Us normals are very suspicious of the whistleblower complaint

KLATTU · Oct 2, 2019

Remember , for 2 years Democrats and their water carriers in the press assured us that Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the 2016 election.
ot only did that turn out to be false, but as the investigation dragged on it became clear that the origins of the probe were highly suspicious, implicating senior intelligence officials in the Obama administration and raising questions about whether the whole thing was a political hit job from the start.

Now e’re supposed to accept that what the anti-Trump whistleblower complaint describes is confirmed by the unredacted and publicly released transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky. We’re not supposed to question the veracity of the whistleblower’s complaint or the purity of the whistleblower’s motives.

As it is, the fact that ICIG developed new forms that don’t require firsthand information suggests that it was done as an after-the-fact justification of how the anti-Trump whistleblower’s complaint was handled.

I'm highly skeptical as are most normals.

Simon W. Moon · Oct 2, 2019

KLATTU said:
Remember , for 2 years Democrats and their water carriers in the press assured us that Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the 2016 election.
ot only did that turn out to be false, but as the investigation dragged on it became clear that the origins of the probe were highly suspicious, implicating senior intelligence officials in the Obama administration and raising questions about whether the whole thing was a political hit job from the start.
Now e’re supposed to accept that what the anti-Trump whistleblower complaint describes is confirmed by the unredacted and publicly released transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky. We’re not supposed to question the veracity of the whistleblower’s complaint or the purity of the whistleblower’s motives.
As it is, the fact that ICIG developed new forms that don’t require firsthand information suggests that it was done as an after-the-fact justification of how the anti-Trump whistleblower’s complaint was handled.
I'm highly skeptical as are most normals.

"Normals" make gleeful posts every time a new Rasmussen poll about the PotUS comes out?

It seems the board would see a lot more of those posts if they were the actions of "normals"

You seem to be more of an outlier, imho.

ymmv

OlNate · Oct 2, 2019

KLATTU said:
Remember , for 2 years Democrats and their water carriers in the press assured us that Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the 2016 election.
ot only did that turn out to be false, but as the investigation dragged on it became clear that the origins of the probe were highly suspicious, implicating senior intelligence officials in the Obama administration and raising questions about whether the whole thing was a political hit job from the start.

Now e’re supposed to accept that what the anti-Trump whistleblower complaint describes is confirmed by the unredacted and publicly released transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky. We’re not supposed to question the veracity of the whistleblower’s complaint or the purity of the whistleblower’s motives.

As it is, the fact that ICIG developed new forms that don’t require firsthand information suggests that it was done as an after-the-fact justification of how the anti-Trump whistleblower’s complaint was handled.

I'm highly skeptical as are most normals.

It's ok, we know you "normals" wouldn't believe anything bad about your lord and savior Donald Trump. :shrug: What's to debate here?

chuckiechan · Oct 2, 2019

KLATTU said:
Remember , for 2 years Democrats and their water carriers in the press assured us that Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the 2016 election.
ot only did that turn out to be false, but as the investigation dragged on it became clear that the origins of the probe were highly suspicious, implicating senior intelligence officials in the Obama administration and raising questions about whether the whole thing was a political hit job from the start.

Now e’re supposed to accept that what the anti-Trump whistleblower complaint describes is confirmed by the unredacted and publicly released transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky. We’re not supposed to question the veracity of the whistleblower’s complaint or the purity of the whistleblower’s motives.

As it is, the fact that ICIG developed new forms that don’t require firsthand information suggests that it was done as an after-the-fact justification of how the anti-Trump whistleblower’s complaint was handled.

I'm highly skeptical as are most normals.

They have been “impeaching” Trump from day one.

If we had an honest press, they would have gotten nowhere and we wouldn’t be facing a hostile socialist take over.

OlNate said:
It's ok, we know you "normals" wouldn't believe anything bad about your lord and savior Donald Trump. :shrug: What's to debate here?

Antiquated things like proof, evidence, intent, honesty, and accepting democracy as it is designed to operate.

OlNate · Oct 2, 2019

chuckiechan said:
Antiquated things like proof, evidence, intent, honesty, and accepting democracy as it is designed to operate.

Not really...not with Trump supporters. Unless it is to accept your apology...

danielpalos · Oct 2, 2019

KLATTU said:
Remember , for 2 years Democrats and their water carriers in the press assured us that Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the 2016 election.
ot only did that turn out to be false, but as the investigation dragged on it became clear that the origins of the probe were highly suspicious, implicating senior intelligence officials in the Obama administration and raising questions about whether the whole thing was a political hit job from the start.

Now e’re supposed to accept that what the anti-Trump whistleblower complaint describes is confirmed by the unredacted and publicly released transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky. We’re not supposed to question the veracity of the whistleblower’s complaint or the purity of the whistleblower’s motives.

As it is, the fact that ICIG developed new forms that don’t require firsthand information suggests that it was done as an after-the-fact justification of how the anti-Trump whistleblower’s complaint was handled.

I'm highly skeptical as are most normals.

Only the right wing seems to have no understanding of national security concerns and any influence our new Russian friends may have on this administration.

ttwtt78640 · Oct 2, 2019

KLATTU said:
Remember , for 2 years Democrats and their water carriers in the press assured us that Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the 2016 election.
ot only did that turn out to be false, but as the investigation dragged on it became clear that the origins of the probe were highly suspicious, implicating senior intelligence officials in the Obama administration and raising questions about whether the whole thing was a political hit job from the start.

Now e’re supposed to accept that what the anti-Trump whistleblower complaint describes is confirmed by the unredacted and publicly released transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky. We’re not supposed to question the veracity of the whistleblower’s complaint or the purity of the whistleblower’s motives.

As it is, the fact that ICIG developed new forms that don’t require firsthand information suggests that it was done as an after-the-fact justification of how the anti-Trump whistleblower’s complaint was handled.

I'm highly skeptical as are most normals.

Normals would not make breathless calls for impeachment ASAP or make wild claims of a "Deep State" conspiracy, and would carefully (and without prejudice) investigate the WB claim(s) and only after that investigation was complete decide on an appropriate course of action. Obviously, that is not what is happening.

danielpalos · Oct 2, 2019

ttwtt78640 said:
Normals would ignore the breathless calls for impeachment or make wild claims of a "Deep State" conspiracy, carefully (and without prejudice) investigate the WB claim(s) and only after that investigation was complete decide on an appropriate course of action. Obviously, that is not what is happening.

propaganda and rhetoric are all the right wing has.

ttwtt78640 · Oct 2, 2019

danielpalos said:
propaganda and rhetoric are all the right wing has.

Hmm... is a post dripping with partisan bias helpful?

ataraxia · Oct 2, 2019

KLATTU said:
Remember , for 2 years Democrats and their water carriers in the press assured us that Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the 2016 election.
ot only did that turn out to be false, but as the investigation dragged on it became clear that the origins of the probe were highly suspicious, implicating senior intelligence officials in the Obama administration and raising questions about whether the whole thing was a political hit job from the start.

Now e’re supposed to accept that what the anti-Trump whistleblower complaint describes is confirmed by the unredacted and publicly released transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky. We’re not supposed to question the veracity of the whistleblower’s complaint or the purity of the whistleblower’s motives.

As it is, the fact that ICIG developed new forms that don’t require firsthand information suggests that it was done as an after-the-fact justification of how the anti-Trump whistleblower’s complaint was handled.

I'm highly skeptical as are most normals.

Wow. And to think you all you “normals” voted for someone who told you for six years straight that you weren’t going to believe what his “top people” were finding on Obama’s secret Kenyan birth certificate, and how his “university” was better than Harvard.

You clever, clear-minded, sober skeptic you!:lamo

danielpalos · Oct 2, 2019

ttwtt78640 said:
Hmm... is a post dripping with partisan bias helpful?

it is only bias if i am wrong;

want to argue about it?

jnug · Oct 2, 2019

"Us normals"

Ya' lost me in the first two words. That might be a record even for this place.

ttwtt78640 · Oct 2, 2019

danielpalos said:
it is only bias if i am wrong;

want to argue about it?

Nope.

danielpalos · Oct 2, 2019

ttwtt78640 said:
Nope.

thank you.

trouble13 · Oct 2, 2019

OlNate said:
It's ok, we know you "normals" wouldn't believe anything bad about your lord and savior Donald Trump. :shrug: What's to debate here?

He does raise a fair point about them asking for peoples blind trust on certain elements of this complaint after they have recently abused that faith.

Even this current complaint has ties to that past betrayal of trust. I do question why they are being defensive about investigating the events leading up to the 2016 election.

I dont want to believe that anyone did anything wrong but the only way we are going to know is to do a full investigation. Mueller investigated only things that involved the Trump team and some would argue that he did not fully investigate even those aspects of it.

If he looked at the origins of the investigation at all it was in very cursory sense. I dont know that im gonna be completely satisified with Barrs investigations either but whatever answers he brings back will at least give us more of the picture.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

chuckiechan · Oct 2, 2019

OlNate said:
Not really...not with Trump supporters. Unless it is to accept your apology...

Hypothetically speaking, what is happening politically is a good example for “normals” when confronted by the mentally ill: You cannot expect them to be like you. They think differently, they relate to the world around them differently, and as disorganized as their minds are by normal standards, they believe with their heart of hearts that aliens really are chasing them. Most have been socialized enough that they won’t attack you in person, they will just stomp of muttering and swearing because they don’t know how to do anything else.

The media is doing it for money and power. Most of my antagonists are believing the MSM because they can’t bring themselves to take time out from a busy life to ferret out the truth, so they are doing it because they are lazy.

trouble13 · Oct 2, 2019

danielpalos said:
Only the right wing seems to have no understanding of national security concerns and any influence our new Russian friends may have on this administration.

Whis is the left only concerned with foreign influence on this administration and not with it through out the entire government?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

OlNate · Oct 2, 2019

chuckiechan said:
Hypothetically speaking, what is happening politically is a good example for “normals” when confronted by the mentally ill: You cannot expect them to be like you. They think differently, they relate to the world around them differently, and as disorganized as their minds are by normal standards, they believe with their heart of hearts that aliens really are chasing them. Most have been socialized enough that they won’t attack you in person, they will just stomp of muttering and swearing because they don’t know how to do anything else.

The media is doing it for money and power. Most of my antagonists are believing the MSM because they can’t bring themselves to take time out from a busy life to ferret out the truth, so they are doing it because they are lazy.

Truth no longer exists. That was made normal by Trump, and adopted whole heartedly by his supporters. Sure, there were lying politicians before him, but it used to be a shameful act, not the crowd pleaser it is today.

Maybe it's true, or maybe it's fighting fire with fire...either way, it doesn't matter. Trump deserves every piece of **** flung at him. You folks who support him shouldn't expect anything different before that orange tumor is removed.

OlNate · Oct 2, 2019

trouble13 said:
He does raise a fair point about them asking for peoples blind trust on certain elements of this complaint after they have recently abused that faith.

Even this current complaint has ties to that past betrayal of trust. I do question why they are being defensive about investigating the events leading up to the 2016 election.

I dont want to believe that anyone did anything wrong but the only way we are going to know is to do a full investigation. Mueller investigated only things that involved the Trump team and some would argue that he did not fully investigate even those aspects of it.

If he looked at the origins of the investigation at all it was in very cursory sense. I dont know that im gonna be completely satisified with Barrs investigations either but whatever answers he brings back will at least give us more of the picture.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

It's all a mess, Trouble. The trouble is, you guys accepted lies as SOP. You set the precedent. Everything after, well... :shrug: I think the only solution here is for you guys to start picking better government.

Lutherf · Oct 2, 2019

KLATTU said:
Remember , for 2 years Democrats and their water carriers in the press assured us that Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the 2016 election.
ot only did that turn out to be false, but as the investigation dragged on it became clear that the origins of the probe were highly suspicious, implicating senior intelligence officials in the Obama administration and raising questions about whether the whole thing was a political hit job from the start.

Now e’re supposed to accept that what the anti-Trump whistleblower complaint describes is confirmed by the unredacted and publicly released transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky. We’re not supposed to question the veracity of the whistleblower’s complaint or the purity of the whistleblower’s motives.

As it is, the fact that ICIG developed new forms that don’t require firsthand information suggests that it was done as an after-the-fact justification of how the anti-Trump whistleblower’s complaint was handled.

I'm highly skeptical as are most normals.

There's nothing to be suspicious about with the complaint. I have no doubt that it's a real complaint. I also believe that the whistleeblower had or has a sincere fear that anything Donald Trump said is a dire threat to our national security. I mean, every one of the "resistance" believes that crap anyway so why not he whistleblower too? That's the Democrat plan these days. They freak out over anything and everything related to Trump then call it a "threat to national security". It's the same thing they do with guns, health care and free speech. Basically, they believe that the world is going to end unless Democrats run everything. That's all this garbage is.

Well, that and their basis for impeachment. That's also kind of cute on their part. "Highg crimes and misdemeanors" no longer requires a crime or a misdemeanor if you're a Democrat because, as Democrats, YOU are the one that gets to decide what a crime or misdemeanor is.

It must be really, really good to be a Democrat.

ocean515 · Oct 2, 2019

OlNate said:
Not really...not with Trump supporters. Unless it is to accept your apology...

Apology for what?

Drawdown · Oct 2, 2019

At this point, the ONLY thing the democrats can build a case on is if Trump himself told them not to turn the report over to Congress. So far, there is no evidence of that. Since Shiff apparently has had this report for several weeks before anything was made of it, it looks more and more like the democratic motives were political in the same way Feinstein sat on the Ford story for months and waited until the last second after they had lost every other way to suddenly drop it into Congress's lap. Pelosi signing off on the impeachment inquiry BEFORE the complaint was officially released or the transcripts given to Congress just adds more to the republican case that this is nothing but a partisan stunt as she undoubtedly had seen it beforehand as well.

OlNate · Oct 2, 2019

ocean515 said:
Apology for what?

For ushering in a period where lies are normal, because you hated the folks who disagreed with you so much that you elected a president solely on his ability to piss those people off. For enabling his lies by believing every one, even when you had to make fools of yourselves by excusing the inexcusable, or simply doing 180's on things you'd previously said. For defending his lies when they couldn't otherwise be explained.

No one really has a strong hold on the truth these days, but Trump supporters have lost any claim to it entirely.

CaughtInThe · Oct 2, 2019

If a person supports a New York City liar and crook, does the public consider them normal?

Hypothetical · Oct 2, 2019

OlNate said:
It's all a mess, Trouble. The trouble is, you guys accepted lies as SOP. You set the precedent. Everything after, well... :shrug: I think the only solution here is for you guys to start picking better government.

what lies do we accept as SOP?

Us normals are very suspicious of the whistleblower complaint

KLATTU

Simon W. Moon

OlNate

Shameless Canuck

chuckiechan

OlNate

Shameless Canuck

danielpalos

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong

danielpalos

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong

ataraxia

danielpalos

jnug

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong

danielpalos

trouble13

chuckiechan

trouble13

OlNate

Shameless Canuck

OlNate

Shameless Canuck

Lutherf

ocean515

Drawdown

OlNate

Shameless Canuck

CaughtInThe

Hypothetical

Us normals are very suspicious of the whistleblower complaint

Shameless Canuck

Shameless Canuck

Sometimes wrong

Sometimes wrong

Sometimes wrong

Shameless Canuck

Shameless Canuck

Shameless Canuck

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency