Page 9 of 16 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 154

Thread: Anyone with a logical reason for outing the whistleblower other than to punish him?

  1. #81
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,974

    Re: Anyone with a logical reason for outing the whistleblower other than to punish him?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thoreau72 View Post
    Ignoring all the various personalities for a moment, and to answer the thread question, a logical reason to name Ciaramello would be the 6th Amendment, so that POTUS can confront his accuser.
    the accuser is the house of representatives
    hopefully, you already know who they are
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    He looks for corruption wherever he goes ~ tRump describing rudy
    45<44

  2. #82
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    25,923

    Re: Anyone with a logical reason for outing the whistleblower other than to punish him?

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    the accuser is the house of representatives
    hopefully, you already know who they are
    Yes, but isn't this all supposedly the result of the once anonymous WB Ciaramello? Weren't the Dem prosecutors so moved by the words of the anonymous WB that they were spurred into action to save the Republic?

  3. #83
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:37 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,597

    Re: Anyone with a logical reason for outing the whistleblower other than to punish him?

    Quote Originally Posted by eman623 View Post
    That certainly is one argument for keeping the identity a secret. But this is too big of a deal for the normal anonymity rules to apply.
    The opposite is true actually. BECAUSE this is such a big deal, you ESPECIALLY want to keep it secret. Do you really want no WB coming forward in future when it comes to actions of a President?

    Quote Originally Posted by eman623 View Post
    Since the WB's identity is already (IMO) already fairly well known to the people in power, I think that sooner or later, it's going to come out. When the Senate takes this up, I imagine they'll make much hay over the president's right to face his accuser.
    You don't know how many people know the identity. Your opinion is just that. The less people know the better. Yes, the Republicans will make it an issue - because they have to say something, no matter how dumb, to defend this President. It's quite disappointing that they'd be pushing for this, not just due to safety concerns to this person but also due to the "moral hazard" effect of other WBs NOT coming forward with damaging info on future Presidents, be they Dems or Reps.

  4. #84
    Sage
    veritas1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Old Line State
    Last Seen
    11-23-19 @ 06:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    10,226

    Re: Anyone with a logical reason for outing the whistleblower other than to punish him?

    Anybody accused of a crime has a right to publicly face their accuser. That's a bedrock of the US legal system. Having some faceless, anonymous person make charges is reminiscent of the Soviet Union and third world banana republics. This guy should publicy testify before Congress and answer any and all questions. The voters have a right to assess his credibility, if he has any. Schiff is hiding this guy because he's afraid that public testimony will destroy his story. The idea that his life is in danger is so much hysterical blather.

  5. #85
    Sage
    veritas1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Old Line State
    Last Seen
    11-23-19 @ 06:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    10,226

    Re: Anyone with a logical reason for outing the whistleblower other than to punish him?

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    the accuser is the house of representatives
    hopefully, you already know who they are
    Baloney. Without the WB, none of this would be happening. If the Dems in the House are the accusers, then they should recuse themselves from these proceedings as that is a conflict of interest.

  6. #86
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:54 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,600

    Re: Anyone with a logical reason for outing the whistleblower other than to punish him?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaughtInThe View Post
    everybody see this? extorting another country for personal gain while being an American politician is now crap.

    God. Rush and Sean have killed the country.
    there is no proof your first line happened, so yes, everyone sees that.

  7. #87
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:54 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,600

    Re: Anyone with a logical reason for outing the whistleblower other than to punish him?

    Quote Originally Posted by Excast View Post
    The vast majority of people with more direct knowledge of what transpired have been blocked from testifying. If Republicans are actually looking for better insight, they should call on the White House to have Giulliani, Mulvaney, Bolton, etc testify.
    they have no need to do so, thus they will not. I have news for you.... with what the Dems are parading as witnesses at the moment, they are losing this battle.

  8. #88
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:51 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    45,524

    Re: Anyone with a logical reason for outing the whistleblower other than to punish him?

    Quote Originally Posted by independentusa View Post
    I said a logical argument. That one is neither logical or lawful. There is no such right in our constitution and to out him violates the law and his testimony would be by the GOP's definition, hear say and thus worthless. Now try logic please.
    see the constitution. the constitution gives the right for the accused to face the accuser.
    actually it doesn't violate the law to oust him.

    as there is no law protecting him.

    Experts: Trump Not Legally Prohibited From Publicly Identifying Whistleblower : NPR

    Similarly, if a news outlet, member of Congress or member of the public outed the whistleblower, legal experts said, no criminal law would be violated.

    "There is no overarching protection for the identity of the whistleblower under federal law," said Dan Meyer, a lawyer and the former executive director of the intelligence community whistleblower program. "Congress has never provided that protection."

  9. #89
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Northern Utah
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    538

    Re: Anyone with a logical reason for outing the whistleblower other than to punish him?

    Quote Originally Posted by veritas1 View Post
    Anybody accused of a crime has a right to publicly face their accuser. That's a bedrock of the US legal system. Having some faceless, anonymous person make charges is reminiscent of the Soviet Union and third world banana republics. This guy should publicy testify before Congress and answer any and all questions. The voters have a right to assess his credibility, if he has any. Schiff is hiding this guy because he's afraid that public testimony will destroy his story. The idea that his life is in danger is so much hysterical blather.
    Repugs want focus on the 911 caller and ignore the possible crime he reported.

    That might make sense if the WB's credibility wasn't already rendered moot by witnesses coming forward to corroborate his version of events.

  10. #90
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,397
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Anyone with a logical reason for outing the whistleblower other than to punish him?

    Quote Originally Posted by independentusa View Post
    The GOP and Trump want to out the whistleblower and WHY? When the whistleblower's report came out the first thing that the GOP and Trump said was since the WB had no direct knowledge of what was said in the telephone call and thus his testimony if he was to give one would be nothing but hear say. So if he has no direct knowledge and his testimony would be "nothing" but hear say and thus worthless, why have him testify. The report he gave has been proven by other people who had knowledge of the telephone call and what happened before and after the call, including the president himself and Mulvaney. SO, my question to those out there is why have the WB testify except to out him so he can be punished. There have been death threats for the WB and his family by people unknown, but certainly they would have to be by those who support the president. The reason the WB law was put in place was to keep the identity of the WB safe and to insure that those who saw suspected wrong doing in our government could report it and have it investigated as was done in this case. SO give me a logical reason for outing the WB as would happen of any of the GOPers on the committee would learn of the WB's identity? Just another question, can you tell me with a straight face that if Nunes or Jordan discovered the identity of the WB, they would not report it directly to the president who wold happen to let it slip in his very next meeting with the press?
    They want to know the ties to the democrats. The tie and connection to Biden, to Schiff and where the second and third hand information the whistleblower reported came from. In a court of law nothing that was reported would be admissable, nothing not one word of it. Democrats failed in collusion, obstruction, campaign finance and on and on. So the answer is to create some impreachment reason. That's not too hard they control the House and can impeach based on about anything they want to call impeachable without any real evidence. This is evident because of the high number os impeachment calls long before any inquiry.

Page 9 of 16 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •