Home » Sean Davis puts the pieces together: “whistleblower” plus leaks plus media plus Adam Schiff plus…

Comments

Sean Davis puts the pieces together: “whistleblower” plus leaks plus media plus Adam Schiff plus… — 25 Comments

  1. It’s rather like arguing with a teenager. If you debate something, they can claim “it’s debatable” and if it’s debatable one view is as legit as another. “So, Papa, my view’s as good as yours. Better, even, because I like it.” Thus with evidence against Trump. Credible sources have said X. Where did they get that idea? Well, we gave it to ’em.

    See also, Monty Python’s Argument Clinic.

  2. It won’t do any good but every ranking Republican needs to formally call out Schiff and seek his resignation from committee for the lies he spread in his opening statement.

  3. “Presidential phone calls are not an intelligence concern. The fact that IC officers transcribe these calls does not give the IC IG jurisdiction over these calls.”

    So this is a stupid system put in place long before Trump. In the past we’ve heard repeatedly from GOP leaders that these intelligence people are salt of the earth types that would never ever breach their sworn oaths.

    Yet here are multiple IC (intel community?) people blabbing and complaining about what they “witnessed” while they were supposedly just “transcribing” a phone call. Then the transcribed call goes into a server with access made available to a substantial number of people? Who thought this up?

    It’s worth noting that Obama’s DOJ ran more prosecutions and handed out more severe penalties for improper handling of confidential/classified information than most other admins. They did this simultaneously with Hillary mishandling of thousands of pieces of State Dept. email. A conservative Obama admin. person who might potentially leak to the WSJ, for example, would think twice.

  4. I listened to the beginning of Schiff’s opening statement and my head was going blow off I was so angry at the straight up lies he was telling, “Seven times Trump asked … blah, blah, blah…”. After I cooled off a bit I realized what had happened. He was giving a speech prepared before the transcript of Trump’s conversation had been released. Schiff was assuming that he could lie with impunity because no one would be able to check his statement against the truth. It showed he’s too stupid and inflexible to change his course of action and wound up, up to his neck in bleep. He’s also betting on CNN playing his speech without criticism so that he can fool a lot of people despite the blatant mendacity of his performance

  5. I’ve been reading neo’s posts in reverse chronological order. Thanks, neo, for doing a great job collating and describing the news on this despicable Ukraine hoax.

  6. The comment has been made that this whistleblower’s document seems too well done to be the work of the typical lone whistleblower.

    That’s one of the things that bothered me but, initially, I couldn’t put my finger on this aspect of the document.

    Looking at it again, it reads like the work product of a team of lawyers who put some time in on it, rather than that of one guy on the ragged edge, hazarding his career to point out some great injustice he’ become aware of, and cobbling together his statement.

    The idea that this whole thing was orchestrated by the Democrats from the get go, was a charade, just a big flashy Kabuki routine is, it seems to me, increasingly likely.

  7. I am reading information from conservative sources and it appears the whole new Trump Bad impeach story is flimsy and starting, like the others in the past, to fall apart and kind of come crashing down. At the same time when I check the news from the left side of the fence it appears they, CNN, NYT and WaPo are doubling down with the story of unprecedented Treason with a capital ‘T’ and no facts or names of the accusers.

    I am still under the impression that in the USA when a person makes charges against another they need to identify themselves and using the term whistleblower for hearsay accusations is ludicrous, trying to bring down the elected head of the most powerful country in the world with gossip repeated over and over in the media is not good for our nation. I hope we can actually turn the rocks over and see who these maggots really are.

  8. Last night on FOX, Jillian Turner, who formerly worked on the National Security Council in two Administrations, and said she had participated in hundreds of such phone calls, said that the usual procedure was for two CIA Agents, detailed from that Agency, to monitor the conversation, and to write a transcript of it down.

    From the various articles I have read today, it is seeming as if one or more of these CIA agents were the source of some—or perhaps all of—the information that the “whistleblower” received about this call.

    As has been pointed out, if true, this would certainly argue for banning a disloyal CIA from having any further role in being a party to, or transcribing these calls.

    It seems remarkable to me just how many members of the Federal government—members of Congress, people in the State Department, CIA, FBI, DOJ, the White House, and other Federal Departments and Agencies—have revealed themselves as being quite willing to rat out this President, and to try to take him down, regardless of the fact that, by doing so, they apparently break the law.

    As I have pointed out here before, the only honorable figure in all of this putrid mess, the only person who has apparently remained faithful to his oath, faithful to our Constitution, and to our Republic, and to the Presidency, has been Admiral Mike Rogers, the former head of the NSA who, when he learned of it, informed President Trump that he was being spied upon and then, promptly, resigned.

    All this seems extraordinary.

    Has this level of animosity–coupled with disloyalty–always been present just below the surface in our apparently overwhelmingly leftist Federal government?

    How many times have we seen someone–touted by almost everyone as being a honorable, competent, some sort of a conservative, and a great fellow–be appointed by Trump, only to turn out to function as a solid road block to anything the President wants to do, or as someone who is actively working against him?

    More and more, it seems as if Trump—his family, and a few loyal aides—have been dropped down in the midst of the vast snake pit that is Washington, D.C., and can trust not a single person, or take anyone at face value.

    Nonetheless, even given all this,i t’s surprising just how much President Trump has accomplished, given how much opposition, animosity, outright hatred, and sabotage that he, his family, and his Administration and its officers have been subject to.

  9. To speculatively track and expand on your thought Snow on Pine (and if I misinterpret please say), it seems to me plausible that the President distrusting the CIA nearly entire might banish from the White House every single one of those detailed to work there. He might if the need occurs, for instance, replace them with uniformed men and women from the DIA, possibly even consulting with Gen. Flynn for recommendations. The President might keep his daily briefing from a CIA officer, but not invite that officer to hang around. Something, anyhow, ought to be done to vigorously demonstrate the distance between formerly convenient trust and currently repeated betrayals.

  10. It has been pointed out that–out of all the major institutions in this country–the military is the only one that is left that–according to public polls–has the confidence of a major percentage of the people, and even our military has reportedly been weakened/corrupted during the Obama Administration.

    Nonetheless–regardless of the very predictable howls from the left, and the accusations of President Trump instituting a military dictatorship–replacing key, selected White House Federal civilian employees with well-vetted members of the military may be the only way that President Trump may have a reasonable chance of getting loyalty from the staff, and an end to leaks.

  11. Snow on Pine on September 26, 2019 at 5:02 pm said:
    The comment has been made that this whistleblower’s document seems too well done to be the work of the typical lone whistleblower.

    That’s one of the things that bothered me but, initially, I couldn’t put my finger on this aspect of the document.
    * * *
    I only got a cursory look at the complaint this morning, but had much the same response.
    Now, maybe we all on the outside just haven’t seen enough whistleblower complaints to realize what’s normal and what’s not, but it read to me much more like a legal brief to a court, and I have seen a few of those.

    Glad to see I was not alone.

  12. The complaint is addressed to both Burr and Schiff. It is declared by the writer to be UNCLASSIFIED except for the (redacted) appendices.

    How did the IGIC get it in the first place, and why did it have to go to Maguire to get permission to give to Congress, since … a senator and representative had it from the beginning?
    Or should have, unless all their mail is routed through gatekeepers.
    Or were they just holding out on the rest of the committee until they milked it dry first?*

    Any old hands out there know what is going on?

    *There are a lot of parallels to the Russia collusion scheme, but this one (holding a document at the same time you complain that no one will give you the document) is at least a cousin of Pelosi’s stunt with Blasey-Ford’s letter about Kavanaugh.

  13. note to sdferr: thanks for treading the wine-press of the Twitter-yard (almost) alone, and doing the work many of us shrink from doing.
    I really, really, hate posts that embed a tweet, THEN quote it AGAIN, and run the sequence backwards in most of the articles, what with the multiple replies to replies to replies; at least you put them substantive paragraphs in the right order.
    (Cheers for the ThreadReader unrolling app, btw.)

    Why can’t people just go back to writing articles that aren’t busted up into separate paragraphs and dispensed one at a time? One or two or three, maybe, but not these 10 to 20 tweet long monsters that sometimes show up.

    Maybe it’s the modern equivalent of a magazine serialized novel, shortened for the modern attention span.

    And get off my lawn!

  14. I have a good friend who is a retired 3-star General having done a lot of high profile good things in the past and he has been very upset at the number of good people who were pushed out during the eight years of the Democrats and the product of the military schools they have produced for the past 30 years which means we have a lot of military who march to the beat of a different drummer.

    I spent a very early morning breakfast in the late 1990’s with a Lt.Col. in the Army, West Point Grad, who was assigned to the Pentagon we were the only early risers and having been out of the military for over 30 years at that time I asked how things were going. He looked around and said I don’t know you and you don’t know me so I can tell you, “It is hell!” he went on to say that over 40% of his time was making sure all of those who were working for him were happy and no one had any complaints about civil rights or any kind of harassment, his further promotions would be based on him not having in problems with his staff. He told me that he wanted to get out of that nest of vipers, back in a field unit and command position and he hoped he could hang on long enough and not have an ulcer or become an alcoholic. We shook hands and I wished him the best, I hope he made his 30 years.

    No arguments with Snow on the Pine about the military being a decent place to find good people, there are a lot of them still serving but they really need to be selective.

  15. More and more, it seems as if Trump—his family, and a few loyal aides—have been dropped down in the midst of the vast snake pit that is Washington, D.C., and can trust not a single person, or take anyone at face value.

    I heartily agree. He has been able to trust no on e and each time he has tried, he is taught they are all liars and crooks. I am very much in favor of moving agencies out of DC. Disperse the carp. The screams when Perdue ordered one small branch of Ag to move indicates how effective it could be.

  16. Make K–I too found it funny how loudly federal employees of the major Department dealing with agriculture, farming, and similar issues were screaming, when it was moved away from Washington, and nearer to where agriculture is the primary economic activity.

    As I recall, the MSM even dug up the sob story about an employee who had a severely handicapped child, and what a trauma that move would be for them.

    It seems to me that it is just “standard practice” for private companies here in the u.S. to move/transfer their employees all around the country.

    Why should the Federal government be any different?

    It strikes me that these transferred Federal employees will likely be making a hell of a lot more money than most workers around them, and will thus be able to live quite comfortable lives in Fargo, or Keokuk, Missoula, or Avoca, Iowa.

  17. I’d sure like to have heard from a “whistleblower” during the night of Benghazi. Whatever happened then and whoever made the big decisions — that they have kept zipped tight.

    And four Americans died violently, including a US Ambassador.

  18. “This time they decided to go the ‘whistleblower’ route instead of the ‘leak to the Times‘ route, just to add variety and supposed gravitas.” — Neo

    This is a good guess, and for what it’s worth, I thought of a different possibility.

    Certainly, a while ago, Trump must have strongly considered how hostile and “leaky” his White House staff is. This, combined with the absurdly (mostly) open server system for disseminating confidential but not secret communications, a “sting operation” would be an obvious tactic. Maybe too obvious.

    When they moved the not secret phone call transcript over to the secret server, were they baiting a trap, or wetting appetites? Had the transcript ended up in a newspaper, then a crime would have been committed by someone. Identification and proof is the hard part, but in a sting extra preparation is possible.

    But the Dems didn’t go for a leak to a newspaper. With this whistleblower complaint, I think all legal bases have been covered as far as handling confidential material is concerned. Certainly, the people doing and handling the transcript have clearances, as does some person detailed from the CIA; and they’re allowed to discuss classified matters with each other (in a secure room?).

  19. The Clinton 2020 Campaign is driving the whole situation.

    Ukraine sidelines Biden and impeaches Trump. The MSM and the lefty programmer types who actually control the systems running social media will see this as their last chance to get Trump. No exculpatory evidence will get through the noise, but they will overplay their hand and destroy their credibility.

    Warren will win Iowa and New Hampshire but will peak. Her more extreme positions will be endlessly discussed in the MSM as serious problems against Trump. Some Democratic Governor will emerge as a savior as Biden falls. A necessary event to provide a VP for Hillary and to block Warren.

    Nobody really believes that a two third Senate vote is likely, but there is no turning back. Anti-Trump hysteria will not diminish.

    At some point calls for Hillary to enter the race will begin from prominent Democrats and Never Trumpers. A Super-Delegate count will show her with lots of potential support. Warren will win lots of delegates but not a first round victory, Hillary may never actually enter the Primaries, but will take the Convention.

    The Blue Bubble will become even more impenetrable and more disconnected from reality when viewed from the outside.

    The Swamp will become obsessed with fear for their existence. They will project their beliefs of persecution and feel justified in engaging in behavior that enrages the general voting public.

    There will emerge a desire for a housecleaning that Trump will drive to a huge 2020 win.

  20. Cornhead—No, I think its more like the working age members of the general public are carrying on with their normal daily routines—trying to make a living, to pay their bills, take care of their kids, and maybe go out to dinner once in awhile, look at some sports or other entertainment on TV, or socialize with friends—and, thus, they have neither the time, nor the interest, to follow every twist and turn of the machinations in Washington, which, in any case, I’d think they’d be disgusted with and turned off by.

    Moreover, if and when they do pay attention to the “news,” unless they are very careful about what news sources they pay attention to and credit, they are going to be fed straight Leftist/Democrat propaganda.

    I think that, more than likely, beside some political junkies, its retirees like myself, who have both the time and the interest, who do most of the following and commenting on this crap.

    I think that the Left is counting on this lack of attention by the general public, and their being misled by the MSM’s reporting i.e. Leftist/Democrat propaganda, to allow their candidate to escape close, objective, and careful scrutiny, so that they can slip their candidate—whoever that is going to be—into the presidency.

    I believe those on the Left/Democrats think that their hysterical scream of “Orangeman Bad” will drown out everything else.

  21. It’s probably too late to get into this discussion as everyone has moved on, but two thoughts occurred to me:

    1) Who picks these two IC officers that “transcribe” these calls? After 8 years of Brennan and Clapper packing these agencies with Obama supporters, what are the odds that some of those will be planted in the Executive to work on the calls? These officers are not stenographers so how accurate are the transcriptions?

    2) Why not go to a dedicated position(s) in the Executive like that of a court reporter staffed with trained professionals who would produce highly accurate renditions of the calls?

  22. The incredible and continuing number of leaks, that appear to be coming from inside the White House, argue that many, perhaps even the majority of those around Trump are very likely his enemies.

    It may well be that their opposition to Trump has forced a lot of people into the sunlight who had, heretofore, remained silent, may have done this or that passive-aggressive/minor thing to impede those they considered their enemy, but took no major actions, and remained undetected.

    I’m hoping that a lot of these people, having acted, will now be detected and fired–or effectively sent into exile–stripped of any power to effect events, transferred to some unimportant, very uncomfortable, God-forsaken post in the middle of nowhere, there to contemplate their sins.

    It appears that the problem may be that President Trump has just only a few actually loyal people around him and that he can count on, numbers insufficient to ferret out who these enemies are, and to take action against them when, other, more consequential things have to be done.

    On the larger scale, there may just be too many people inside the Beltway who see Trump as their enemy, as the “disruptor” who is trying to break their “Iron Ricebowl,” for Trump to make any lasting change, to hold back the Leftist tide, to reform a system that is just too far gone, as the opposition to him from all sides seems to indicate.

  23. One thing that the advent of Trump has done for us–whether we wanted this knowledge or not–was to cause to surface before our horrified gaze actors, agendas, and actions, revelatory things about the true state of our government, our political system, and the Republic, that we were heretofore blissfully unaware of.

    Did we want to know these things, probably not, did we need to know these things, pretty certainly yes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>