• 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!

I am the whistleblower

jnug said:
First, its not a transcript. Its a Memo of a Telcon. Trump has not released a transcript though I am sure one exists. What you should be asking is why hasn't Trump released a transcript and why does he continue to call the Memo a transcript. Please don't respond with something about what the knuckleheads of the News Channels call it. I couldn't care less what "entertainers" call it. ITS NOT A TRANSCRIPT.

Then again, none of us can help what you refuse to see.
Click to expand...

Chomsky said:
Which transcript? Trump's PR document? I read that too, and it was clear to me what Trump did. And if Trump copped to that, imagine what he didn't put in the document?

But I can see where you're taking this. You seem to be giving yourself a permission slip to disregard the evidence presented at the hearings. Amiright?
Click to expand...

Hold on, are you suggesting the transcript is not the transcript and there have been substantial changes made before being released?
Vindman isn't even claiming that about the transcript minus his changes.
I'm afraid all you have is the transcript and something you wish was said but wasn't.
 
bubbabgone said:
Hold on, are you suggesting the transcript is not the transcript and there have been substantial changes made before being released?
Vindman isn't even claiming that about the transcript minus his changes.
I'm afraid all you have is the transcript and something you wish was said but wasn't.
Click to expand...
I noticed you pivoted from "I'm making an argument to invalidate the upcoming hearings", to "let's debate the so-called transcript".

Which is it?

(and yeah, I don't trust Trump's documents until I see them introduced as evidence at the hearings, and evaluated there)
 
Chomsky said:
I noticed you pivoted from "I'm making an argument to invalidate the upcoming hearings", to "let's debate the so-called transcript".

Which is it?

(and yeah, I don't trust Trump's documents until I see them introduced as evidence at the hearings, and evaluated there)
Click to expand...

The transcript forms the foundation of the issue.
If the accusation ain't there it ain't anywhere.
And it ain't there.
 
bubbabgone said:
Hold on, are you suggesting the transcript is not the transcript and there have been substantial changes made before being released?
Vindman isn't even claiming that about the transcript minus his changes.
I'm afraid all you have is the transcript and something you wish was said but wasn't.
Click to expand...

Its a MEMO not a Transcript. If it was a Transcript it would be titled as a Transcript and it would not carry the footer at the bottom of the page that tells you how the document is to be considered, NOT AS A TRANSCRIPT. The footer reads:
CAUTION: A Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation.· (TELCON) is not a verbatim transcript of a discussion. The text in this document records the notes and recollections of Situation Room Duty "Officers and-NSC policy staff assigned t_o listen.and memorialize the conversation in written form as the conversation takes place. A numper of factors can affect 'the accuracy of the reco�d, including poor telecommunications connections and variations in accent and/or interpretation.
The word "inaudible" is used to indifate portions of a conversation that the notetaker was unable to hear.

There are ellipsis in the document. A Transcript would not have ellipsis. There are no grammatical pauses. A Transcript would have grammatical pauses. If it were a Transcript in any segments where the speech was garbled or inaudible, it would be identified as such. So, sorry, its not a Transcript and again I would be asking Trumpkin why he insists on calling something a "perfect transcript" of his "perfect call" that is no transcript at all.

Also, there is no pkgnumber at the top. It simply reads [pkgnumbershort] at the top. So what is it actually because an official WH "Transcript" or even an official MEMO should have a pkgnumber. So what the frig is it actually. Its no Transcript and it might not even be an official Memo.
 
Last edited:
humbolt said:
That's opinion. Everybody has opinions.
Click to expand...
That's air enough. I just hope the country's collective opinion will be fair & open-minded in evaluating the public evidence presented, rather than blindly succumb to partisanship blinding.
 
jnug said:
Its a MEMO not a Transcript. If it was a Transcript it would be titled as a Transcript and it would not carry the footer at the bottom of the page that tells you how the document is to be considered, NOT AS A TRANSCRIPT. The footer reads:
CAUTION: A Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation.· (TELCON) is not a verbatim transcript of a discussion. The text in this document records the notes and recollections of Situation Room Duty "Officers and-NSC policy staff assigned t_o listen.and memorialize the conversation in written form as the conversation takes place. A numper of factors can affect 'the accuracy of the reco�d, including poor telecommunications connections and variations in accent and/or interpretation.
The word "inaudible" is used to indifate portions of a conversation that the notetaker was unable to hear.

There are ellipsis in the document. A Transcript would not have ellipsis. There are no grammatical pauses. A Transcript would have grammatical pauses. If it were a Transcript in any segments where the speech was garbled or inaudible, it would be identified as such. So, sorry, its not a Transcript and again I would be asking Trumpkin why he insists on calling something a "perfect transcript" of his "perfect call" that is no transcript at all.

Also, there is no pkgnumber at the top. It simply reads [pkgnumbershort] at the top. So what is it actually because an official WH "Transcript" or even an official MEMO should have a pkgnumber. So what the frig is it actually. Its no Transcript and it might not even be an official Memo.
Click to expand...
Truth of the matter is, we know nothing about the "transcript" above what Trump claims - in other words it's worthless.

But I will say this: If Trump was willing to admit to improper conduct in his memo, I would bet the farm it is far, far, far worse than he cops to in his document. I have zero doubt.
 
jnug said:
Its a MEMO not a Transcript. If it was a Transcript it would be titled as a Transcript and it would not carry the footer at the bottom of the page that tells you how the document is to be considered, NOT AS A TRANSCRIPT. The footer reads:
CAUTION: A Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation.· (TELCON) is not a verbatim transcript of a discussion. The text in this document records the notes and recollections of Situation Room Duty "Officers and-NSC policy staff assigned t_o listen.and memorialize the conversation in written form as the conversation takes place. A numper of factors can affect 'the accuracy of the reco�d, including poor telecommunications connections and variations in accent and/or interpretation.
The word "inaudible" is used to indifate portions of a conversation that the notetaker was unable to hear.

There are ellipsis in the document. A Transcript would not have ellipsis. There are no grammatical pauses. A Transcript would have grammatical pauses. If it were a Transcript in any segments where the speech was garbled or inaudible, it would be identified as such. So, sorry, its not a Transcript and again I would be asking Trumpkin why he insists on calling something a "perfect transcript" of his "perfect call" that is no transcript at all.

Also, there is no pkgnumber at the top. It simply reads [pkgnumbershort] at the top. So what is it actually because an official WH "Transcript" or even an official MEMO should have a pkgnumber. So what the frig is it actually. Its no Transcript and it might not even be an official Memo.
Click to expand...

It's good enough for Vindman but not you. Okay.
 
Craig234 said:
I remember a movie about a student, I think they were gay, being persecuted. In a show of support, everyone in the group said THEY were the person being attacked.

In that spirit, I am the whistleblower. Have something to say Republicans? Try. And if millions of Americans also admit they're the whistleblower, that's fine.
Click to expand...

This reminds me of how we citizens are told "see something, say something." Certainly a scenario could be imagined where that would be good advice from the government and media, but the truth is that whistleblowers are prosecuted by the government, under both "liberal" administrations and "conservative" administrations.

If you see an example of government misfeasance or malfeasance and report it, you will go to jail like John Kiriakou.

So the idea that the government promotes and protects whistleblowers is false, and the record shows it clearly.

Hugh Thompson was the principled Warrant Officer who watched the My Lai massacre unfold and landed his helicopter between the retreating villagers and the advancing US troops, ending the massacre.

He was subsequently marginalized by the Army, and his career was over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom