Trump: Why aren't we entitled to 'learn everything about' the whistleblower?

[prometeus]

It is fascinating to watch democrats argue so vigorously against the sixth amendment.

"“The primary object of the [Confrontation Clause is] to prevent depositions of ex parte affidavits . . . being used against the prisoner in lieu of a personal examination and cross-examination of the witness in which the accused has an opportunity not only of testing the recollection and sifting the conscience of the witness, but of compelling him to stand face to face with the jury in order that they may look at him, and judge by his demeanor upon the stand and the manner in which he gives his testimony whether he is worthy of belief.”221 The right of confrontation is “[o]ne of the fundamental guarantees of life and liberty . . . long deemed so essential for the due protection of life and liberty that it is guarded against legislative and judicial action by provisions in the Constitution of the United States and in the constitutions of most if not of all the States composing the Union.”222 Before 1965, when the Court held the right to be protected against state abridgment,223 it had little need to clarify the relationship between the right of confrontation and the hearsay rule,224 because it could control the admission of hearsay through exercise of its supervisory powers over the inferior federal courts.225"

It is also interesting the bar was lowered so this latest cartoon show could start.

Intelligence community changed whistleblower rules to include hearsay shortly before complaint was filed

"The brand new version of the whistleblower complaint form, which was not made public until after the transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and the complaint addressed to Congress were made public, eliminates the first-hand knowledge requirement and allows employees to file whistleblower complaints even if they have zero direct knowledge of underlying evidence and only “heard about [wrongdoing] from others.”"

"“We learned from today’s reporting from a couple different sources, including The Federalist, that the form used to require as recently as a month ago or at least in the last year, the complaint had to be firsthand knowledge, and a number of other obligations, that it not be a matter of differences of policy. It has to be some very specific criteria. It doesn’t even cover the president, it only covers what happens in the intelligence community,” Dhillon said.

“The new form which is published on the website of the DNI for whistleblowers. It’s marked August 2019, so last month, around the time this whistleblower complaint,” she continued. “It has eliminated that first-hand knowledge requirement. And you see that reflected in the current complaint. It’s full of second-hand, third-hand and press reports and more.”

Dobbs listed several examples of what the Trump whistleblower complaint consists of, to include:

“I received information from multiple officials.”
“Officials have informed me.”
“Officials with direct knowledge of the call informed me.”
“I was told by White House officials.”

“It reads like the most preposterous document,” said Dobbs.

“There is a very good reason why we require firsthand knowledge and firsthand eyewitness testimony on these types of things,” said Dhillon. “It’s the most credible and most close to the facts. But more importantly, the type of complaint we are talking about today could not have been made under last year or earlier this year’s rules. It’s very significant that those rules were secretly, surreptitiously changed.”"


A reasonable observant person will have little trouble picking out the fascists in the current scenario.

If you cannot face your accuser, then you cannot be certain that what you are being accused of has any basis in fact. If the government could bring charges against someone without presenting the accuser claiming that you have done something against the law, then the government would be entirely free to make up whatever crime it wants, along with whatever evidence it wants, without any recourse of your own. This is how "trials" during the Inquisition were performed, and the decision by the Founding Fathers to include this right explicitly in the Constitution is a reflection of the abuses that such systems wrought in the past.

How the **** does any of your moronic rant negate what Trump did?

 

[prometeus]

Hopefully, the whistleblower law only protects those who in 'good faith' whistled.

Trump only wants those that blow him protected.

 

[ataraxia]

Whistleblowers are no longer protected with their statements are publicly released.

Where did you hear this?

 

[Vern]

I would prefer to see a Special Prosecutor look into this whole thing...perhaps call Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler and others before a Grand Jury to explain their actions.

can you even begin to explain what actions Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler and others need to explain? If you do find the courage to respond honestly, feel free to mention if you think trump has any actions he needs to explain.

 

[d0gbreath]

This is making me giddy!

 

[prometeus]

There is NO part of due process and constitutional rights the Democratic Party

What the **** are you babbling about? Where is the dues process in any way negated?
Learn something before spouting the usual moronic tripe.

 

[prometeus]

The right to face and challenge your accuser is THE most absolute due process right of all

Only in a ****ing court of law. Your uneducated drivel is a constant.

 

[Mycroft]

can you even begin to explain what actions Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler and others need to explain? If you do find the courage to respond honestly, feel free to mention if you think trump has any actions he needs to explain.

Yes, I can imagine what they need to explain. Read the rest of the thread for one example.

 

[prometeus]

akyron likes to post random, stupid stuff to derail threads and get your attention.

YouTube

 

[Rexedgar]

It is fascinating to watch democrats argue so vigorously against the sixth amendment.

"“The primary object of the [Confrontation Clause is] to prevent depositions of ex parte affidavits . . . being used against the prisoner in lieu of a personal examination and cross-examination of the witness in which the accused has an opportunity not only of testing the recollection and sifting the conscience of the witness, but of compelling him to stand face to face with the jury in order that they may look at him, and judge by his demeanor upon the stand and the manner in which he gives his testimony whether he is worthy of belief.”221 The right of confrontation is “[o]ne of the fundamental guarantees of life and liberty . . . long deemed so essential for the due protection of life and liberty that it is guarded against legislative and judicial action by provisions in the Constitution of the United States and in the constitutions of most if not of all the States composing the Union.”222 Before 1965, when the Court held the right to be protected against state abridgment,223 it had little need to clarify the relationship between the right of confrontation and the hearsay rule,224 because it could control the admission of hearsay through exercise of its supervisory powers over the inferior federal courts.225"

It is also interesting the bar was lowered so this latest cartoon show could start.

Intelligence community changed whistleblower rules to include hearsay shortly before complaint was filed

"The brand new version of the whistleblower complaint form, which was not made public until after the transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and the complaint addressed to Congress were made public, eliminates the first-hand knowledge requirement and allows employees to file whistleblower complaints even if they have zero direct knowledge of underlying evidence and only “heard about [wrongdoing] from others.”"

"“We learned from today’s reporting from a couple different sources, including The Federalist, that the form used to require as recently as a month ago or at least in the last year, the complaint had to be firsthand knowledge, and a number of other obligations, that it not be a matter of differences of policy. It has to be some very specific criteria. It doesn’t even cover the president, it only covers what happens in the intelligence community,” Dhillon said.

“The new form which is published on the website of the DNI for whistleblowers. It’s marked August 2019, so last month, around the time this whistleblower complaint,” she continued. “It has eliminated that first-hand knowledge requirement. And you see that reflected in the current complaint. It’s full of second-hand, third-hand and press reports and more.”

Dobbs listed several examples of what the Trump whistleblower complaint consists of, to include:

“I received information from multiple officials.”
“Officials have informed me.”
“Officials with direct knowledge of the call informed me.”
“I was told by White House officials.”

“It reads like the most preposterous document,” said Dobbs.

“There is a very good reason why we require firsthand knowledge and firsthand eyewitness testimony on these types of things,” said Dhillon. “It’s the most credible and most close to the facts. But more importantly, the type of complaint we are talking about today could not have been made under last year or earlier this year’s rules. It’s very significant that those rules were secretly, surreptitiously changed.”"


A reasonable observant person will have little trouble picking out the fascists in the current scenario.

If you cannot face your accuser, then you cannot be certain that what you are being accused of has any basis in fact. If the government could bring charges against someone without presenting the accuser claiming that you have done something against the law, then the government would be entirely free to make up whatever crime it wants, along with whatever evidence it wants, without any recourse of your own. This is how "trials" during the Inquisition were performed, and the decision by the Founding Fathers to include this right explicitly in the Constitution is a reflection of the abuses that such systems wrought in the past.

This the same Dobbs that states Trump has never lied?

What is so difficult? A whistleblower is not an accuser. Trump has not been accused, yet. So much blather, so little substance....

 

[Vern]

Yes, I can imagine what they need to explain. Read the rest of the thread for one example.

so that's a no. why are you even at a debate forum if reality gives you such a tummy ache.

 

[prometeus]

Whistleblowers are no longer protected with their statements are publicly released.

How the **** did you come up with that idiocy?

Understand, this is what Democrats in Congress (and on this forum) are really saying. They are saying that a president can be impeached on a non-man hearsay gossip mongering letter having no clue who wrote it, what the person knows or who the person is.

Your uneducated tripe is a constant. No, if Trump is impeached it will be because what he did and what will be supported by direct evidence. Read the ****ing summary of his conversation and try to learn something.

 

[Amelia]

Here we go



The right to confront one's accuser specifically refers to criminal prosecutions. Did you not bother to actually read the 6th Amendment?

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the
right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of
the State and district wherein the crime shall have been
committed, which district shall have been previously
ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and
cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses
against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses
in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel
for his defence. (emphasis added)

It does NOT mean that the accused can literally sit across the table from a witness and berate the individual to their heart's content. That would be witness tampering and/or obstruction of justice. Of course, we know Trump doesn't give a s*** about that, but yeah he's basically demanding to violate the law. And you are somehow trying to say that's OK, while wildly misinterpreting the Constitution.

Oh, and impeachment is not a criminal proceeding. It's a political process. If the House impeaches Trump, then he will not be arrested; he won't be Mirandized; he won't have to post bail; if the Senate convicts him, he won't be fined and/or incarcerated and/or put under house arrest or receive any other type of punishment associated with a criminal conviction. He'll only be kicked out of office.



It wasn't. You're repeating ignorant conspiracy theory BS. Whistleblowers have never been required to personally witness wrongdoing. Not to mention the WB did have some first-hand experience, and multiple claims in his complaint just happen to be true -- including problems with the call, its being placed on a "code server," Giuliani being involved, etc.
https://www.dni.gov/files/ICIG/Docu...on Processing of Whistleblower Complaints.pdf
No Hearsay Rule Change for Whistleblowers - FactCheck.org



Yes, it's pretty obvious that Trump is so deep into his delusional authoritarianism, that he convinced himself it's OK to violate US law. Sad!

You are very patient. I am not so patient. That poster you are attempting to enlighten doesn't care about law or facts. That's not a necessary condition that a poster needs to have in order to support Trump, but it helps.

 

[prometeus]

You are very patient. I am not so patient. That poster you are attempting to enlighten doesn't care about law or facts.

It is a good thing though when we see people willing to make the effort to educate those who are entirely devoid of anything intelligent and honest, even if ultimately it proves futile.

 

[akyron]

Yes because shooting the messenger is so American.

False accusations appear to be the leftest progressive democrat way lately. It is convenient that the elimination of the 6th amendment would appear appealing to democrats. The democrat desire to obfuscate, and desire to disenfranchise millions of american voters are quite clear.


Jussie Smollett’s neighbors cast doubt on his attack story
Claims against Kavanaugh Fall Apart
How the Media Covered False Smear of Covington Kids
Yet Another Major Russia Story Falls Apart.

ad infinitum.

 

[akyron]

How the **** does any of your moronic rant negate what Trump did?

None of us have a clue as to what heinous imaginary crime you clawed out of the depths of the sewer in your mind.

eww.

Some of are consigned to reality instead.

 

[Pound4abrown]

Yes. We can see why false accusations would be popular with the "facts don't matter" crowd.


Jussie Smollett’s neighbors cast doubt on his attack story
Claims against Kavanaugh Fall Apart
How the Media Covered False Smear of Covington Kids
Yet Another Major Russia Story Falls Apart.

ad infinitum.

Wow. That is herculean whataboutisms ya got there.

 

[MTAtech]

I would prefer to see a Special Prosecutor look into this whole thing...perhaps call Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler and others before a Grand Jury to explain their actions.

Look into what "whole thing"? Trump's own transcript confirms everything DeepWhistle said. There is no doubt that Trump said what DeepWhistle said, because Trump said that he said it.

He just wants an opportunity to harass DeepWhistle -- which is exactly why the law protects them.

 

[akyron]

akyron likes to post random, stupid stuff to derail threads and get your attention.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2 Section 4

Section 4

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Article III Section II

"The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.

The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed."

The process of impeachment is a criminal trial, therefore defendants in an impeachment case are criminal defendants, such defendants would gain the protection of 5th and 6th Amendment Constitutional Rights.

The 5th and 6th Amendments were passed after the original Constitutional text, and take precedence over the original Constitutional text covering the process of impeachment.

That means Congress must afford all defendants the same rights they would have for a Court trial including:

The right to a speedy and public trial

The right to confront and compel witnesses before Congress

The right to Counsel

The right to remain silent

The right to “due process”

The protection against being tried twice for the same crime.

So which parts of the constitution do you disagree with and why?

 

[akyron]

confirms everything.

There is no "whistleblower". Just a pack of establishment and democrat political operative lawyers angry about Hillary's failure to convince the appropriate millions of necessary Americans she was worth considering to lead the country. Entrenched swamp creatures striving to hold onto power.
It is fascinating to witness demokkkrats aligning with the enemies of the country. China, NK, foreign agents, arms dealers, cartels, drug lords, human traffickers, drug dealers, and on and on.

 

[Visbek]

....which parts of the constitution do you disagree with and why?

Impeachment is not a criminal proceeding. It's a political process.

You really ought to understand that before you continue to post.

 

[Visbek]

There is no "whistleblower".

:roll:

Denial of basic facts does not help your position. Just FYI.

 

[MTAtech]

There is no "whistleblower". Just a pack of establishment and democrat political operative lawyers angry about Hillary's failure to convince the appropriate millions of necessary Americans she was worth considering to lead the country. Entrenched swamp creatures striving to hold onto power.
It is fascinating to witness demokkkrats aligning with the enemies of the country. China, NK, foreign agents, arms dealers, cartels, drug lords, human traffickers, drug dealers, and on and on.

You know there is no whistleblower how, exactly? But let me entertain your fantasy...

You don't know who this person is but you know for a fact that they are "a pack of establishment and democrat political operative lawyers angry about Hillary's failure to convince the appropriate millions of necessary Americans she was worth considering to lead the country." Let me correct you: HRC got four million more Americans to vote for her. Moreover, it isn't the Democrats warming up to China, North Korea, etc. it's Trump. Trump exchanges love letters with Kim of NK. He praised the leaders of China yesterday for the anniversary of the Communist Revolution! He's also cutting back military projects in Europe that would protect them from a Russian invasion.

Trump is doing all of that and it's the Democrats aligning with enemies? Sorry that you are so influenced by bull crap.

 

[prometeus]

None of us have a clue as to what heinous imaginary crime you clawed out of the depths of the sewer in your mind.

eww.

Some of are consigned to reality instead.

You can not refute facts. Trump made the call, all you are left with is ass kissing, excuses and deflections.

 

[akyron]

You know there is no whistleblower how, exactly?.

I will let a demokkkrat explain it to you.

"I come from a state that raises corn and cotton, cockleburs and Democrats, and frothy eloquence neither convinces nor satisfies me. I'm from Missouri, and you have got to show me."

After the plethora of lies we have witnessed over the last few years we are lucky to know what we know now despite the obstruction. Even all that may be wrong.

Swamp creatures are desperate to hide their complicity on the shenanigans leading up to 2016. That is what is visible in the current desperation.

Enjoy a ta$$$te of ukraine.