Venting a guess but something along the lines of disclosure of classified materials and perhaps insubordination

whatthehey78 said:

---

blindey said:

---

I was wondering about that...how long is the timeline until some O-5 is looking down the business end of a court martial?

---

Not arguing/just curious...but why exactly, would he be facing a court martial as a result of his testimony?

---

I'd guess an E-4 driver would get in a lot of trouble for turning right when his O-9 passenger told him to turn left. Seems like this LTC is way overstepping his bounds in regards to the Commander in Chief and his business.

whatthehey78 said:

---

blindey said:

---

I was wondering about that...how long is the timeline until some O-5 is looking down the business end of a court martial?

---

Not arguing/just curious...but why exactly, would he be facing a court martial as a result of his testimony?

---

If the Lt.Col. said that the transcript was bogus then, assuming it's not bogus, He would be giving false testimony against POTUS. I would expect that's enough to warrant a court martial.

.

aggiehawg said:

---

blindey said:

---

I was wondering about that...how long is the timeline until some O-5 is looking down the business end of a court martial?

---

I was confused about that too. He is still active duty, I believe.

---

He's active duty alright, but by tradition, NSC military staffers do not usually wear their uniforms except under certain special situations (see below) -- has to do with meeting foreign diplomatic persons. Wearing the uniform before Schiff's Kangaroo Court though was for 'patriotic' show.

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2017/03/01/as-trump-s-national-security-adviser-mcmaster-still-wears-his-army-uniform-why-that-matters/

Quote:

---

..."So to avoid confusion and misperceptions, I would recommend the coat and tie except in the most exceptional circumstances when military protocol is appropriate, such as a promotion or retirement ceremony or honoring a fallen comrade."...

---

drcrinum said:

---

---

Trump has referenced the tape of Biden bragging about getting the prosecutor fired while speaking at the CFR. My guess is that is the tape Trump was talking about.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/09/27/flashback_2018_joe_biden_brags_at_cfr_meeting_about_withholding_aid_to_ukraine_to_force_firing_of_prosecutor.html?fbclid=IwAR181lkOPmI8u3ic1cMO4FDNlGooUoo--u6puUYgo7S160uDE_F_AVg4J4c

Que Te Gusta Mas said:

---

Nunes interview. At the end, he said there is a larger story than the seeding of the Steele dossier concerning exculpatory evidence that they are hoping will be declassified.

---

Do we have any idea what this is referencing? A post from Tiger Droppings says it's related to the Carter Page FISA.

Quote:

---

In Lee Smiths new book he says Nunes told him the Insurance Policy is actually a reference to something much more specific than the entire investigation, and it's in reference to them pulling out all the stops to get a FISA on Carter Page (they were very worried it would be denied, and because nobody else in fbi knew, they couldn't miss)

Evidently it's classified but Nunes said it should be declassified and come out w either the IG or Durham.

---

He could have been the original leaker...er...whistleblower that heard the call first hand and told the other guy that went to Schiff..allegedly

I.e. the first whistleblower is also this third whistleblower, which would explain why the Dems desperately want to protect his ID, as the first whistleblower apparently grossly exaggerated what happened.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

He could have been the original leaker...er...whistleblower that heard the call first hand and told the other guy that went to Schiff..allegedly

---

Yeah, I think that is what happened here. I have seen reports that Vindman talked to more than a few people and not all of them were in his chain of command.

Which raises the question that if he talked to multiple people and only a Schiff fan came forward does that mean the others must have thought it wasn't a big deal or they didn't buy what he was selling?

Que Te Gusta Mas said:

---

Que Te Gusta Mas said:

---

Nunes interview. At the end, he said there is a larger story than the seeding of the Steele dossier concerning exculpatory evidence that they are hoping will be declassified.

---

Do we have any idea what this is referencing? A post from Tiger Droppings says it's related to the Carter Page FISA.

Quote:

---

In Lee Smiths new book he says Nunes told him the Insurance Policy is actually a reference to something much more specific than the entire investigation, and it's in reference to them pulling out all the stops to get a FISA on Carter Page (they were very worried it would be denied, and because nobody else in fbi knew, they couldn't miss)

Evidently it's classified but Nunes said it should be declassified and come out w either the IG or Durham.

---

---

Was Page the first FISA? I guess the perps got one, and decided they'd spread the wealth. I also wonder if the perps thought Page could deliver genuine info., or if they just needed the "look" for the Russia connection?

backintexas2013 said:

---

Which raises the question that if he talked to multiple people and only a Schiff fan came forward does that mean the others must have thought it wasn't a big deal or they didn't buy what he was selling?

---

Hard to tell. Maybe Vindman was outed by one of the other people who have testified, like Bill Taylor or Fiona Hill. Hill being the more likely suspect here.

Quote:

---

Was Page the first FISA? I guess the perps got one, and decided they'd spread the wealth. I also wonder if the perps thought Page could deliver genuine info., or if they just needed the "look" for the Russia connection?

---

I have my doubts that Page was the first and only FISA attempt. In fact, I think the reason for opening Crossfire Hurricane on a weekend was because there had been another attempt to get a FISA approved that was rejected because of the lack of an open investigation and all of the facts that would have been included in such an application.

Sussman, Perkins, Coie lawyer was meeting with FBI counsel James Baker at the time, as well. So info was going into the FBI over the transom and under the door, so to speak but none of it qualified as an intel product.

drcrinum said:

---

Quote:

---

He's active duty alright, but by tradition, NSC military staffers do not usually wear their uniforms except under certain special situations (see below) -- has to do with meeting foreign diplomatic persons. Wearing the uniform before Schiff's Kangaroo Court though was for 'patriotic' show.

---

---

He should have draped himself in the Ukrainian flag. Or DNC flag.

Ugh!

Good point, and makes sense.

BTW, I told my Reps office he needs to brush up on Sovereign Immunity. I'm intent on having Page, Flynn, etc., suing the hell outta our government, and want my Rep to pave the way for Sovereign Immunity to not be such a stumbling block. He's not on the proper committee, but he knows who to contact, and how to get it started.

Basically, I want our government to be accountable, and if miillions out of the government cofers is the only way, then so be it.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2019/10/30/whistleblower_exposed_close_to_biden_brennan_dnc_oppo_researcher_120996.html

The above is a lengthy article on the alleged original whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella. We've covered a number of things about him in our thread, & listed below is some new info extracted from the article, at least to me. This guy is clearly a Dem operative, & he never blew the whistle on Dems in Ukraine when they were in power.

Quote:

---

.....
And Ciaramella worked with a Democratic National Committee operative who dug up dirt on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election, inviting her into the White House for meetings, former White House colleagues said. The operative, Alexandra Chalupa, a Ukrainian-American who supported Hillary Clinton, led an effort to link the Republican campaign to the Russian government. "He knows her. He had her in the White House," said one former co-worker, who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter.

Documents confirm the DNC opposition researcher attended at least one White House meeting with Ciaramella in November 2015. She visited the White House with a number of Ukrainian officials lobbying the Obama administration for aid for Ukraine.

With Ciaramella's name long under wraps, interest in the intelligence analyst has become so high that a handful of former colleagues have compiled a roughly 40-page research dossier on him. A classified version of the document is circulating on Capitol Hill, and briefings have been conducted based on it. One briefed Republican has been planning to unmask the whistleblower in a speech on the House floor....
.....

"Everyone knows who he is. CNN knows. The Washington Post knows. The New York Times knows. Congress knows. The White House knows. Even the president knows who he is," said Fred Fleitz, a former CIA analyst and national security adviser to Trump, who has fielded dozens of calls from the media....
.....

A CIA officer specializing in Russia and Ukraine, Ciaramella was detailed over to the National Security Council from the agency in the summer of 2015, working under Susan Rice, President Obama's national security adviser. He also worked closely with the former vice president

Federal records show that Biden's office invited Ciaramella to an October 2016 state luncheon the vice president hosted for Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi. Other guests included Brennan, as well as then-FBI Director James Comey and then-National Intelligence Director James Clapper.

Several U.S. officials told RealClearInvestigations that the invitation that was extended to Ciaramella, a relatively low-level GS-13 federal employee, was unusual and signaled he was politically connected inside the Obama White House....
.....

In May 2017, Ciaramella went "outside his chain of command," according to a former NSC co-worker, to send an email alerting another agency that Trump happened to hold a meeting with Russian diplomats in the Oval Office the day after firing Comey, who led the Trump-Russia investigation. The email also noted that Russian President Vladimir Putin had phoned the president a week earlier.

Contents of the email appear to have ended up in the media, which reported Trump boasted to the Russian officials about firing Comey, whom he allegedly called "crazy, a real nut job."

In effect, Ciaramella helped generate the "Putin fired Comey" narrative, according to the research dossier making the rounds in Congress, a copy of which was obtained by RealClearInvestigations.

Ciaramella allegedly argued that "President Putin suggested that President Trump fire Comey," the report said. "In the days after Comey's firing, this presidential action was used to further political and media calls for the standup [sic] of the special counsel to investigate 'Russia collusion.' "

In the end, Special Counsel Robert Mueller found no conspiracy between Trump and Putin. Ciaramella's email was cited in a footnote in his report, which mentions only Ciaramella's name, the date and the recipients "Kelly et al." Former colleagues said the main recipient was then-Homeland Security Director John Kelly...
.....

---

Okay, first of all, why would the CIA hire a person who was fired from the NSC for leaking?

Secondly, IF he's involved in setting up the Sypgate fiasco, wouldn't that put him in the crosshairs of Durham? To me, it means he was a useful idiot, low level employee who was able to begin spreading the news, so to speak. Thirdly, if he's confirmed as the leaker (WB), he now has a second opportunity for criminal counts from Durham.

Am I on the right track?

He's 'protected' in more than one way...not only against retaliation, but he is also protected by government security personnel because of alleged death threats.

drcrinum said:

---

He's 'protected' in more than one way...not only against retaliation, but he is also protected by government security personnel because of alleged death threats.

---

Schiff probably threatened him if he didn't testify the way Schiff wants him to testify.

You know, being class of '84, I never REALLY started paying attention to politics until probably '89 or '90. Of course, even then, one could only learn what you read hoping the writers wrote accurately, and not with an agenda. As I've said before, I've learned as much about our government from this thead than I ever thought possible. However, I don't know that we've had such a mad manipulator and ruthless propagator of lies like Shciff in such a long time.

Maybe Ted Kennedy, or Howard Metzenbaum, but nothing in the time I've been paying attention. Furthermore, he seems to have zero shame; almost a sociopathic zeal for ends justifying the means. I'm not saying there aren't plenty of backroom operators like Weissman or Syd Blumenthal, but elected officials like Schiff.

Just an observation. I'd love for bedbugs and earwigs to infest Schiff's home and bedroom! It's the nicest thing I can say without getting banned or having authorities visiting me!

Quote:

---

Maybe Ted Kennedy, or Howard Metzenbaum, but nothing in the time I've been paying attention. Furthermore, he seems to have zero shame; almost a sociopathic zeal for ends justifying the means.

---

There is almost no one in government that is more morally bankrupt than Schiff. The guy is so slimy that he leaves a trail of oil everywhere he goes. It would not shock me if he was the person who ordered the hit on Seth Rich (MS-13 is very active in his district).

Secolobo said:

---

---

I'm going out on a limb and say Sidney doesn't think the Senate trial will qualify as a "judicial proceeding" under F.R.C.P 6(e), if not pursuant to a legitimate House impeachment inquiry.

Then war damn turtle needs to lay it out for them.

Check out this thread.

Here's the unroll.

Secolobo said:

---

Check out this thread.

---

They're everywhere! Boys and girls, we've been surrounded. Everyone owns some form of media outlet or platform EXCEPT right wingers.

The Deep State gave Facebook and Google their algorithms. They've been playing the long game and didn't count on someone like Trump ever getting elected.

https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2019/10/the-failed-fbi-plot-to-paint-trump-doing-deals-with-putin-by-larry-c-johnson.html#more

Interesting read on Felix Sater & the Trump-Russian/Moscow hotel project that was a focus of Mueller's investigation. Sater has been an FBI informant since 1998. Was he deployed to set up Trump by the FBI? Was he a source for Steele's dossier? Suspicious. Have Horowitz or Durham reviewed Sater's FD-1023s?

https://johnsolomonreports.com/debunking-some-of-the-ukraine-scandal-myths-about-biden-and-election-interference/

Quote:

---

Debunking some of the Ukraine scandal myths about Biden and election interference

---

John Solomon's latest. This is a must read on Ukraine. Lots of linked documentation (several links were not working for me).

Well, we see how "incompetent" (biased) our media mostly is based on that information, and how slimy the Democrats are, and it's very clear why Giuliani was so busy: Trump cannot trust DOJ and state to not interfere with his official Article II activities.

The reports need to be dropped NOW. Damage is being done.