Full Document: The Whistle-Blower Complaint Against President Trump

Here is the complaint filed by an intelligence officer about President Trump’s interactions with the leader of Ukraine. It was released with a letter from the inspector general of the intelligence community:

In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election.

This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals. The President’s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well.

The White House officials who told me this information were deeply disturbed by what had transpired in the phone call. They told me that there was already a “discussion ongoing” with White House lawyers about how to treat the call because of the likelihood, in the officials' retelling, that they had witnessed the President abuse his office for personal gain.

In the days following the phone call, I learned from multiple U.S. officials that senior White House officials had intervened to “lock down” all records of the phone call, especially the official word-for-word transcript of the call that was produced—as is customary-by the White House Situation Room. This set of actions underscored to me that White House officials understood the gravity of what had transpired in the call.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/09/26/us/politics/whistle-blower-complaint.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article

Comments

  • Democrats socialists never waited for the facts or the evidences before they went ahead with their now debunked impeachment proceedings. No evidences but lets go ahead. Like the kavanaugh hearings. Like the fake Mueller russia investigations.

    Democ rats socialists want to presume guilty before going to court. In no democracy is that going to fly. You arr guilty before you have a day in court and you atr guilty before the case start. This kind of Thinking that you atr guilty before trial or evidence only happened in Nazi Germany under Hitler or Communist Russia under Stalin and communist china. All socialists countries. Socialists are the same even when they put Democ rat before socialists as their party affiliation.

  • hear·say
    /ˈhirˌsā/
    Learn to pronounce
    noun
    information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.


    this is what the maguire said about the whistleblower complaint. Rumours like kavanaugh ane the Trump collusion narrative.

    Hahaha
  • Good God Almighty, Rastaman, you are one stupid fuck.

    No impeachment proceedings have been "debunked." There are a majority of members of the House of Representatives who will vote for impeachment of the Orange Orangutan when the Article(s) of Impeachment (not yet drafted) are completed and voted on by the Judiciary Committee of the House. When the Judiciary Committee takes up the Article(s) of Impeachment they will approve at least one Article by a majority vote of the Committee, and send at least one Article of Impeachment to the floor of the House, where it will be approved and sent to the Senate for trial. Yes, trial.

    Also, it is good that you brought up the hearsay nature of the whistleblower complaint, because it is of course true that the whistleblower was not present when Trump made his solicitation for Ukrainian help for the 2020 election in violation of US criminal law, and so the entire whistleblower complaint is in fact hearsay. Good point, little boy, you have been paying attention.

    Unfortunately, you missed the most important fact when you were out back of the school smoking a doobie. The Federal Rules of Evidence do not apply in impeachment trials before the Senate. 100 Senators will hear the presentation of the prosecutors (Lindsay Graham was a prosecutor in the Clinton Impeachment trial), and will consider the Orange Orangutan's call record which was released by the Orange Orangutan Wednesday, and which corroborates (good evidence word) the whistleblower complaint regarding the Orange Orangutan's telephone conversation with the President of Ukraine in which the Orange Orangutan requested the help of Ukraine in making shit up about Vice President Biden and his son to help the Orange Orangutan win re-election.

    So the Orange Orangutan, almost as stupid as you are, has released an official record of his phone call, admitted as accurate, which proves violations of federal criminal statutes. An admission of guilt, just like you and Pansie Pants admitted you both smuggled guns into the FSM in violation of FSM criminal statutes barring non-registered guns from the FSM.

    Which brings us back to your definition of "hearsay." The definition says "information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor." But here, the whistleblower complaint has been adequately substantiated. By the official record of the phone call which the Orange Orangutan made public!

    Furthermore, you can bet that the House Select Committee on Intelligence, which heard from the Acting DNI yesterday, will obtain testimony from the people who told the whistleblower about the phone call to the President of Ukraine and who were present when the call was made (admissible evidence and not hearsay), and the ham-handed efforts to keep it secret by moving it to a highly secret server, called a "cover-up" (which you can of course look up, since you found the definition of hearsay), and which also constitutes a crime and was one of the Articles of Impeachment which the House would have voted on against Nixon except Nixon did the honorable thing (a word which the Orange Orangutan does not know) and resigned.

    Of course, I would be remiss if I did not note that the Senate will, in all probability, refuse to convict the Orange Orangutan of the crimes which he has admitted committing, because all republicans are more interested in power for power's sake than honesty or ethics, or morality, or anything other than power pure and simple.

    But the good thing is, that going into 2020, every Republican in the Senate will have to cast his or her vote on removing the impeached Orange Orangutan from office. Go through the list of Republican senators, idiot, and try to figure out how many will be defeated in the 2020 election because they refused to convict an admittedly guilty man. Only God knows, of course, but my bet would be that the Democrats will increase their majority in the House, and regain the majority in the Senate. And of course, take back the presidency from the biggest con man with the smallest hands on record.

    All without having to worry about "hearsay."

    So pay attention, Rats Ass Man, because contrary to your assertions about impeachment proceedings being "debunked," the good stuff is just getting going.

    WADF
  • Rarely do you have a criminal say: “Look at me! I’m committing a crime! And now watch me cover it up!”

    Only a moron has that unique talent.
Sign In or Register to comment.