Apparently the whistleblowers ID is known by many main stream media outlets. The debate is centered on wether or not to publish it. Your thoughts?
It’s outrageous that they are not publishing it when it’s already in the public domain. The media isn’t supposed to enforce the governments regulations. And I think the excuse that it puts the whistleblower is immediate harm is a load of bullshir, as if the president is gonna whack someone that high profile.
Anytime Trump attacks someone publicly that person has to go out and get security from the loads of death threats they receive..
If the deep state CIA partisan hack clown wants to spread lies let his identity be known
It’s illegal to publish it. Not that Rand Paul and DJT and DJT Jr care about federal whistleblower laws.
Shy ... that is a lie. If so, why isn’t MrO in jail for the MANY legitimate whistleblowers that MrO and his disgusting regime outed, persecuted and prosecuted?
This political hack is NOT a whistleblower. He is a Democrat plant that went around the whistleblower process and colluded with Adam Schiff.
Your shrink called, Think. You missed your appointment.
They had to change the whistleblower rules to allow for secondhand hearsay to be considered a whistleblower complaint. The whole thing was a setup started a few years ago. What the Dems are only beginning to realize is that FISA works both ways. They have it all, including the plan. The whistleblower is cracking and will likely testify to save his own ass now.
Whistleblower rules?? Duh - it’s a Law, and not changed because of someone/anyone’s whim.
Your claims of changing the rules are invalid - like most of the wild ideas you spread.
Shy ... show us the law! Show us where it says that whistles can be blown with third hand information.
There's a thing called Google. Use it.
Lady ... psst, there is no law. That’s why Shy didn’t take up my challenge. Even she knows that she’s just blowing smoke.
I recommend that you use your a google and find out for yourself what Shy and I already know.
Think - I didn't respond to you because I had much better things to do ... and I still do.
I just can't be bothered with your pettiness some days.
Shy .... ha ha ... thanks for showing your hypocrisy AND the fact that have absolutely no sources to substantiate the lies that you spread.
How ironic is that you took the time you said you wouldn’t take to respond, yet the only thing you failed to do is to provide a source for your nonsense.
I say don’t publish it, just put him in prison for lying on a federal form while incognito.
Here you say it’s a lie. Below you say it’s not illegal. At least pick one of the talking points you’ve been given and stick to it.
Below? I don’t see it?
Unfortunately for you, everyone else can.
Two separate subjects. The whistle blower lied, and what Trump did is not illegal.
I think it was clear. But. Just in case I hope that clears up what I said.
He lied about the not-illegal action?
No. Read the not so liberal news. Something unbiased and you will see that he filled out the form improperly and lied. Now how much people care about him lying on the form is what they will have to determine. We don’t need the whistle blowers testimony anyway. We got the transcript before Nancy could announce the whistle blower testimonial. So who cares what he said about it. Especially since he didn’t even listen to the phone call. That’s hearsay. Not admissible anyway. But what is interesting is another spy leaking classified material. Remember the President of Mexico phone call that was spied on? These people should be imprisoned. That’s seriously bad.
There’s no transcript and you obviously can’t tell me what this alleged lie is.
I agree with @Breck Why should the leaker get due process if we’re not even going to allow the POTUS to have it?
We’re all literally watching due process take place right now, dumdum.
The president deserves to be able to face his accuser and bring out his motivations. We already know he was an Obama holdover who worked for Brennan, Clapper, and other members of the deep state. He also was deeply involved in bring forth the now debunked Steele Dossier. His involvement runs deep with those attempting to overthrow an election and a duly elected president.
The “whistleblower” now knows he is listed in the FISA report that will be coming out. That’s why his lawyer suddenly said they would respond to Republican questions in writing. Nope! They aren’t having that. He will testify in person under oath and verbally respond to questions or he’ll drop away.
The whistleblowers should be protected. Everything reported has been corroborated. It doesn’t matter anymore. We have written statements and depositions. Let the hearings begin.
Not to mention Trump admitted it and did it again during a press conference. His administration released a memo of the call.
I agree. But why wasn’t the whistle blower on Obama protected? He was fired and hounded. He’s in hiding now
Guess you will have to ask Obama.
Shy ... your double standard is showing!
Nothing has been corroborated. You can read the memorandum/transcript for yourself. Nothing illegal or unethical was said on the call.
I have read the transcript and am working my way they the released transcripts.
I suggest you do the same, kscott, before you start waving the flag of partisanship and opinion writers.
Shy ... what high crime have you found?
I’m not sitting in DC - and neither are you, or your cronies. I hear what every other American hears. I probably read a great deal more than the average.
Following your typical twist; what high crime HASN’T he done?
Shy ... thanks for confirming that you have found no high crimes in the reading that you felt compelled to brag about.
It’s fun to watch you squirm around and send your virtue signals as you justify not addressing the simple question asked.
As for your moronic twist, in our country, every person accused of a crime is afforded due process, that includes the president. Every person is presumed innocent unless and until they’ve been proven guilty. There is no need to prove that MrT didn’t commit a crime, there is only a need to have compelling evidence that he did commit a crime.
So the net take away is, you feel virtuous because you read some of the testimony (yeah you) and you’ve found no evidence of a high crime (thus your tantrum), which means that with all your reading, you are left with nothing but hollow dreams of impeaching this president because he colors his hair.
I did read the transcript. That’s why I said nothing was illegal or unethical.
Asking for a favor in return for America’s help is in fact illegal.
He didn’t hold the aid over his head for one. Second, he asked about looking into Biden’s corruption. Is Biden somehow immune from investigation? Dems have been investigating Trump for 3 years and every single time came up without any shred of wrongdoing and are trying to remove a duly elected president. That sure seems like election interference and treason to me.
Kscott lives in an alternate reality.
Just read Think’s diatribe ... it’s hilarious!
The aid was approved in February and released two days after the whistleblowers complaint was made public. Guilty!
They could be the same person! 😹😹😹😹😹
You can read the publicly available transcript. The “whistleblower” isn’t necessary. No crime committed.
I have read it! Duh! Can you comprehend what it says?
“I would like you to do us a favor though”
SP ... if asking a foreign country for a favor were illegal then every president would be in jail. The fact is you are wrong. You can’t find even one statute that makes your silly assertion true.
Please understand that most people don’t fall for your silly approach of avoiding the facts.
Shy ... you still haven’t shown even one crime committed by MrT. I wonder why you’ve failed so badly.
Shy ... we get that you’re too embarrassed to speak now that your lies are exposed.
SP ... no crime, what’s your point?
Which law did he break?
SP ... more self portraits? Man, you are more full of yourself than previously thought!
So did you find the law or not?
Because we hate him is good enough for the left.
Steadfastandloyal 🤣 What does trumpfluffers.com say?
The GOP wants his or her identity to be known so that they can use their character to try and demean the things that were said in the whistle report. After the release of the private hearings transcripts everything that The whistleblower alleged has been backed up by multiple different witnesses. So the identity of the whistleblower does not matter it doesn't matter if they work for biting it doesn't matter if they worked for Trump the things that they said have been backed up by other witnesses the GOP just wants to distract people
Don’t the whistleblower laws make it illegal to identify the person? By the government? By anyone? Aren’t the laws there to protect them from treats and intimidation? Why have them if people are just going to break them?
It protects the whistleblower from retaliation on the job. It doesn’t protect him from having his name published by the press.
I guess this “loyal” website must be the new Fox News buzzword ... I keep seeing it from Rs.
The truth is the truth. Criticizing the site presenting the facts is just a deflection that shows you have no valid argument.
And I’m not an R.
We must remember that the deep state insider coup plotters changed the whistleblower guidelines just before this clown came forward. Guidelines were changed from a whistleblower needing direct knowledge to just needing heresay knowledge.
Ok, whatever your political inclination Ebola, Fox is trying to recover from years of Ailes pushing the Murdoch ultra-conservative style ... unfortunately, I won’t believe Fox is successful until they get rid of Hannity, Carlson, and Ingraham.
... highly biased channel and mostly opinion rather than news and/or documentaries.
And CNN, MSNBC, et al are unbiased...wow. 😂
“Trying to recover...?” Fox 🦊 is the most watched and trusted cable news network and has been for the last 16 years. They are certainly the least biased of the major cable news networks.
They have their conservative bias in the opinion but always have liberals to counterbalance the conservative POV.
@4boot .. I never said the sources you mentioned are unbiased. Re-read what I said. You are attempting to re-direct the POV to something not said. I’ve noticed that a lot since 1/20/2017
And Ebola ... a 2015 report?? Pre-Ailes’ death? Pre the MeToo movement?
... how about a claim that isn’t 4+ years old.
😂🤣. The source cites itself as a valid source???? 😂🤣😂🤣
Fox News finishes 2018 as most-watched cable network, ‘Hannity’ tops cable news
The facts speak for themselves. Stats don’t lie.
Shall I continue or are you going to continue to deny the facts?
Hmmm - well, all I can say is that there are a lot of old people that have the tv on all day, whether it’s watched or not, and a lot of them have Fox on all day.
But, but, but...
Publish it. We need to know where these crazy accusations came from.
Crazy accusations? The White House released a memo confirming exactly what they confessed to doing.
White house memos and witness testimony has backed up everything that was said, it doesn't matter where they accusations came from
Sure it does. I haven’t seen any memo that backs up what was said and the president deserves to be able to face his accuser and cross examine him. The American people need to know his motivations for doing what he did.
It’s gotta be hard to see with Trump’s dick in your mouth.
It’s gotta be hard to think with Shiff’s dick up your ass.
That’s NOT true.
That is a real good unbiased source there...
By law in every state and the feds, the accused only has the right to face their accuser DURING trial.
It’s customary to allow for depositions and other sworn interrogatories between the plaintiff and defendant prior to trial. In any case this is a political proceeding, not a legal proceeding. The president deserves to question and cross examine his accuser.
No, he doesn’t. Not as long as all discovery is shared with him.
Trump only wants the name published so that he can tear the man apart and ensure an “accident” happens. Which, of course would be the best accident that ever happened but HE didn’t do it.
I have to disagree having been party to legal proceeding in the past.
And I think you’re confusing Trump with Hillary.
Plus there’s an excellent chance the “whistleblower” will be charged with filing a false whistleblower complaint. The penalty for that is not just a slap on the wrist and it would void any protection he has under the whistleblower law.
His lawyer has been tweeting since 2017 that the “coup” has started.
The tin foil residue is strong in this one 🙄
The allegations have been independently verified. The only reason to name this person is to subject them to harassment/death threats and to send a message to potential whistleblowers to keep their mouth shut.
The allegations were never verified and the transcript stands as is.
Stop spreading disinformation
There is no transcript. There’s a White House summary and even that shows quid pro quo. No doubt you’ll keep lying though.
The allegations are not illegal. So it doesn’t matter anyway. You better hope you find a better last minute candidate. Because this last ditch effort isn’t going anywhere.