Are you saying that the whistleblower complaint is an untrue fabrication? How would YOU know that? Are you saying the readout of the telephone conversation between Trump and Zelensky was fabricated? Again, how would YOU know that?
Whistleblower
- Thread starter Aglaopheme
- Start date
Are you saying that the whistleblower complaint is an untrue fabrication? How would YOU know that? Are you saying the readout of the telephone conversation between Trump and Zelensky was fabricated? Again, how would YOU know that?
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Posts
- 19,245
You know, when I've cited Fox News, many Lit Lefties, including perhaps you, have claimed it's an illegitimate source due to bias.
Seriously, though, while I still don't see evidence of any quid quo pro, if Napolitano is right, then it's not necessary. Unfortunately, he does not cite the statute, and two issues remain in my mind:
1. Does the statute include an element of intent?
2. Would Biden be deemed a political opponent at the time of the call, given that he has not yet been nominated for anything?
If intent is unnecessary, or if it is established, and if Biden would be in the statute's definition of political opponent under these circumstances, then it seems to me you're right.
Can someone please cite the applicable statute for me?
Foreign nationals
Campaigns may not solicit or accept contributions from foreign nationals. Federal law prohibits contributions, donations, expenditures and disbursements solicited, directed, received or made directly or indirectly by or from foreign nationals in connection with any election — federal, state or local. This prohibition includes contributions or donations made to political committees and building funds and to make electioneering communications. Furthermore, it is a violation of federal law to knowingly provide substantial assistance in the making, acceptance or receipt of contributions or donations in connection with federal and nonfederal elections to a political committee, or for the purchase or construction of an office building. This prohibition includes, but is not limited to, acting as a conduit or intermediary for foreign national contributions and donations.
A person acts knowingly for the purposes of this section when he or she has:
Actual knowledge that the funds have come from a foreign national;
Awareness of certain facts that would lead a reasonable person to believe that there is a substantial probability that the money is from a foreign national; or
Awareness of facts that should have prompted a reasonable inquiry into whether the source of funds is a foreign national.
https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates...-taking-receipts/who-can-and-cant-contribute/
I thought I had posted this before in this thread.
KeithD
Virgin
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2012
- Posts
- 29,626
Doesn't matter how often you post it. The Trumpettes aren't interest in law--or common decency.
"Billy, just grab him by the weenie!"
[if you happen to have a magnifying glass and a pair of tweezers]
someoneyouknow
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Posts
- 28,274
I find it amusing Republicans are calling the whistleblower a snitch. I never knew Republicans sided with the ghetto rats. Times are a changin.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Posts
- 19,245
I’m super surprised.
Barr will be singing a new song soon.
BizzaBizza
Loves Spam
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2018
- Posts
- 481
I’m super surprised.
Barr will be singing a new song soon.
Wish in one hand and ....
someoneyouknow
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Posts
- 28,274
Former Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin categorically denies the con artist's lies regarding Biden. Mr Klimkin told the BBC that the prosecutor was sacked for corruption.
Mr Klimkin, who was serving as foreign minister when Mr Shokin was sacked in 2016, said there was "definitely" no evidence that his removal was for anything other than corruption.
He said it was important to have a full reshuffle of the offices, and pressure was coming from the whole international community, not just Mr Biden or the US individually.
And 300 former US national security officials signed a letter supporting the impeachment. They described Mr Trump's actions as a "national security concern", and said he appeared to have committed "an unconscionable abuse of power".
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49856788
Mr Klimkin, who was serving as foreign minister when Mr Shokin was sacked in 2016, said there was "definitely" no evidence that his removal was for anything other than corruption.
"The whole sense of this push was to sort out, to deliver on reforms in Ukraine," he said. "It was not about the prosecutor general. It was about prosecutor offices which were systemically corrupt."
He said it was important to have a full reshuffle of the offices, and pressure was coming from the whole international community, not just Mr Biden or the US individually.
And 300 former US national security officials signed a letter supporting the impeachment. They described Mr Trump's actions as a "national security concern", and said he appeared to have committed "an unconscionable abuse of power".
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49856788
HisArpy
Loose canon extraordinair
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2016
- Posts
- 42,905
1. The whistleblower complaint is based on hearsay since he/she WAS NOT A LISTENER to the phone call.
https://theweek.com/speedreads/8679...y-call-secondhand-account-completely-accurate
That makes it a fabrication since there is no percipient witness to the actual events.
2. Schiff began his hearing by stating the contents of the transcript. His statements regarding those contents were KNOWINGLY FALSE and he later called them a "parody" of the call. He read that "parody" into the Congressional record as if it were actual fact.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/26/adam-schiff-called-out-fabricating-ukraine-call-tr/
That's called fabrication of evidence. And a lie.
The question becomes; do you still support the narrative now that YOU KNOW it's not true?
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Posts
- 28,126
The problem is that both Trump and Rudy insist that it is true.
HisArpy
Loose canon extraordinair
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2016
- Posts
- 42,905
I’m super surprised.
Barr will be singing a new song soon.
So, because you don't like the fact that the DOJ cleared Trump of any wrongdoing, you're hoping to retaliate against the AG for doing his job?
Remember, in any litigation or determination of facts, one side of the controversy will ALWAYS lose. Sour grapes doesn't change that fact.
HisArpy
Loose canon extraordinair
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2016
- Posts
- 42,905
Insist what is true?
Be specific Sgt Mushroom - tell us WHAT EXACTLY they insist is "true".
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Posts
- 28,126
That Trump asked a foreign country to investigate a political rival.
HisArpy
Loose canon extraordinair
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2016
- Posts
- 42,905
Trump requested Ukraine assist the ONGOING DOJ INVESTIGATION into Hunter Biden's Ukrainian dealings as well as election interference in the 2016 election.
As usual, the words from your mouth are nothing but lies.
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Posts
- 28,126
Carnal_Flower
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- May 31, 2014
- Posts
- 7,031
Cite? No one's confirmed anything about a "DOJ Investigation into Hunter Biden." That would be big news. Feel free to provide a link.
A couple of points in response:
If someone says someone else told them something, whether or not what the someone else told them was true does not make the statement that they were told something by someone else a fabrication. Unless, of course, they were not actually told something by someone else. But that is not what you are arguing. You are arguing that because the whistle-blower did not perceive the conduct or hear the conversation them self, they cannot say what someone else who did see the conduct or hear the conversation told them about what they observed or heard.
A far as Schiff's characterization of the contents of the partial transcript of the call and the complaint, I did not see the opening statements of the Maguire hearing (so under your argument, I would have to conclude that anything you told me about them was false) but as a lawyer, wouldn't you agree that the documents themselves are the best evidence of what they say? What Schiff said regarding their content is irrelevant to their actual content, particularly since now they are a part of the public record.
I don't know whether the allegations in the complaint are true or not, although the partial transcript of the phone call appears to give credence to statements made about the call in the complaint. They certainly seem of sufficient import that whether or not they are true should be determined through a full and complete investigation.
KeithD
Virgin
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2012
- Posts
- 29,626
Is it going to surprise anyone that, although there may be one chosen person coming forward, as needed, as the whistleblower, that it's going to turn out that this was a whole bunch of folks in the Intel community putting what they knew together? That's pretty evident from the content of the complaint.
KeithD
Virgin
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2012
- Posts
- 29,626
Not necessarily. He doesn't seem to have a very high quotient in knowing what he claims to know.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was a drawing of straws and whistle blower drew the shortest one.
He's not a snitch. He's a liar, a fabricator. The "whistleblower" is no longer a key player in this issue because the actual verbiage has been released.
phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
Maybe he has alternative facts.
