/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/64038312/GettyImages_1149412193__1_.0.jpg)
Oh, man...
What a load of malarkey!
Posted on 10/09/2019 10:28:07 AM PDT by billorites
I've grown increasingly curious — hell, let's say suspicious — about the most recent incarnation of the three-year effort to find a case for impeaching Trump. "
edit...
It seems Trump asked Zelensky for two things: an investigation into Crowdstrike, the company that performed the forensic examination of the DNC servers in lieu of the FBI, and to co-operate in investigating the Bidens, pere et fils, involvement in the suspended prosecution of Ukrainian company Burisma, which employed Hunter Biden. This is what is supposed to have been "crazy" and "frightening" left Whistle-Blower2 "visibly shaken."
Now, what could have been so emotionally charged in that call? The transcript seems relatively low key: no shouting, no screaming, and if there were any threats they were phrased very diplomatically.
It seems to me — and this is just a plausible inference, I'm not asserting it's the truth — it seems to me that the only people who would be "visibly shaken" by that would be someone who already has guilty knowledge of Crowdstrike, Burisma, or both.
Now, look at the really just astonishing irregularity of the "impeachment inquiry": not just refusing to take it to the floor of the House, but the secrecy, the selective cherry-picking of releases, and the plan to prevent Republican members — not to mention the Nation — from learning anything about either WB1 or WB2.
I think the most plausible inference is that the whistleblowers are connected to Biden's campaign, or to the DNC, and were shaken by the possibility of Biden and Crowdstrike being investigated because they know there is something there to be found.
It's time for the Democrat majority on HPSCI to come clean: what did they know, when did they know it, and who are they really protecting with their unprecedented secrecy?
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
Bet Money Kamala Harris is the puppet master.
I’m not convinced that the whistleblower exists.
Right on the money.
About crowdstrike we’re hearing that any mention of that server is a “conspiracy theory”. Given that the FBI nor anyone else in authority has ever seen that server, I’d say it isn’t a conspiracy theory to demand to see the server.
It’s not a theory. It’s a reasonable request. We haven’t yet seen it. We want to see it.
What the heck is the server doing in Ukraine?
Oh, man...
What a load of malarkey!
There was not enough space in Clinton's garage.
concocted as conspiracy by
those involved with Ukraine and Crowdstrike,
and/or Ukraine and Burisma.
venn diagram encircles kerry, pelosi, romney,
and biden already.
I think that the DNC are trying to get it as far away from the US and the FBI as possible. Out of the reach of the FBI and justice dept.
This is the only explanation.
Crowdstrike’s owner has links to the Atlantic Council, at “think tank” which is focused on the Ukraine.
We have the transcript of the call.
Is this whistle about something else?
It is akin to storing US confidential data on a server in the Ukraine. Actually, there might even be US confidential data on the DNC server. After all, it probably has communications between the DNC and future presidents and officials.
Right but none of them gain by this becoming public
Who gains with a manufactured scandal that exposes Biden’s corruption while launching Muller Clown show 2.0 against Trump?
Exactly there IS nothing here but the manufacture political attack at Trump that exposes Biden deep corruption?
Which candidate for the Democrat 2020 nomination gains the most here and has the contacts to pull this off?
I'm not either. It could easily be that a few people got together and wrote up the hearsay that's floating around and filled out a Whistleblower accusation as soon as the rules were changed to allow hearsay.
That would fit with the Steele BS where you could only follow any accusation as far as an "unnamed source".
Shifty Shiff knows one trick and keeps repeating it.
Elizabeth Warren
Crowdstrike is owned by a Ukrainian billionaire.
Ukraine had a Democrat friendly government until the last election that no one saw coming. Sound familiar?
I have several theories, but the most surprising may be that the so-called "Whistleblower" doesn't even know that he/she is the Whistleblower. Since it has become increasingly apparent that the complaint was drafted by a law firm, there is a good chance it came from the warped mind of Adam Schiff or a brainstorming session among the dems, and the person they put forth as the nominal "Whistleblower" may not even know yet that he has been nominated for this suicide mission.
Yes. And with the server stored just the across the border from Russia, it would be easy for Russia to “hack into it.”
After all Democrats are accusing Russia of meddling in the 2016 election and their server is within a stones throw of Russia.
Again, it doesn’t add up. Or maybe it does....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.