in the events by which to evaluate them.
The effort is also a clear attempt to intimidate and threaten other whistleblowers who might speak out against this maniac's historic levels of criminality and corruption as POTUS.
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.
