Wrote and posted a reply to yours... which seems to have gone missing ? That's pretty odd.
A new troll pops up... joined SI only last Friday... and messages I post here on my own board... disappear ?
I'll try it again... duplicating mine, if not as well as I remember... as I hate do overs...
Read the whistleblower statutes.
I know the law. Do you ? Let's find out.
Post a link to the statutes you want to talk about... and the "facts" you think matter in relation... and lets talk about them...
The whistleblower...
Is not a whistleblower under the law. He admits to having no first hand knowledge... of anything...
reported his concerns to a republican Inspector General
Inspectors General are not political partisans... but, the "whistleblower" is a political activist... and he's not the only one involved in making the "report"... and he wasn't acting alone... wasn't reporting in a way that is compliant with the law... in making the report he did.
However... that you use that language claiming the IG was in fact a political partisan... is telling in itself.
I see that behavior too often to not know what it means. Saw the same thing often enough in relation to former communist James Comey ( as also Brennan was dyed in the wool) seeing him often pretending and posing as a Republican. Fairly common, actually, among the sycophant class of liberal baggage carriers... to see that they'll misrepresent themselves in efforts to infiltrate the opposing camp...
DAG Rosenstein... a member of the Federalist Society ? It's laughable...
There's far more in play here, though, than the ephemeral in stupidly misrepresenting ones political beliefs... when we can see the direct proofs in behavior that enable us to compare them against the claims of moral superiority.
In theory, it isn't supposed to matter what party you prefer ? Since we DO expect that everyone in public office... and everyone holding an office of trust... is operating in good faith ? Or, are they ?
Those issues in misrepresentation are important to consider... not just in evaluating good faith... but in looking at HOW it is that the political operations run against the DOJ intended and ensured that the DOJ became wholly corrupted by political partisanship...
Democrats have been spectacularly foolish... in abusing trust... and seem not to recognize or understand that, or the implications of it... and what it means when your opponents understand you cannot be trusted to operate in good faith. There's a price to pay for that... and, you do have to wonder... at what point will Democrats figure out that they're burying themselves... and decide to quit digging the hole deeper ?
It is true, however, that IG Horowitz is and has always been a Democrat... so we can absolutely trust what he has to say about what happened to the IG function in the DOJ during the prior administration... since he was right there, involved in every element of it ?
Obama interfered with... and then suspended his ability to do his job as IG... so he's doing it now ?
who determined that it was urgent and had merit.
Wrong. That's, at the least, a deliberate bit of mis-representation... only a partial view of the process that did occur... and the political operation behind it, driving it. It is a misrepresentation of a particular type... that identifies you as a partisan... interested in prosecuting a partisan agenda... the facts be damned.
It's transparent that there is a political operation under way... you have to be blind to not see it...
That's not going to work here... where facts, the law, and the truth matter... but you're welcome to tilt at the windmill... as long as you're polite, as well as open and honest in the effort... rather than a shill.
If you listened to the facts the past two weeks the evidence
is overwhelming.
LOL! I agree. The evidence is overwhelming... But, I suspect I'm seeing more of it than you are... and see more of what it proves than you will... since I do go where the facts require... instead of following the narrative I'm directed to follow... |
