• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the Whistleblower "Complaint" Actually an Intelligence Agency Conspiracy Plot?

ttwtt78640 said:
That was my initial hunch since Pelosi was "all in" before anything was released.
Click to expand...

Democrats knew the contents of the phone call and they knew it alone would not be enough. They knew they'd need the "complaint" to justify impeachment inquiry. It makes zero sense why Pelosi would have make her announcement before the transcript was released.
She knew what was in the phone call. She knew what was in the complaint.
 
Mycroft said:
There's only one problem...

Trump didn't ask Zelenskiy to "get to the bottom" of anything involving Biden or his son.

If you think he did, please quote whatever words Trump used that give you that opinion. (and please...no matter how hard you find it to do...try to provide context)
Click to expand...

LOL, why am I not surprised you worked really hard to completely miss the point and engage in hair splitting? Why would the words, or the exact nature of the favor matter? It's either OK to enlist the services of the intelligence/law enforcement agencies of a foreign government for political advantage or it isn't. We know if Trump does it, you're OK with it, and the question is why shouldn't every candidate going forward go to open foreign governments and ask them to put the weight of their government to work to help them out in the election?
 
Captain Adverse said:
Sorry, I didn't want to fill the thread with separate cites when I am responding with the same info.

I just came across this report containing the opinion of a former CIA Analyst.

He says this looks like it was written by a "law firm," then points out how Schiff had been talking about this before it was revealed, and there are other Congressional sources who suggest it could have been written by congressional staffers.
Click to expand...

It's relevant this "former CIA analyst" is also Trump's former chief of staff for NSC. And he cites anonymous people on the committee. Nunes anyone?

What's pretty fascinating is all the efforts to smear the whistleblower personally, delegitimize the complaint, focus on how this person obtained the info, etc. and not on the contents of the complaint, or the transcript of the phone call.

“If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell”
 
Acadia said:
Schiff couldn't wait to leak it, but UkraineGate couldn't be *just* a leak, wafting around the Beltway. No, it had to have legs, so leaked information was funneled to a designated "whistleblower" who in turn, got hooked up with legal representation, who wrote the complaint letter for him, based on his regurgitated, second-hand information. That letter was sent to the proper authorities to launch an investigation.
Mind you, all the while, people who had FIRST-HAND information about these complaints said NOTHING. Why? Perhaps because what they actually witnessed would not trigger impeachment, but when several stories are leaked and conflated to make more hysteria, Democrats gin up a narrative to launch an impeachment inquiry, with gives them authority to subpoena all sorts of information, drag anyone in front of them and crank the "overturn Trump's election" tornado to an F5, as we barrel head long into the 2020 election.
Click to expand...

Just thought I'd mention but the act of whistleblowing implies a systemic breakdown of some kind, a willingness of those who are participants and in power to engage in wrongdoing, and for those around them to say nothing. That's why there's a confidential process for reporting these things and why the law has very strong protections for the whistleblower, because if not the experience was the person pointing out the wrongdoing was retaliated against and the wrongdoing going unanswered.

Nixon and Watergate are a good example. Almost none of those with first hand evidence of the crime and the coverup reported what they saw, because they were co-conspirators or were scared or believed in Nixon or whatever. The reason doesn't matter.
 
JasperL said:
LOL, why am I not surprised you worked really hard to completely miss the point and engage in hair splitting? Why would the words, or the exact nature of the favor matter? It's either OK to enlist the services of the intelligence/law enforcement agencies of a foreign government for political advantage or it isn't. We know if Trump does it, you're OK with it, and the question is why shouldn't every candidate going forward go to open foreign governments and ask them to put the weight of their government to work to help them out in the election?
Click to expand...

If you think Trump said anything "for political advantage", please quote whatever words Trump used that gives you that opinion. (and please...no matter how hard you find it to do...try to provide context)
 
Mycroft said:
If you think Trump said anything "for political advantage", please quote whatever words Trump used that gives you that opinion. (and please...no matter how hard you find it to do...try to provide context)
Click to expand...

Again, you're splitting hairs to avoid confronting the argument I'm making. OK! Not playing that game. You can address the substance or not.
 
JasperL said:
Again, you're splitting hairs to avoid confronting the argument I'm making. OK! Not playing that game. You can address the substance or not.
Click to expand...

Oh...trying to stick to the actual words that were spoken instead of applying meanings and motives to those words that were not expressed is not "splitting hairs"?

LOL!!

Dude...it's you who is "playing games.

You are dismissed. (see my sig)
 
Mycroft said:
Oh...trying to stick to the actual words that were spoken instead of applying meanings and motives to those words that were not expressed is not "splitting hairs"?

LOL!!

Dude...it's you who is "playing games.

You are dismissed. (see my sig)
Click to expand...

Thanks you! :thumbs:
 
Captain Adverse said:
Sorry, I didn't want to fill the thread with separate cites when I am responding with the same info.

I just came across this report containing the opinion of a former CIA Analyst.



He says this looks like it was written by a "law firm," then points out how Schiff had been talking about this before it was revealed, and there are other Congressional sources who suggest it could have been written by congressional staffers.
Click to expand...


Yeah. Other folks here have noted or implied that this thing appears to be going the same route as the other attack lines that were expected to be the one.
They weren't.
And this one smells more each day as we find out more about it.
That's not even considering that what was promised in the complaint about the call wasn't there to begin with. Thus the Schiff screenplay.
They're going to have to keep going with this one though. They need that asterisk.
Given the lateness of the game there's not much time to work up another line of attack and they sure won't admit anything about this one.
 
bubbabgone said:
Yeah. Other folks here have noted or implied that this thing appears to be going the same route as the other attack lines that were expected to be the one.
They weren't.
And this one smells more each day as we find out more about it.
That's not even considering that what was promised in the complaint about the call wasn't there to begin with. Thus the Schiff screenplay.
They're going to have to keep going with this one though. They need that asterisk.
Given the lateness of the game there's not much time to work up another line of attack and they sure won't admit anything about this one.
Click to expand...

As each day passes, more and more of the complaint is verified as accurate. Get out of the bubble. You'll find it illuminating!
 
JasperL said:
As each day passes, more and more of the complaint is verified as accurate. Get out of the bubble. You'll find it illuminating!
Click to expand...

"what was promised in the complaint about the call wasn't there"
 
bubbabgone said:
"what was promised in the complaint about the call wasn't there"
Click to expand...

Right, got it. So if Biden sends his reps over to China to meet with Xi and Biden talks trade, how he favors more open trade, and asks them to put Trump's kids under investigation as a favor, that's OK. If China brings up ending the tariffs and the next words from Biden are, "I'd like for you to do me a favor, though" so long as the quid pro quo isn't explicit, even though everyone not a complete moron understands the quid and the quo are completely obvious in that discussion, that's great, acceptable.

Why do you think Trump's people locked down this call behind the code word vault?

Besides, the quid or the quo depending on how you look at it doesn't even need to exist at all for the request to be corrupt. It's inviting a foreign government for WHATEVER reason to interfere in the elections by putting Trump's rivals under official investigation by that government. Even if they were roughly equal allies who need nothing in particular from us, that's corrupt.

In this case, however, there's no connection between Biden's actions and our national interests in Ukraine. There's no connection between the policy wisdom of selling Javelines to Ukraine and finding the "missing server." And reports make it clear that discussing these topics was a condition for the call. The investigations were VERY important to Trump, who Ukraine cannot afford to lose as a key ally in their fight against Russia. If you can't see the quid pro quo, you're just trying hard to miss what's obvious to everyone.
 
JasperL said:
Right, got it. So if Biden sends his reps over to China to meet with Xi and Biden talks trade, how he favors more open trade, and asks them to put Trump's kids under investigation as a favor, that's OK. If China brings up ending the tariffs and the next words from Biden are, "I'd like for you to do me a favor, though" so long as the quid pro quo isn't explicit, even though everyone not a complete moron understands the quid and the quo are completely obvious in that discussion, that's great, acceptable.

Why do you think Trump's people locked down this call behind the code word vault?

Besides, the quid or the quo depending on how you look at it doesn't even need to exist at all for the request to be corrupt. It's inviting a foreign government for WHATEVER reason to interfere in the elections by putting Trump's rivals under official investigation by that government. Even if they were roughly equal allies who need nothing in particular from us, that's corrupt.

In this case, however, there's no connection between Biden's actions and our national interests in Ukraine. There's no connection between the policy wisdom of selling Javelines to Ukraine and finding the "missing server." And reports make it clear that discussing these topics was a condition for the call. The investigations were VERY important to Trump, who Ukraine cannot afford to lose as a key ally in their fight against Russia. If you can't see the quid pro quo, you're just trying hard to miss what's obvious to everyone.
Click to expand...

AH!
I thought so.
You're following Schiff's lead and instead of relying on the actual words spoken or actions taken you're creating your own screenplay complete with heroes, villains, dialog, and thought bubbles.
Just like every one of the other lines of attack that were tried unsuccessfully. You probably believed them too.
Show me the goods, not the suspicions, and I'll join you.
 
There is an underlying defect in the premise of this thread. The implication is that the more people who know of, and object to, a criminal act, the less credibility the objection has. Note the inherent fallacy of that approach. Defendant: I didn't do it. Prosecution: I have ten witnesses who saw you do it! Defendant: Ha! They obviously cancel each other out, so I win.
 
bubbabgone said:
AH!
I thought so.
You're following Schiff's lead and instead of relying on the actual words spoken or actions taken you're creating your own screenplay complete with heroes, villains, dialog, and thought bubbles.
Just like every one of the other lines of attack that were tried unsuccessfully. You probably believed them too.
Show me the goods, not the suspicions, and I'll join you.
Click to expand...

So are you OK with Biden doing that or no?

You quoted me and didn't address a single point, except to dismiss it with the equivalent of NUH UH!
 
bubbabgone said:
"what was promised in the complaint about the call wasn't there"
Click to expand...

Be careful what you claim.

Your words could easily be feed back to you later on.

You may not like the taste of them once the whole story is known and all those involved.

When / if the story shows a clear Trump impeachable offence then you can expect negative returns from the other side.

Your cruising on a ship and it could be the Titanic heading towards an unpredicted iceberg, do not get cocky and stay close to a lifeboat.




*My thought is that the iceberg came Greenland's ice sheet and resulted from climate change....
 
Captain Adverse said:
I am posting this "theory" where it belongs at this point in time, the "Conspiracy Theories" sub-forum.

I do not know if anyone else has considered this possibility yet.

However, after reviewing media sources and actions, party political actions, and the actual whistleblower complaint, I have come to suspect that this is a new Intelligence Agency conspiracy to undermine the current Administration.

That a cabal of CIA members (perhaps Brennan loyalists?) who might also have been connected to the original Russia Collusion plot, have been working to create a "bombshell" to derail the current Administration.

I present Exhibit A, the Whistleblower Complaint:

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/09/26/20190812_-_whistleblower_complaint_unclass.pdf

Look at this report carefully. What do you see?

It is a highly professional, step by step presentation; complete with footnotes and analysis of each point.

Note also that all throughout the complaint, the author is clear that he, himself, had no direct access to the subject material. It was all passed on to him by unnamed sources "concerned" about the President's "illegal actions."

IMHO this is NOT the work of a single person, seeking protection as a whistleblower.

It looks more like something that was worked on in conjunction with various individuals. Agency(?) members who collated the information from intelligence sources (spies?); who then discussed and revised it until it was ready for "presentation" by the selected front-man?

It is not a single "smoking gun" item. It is a hatchet job designed for one thing only, give the Impeachment movement the ammunition it needed.

Now, I am not ready to say that Trump is innocent of possible attempts to undermine Biden. I'll leave that to Constitutional scholars like Alan Derschowitz and Andrew Napolitano to argue over.

But if this "Conspiracy Theory" turns out to be in any way true?

Then I think this is a deadly dangerous precedent as well as a warning of the power we have given our Intelligence community over our society. Power that can be used to undermine ANY occupant of the Oval Office, Democrat, Republican, Third Party.

What say you?
Click to expand...

Not sure what your point is regarding national security concerns.
 
Dick Tornado said:
Be careful what you claim.

Your words could easily be feed back to you later on.

You may not like the taste of them once the whole story is known and all those involved.

When / if the story shows a clear Trump impeachable offence then you can expect negative returns from the other side.

Your cruising on a ship and it could be the Titanic heading towards an unpredicted iceberg, do not get cocky and stay close to a lifeboat.




*My thought is that the iceberg came Greenland's ice sheet and resulted from climate change....
Click to expand...


Later on?
Just what are you waiting for?
We already have both the complaint and the transcript.
What was damning in the complaint that was confirmed by the transcript?
 
JasperL said:
So are you OK with Biden doing that or no?

You quoted me and didn't address a single point, except to dismiss it with the equivalent of NUH UH!
Click to expand...

Your comment was your conjecture about what was said, but it wasn't actually what was said.
Given that, a "NUH UH!" would have been understandable to say, but it wasn't actually what was said either.
No need to make stuff up, although I understand you don't have much of a choice.
 
Come on. Can all you guys not see what's really happening with Trump Republicans? They're struggling in the early "Stages" of grief. Read all these threads and posts. They all fit right in and show how they're fighting with reality.
 
bubbabgone said:
Your comment was your conjecture about what was said, but it wasn't actually what was said.
Given that, a "NUH UH!" would have been understandable to say, but it wasn't actually what was said either.
No need to make stuff up, although I understand you don't have much of a choice.
Click to expand...

OK with Biden doing that or not?

Can you address any of that original comment?

If not, I'm not going down ratholes with you.
 
JasperL said:
OK with Biden doing that or not?

Can you address any of that original comment?

If not, I'm not going down ratholes with you.
Click to expand...

What did Biden do?
Don't create ratholes if you don't intend to go down them.
 
bubbabgone said:
What did Biden do?
Don't create ratholes if you don't intend to go down them.
Click to expand...

:roll: Feigned ignorance is boring. Troll better. If you are confused, go back to the comment you quoted and ignored. If you can read, you don't need to ask. If you cannot read, I cannot help with that in this setting.
 
Captain Adverse said:
I am posting this "theory" where it belongs at this point in time, the "Conspiracy Theories" sub-forum.

I do not know if anyone else has considered this possibility yet.

However, after reviewing media sources and actions, party political actions, and the actual whistleblower complaint, I have come to suspect that this is a new Intelligence Agency conspiracy to undermine the current Administration.

That a cabal of CIA members (perhaps Brennan loyalists?) who might also have been connected to the original Russia Collusion plot, have been working to create a "bombshell" to derail the current Administration.

I present Exhibit A, the Whistleblower Complaint:

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/09/26/20190812_-_whistleblower_complaint_unclass.pdf

Look at this report carefully. What do you see?

It is a highly professional, step by step presentation; complete with footnotes and analysis of each point.

Note also that all throughout the complaint, the author is clear that he, himself, had no direct access to the subject material. It was all passed on to him by unnamed sources "concerned" about the President's "illegal actions."

IMHO this is NOT the work of a single person, seeking protection as a whistleblower.

It looks more like something that was worked on in conjunction with various individuals. Agency(?) members who collated the information from intelligence sources (spies?); who then discussed and revised it until it was ready for "presentation" by the selected front-man?

It is not a single "smoking gun" item. It is a hatchet job designed for one thing only, give the Impeachment movement the ammunition it needed.

Now, I am not ready to say that Trump is innocent of possible attempts to undermine Biden. I'll leave that to Constitutional scholars like Alan Derschowitz and Andrew Napolitano to argue over.

But if this "Conspiracy Theory" turns out to be in any way true?

Then I think this is a deadly dangerous precedent as well as a warning of the power we have given our Intelligence community over our society. Power that can be used to undermine ANY occupant of the Oval Office, Democrat, Republican, Third Party.

What say you?
Click to expand...

Paul Craig Roberts agrees with you, and provides interesting details to support that conclusion.

Opinion  -The ?Whistleblower Complaint? Is an Orchestration Not in Compliance with Whistleblower Law

The CIA plays the public and media perceptions like a fiddle. :3oops:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom