MAGAThread XVI: Raising the Barr

[Aclion]

If this guy was a whistleblower he'd be protected from retaliation. All protecting his identity does is prevent due process.

How? Do you say the same thing about witness protection?

Witness protection doesn't prevent the defense knowing who the witness is, until after the trial.

Because it prevents cross examination.

Will Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee be prohibited from asking questions?

the republican members of the house intelligence committee are not the accused. Also probobly.

[Neutraligon]

How? Do you say the same thing about witness protection?

Witness protection doesn't prevent the defense knowing who the witness is, until after the trial.

Will Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee be prohibited from asking questions?

the republican members of the house intelligence committee are not the accused. Also probobly.

Why do you believe they will be prevented from asking questions?

[Vassenor]

How? Do you say the same thing about witness protection?

Witness protection doesn't prevent the defense knowing who the witness is, until after the trial.

OK, let's try a different tack. Should vulnerable witnesses not have their identities protected during trial?

[Farnhamia]

Witness protection doesn't prevent the defense knowing who the witness is, until after the trial.


the republican members of the house intelligence committee are not the accused. Also probobly.

Why do you believe they will be prevented from asking questions?

The Democrats are notorious meanies. That Schiff guy, when he was the District Attorney in Manhattan, boy! what a grump.

[Ifreann]

Will Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee be prohibited from asking questions?

the republican members of the house intelligence committee are not the accused.

So if the identity of the whistleblower was known then the accused, Donald Trump, would be invited to the House Intelligence Committee hearing and permitted to ask questions of the whistleblower?

Also probobly.

Why do you think this?

[Greater Miami Shores and La Habana Cuba]

Why do you believe they will be prevented from asking questions?

The Democrats are notorious meanies. That Schiff guy, when he was the District Attorney in Manhattan, boy! what a grump.

If the Republicans cant ask questions than we win by default, lol.

[Farnhamia]

The Democrats are notorious meanies. That Schiff guy, when he was the District Attorney in Manhattan, boy! what a grump.

If the Republicans cant ask questions than we win by default, lol.

Why do you believe the Republicans will not be allowed to ask questions?

[Aclion]

the republican members of the house intelligence committee are not the accused. Also probobly.

Why do you believe they will be prevented from asking questions?[/quote]
Because the committee is chaired by Adam Shiff who sees the committee as a party political and also loves interrupting people, I will also be very surprised if the whistle blower will be allowed to answer their questions if he goes off script.

[Greater Miami Shores and La Habana Cuba]

the republican members of the house intelligence committee are not the accused.

So if the identity of the whistleblower was known then the accused, Donald Trump, would be invited to the House Intelligence Committee hearing and permitted to ask questions of the whistleblower?

Also probobly.

Why do you think this?

:So if the identity of the whistleblower was known then the accused, Donald Trump, would be invited to the House Intelligence Committee hearing and permitted to ask questions of the whistleblower?:
lol, I would love to see that happen.

[Farnhamia]

the republican members of the house intelligence committee are not the accused. Also probobly.

Why do you believe they will be prevented from asking questions?

Because the committee is chaired by Adam Shiff who sees the committee as a party political and also loves interrupting people, I will also be very surprised if the whistle blower will be allowed to answer their questions if he goes off script.[/quote]
Oh, kind of like the House committee that "investigated" the Benghazi attack? Gotcha.

[Vassenor]

So if the identity of the whistleblower was known then the accused, Donald Trump, would be invited to the House Intelligence Committee hearing and permitted to ask questions of the whistleblower?

Why do you think this?

:So if the identity of the whistleblower was known then the accused, Donald Trump, would be invited to the House Intelligence Committee hearing and permitted to ask questions of the whistleblower?:
lol, I would love to see that happen.

It would be one hell of a way for Trump to torpedo his credibility and make the whole process that much faster. Might even be cause for a 25A if it shows his mental state to be so degraded that he cannot discharge the duties of his office.

[Ifreann]

Why do you believe they will be prevented from asking questions?

Because the committee is chaired by Adam Shiff who sees the committee as a party political and also loves interrupting people, I will also be very surprised if the whistle blower will be allowed to answer their questions if he goes off script.

You seem to be positing some kind of large conspiracy against Trump. Maybe you should email his lawyer about this.

[Greater Miami Shores and La Habana Cuba]

:So if the identity of the whistleblower was known then the accused, Donald Trump, would be invited to the House Intelligence Committee hearing and permitted to ask questions of the whistleblower?:
lol, I would love to see that.

...That's not how government investigations like this work.

I know, darn. Donnie would tear him or her apart. Perhaps in the UK, I don't know.

[Aclion]

Why do you believe they will be prevented from asking questions?

Because the committee is chaired by Adam Shiff who sees the committee as a party political and also loves interrupting people, I will also be very surprised if the whistle blower will be allowed to answer their questions if he goes off script.

Oh, kind of like the House committee that "investigated" the Benghazi attack? Gotcha. [/quote]
Not like that at all, unless trump has the whistler blower bleached

[Vassenor]

...That's not how government investigations like this work.

I know, darn. Donnie would tear him or her apart. Perhaps in the UK, I don't know.

[Salandriagado]

"No, we need to know who it is so we can write them off as biased against our dear leader"

Not really the best logic.

Vassenor, so if it were a Democrat President you support, you would not want to know who the whistleblower is? Especially if you were on the Committee? No one has actually answered my questions, biases or no biases?

Fuck no. In particular, the identity of the whistleblower is utterly irrelevant: they just bring attention to the actual evidence.

[Salandriagado]

Protected maybe by having their identity kept secret.

Nope, retaliating against whistleblowers is a violation of the civil service reform act.

I'm sure that piece of paper will be very useful against whichever random nutjob takes it into his head to murder the guy.

[Salandriagado]

How is protecting his identity prevent due process? I mean all they did was submit a complaint of wrongdoing, they did not witness or partake in any of the events they are describing, but instead heard about them second hand. The Inspector General then reviewed the complain, and said that the complaint was both credible and urgent, meaning it needed to be handed over to Congress for investigation. Congress is now investigating, by gathering the evidence and talking to the people involved.

It should also be noted that the very process of keeping a whistle blower anonymous is done to protect them from retaliation, as whistle blowers have been targeted routinely in the past for their actions. One of the most effective ways to protect someone is to not let people know who they are or where they are.

Because it prevents cross examination.

No it doesn't. Case in point: you are currently being "cross-examined" by me. I have no fucking clue who you are.

[Vassenor]

Nope, retaliating against whistleblowers is a violation of the civil service reform act.

I'm sure that piece of paper will be very useful against whichever random nutjob takes it into his head to murder the guy.

But people don't do that, it's illegal.

[Greater Miami Shores and La Habana Cuba]

Vassenor, so if it were a Democrat President you support, you would not want to know who the whistleblower is? Especially if you were on the Committee? No one has actually answered my questions, biases or no biases?

Fuck no. In particular, the identity of the whistleblower is utterly irrelevant: they just bring attention to the actual evidence.

I know here I go again but it fits the post, and if the whistleblower has obvious biases against Donnie, that is going to be a line of defense by the Republicans in the committee like all lawyers do in a US Court of Law, at end the votes for impeachment or not are going to come down to politics on both the right and the left, no matter what the whistleblower says and the objective or subjective evidence which ever is grammatically correct, especially in an election season, I know their I go again lol.

If my fellow nations can call President Trump Donnie and not get in trouble with the Moderators as it appears so, than I can call President Trump Donnie too, so from now on is Donnie, I like the sound of the name better than Donald.

[Salandriagado]

Fuck no. In particular, the identity of the whistleblower is utterly irrelevant: they just bring attention to the actual evidence.

I know here I go again but it fits the post, and if the whistleblower has obvious biases against Donnie, that is going to be a line of defense by the Republicans in the committee like all lawyers do in a US Court of Law,

Nope: ad hominem is not a functional legal defence.

[Fartsniffage]

Fuck no. In particular, the identity of the whistleblower is utterly irrelevant: they just bring attention to the actual evidence.

I know here I go again but it fits the post, and if the whistleblower has obvious biases against Donnie, that is going to be a line of defense by the Republicans in the committee like all lawyers do in a US Court of Law, at end the votes for impeachment or not are going to come down to politics on both the right and the left, no matter what the whistleblower says and the objective evidence, especially in an election season, I know their I go again lol.

If my fellow nations can call President Trump Donnie and not get in trouble with the Moderators as it appears so, than I can call President Trump Donnie too, so from now on is Donnie, I like the sound of the name better than Donald.

A rape victim has a clear bias against their rapist. Do we devalue their evidence because they don't like the person they're testifying against or do we listen to what they say in an objective manner and see if the rest of the evidence supports it?

[Greater Miami Shores and La Habana Cuba]

I know here I go again but it fits the post, and if the whistleblower has obvious biases against Donnie, that is going to be a line of defense by the Republicans in the committee like all lawyers do in a US Court of Law,

Nope: ad hominem is not a functional legal defence.

The rape case scenario is a very different case, are we going to deny that Republicans will vote for Trump as not guilty and Democrats will vote for Trump as guilty especially during an election season. Are we goin to deny that Adam Schiff has made up his mind that Donnie is guilty from day one. I know here I go again but that is so evident.

[Ifreann]

Fuck no. In particular, the identity of the whistleblower is utterly irrelevant: they just bring attention to the actual evidence.

I know here I go again but it fits the post, and if the whistleblower has obvious biases against Donnie, that is going to be a line of defense by the Republicans in the committee like all lawyers do in a US Court of Law, at end the votes for impeachment or not are going to come down to politics on both the right and the left, no matter what the whistleblower says and the objective evidence, especially in an election season, I know their I go again lol.

If my fellow nations can call President Trump Donnie and not get in trouble with the Moderators as it appears so, than I can call President Trump Donnie too, so from now on is Donnie, I like the sound of the name better than Donald.

We know that you want to know who the whistleblower so that you can try to undermine their credibility. But someone else might try to assassinate them.

[Greater Miami Shores and La Habana Cuba]

I know here I go again but it fits the post, and if the whistleblower has obvious biases against Donnie, that is going to be a line of defense by the Republicans in the committee like all lawyers do in a US Court of Law, at end the votes for impeachment or not are going to come down to politics on both the right and the left, no matter what the whistleblower says and the objective evidence, especially in an election season, I know their I go again lol.

If my fellow nations can call President Trump Donnie and not get in trouble with the Moderators as it appears so, than I can call President Trump Donnie too, so from now on is Donnie, I like the sound of the name better than Donald.

We know that you want to know who the whistleblower so that you can try to undermine their credibility. But someone else might try to assassinate them.

Just like lawyers do in US Courts of law, just as Republicans and Democrats do in congress. The votes will be along party lines in congress.