|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
12-03-2019, 12:35 PM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,725
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
What agency bureaucrat spun something?
|
''In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election".
|
|
|
|
12-03-2019, 02:23 PM
|
#2
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
''In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election".
|
What is the spin in that?
The Trumplican report from the House Intelligence committee says Trump sought that investigation. That investigation could and was by a number of people in the administration, construed to be soliciting interference from a foreign country in the 2020 election and moved forward thru appropriate channels per the law. There is no provision in the law for setting that aside or covering it up. Some of the people, Trump appointees, involved thought they had made a criminal referral of the president to DOJ. The administration tried and continues to obstruct the investigation.
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
12-03-2019, 02:36 PM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,725
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
What is the spin in that?
That investigation could and was by a number of people in the administration, construed to be soliciting interference from a foreign country in the 2020 election and moved forward thru appropriate channels per the law.
|
"could" and "construed to be" are assumptions, spin is assumption.
|
|
|
|
12-03-2019, 02:47 PM
|
#4
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
"could" and "construed to be" are assumptions, spin is assumption.
|
And the whistleblowers report per the law was supposed to go where in order that the parties deemed responsible could determine what validity it had?
Into hiding, or to Congress?
Where in the law did it say that it could be shelved, hidden, covered up?
Given how damning the basic facts are, imagine how compelling the case/evidence would be if Trump hadn’t obstructed the investigation so thoroughly?
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
12-03-2019, 02:58 PM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
Given how damning the basic facts are
|
this is dumb...you watch too much msnbc
|
|
|
|
12-03-2019, 03:36 PM
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,725
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
And the whistleblowers report per the law was supposed to go where in order that the parties deemed responsible could determine what validity it had?
Into hiding, or to Congress?
Where in the law did it say that it could be shelved, hidden, covered up?
Given how damning the basic facts are, imagine how compelling the case/evidence would be if Trump hadn’t obstructed the investigation so thoroughly?
|
OK, just keep moving the goalposts. I can't keep up. I thought we were talking about spin. The whistleblowers report did not have to include the assumption (spin) that Trump was acting in respect to the 2020 elections. If, without that spin, the withholding of money was so "damning," then that would be enough to investigate it. Why was it necessary to inject an opinion of what Trump's motives were? He explained what his motive was.
|
|
|
|
12-03-2019, 03:39 PM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
OK, just keep moving the goalposts.
|
dude...he's nuts
|
|
|
|
12-03-2019, 03:45 PM
|
#8
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election.
Trump’s ask of Zelensky was so grave that both the CIA general counsel, Courtney Simmons Elwood, and the general counsel at the National Security Council, John Eisenberg, decided the accusations had a “reasonable basis” and together called the Justice Department on Aug. 14 to discuss how to handle them. Elwood reportedly intended this call to be a criminal referral about the president’s conduct. Later in August, the Acting Director of National Intelligence and Inspector General for the Intelligence Community referred the allegations to the Justice Department as a possible criminal matter. This means that upon learning of Trump’s ask alone (forget everything else we’ve learned), multiple senior government lawyers, all appointed by Trump, were worried the president had committed a crime.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
This is the original spin that started this mess. It was an assumption, not a fact, that it was specifically about the 2020 election not about corruption.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
''In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election".
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
"could" and "construed to be" are assumptions, spin is assumption.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
And the whistleblowers report per the law was supposed to go where in order that the parties deemed responsible could determine what validity it had?
Into hiding, or to Congress?
Where in the law did it say that it could be shelved, hidden, covered up?
Given how damning the basic facts are, imagine how compelling the case/evidence would be if Trump hadn’t obstructed the investigation so thoroughly?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
OK, just keep moving the goalposts. I can't keep up. I thought we were talking about spin. The whistleblowers report did not have to include the assumption (spin) that Trump was acting in respect to the 2020 elections. If, without that spin, the withholding of money was so "damning," then that would be enough to investigate it. Why was it necessary to inject an opinion of what Trump's motives were? He explained what his motive was.
|
That assumption is why he thought it should be reported, others concurred, some thought it was criminal.
What was supposed to happen per the law to a whistleblowers report deemed reportable by the officials having jurisdiction?
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:07 PM.
|
| |