As more and more info comes out, it looks worse for both the IG and whistle blower.

In an Aug. 26 letter, the Intelligence Community's inspector general, Michael Atkinson, wrote that the anonymous whistleblower who set off the Trump-Ukraine impeachment fight showed "some indicia of an arguable political bias ... in favor of a rival political candidate."

A few weeks later, news reports said the whistleblower's possible bias was that he is a registered Democrat. That was all. Incredulous commentary suggested that Republicans who were pushing the bias talking point were so blinded by their own partisanship that they saw simple registration with the Democratic Party as evidence of wrongdoing.

"Give me a break!" tweeted whistleblower lawyer Mark Zaid. "Bias? Seriously?"

Now, however, there is word of more evidence of possible bias on the whistleblower's part. Under questioning from Republicans during last Friday's impeachment inquiry interview with Atkinson, the inspector general revealed that the whistleblower's possible bias was not that he was simply a registered Democrat. It was that he had a significant tie to one of the Democratic presidential candidates currently vying to challenge President Trump in next year's election.

"The IG said [the whistleblower] worked or had some type of professional relationship with one of the Democratic candidates," said one person with knowledge of what was said.

"The IG said the whistleblower had a professional relationship with one of the 2020 candidates," said another person with knowledge of what was said.

"What [Atkinson] said was that the whistleblower self-disclosed that he was a registered Democrat and that he had a prior working relationship with a current 2020 Democratic presidential candidate," said a third person with knowledge of what was said.



https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/...-candidate

So, in summary what we have here is that someone who's working for a 2020 candidate colludes with Adam Schiff and the intelligence committee to spread a quid pro quo lie about Trump, and found a complicit IG to help out.

Good thing President Trump released the phone transcript so we could see the whistleblowers claim mirrored the President’s call.

Hard to claim bias when the guy’s claim aligns perfectly with the transcript.

Can you not put "breaking" in the thread? It has passed the point of breaking news if you've had time to read the article, summarize it, and post it for everyone on a message board to read.

(10-08-2019 02:55 PM)Auburn_Blazer Wrote:  Can you not put "breaking" in the thread? It has passed the point of breaking news if you've had time to read the article, summarize it, and post it for everyone on a message board to read.

Breaking - Libturd gets butthurt over breaking news that gets his panties in a wad.

(10-08-2019 02:56 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-08-2019 02:55 PM)Auburn_Blazer Wrote:  Can you not put "breaking" in the thread? It has passed the point of breaking news if you've had time to read the article, summarize it, and post it for everyone on a message board to read.

Breaking - Libturd gets butthurt over breaking news that gets his panties in a wad.

Yep, it'd be ok if it was more orange man bad. As is, the longer this goes on the better it will be for Trump.

(10-08-2019 02:27 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  As more and more info comes out, it looks worse for both the IG and whistle blower.

In an Aug. 26 letter, the Intelligence Community's inspector general, Michael Atkinson, wrote that the anonymous whistleblower who set off the Trump-Ukraine impeachment fight showed "some indicia of an arguable political bias ... in favor of a rival political candidate."

A few weeks later, news reports said the whistleblower's possible bias was that he is a registered Democrat. That was all. Incredulous commentary suggested that Republicans who were pushing the bias talking point were so blinded by their own partisanship that they saw simple registration with the Democratic Party as evidence of wrongdoing.

"Give me a break!" tweeted whistleblower lawyer Mark Zaid. "Bias? Seriously?"

Now, however, there is word of more evidence of possible bias on the whistleblower's part. Under questioning from Republicans during last Friday's impeachment inquiry interview with Atkinson, the inspector general revealed that the whistleblower's possible bias was not that he was simply a registered Democrat. It was that he had a significant tie to one of the Democratic presidential candidates currently vying to challenge President Trump in next year's election.

"The IG said [the whistleblower] worked or had some type of professional relationship with one of the Democratic candidates," said one person with knowledge of what was said.

"The IG said the whistleblower had a professional relationship with one of the 2020 candidates," said another person with knowledge of what was said.

"What [Atkinson] said was that the whistleblower self-disclosed that he was a registered Democrat and that he had a prior working relationship with a current 2020 Democratic presidential candidate," said a third person with knowledge of what was said.



https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/...-candidate

Shocking. The deep state is real.

(10-08-2019 02:32 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Good thing President Trump released the phone transcript so we could see the whistleblowers claim mirrored the President’s call.

Hard to claim bias when the guy’s claim aligns perfectly with the transcript.

Actually it didnt. Quid pro quo? Nope. He was correct that the president was interested in Ukrainian authorities looking into the possibility that Biden engaged in corrupt activity when he strong armed the firing of a prosecutor looking into his sons company---but I think its very difficult to argue its NOT in the interests of the US government to know if a crime was committed at the highest level of US government. It sure seems the Democrats are very interested in any misdeed related to the highest level of government---so such an investigation into possible Biden corruption is very consistent Democrat congressional behavior---is it not? I mean---the president is supposed to uphold the laws of the United States---its literally part of his constitutional duties.

(10-08-2019 02:32 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Good thing President Trump released the phone transcript so we could see the whistleblowers claim had no similarity to the President’s call.

Easy to claim bias when the guy’s claim has nothing to do with the transcript.

Fixed it for ya.

(10-08-2019 02:56 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-08-2019 02:55 PM)Auburn_Blazer Wrote:  Can you not put "breaking" in the thread? It has passed the point of breaking news if you've had time to read the article, summarize it, and post it for everyone on a message board to read.

Breaking - Libturd gets butthurt over breaking news that gets his panties in a wad.

Not butthurt, especially since your touting the largest nothing-burger I've seen lately, just pointing out that your headline is silly.

(10-08-2019 02:32 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Good thing President Trump released the phone transcript so we could see the whistleblowers claim mirrored the President’s call.

Hard to claim bias when the guy’s claim aligns perfectly with the transcript.

Sooooo, you haven't read the transcript yourself either, hunh?

(10-08-2019 02:55 PM)Auburn_Blazer Wrote:  Can you not put "breaking" in the thread? It has passed the point of breaking news if you've had time to read the article, summarize it, and post it for everyone on a message board to read.

Really? That's what you took from his post?


Geeeeez, get a life...

Oh, and Roll Tide!

(10-08-2019 04:20 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(10-08-2019 02:55 PM)Auburn_Blazer Wrote:  Can you not put "breaking" in the thread? It has passed the point of breaking news if you've had time to read the article, summarize it, and post it for everyone on a message board to read.

Really? That's what you took from his post?


Geeeeez, get a life...

Oh, and Roll Tide!

yep....that's XACLY! what his comprehension 'billyTTT displayed....

dems are fk'n with the wrong mothertruckers....

So let me get this straight.. Trump is asking another country to look into corruption that implicates a candidate who used his power to end an investigation of his son's corruption, and that's wrong.. But someone working with a candidate against the sitting president, makes a complaint based on information he got 2nd hand and that's a viable complaint.

F*ck.. I need whatever they're smoking, dipping, drinking..

(10-09-2019 01:31 PM)gdunn Wrote:  So let me get this straight.. Trump is asking another country to look into corruption that implicates a candidate who used his power to end an investigation of his son's corruption, and that's wrong.. But someone working with a candidate against the sitting president, makes a complaint based on information he got 2nd hand and that's a viable complaint.

F*ck.. I need whatever they're smoking, dipping, drinking..

I've seen some stoooooooooooooooopid shite in my life in 'stragety' {sic tribute to ol' bushy)......this one takes the cookie and cake to the outhouse wishing they had more
to wipe their arse with....