(09-30-2019 01:17 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(09-30-2019 01:11 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-30-2019 01:07 PM)appst89 Wrote:  

(09-30-2019 12:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-30-2019 11:15 AM)Kronke Wrote:  Oh, well if Drudge..

If you truly believe 67 Senators are going to convict him, you need to stop analyzing politics.

Of course, knowing what we know now, they won't. But this is likely a long way from over.

No, the coup attempt is not over. They will just move on to the next ridiculous claim.

You mean like Biden was corrupt and/or the Whistleblower law/form was changed?

Is gaslighting the new strategy? Put on a front and pretend biden isn't on tape doing the exact thing you're accusing Trump of having done, except with Trump the so-called smoking gun piece of evidence is actually exculpatory?

Also, whether it was a grand conspiracy or not, the procedures were changed. That's a fact. I imagine you've read the daily beast and pro publica OPINION pieces claiming otherwise, but they admit that they were changed, just that the whistleblower's complaint met the standard to be forwarded in the process. Those two outlets and the Federalist are arguing past one another.

Quote:In fact, as a detailed review of the evidence conducted by The Intercept in May showed, Biden’s intervention in Ukrainian affairs that year, when he successfully pressed Ukraine’s then-president to dismiss a chief prosecutor who had failed to pursue corruption investigations, was no secret and was widely praised by Ukrainian anti-corruption activists and international donors to the country.

The reason there is footage of Biden boasting about this intervention on stage at a public event in 2018 is that he knew he had nothing to hide.

Put simply, there is no evidence to support the conspiracy theory that Trump and his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani want Ukraine to validate by opening an investigation. Still, it has become an article of faith among Trump supporters that Biden got the chief prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, dismissed to derail a corruption investigation of a Ukrainian firm his son was paid to advise.

Quote:What the article didn’t mention or screenshot is a nearly identical field gracing Form 401 since at least May 2018, making it impossible that it was added as an easement for Trump’s whistleblower. The major difference in the fields is that the old form includes three options instead of two, subdividing secondhand sources into outside source and “other employees.”

There’s a reason the form has allowed secondhand reports all along. The requirement for firsthand whistleblowing only is completely made up.

“There’s never been a requirement that a whistleblower have firsthand knowledge of what they’re reporting,” said Irvin McCullough, an investigator at the nonprofit Government Accountability Project (and the son of a former IC IG). “They need to have a reasonable belief. The firsthand information is usually gathered by the inspector general, as I believe did occur here.”