Whistleblower Complaint Involves Trump Communication With Foreign Leader

[jimnyc]

This of course was denied and denied and the dems ran around claiming it was debunked.

---

Exclusive – Devin Nunes: Intelligence Community Inspector General ‘Knowingly Changed’ Whistleblower Complaint Form

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said Sunday the intelligence community inspector general (ICIG), with whom an intelligence official filed a whistleblower complaint against President Trump, “knowingly changed” the complaint form in order to help get the complaint out publicly.

Nunes told Sirius XM’s Breitbart News Sunday host Matt Boyle, “[The ICIG is] either totally incompetent or part of the deep state, and he’s got a lot of questions he needs to answer because he knowingly changed the form and the requirements in order to make sure that this whistleblower complaint got out publicly.”

Nunes’s comments come after the ICIG, Michael Atkinson, testified to lawmakers on Friday.

“So he’s either incompetent or in on it, and he’s going to have more to answer for, I can promise you, because we are not going to let him go; he is going to tell he truth about what happened,” Nunes added.

Nunes also said the intelligence official who filed the complaint had filled out an old complaint form that said the complainant must have firsthand information related to the alleged wrongdoing. The form was updated sometime after the official filed his complaint, to not require firsthand knowledge.

“First of all, you have the change of the forms. … You no longer had to have firsthand information; you had to have secondhand information. Clearly they backdated it to August. The evidence is clear that it didn’t change on the website until the 25th of September,” he said.

Rest - https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...omplaint-form/

[LongTermGuy]

*Love to see Bongino vs Chuck Dudd in the Octagon...!

>

[jimnyc]

I said that this would help Trump and now I see other ways it could help. It's calling into question a lot of Dem actions in general and putting the spotlight on quite a few others directly. Toasty Joe is the first casualty. Schiff made himself a casualty. Pelosi directly lies and supports the first casualty. Leading 2020 candidates are all backing this BS. This has more than potential to call out much more than Trump's phone call.

---

Here’s How A Formal Vote On The Impeachment Inquiry Could Help Republicans And Hurt Democrats Ahead Of 2020

The Democratic-led impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump poses serious risks to former Vice President Joe Biden and a possible roadmap for Republicans trying to defend the president.

If history is any indication, then Democrats could give House Republicans the ability to subpoena testimony from Biden or his son, Hunter Biden. The majority parties who sought to impeach former presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton granted their minority opponents such powers.

Subpoenas were subject to a vote of the House Judiciary Committee at the time, leaving open the possibility this time around that Democrats could squash any such move, especially as it would give the president the ability to switch the media narrative.

Trump’s intransigence could bring the matter to a head shortly.

The Trump administration is suggesting it will not comply with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s investigation unless House Democrats hold a formal vote on an impeachment inquiry. Trump intends on putting moderate Democrats on the spot, forcing them to publicly state their intentions.

If Republicans are given the opportunity to subpoena, then the inquiry could be jeopardized, according to some experts.

“This is almost entirely about framing the narrative … Just on procedural grounds they are going to try to delegitimize the impeachment effort,” William Howell, a professor of American politics at the University of Chicago, told reporters Monday.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy asked Pelosi in an Oct. 3 letter to put the inquiry on hold, arguing that waiting to establish rules gives the minority party some leverage during the process. The California Democrat was not swayed. She denied the request, stating that the House committee is under no obligation to hold a vote.

Even if Pelosi gives Republicans a vote, then she still might not allow them the power to subpoena, Julian Epstein, former attorney for the committee during Clinton’s impeachment, told reporters.

Denying them that opportunity would likely give Trump and his defenders a new issue to find fault with, namely that House Democrats are denying the president due process. “It could spell those things out or doesn’t have to,” Epstein said, adding: “it gives them a soapbox on which to argue process.”

Rest - https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/08/t...urt-democrats/

[jimnyc]

Looks like yet the investigations the left wants to ignore - are finding out more and more. I think Clapper was involved as was Brennan. Of course Obama will be shielded at all costs.

Could be nothing, but could show they were involved in crap and under some orders from the CiC.

---

Did James Clapper Just Admit President Obama Directed Him to Go After the Trump Campaign?

As U.S. Attorney John Durham continues his criminal investigation into the origins of the government's targeting of the 2016 Trump campaign, former Obama administration intelligence officials are denying any wrong doing and justifying their actions.

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is arguing he was concerned about the Russians interfering in the election, which is why his agency gathered "information." During a recent interview with CNN, Clapper admitted he was simply following orders from the "commander-in-chief," who had ordered intelligence agencies to do so.

"I don't know. I don’t think there was any wrongdoing," Clapper said. "My main concern was with the Russians and the threat posed by the Russians to our very political fabric and ugh, the message I'm getting from all of this is apparently what we were supposed to have done was to ignore the Russian interference, ignore the Russian meddling and the threat that it poses to us and oh by the way, blown off what the then commander-in-chief, President Obama, told us to do, which was to assemble all of the reporting we could."

"What Obama told us to do...." pic.twitter.com/KEKHTx40j3

— Rep. Steven Smith ???? (@RepStevenSmith) October 8, 2019

Rest - https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...paign-n2554364

[STTAB]

Looks like yet the investigations the left wants to ignore - are finding out more and more. I think Clapper was involved as was Brennan. Of course Obama will be shielded at all costs.

Could be nothing, but could show they were involved in crap and under some orders from the CiC.

---

Did James Clapper Just Admit President Obama Directed Him to Go After the Trump Campaign?

As U.S. Attorney John Durham continues his criminal investigation into the origins of the government's targeting of the 2016 Trump campaign, former Obama administration intelligence officials are denying any wrong doing and justifying their actions.

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is arguing he was concerned about the Russians interfering in the election, which is why his agency gathered "information." During a recent interview with CNN, Clapper admitted he was simply following orders from the "commander-in-chief," who had ordered intelligence agencies to do so.

"I don't know. I don’t think there was any wrongdoing," Clapper said. "My main concern was with the Russians and the threat posed by the Russians to our very political fabric and ugh, the message I'm getting from all of this is apparently what we were supposed to have done was to ignore the Russian interference, ignore the Russian meddling and the threat that it poses to us and oh by the way, blown off what the then commander-in-chief, President Obama, told us to do, which was to assemble all of the reporting we could."



Rest - https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...paign-n2554364

Of course that corrupt nigger was involved. History will remember Obama as THE most corrupt US President ever.

[jimnyc]

Of course that corrupt nigger was involved. History will remember Obama as THE most corrupt US President ever.

I thought he wasn't directly involved, but over the past 2 years I have started to suspect more and more that he was behind the scenes. But I don't see any direct proof yet of this. Nor would it matter unless it's a smoking gun, as they will protect him and shield him.

And your choice, but why lower yourself with calling him that? I think it only reflects on you. I'm not saying that Obama isn't a POS, and a scumbag IMO. And maybe even a criminal if directly involved here. But calling him such only makes anyone reading ten dismiss the facts that you and others may present. But I'm not stopping you!

[Kathianne]

I thought he wasn't directly involved, but over the past 2 years I have started to suspect more and more that he was behind the scenes. But I don't see any direct proof yet of this. Nor would it matter unless it's a smoking gun, as they will protect him and shield him.

And your choice, but why lower yourself with calling him that? I think it only reflects on you. I'm not saying that Obama isn't a POS, and a scumbag IMO. And maybe even a criminal if directly involved here. But calling him such only makes anyone reading ten dismiss the facts that you and others may present. But I'm not stopping you!

I use, "worst president ever," which used to be my moniker for Jimmy Carter.

[STTAB]

I use, "worst president ever," which used to be my moniker for Jimmy Carter.

We've had some pretty bad Presidents in our history, hard to say Obama was the worst, But it is easy to say he was the most corrupt.

That is EXACTLY why when he left office, the big push was "no scandals" because all the man cared about was his legacy,

[jimnyc]

I use, "worst president ever," which used to be my moniker for Jimmy Carter.

I think he was a racist in quite a few ways (Obama of course) and acted like he was a God of sorts instead. The transparency wasn't there in many ways. I just think if I were to use that term, folks would likely see that word and judge me as a result and completely ignore the message.

[jimnyc]

When are they going to vote? Why are they avoiding a vote is the bigger question. Why did the intel change the form needed for the whistlblowers? Why did the house change the rules the same day they revealed this whistleblower?

And when they subpoena Trump and others in the WH? Trump tells them to F off, basically saying the same - it's not legit and have the vote.

---

No Vote, No Docs: Dems Should Get Real on Impeachment or Go Home

If Democrats think President Trump is going to provide to them a trove of documents and/or comply with subpoenas related to his classified interactions with the Ukrainian government without their full commitment to a real impeachment process, they’ve got another thing coming. Until Democrats fully unleash this dog that only the extremist Democrat base thinks will hunt, the president should hand over exactly jack squat.

The impeachment “inquiry” circus, if and when it ever morphs into a legitimate House impeachment vote and passes, will have no chance of surviving either a Senate trial or up-down motion to dismiss. That’s the consensus even on the Democrat side. Dems won’t openly admit it, but everybody, even Senator Mitt Romney, knows that what’s really behind this politically-motivated travesty is the desperate hope that Trump will be so weakened by impeachment that his prospects for reelection will be mortally wounded.

Why the big rush to impeach? Why all this inane talk of having it “done by Thanksgiving”? If it is such a great idea, if anyone other than the Democrat kook base wants this, wouldn’t it be better to prolong the House inquiry, drag out the process, the subpoenas, the various feints and thrusts, so that it hangs over the Trump administration for months? If it is calculated to undermine confidence in the president, why rush to button things up expeditiously? Isn't it possible that a Democrat-only impeachment will be old news by the time voters head to the polls next November 3?

Democrats want to sign, seal, and deliver impeachment quickly because it’s a bad idea. Proof of this bad idea’s worthlessness is demonstrated by the fact that they have thus far bent over backward to avoid committing to a historically and constitutionally indicated impeachment vote. Forty-odd Democrats holding seats in "purple" districts will be placed at risk of electoral defeat if forced to vote on this rabidly partisan folly. Enraged Trump supporters will turn out big league. These newly-elected Dems are in an untenable position. They’ll get shellacked if they do and earn the undying enmity of their fellow Democrats if they don’t. They will go along, they must.

Rest - https://pjmedia.com/trending/no-vote...nt-or-go-home/

[jimnyc]

And they want to hide this person at all costs. Everything in private, even mask their voice. WHY? If everything is on the up and up, why the need to hide?

Perhaps they know the connection, and when known folks will laugh at the connection and realize once again what a setup bunch of BS this is? That's my guess. And just how close are they?

---

Whistleblower Had 'Professional' Tie to a 2020 Democratic Candidate

As the impeachment battle continues, a huge bombshell was revealed Tuesday afternoon when Byron York reported at the Washington Examiner that the whistleblower whose complaint resulted in the current impeachment inquiry isn't just a registered Democrat, but had a professional relationship with one of the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates.

Under questioning from Republicans during last Friday's impeachment inquiry interview with Atkinson, the inspector general revealed that the whistleblower's possible bias was not that he was simply a registered Democrat. It was that he had a significant tie to one of the Democratic presidential candidates currently vying to challenge President Trump in next year's election.

"The IG said [the whistleblower] worked or had some type of professional relationship with one of the Democratic candidates," said one person with knowledge of what was said.

"The IG said the whistleblower had a professional relationship with one of the 2020 candidates," said another person with knowledge of what was said.

"What [Atkinson] said was that the whistleblower self-disclosed that he was a registered Democrat and that he had a prior working relationship with a current 2020 Democratic presidential candidate," said a third person with knowledge of what was said.

All three sources said Atkinson did not identify the Democratic candidate with whom the whistleblower had a connection. It is unclear what the working or professional relationship between the two was.

Michael Atkinson, the inspector general of the intelligence community, was apparently aware of the whistleblower's biases, but that did not change his determination regarding the credibility of complaint. President Trump, however, certainly feels vindicated by the revelation:

This is just the beginning, thank you to @ByronYork! https://t.co/1ceplqe5MZ

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 8, 2019

This now raises some important new questions, like: "Which candidate did the whistleblower have a professional relationship with?" "What was the nature of that relationship?" "Were they in contact and possibly coordinating?"

As President Trump said, this is just the beginning!

https://pjmedia.com/trending/bombshe...tic-candidate/

[STTAB]

When are they going to vote? Why are they avoiding a vote is the bigger question. Why did the intel change the form needed for the whistlblowers? Why did the house change the rules the same day they revealed this whistleblower?

And when they subpoena Trump and others in the WH? Trump tells them to F off, basically saying the same - it's not legit and have the vote.

---

No Vote, No Docs: Dems Should Get Real on Impeachment or Go Home

If Democrats think President Trump is going to provide to them a trove of documents and/or comply with subpoenas related to his classified interactions with the Ukrainian government without their full commitment to a real impeachment process, they’ve got another thing coming. Until Democrats fully unleash this dog that only the extremist Democrat base thinks will hunt, the president should hand over exactly jack squat.

The impeachment “inquiry” circus, if and when it ever morphs into a legitimate House impeachment vote and passes, will have no chance of surviving either a Senate trial or up-down motion to dismiss. That’s the consensus even on the Democrat side. Dems won’t openly admit it, but everybody, even Senator Mitt Romney, knows that what’s really behind this politically-motivated travesty is the desperate hope that Trump will be so weakened by impeachment that his prospects for reelection will be mortally wounded.

Why the big rush to impeach? Why all this inane talk of having it “done by Thanksgiving”? If it is such a great idea, if anyone other than the Democrat kook base wants this, wouldn’t it be better to prolong the House inquiry, drag out the process, the subpoenas, the various feints and thrusts, so that it hangs over the Trump administration for months? If it is calculated to undermine confidence in the president, why rush to button things up expeditiously? Isn't it possible that a Democrat-only impeachment will be old news by the time voters head to the polls next November 3?

Democrats want to sign, seal, and deliver impeachment quickly because it’s a bad idea. Proof of this bad idea’s worthlessness is demonstrated by the fact that they have thus far bent over backward to avoid committing to a historically and constitutionally indicated impeachment vote. Forty-odd Democrats holding seats in "purple" districts will be placed at risk of electoral defeat if forced to vote on this rabidly partisan folly. Enraged Trump supporters will turn out big league. These newly-elected Dems are in an untenable position. They’ll get shellacked if they do and earn the undying enmity of their fellow Democrats if they don’t. They will go along, they must.

Rest - https://pjmedia.com/trending/no-vote...nt-or-go-home/

I think that's one of the most important questions that needs to be asked. Why was the rule about first hand knowledge changed, and by whom? Who's running these agencies?

Also, just to be factual, there is no actual requirement for the House to have a vote on whether to open an impeachment inquiry. That's just the way it was handled the three previous times, and you would think precedent would matter, but that is only if you forget that the ONLY thing that matters to these Democrats is getting and keeping power. They'll break the fucking law to do so, a House tradition isn't going to slow them down.

[jimnyc]

How awesome would it be if they somehow reeled in Obama? I have little doubt that he was involved behind the scenes. But could they tie it together? That's a different ballgame altogether. But I think the ENTIRE Ukraine crap needs to be investigated, and bring them ALL in under oath as far as I'm concerned.

---

“It’s Going to Be a Bang-Bang Couple of Weeks” – Rudy and Joe diGenova: IT ALL LEADS TO OBAMA – First Biden, Then Hillary, Then Three Others, Then OBAMA!

The best half hour of TV in a decade occurred last night on Laura Ingraham’s “The Ingraham Angle”. Guests former mayor of New York and President Trump’s attorney, Rudy Giuliani, and former US Attorney Joe diGenova tore into the Democrat’s phony impeachment and then went to the heart of all the corruption in D.C. and they were brilliant.

Shortly before a break Laura’s guests shared the following –

Rudy – For years Obama had a pay for play operation in his administration and it’s disgusting and one of the reasons they’re fighting so hard – If Biden comes out, so does Clinton come out and about three others. This goes right to the top of the Obama administration and the administration that says, ‘I didn’t have scandals’ will be the most scandal ridden administration in our history. Obama didn’t care about ethics. He didn’t care otherwise it wouldn’t happen.

Joe – That’s right

Rudy – A Vice President should have been stopped from doing this by a President who had the slightest bit of integrity. But a Chicago ‘pol’ like Obama – pay for play eight times – millions of dollars to your Vice President [Biden] and hundreds of millions of dollars to your Secretary of State [Hillary Clinton]. They just bought the offices. Crooks.

Rest - https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...rs-then-obama/

[STTAB]

Unbelievable. You can't tell me the shitstorm that would hit Obama if it came out he bribed a foreign power into investigating Romney's son.

I definitely concede that there are man shit heads on the right who if the story were reversed would be screaming that a President can't ask a foreign country to investigate corruption by US politicians and or their family.

They would be wrong, just as you are.

Moron

[jimnyc]

Suppose this is true, and Brennan was the mastermind behind all of this. Anyone higher than him? If he directed this, then he needs life in prison as a traitor.

I think the major players in intel played a major part in this. Fisa warrants. Spying on calls. Inside information from the WH leaking every other day to undermine the office of the president.

---

Former CIA Station Chief: Attempted Coup Against President Trump Looks Like CIA Operation Led by John Brennan

In an exclusive interview with RAIR Foundation USA retired CIA Station Chief Brad Johnson claims the attempted coup against Donald Trump looks like a CIA operation.

Johnson even suggests that former CIA Chief John Brennan is behind it.

Johnson added, “This is the last big gasp so they’re pulling out all the stops. You can see who the desperate people are… We just saw former CIA Director John Brennan out on national news saying, “Please anybody else out there who can be a whistleblower please step forward. Nows the time.”

On Monday night former State Department whistleblower Peter Van Buren spoke with Tucker Carlson on the current Democrat-Deep State coordinated attack to remove President Trump in a political coup.

Peter described the current accusations of the left as a “three way pitch-and-toss” between the Democrat Party, the liberal media and these deep state whistleblowers.

Van Buren then alleged that the second whistleblower is actually an accomplice with the first whistleblower.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...-john-brennan/