News
news New biometric database can identify people through scars, tattoos and even their voice
news Cattle Are Being Mutilated And Killed In Eastern Oregon
news Insider Interview on Skinwalker Ranch History
news Squirrels Can Speak Bird
news US Navy pilot says mystery ‘dark mass’ emerged from ocean and swallowed torpedo
news Cognitive scientist says we see things as we need to, rather than as they are.
news A Movie You Control With Your Mind
news Radioactive Cloud That Blanketed Europe Traced to Russian Nuclear Facility
news Organization Says It’s Obtained ‘Exotic’ Metals Unknown to Science
news The frightening supernatural story of the Black Bird of Chernobyl
news Recent UFO Encounters With Navy Pilots Occurred Constantly Across Multiple Squadrons


Username:
Password: or Register
 
Thread Rating:
  • 6 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 441631
10-09-2019 02:28 PM

 




Post: #16
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
Advertisement
The sixth amendment confrontation clause would seem to be the guidance.
But that said until some actual legal process is instituted it really doesn't matter what drama and theatrics they want to perform in front of the venue of the less informed.
The reality is the more they attempt to present a star chamber as a fair hearing of the facts the greater the public anger and backlash they will experience.

They need to stand up and be accounted for in a vote to impeach and allow the defense to subpoena and cross examine. There should be no fear to do so if they are right because the truth will win in the end.
Anything less is a circular firing squad.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 519110
10-09-2019 03:09 PM

 




Post: #17
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
el Jefe  Wrote: (10-09-2019 12:14 PM)
link to image: https://i.imgur.com/njwhR7L.jpg

chuckle
This should be the theme song for the dnc.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 504100
10-09-2019 03:16 PM

 




Post: #18
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 02:28 PM)
The sixth amendment confrontation clause would seem to be the guidance.
But that said until some actual legal process is instituted it really doesn't matter what drama and theatrics they want to perform in front of the venue of the less informed.
The reality is the more they attempt to present a star chamber as a fair hearing of the facts the greater the public anger and backlash they will experience.

They need to stand up and be accounted for in a vote to impeach and allow the defense to subpoena and cross examine. There should be no fear to do so if they are right because the truth will win in the end.
Anything less is a circular firing squad.

I’m not sure the bill of rights applies the same way to government officials involved in congressional proceedings. Beyond that witness safety is one number directives of a proceeding.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 518545
10-09-2019 03:25 PM

 




Post: #19
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
WHO is the Whistle Blower?
Well I bet you could find DNA up in Adam Schitts Ass!
And on the Sheets at the Standard Hotel!

Breaking News: We have some DNA evidence in the Case!
Lmao
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 441631
10-09-2019 03:32 PM

 




Post: #20
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 03:16 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 02:28 PM)
The sixth amendment confrontation clause would seem to be the guidance.
But that said until some actual legal process is instituted it really doesn't matter what drama and theatrics they want to perform in front of the venue of the less informed.
The reality is the more they attempt to present a star chamber as a fair hearing of the facts the greater the public anger and backlash they will experience.

They need to stand up and be accounted for in a vote to impeach and allow the defense to subpoena and cross examine. There should be no fear to do so if they are right because the truth will win in the end.
Anything less is a circular firing squad.



I’m not sure the bill of rights applies the same way to government officials involved in congressional proceedings. Beyond that witness safety is one number directives of a proceeding.

The final judge is the people. Do you think for a moment that this is some altruistic exercise in oversight and not stunt to effect an election?
Of course you don't.
We aren't talking about El Chapo here and now that I hear the leaker is a democratic sympatico that had worked for a Democratic candidate for president I think the protections are being misdirected. They want to accuse without question. No it won't fly.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 471663
10-09-2019 03:50 PM

 




Post: #21
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
Shoggoth  Wrote: (10-09-2019 02:25 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 01:22 PM)
Proof of threats just might not exist either. What threats? Why no arrests of whoever made some supposed threats to someone they don't know the identity of? Someone should ask for proof that threats were made and the nature of the supposed threats. Just because someone says a thing, don't assume it's true. I tend to think someone is lying about threats existing in order to not have their source scrutinized.

Would you consider video to be sufficient evidence for these threats?

In today's world of tech, not without verification. Reagan once said "Trust but verify". There are now "Deep fake videos" out there. I haven't seen much discussion on the tech or how it could be used to fool people in a world where news is already unquestionably questionable. So, no I would not consider a video as sufficient.




https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gLoI9hAX9dw
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 504100
10-09-2019 03:54 PM

 




Post: #22
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 03:32 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 03:16 PM)
I’m not sure the bill of rights applies the same way to government officials involved in congressional proceedings. Beyond that witness safety is one number directives of a proceeding.

The final judge is the people. Do you think for a moment that this is some altruistic exercise in oversight and not stunt to effect an election?
Of course you don't.
We aren't talking about El Chapo here and now that I hear the leaker is a democratic sympatico that had worked for a Democratic candidate for president I think the protections are being misdirected. They want to accuse without question. No it won't fly.

The final judge is by the people, I do not know why you think there is no evidence to it. What you hear is a bunch blog talk and such has no bearing inside of committee hearing. And no we are not talking about El Chapo you’re dealing with someone much more violent, the US government. Again not unprecedented, there have been many masked witnesses in committee before, and the whistleblower act has protections to include anonymity at hearings.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 441631
10-09-2019 04:10 PM

 




Post: #23
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 03:54 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 03:32 PM)
The final judge is the people. Do you think for a moment that this is some altruistic exercise in oversight and not stunt to effect an election?
Of course you don't.
We aren't talking about El Chapo here and now that I hear the leaker is a democratic sympatico that had worked for a Democratic candidate for president I think the protections are being misdirected. They want to accuse without question. No it won't fly.

The final judge is by the people, I do not know why you think there is no evidence to it. What you hear is a bunch blog talk and such has no bearing inside of committee hearing. And no we are not talking about El Chapo you’re dealing with someone much more violent, the US government. Again not unprecedented, there have been many masked witnesses in committee before, and the whistleblower act has protections to include anonymity at hearings.

Then you have no objections to a properly voted upon impeachment inquiry that provides roe established rules of evidence, due process and the ability to confront your accuser?
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 504100
10-09-2019 04:17 PM

 




Post: #24
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 04:10 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 03:54 PM)
The final judge is by the people, I do not know why you think there is no evidence to it. What you hear is a bunch blog talk and such has no bearing inside of committee hearing. And no we are not talking about El Chapo you’re dealing with someone much more violent, the US government. Again not unprecedented, there have been many masked witnesses in committee before, and the whistleblower act has protections to include anonymity at hearings.

Then you have no objections to a properly voted upon impeachment inquiry that provides roe established rules of evidence, due process and the ability to confront your accuser?

Again, you’ll have to go through it but there are differences between the rights of public official brought before committee and a citizen brought before a court of law. If this individual has a reasonable expectation of violence to them or their family, or impingement or livelihood they have a right anonymity under the law. As for an impeachment inquiry yes they should begin one, but also is on the timeline of who wants to initiate, again another example that there’s a difference as speedy trial is sort of changed there.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 441631
10-09-2019 04:34 PM

 




Post: #25
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 04:17 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 04:10 PM)
Then you have no objections to a properly voted upon impeachment inquiry that provides roe established rules of evidence, due process and the ability to confront your accuser?

Again, you’ll have to go through it but there are differences between the rights of public official brought before committee and a citizen brought before a court of law. If this individual has a reasonable expectation of violence to them or their family, or impingement or livelihood they have a right anonymity under the law. As for an impeachment inquiry yes they should begin one, but also is on the timeline of who wants to initiate, again another example that there’s a difference as speedy trial is sort of changed there.

Once again. The people are deciding. Anything other than an emphatic yes to the question will be viewed as an attempt to take down a duly elected president by a radical faction. Self included.

As far as hiding the accuser from scrutiny, I think that in the environment that has been created by the antics of Adam Schiff that any stock the accusing democrats had as far as veracity has been reduced to junk status. A liar will continue to lie. They aren't going anywhere with just a wink and a promise.
Dems are only kidding themselves if they think they're being taken seriously.
Quote this message in a reply
UnAcceptance
Registered User
User ID: 519115
10-09-2019 04:42 PM

Posts: 2,226




Post: #26
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 04:34 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 04:17 PM)
Again, you’ll have to go through it but there are differences between the rights of public official brought before committee and a citizen brought before a court of law. If this individual has a reasonable expectation of violence to them or their family, or impingement or livelihood they have a right anonymity under the law. As for an impeachment inquiry yes they should begin one, but also is on the timeline of who wants to initiate, again another example that there’s a difference as speedy trial is sort of changed there.

Once again. The people are deciding. Anything other than an emphatic yes to the question will be viewed as an attempt to take down a duly elected president by a radical faction. Self included.

As far as hiding the accuser from scrutiny, I think that in the environment that has been created by the antics of Adam Schiff that any stock the accusing democrats had as far as veracity has been reduced to junk status. A liar will continue to lie. They aren't going anywhere with just a wink and a promise.
Dems are only kidding themselves if they think they're being taken seriously.

And if they want to call it an unofficial impeachment, fine. Then let President Trump have his unofficial due process wherein he can be represented and subpeona and cross examine and confront accusers, or MAKE the VOTE OFFICIAL and prepare for HELL.
Why are the Dems so ascared of the deck not being stacked in their favor and it just being a level field of play?
If they have nothing to hide, then they have nothing to fear. chuckle
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 504100
10-09-2019 05:25 PM

 




Post: #27
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 04:34 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 04:17 PM)
Again, you’ll have to go through it but there are differences between the rights of public official brought before committee and a citizen brought before a court of law. If this individual has a reasonable expectation of violence to them or their family, or impingement or livelihood they have a right anonymity under the law. As for an impeachment inquiry yes they should begin one, but also is on the timeline of who wants to initiate, again another example that there’s a difference as speedy trial is sort of changed there.

Once again. The people are deciding. Anything other than an emphatic yes to the question will be viewed as an attempt to take down a duly elected president by a radical faction. Self included.

As far as hiding the accuser from scrutiny, I think that in the environment that has been created by the antics of Adam Schiff that any stock the accusing democrats had as far as veracity has been reduced to junk status. A liar will continue to lie. They aren't going anywhere with just a wink and a promise.
Dems are only kidding themselves if they think they're being taken seriously.

I’m just telling you what the legal framework for proceedings are, as for anything else I’m done commenting the whole systems being played for people up burn it to the ground.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 519124
10-09-2019 05:27 PM

 




Post: #28
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
Let's get this straight, they want a whistleblower to remain anon and testify about things they only heard from other people and has a contradictory statement from the actual transcript where 20 other people were there and heard it!

If anyone tried this in court your case would be dismissed!
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 519124
10-09-2019 05:27 PM

 




Post: #29
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
Let's get this straight, they want a whistleblower to remain anon and testify about things they only heard from other people and has a contradictory statement from the actual transcript where 20 other people were there and heard it!

If anyone tried this in court your case would be dismissed!
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 504100
10-09-2019 05:31 PM

 




Post: #30
RE: SCAM: Democrats’ ‘Unprecedented’ Moves To Hide Whistleblower’s Identity
LoP Guest  Wrote: (10-09-2019 05:27 PM)
Let's get this straight, they want a whistleblower to remain anon and testify about things they only heard from other people and has a contradictory statement from the actual transcript where 20 other people were there and heard it!

If anyone tried this in court your case would be dismissed!

No it wouldn’t, courts are often circuses. What gets in on cases is much crazier than that sometimes.
Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement









Contact UsConspiracy Forum. No reg. required! Return to TopReturn to ContentRSS Syndication