Whistleblower Lawyer In January 2017: ‘Coup Has Started,’ ‘Impeachment Will Follow’

[Babba]

And that is consistent with every single one of these propaganda campaigns. Look for a starting point that has even a hint of impropriety, line up your assets, invent a narrative, collude with your media assets, ignore the gaping holes in your story and promote the talking points. Honestly, the real evil in all of this is the compliant press that goes along with it all. The Whistle blower has been an obvious smoke screen from the start, but when the press does not confront the lies and actually reinforces them, there is no motive for politicians to give a hoot about the truth. And despite what you will say in response to this, it is a pattern. I don't blame pols for acting like the snakes they are. But when the press just gives up and aligns with pols, we are in serious trouble.

The kabal just replaces the old talking point with new ones, but they keep getting weaker and weaker. Trump as Putin's puppet (dead and gone); Trump as obstructer of justice (why isn't that enough to Impeach if you think it's actually true?; Trump as enabler of a rapist to the Supreme Court (OMG, what an insane dog and pony show that was); Trump as a commander in chief whom you are now claiming can't put the squeeze on foreign governments when it comes to giving them aide ( weak tea; the public not only doesn't care, at least half of them approve).

Your movable feast is reaching the aperitif stage. Enjoy the after dinner drinks because this is getting really old.

Trump is Putin's puppet and he has been actively obstructing justice since he got into office. I don't know why Pelosi didn't consider that grounds for impeachment. Kavanaugh was a serial sexual harasser/assaulter in HS and probably college. And Trump can put the squeeze on foreign governments in pursuit of policies that benefit the US and/or our allies. But he can't do it in pursuit of anything for his own personal political gain. Which is what he did and exactly why his people tried to hide that phone conversation. Thank God for that WB! And thank God for the members of the administration who have testified to the veracity of the WB complaint.

Your continued belief in the deep state is what is really getting old.

 

[John T Ford]

Trump is Putin's puppet and he has been actively obstructing justice since he got into office. I don't know why Pelosi didn't consider that grounds for impeachment. Kavanaugh was a serial sexual harasser/assaulter in HS and probably college. And Trump can put the squeeze on foreign governments in pursuit of policies that benefit the US and/or our allies. But he can't do it in pursuit of anything for his own personal political gain. Which is what he did and exactly why his people tried to hide that phone conversation. Thank God for that WB! And thank God for the members of the administration who have testified to the veracity of the WB complaint.

Your continued belief in the deep state is what is really getting old.

Could it be lack of Evidence ?

Fake News MSM anonymous accusations are not considered Evidence in the real world you know.

 

[John T Ford]

But Congress has heard sworn testimony from eyewitnesses who corroborate what was in the original WB's complaint. They back up what is in the complaint. He/she most certainly did not collude with Schiff.

That's not factual.

If it were then why haven't they come out and officially accused the President with evidence to back up their accusations?

You are parroting Fake News and you can't even see it.

 

[Blueneck]

And that is consistent with every single one of these propaganda campaigns. Look for a starting point that has even a hint of impropriety, line up your assets, invent a narrative, collude with your media assets, ignore the gaping holes in your story and promote the talking points. Honestly, the real evil in all of this is the compliant press that goes along with it all. The Whistle blower has been an obvious smoke screen from the start, but when the press does not confront the lies and actually reinforces them, there is no motive for politicians to give a hoot about the truth. And despite what you will say in response to this, it is a pattern. I don't blame pols for acting like the snakes they are. But when the press just gives up and aligns with pols, we are in serious trouble.

The kabal just replaces the old talking point with new ones, but they keep getting weaker and weaker. Trump as Putin's puppet (dead and gone); Trump as obstructer of justice (why isn't that enough to Impeach if you think it's actually true?; Trump as enabler of a rapist to the Supreme Court (OMG, what an insane dog and pony show that was); Trump as a commander in chief whom you are now claiming can't put the squeeze on foreign governments when it comes to giving them aide ( weak tea; the public not only doesn't care, at least half of them approve).

Your movable feast is reaching the aperitif stage. Enjoy the after dinner drinks because this is getting really old.

Just as an experiment, instead of focusing on what you believe to be the character flaws of the Democratic majority & the media being "out to get" Trump, why not focus on why what he did wasn't actually wrong?

When asked by a reporter if he'd consider accepting help from a foreign government he said he would.

"It's not an interference, they have information -- I think I'd take it," Trump said. "If I thought there was something wrong, I'd go maybe to the FBI -- if I thought there was something wrong. But when somebody comes up with oppo research, right, they come up with oppo research, 'oh let's call the FBI.' The FBI doesn't have enough agents to take care of it. When you go and talk, honestly, to congressman, they all do it, they always have, and that's the way it is. It's called oppo research."

'I think I’d take it': In exclusive interview, Trump says he would listen if foreigners offered dirt on opponents

In an ABC News exclusive, President Donald Trump said he may not alert the FBI to overtures from foreign governments during the 2020 race.

abcnews.go.com

Then he asked not only Ukraine, but China (on camera) to investigate Joe Biden. You think that's okay? Legal?

"Russia, if you're listening..." Next thing you know, Wikileaks is releasing emails from a hacked DNC server.

If Trump invites foreign interference in an election and it happens, why should we assume this is a coincidence?

Your standard of proof for Trump's guilt is way higher than what it is for everyone else. And you don't see it.

Look at all the Benghazi hearings and the hours Hillary spent testifying and all Trump has done is claim executive privilege not only for himself but for everyone in his administration. His lack of cooperation seems to tell you he's innocent while you declared Clinton guilty after she cooperated and was cleared.

 

[Rev. Hellh0und]

Trump is Putin's puppet and he has been actively obstructing justice since he got into office. I don't know why Pelosi didn't consider that grounds for impeachment. Kavanaugh was a serial sexual harasser/assaulter in HS and probably college. And Trump can put the squeeze on foreign governments in pursuit of policies that benefit the US and/or our allies. But he can't do it in pursuit of anything for his own personal political gain. Which is what he did and exactly why his people tried to hide that phone conversation. Thank God for that WB! And thank God for the members of the administration who have testified to the veracity of the WB complaint.

Your continued belief in the deep state is what is really getting old.

#nuttertheories and propaganda. you have been told to call trump putin's puppet and you #neomccarthyites dutifully follow.

 

[kmiller1610]

But Congress has heard sworn testimony from eyewitnesses who corroborate what was in the original WB's complaint. They back up what is in the complaint. He/she most certainly did not collude with Schiff.

You don't corroborate something said if that something is open to interpretation. You can agree with something someone said, but corroboration has to do with a factual event, like rape, murder, assault.

For example, going just with the phone call summary, you can interpret that Trump was going after corruption or trying to dig up dirt, but neither can be proven just based on words spoken.

 

[kmiller1610]

Just as an experiment, instead of focusing on what you believe to be the character flaws of the Democratic majority & the media being "out to get" Trump, why not focus on why what he did wasn't actually wrong?

When asked by a reporter if he'd consider accepting help from a foreign government he said he would.

'I think I’d take it': In exclusive interview, Trump says he would listen if foreigners offered dirt on opponents

In an ABC News exclusive, President Donald Trump said he may not alert the FBI to overtures from foreign governments during the 2020 race.

abcnews.go.com

Then he asked not only Ukraine, but China (on camera) to investigate Joe Biden. You think that's okay? Legal?

"Russia, if you're listening..." Next thing you know, Wikileaks is releasing emails from a hacked DNC server.

If Trump invites foreign interference in an election and it happens, why should we assume this is a coincidence?

Your standard of proof for Trump's guilt is way higher than what it is for everyone else. And you don't see it.

Look at all the Benghazi hearings and the hours Hillary spent testifying and all Trump has done is claim executive privilege not only for himself but for everyone in his administration. His lack of cooperation seems to tell you he's innocent while you declared Clinton guilty after she cooperated and was cleared.

Food for thought on your questions.

Is It Ever OK for a President to Ask a Foreign Country to Investigate a Political Rival?

But the real answer to this question is more complicated. History shows that a president sometimes might be justified in asking a foreign country to investigate a political rival, including a former vice president. So, the mere fact of Trump’s request for an investigation into the Bidens, without considering the circumstances of the request, is not enough to impeach him.

In order to prove Trump abused his presidential powers to the point that he no longer can be trusted in exercising them—the constitutional standard for impeachment—Congress must establish Trump’s intent in making the request. Was it done in good faith, with U.S. foreign or domestic interests in mind, or in bad faith, merely for Trump’s personal and political benefit? To prove the latter, Congress can’t rely on Trump’s words alone; it must show that the charges of corruption against the Bidens are baseless and that Trump’s request to Ukraine is part of a pattern of bad faith demonstrating that the nation no longer can tolerate his incumbency.

In 1804, Aaron Burr contacted the British government, apparently to peddle a plan for severing part of the United States to form a new country in western territory. In response, President Thomas Jefferson had Burr prosecuted for treason, and he was found not guilty. We can stipulate that Jefferson was excessively involved in the treason trial. But had he instead simply asked for Britain’s assistance in gathering more information about Burr’s involvement in this plot, that would have been entirely appropriate given the high stakes for the country.

This is true despite the fact Jefferson was seeking reelection at the time and Burr, an incorrigibly ambitious politician, might still have coveted the presidency.

 

[Babba]

You don't corroborate something said if that something is open to interpretation. You can agree with something someone said, but corroboration has to do with a factual event, like rape, murder, assault.

For example, going just with the phone call summary, you can interpret that Trump was going after corruption or trying to dig up dirt, but neither can be proven just based on words spoken.

They're not just going with the phone call summary. They're investigating every instance where the administration has been pressuring Ukraine to open an investigation and the reasons why. And this shadow foreign policy has been going on for months. It goes against official US policy. Why would they do that clandestinely if there is nothing wrong with it? And why would Trump want the Ukrainians to specifically announce their opening of the investigation on CNN because he knows a lot of Democrats will be watching and it could sew doubt about Biden in their minds?

 

[Babba]

That's not factual.

If it were then why haven't they come out and officially accused the President with evidence to back up their accusations?

You are parroting Fake News and you can't even see it.

They're collecting the evidence now.

 

[John T Ford]

They're collecting the evidence now.

That's what you guys have been saying since Jun 16, 2015 .

Be sure to let us know when that Alt Left Fantasy comes to pass.