Posted on 10/26/2019 8:01:14 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
In real life they tasked Robert Hansen to find the mole.
If the House votes to Impeach it will be the end of the USA. No point in playing anymore when they can just make up the rules as you go.
gathered enough information from recent depositions obtained in secret hearings
THIS IS AMERICAN JUSTICE? When Jeanine pirro questioned house freedom caucus chairmen Andy Biggs about what are you going to do about this? He said well......we’re gonna file a protest, FILE A PROTEST? This fluff of a guy would get trampled by kindergarteners. The cancer against Trump is in the GOP as well
“...as Democrats say the individual’s testimony is no longer necessary.”
It certainly isn’t. It was worthless from the start, only used as an excuse to lift the hoax off the ground. Exact same play as Steele dossier.
Now, Trump can be charged with obstruction because he resists the hoax and refuses to make-believe it is reality.
Well it's an old, old story...going back to prehistoric times...certainly nothing new.
Millions of Americans are aware that the USA, the US Constitution, the US form of government is remarkable--exceptional--sacred--a gift of God. They are called "Trump Supporters."
Millions of others can't understand this. They are called "Stupid People."
It’s 99.999% sure that it’s Eric Ciaramella, who was on the NCS under McMaster.
But he was just a cog in a much larger operation to take out Trump via impeachment this time.
The Ukraine hoax was and still is a full espionage job by Schiff’s intel committee plus never-Trumpers and Obama holdovers.
This video explains it all in detail.
WhistleBlower: Ciaramella? - IPOT Presents - 10.23.19
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VKzO7CnaEk
Trump will call for a million man march on Washington with 2nd ammendment rights if it looks as though he will be impeached.
Remember, the military answers to the commander in chief and constitution.
The guy’s testimony is no longer needed because it has become apparent that it will be counterproductive to the Cause.
“The whistleblower law will protect them.”
Not necessarily in this case. What Trump did was follow a treaty signed by the Ukraine in 1998 and Clinton in 1999 for a cooperation of the investigation of corruption involving both countries as applied to each other. The act of a non-party person releasing anything within the call containing sensitive information that was requested a secure line be in place, which Trump did, is not the act of a whistle blower. It is the act of espionage.
According to Black’s Law Dictionary, the most used law information source in the US, espionage, or spying, has reference to the crime of “gathering, transmitting or losing” information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States.
Harming a president falls under that category. As long as the politicians lead people to believe it is a whistle blower and not an act of spying, people will buy into that. But the person overhearing the information does not have protection under the WBA.
Furthermore, the only people that could have heard the conversation was the people in the room that Trump wished and members of the CIA and/or FBI. And employees of federal intelligence agencies such as the CIA and FBI do not have the same processes and protections that the WPA provides for other federal workers. They have chains of command they are required to go through that was ignored in this case.
According to the act, a federal employee can report misconduct to the Office of the Special Counsel (OSC).
The act considers misconduct to include:
The OSC does not investigate the claims itself; rather, they review the claim to determine the likelihood of wrongdoing — which the act establishes as having reliable, firsthand knowledge of the misconduct.
If the OSC determines there’s a likelihood of wrongdoing, it refers the claim to the appropriate regulatory or governing agency for further investigation. The agency leading the investigation must investigate the claim and report back to the OSC within 60 days. None of this was accomplished prior to the release of the sensitive information within the call.
The act states that an employee who makes disclosures as a whistle blower and then is subject to retaliatory actions can report the suspected acts of reprisal to the OSC, which would further investigate the charge.
So what do you have? Do you have a whistle blower who did it exactly the way that was in the best interest of a political party illegally just prior to an election when they are getting hammered and the WB doing it knowingly? Or do you have a witness to a possible illegal action by a president that was directed through the proper channels for determination and the need for further investigation.
The first possibility is espionage. The second is the right way to do the passing of information with people that have the security clearance and need to know. The WPA does not cover protection from espionage.
rwood
“We have more info now.”
And we have more and better clarified rules and regulations now. And many within the system violated them to make it go the way it shouldn’t have.
rwood
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.