Straight Dope Message Board

[Sunny Daze]

A whistleblower has filed a complaint against Trump based on information they heard while Trump was interacting with a foreign leader.

Trump’s interaction with the foreign leader included a “promise” that was regarded as so troubling that it prompted an official in the U.S. intelligence community to file a formal whistleblower complaint with the inspector general for the intelligence community, said the former officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

There's not much information out there right now. From what I can tell, some members of Congress will be briefed, but there's a very tight lid on the information at the moment.

For discussion:
1) Who leaked? I'm guessing Bolton...
2) What did Trump (allegedly) do? It's got to be pretty bad, right?
3) Is this the thread that unravels the sweater? Please, oh please, oh please. 1

[Aspenglow]

Originally Posted by Sunny Daze

A whistleblower has filed a complaint against Trump based on information they heard while Trump was interacting with a foreign leader.



There's not much information out there right now. From what I can tell, some members of Congress will be briefed, but there's a very tight lid on the information at the moment.

For discussion:
1) Who leaked? I'm guessing Bolton...
2) What did Trump (allegedly) do? It's got to be pretty bad, right?
3) Is this the thread that unravels the sweater? Please, oh please, oh please.

1) I don't think there has been any leak. The Inspector General, whose job it was to pass the whistleblower complaint to the House Intelligence Committee, advised Adam Schiff he was unable to do so because the Acting DNI forbade him based on some non-existent reasoning given him by the DOJ. There was no reason for the DOJ to become involved. The language in the rule compelling the IG to pass the complaint to the House Intelligence Committee is utterly unambiguous. There's no interpretation of the law to be made by the DOJ. Adam Schiff simply made the issue public.

ETA: As I think about it, WaPo first broke the story, I believe. If that's actually the first we heard of it, then your guess is a good one.

2) No one yet knows what Trump supposedly did, but it seems he made a promise to a foreign leader that was inappropriate and of "urgent concern." In this matter, the term, "urgent concern" is a legal standard that the IG felt has been met. So yeah, pretty bad. The most common speculation I keep hearing is that Trump promised to lift Russian sanctions in exchange for Putin's help to win election in 2020.

3) Since Trump supporters have been propagandized to believe that Russian support is preferable to Democrats winning an election, I doubt it will move the needle for them. Senate Republicans should be thinking long and hard about how this willful and blatant disregard for the rule of law could feel when the shoe is on the other foot, but I doubt they will. They've staked all their hopes on blindly following their lawless leader.

So that's where we are. 2

[Sunny Daze]

I wonder if there are tapes... 3

[Aspenglow]

Lordy, I hope there are tapes.

(I'll go now, but it had to be said.) 4

[Nars Glinley]

Originally Posted by Aspenglow

1) I don't think there has been any leak. The Inspector General, whose job it was to pass the whistleblower complaint to the House Intelligence Committee, advised Adam Schiff he was unable to do so because the Acting DNI forbade him based on some non-existent reasoning given him by the DOJ. There was no reason for the DOJ to become involved. The language in the rule compelling the IG to pass the complaint to the House Intelligence Committee is utterly unambiguous. There's no interpretation of the law to be made by the DOJ. Adam Schiff simply made the issue public.

I thought that it was the DNI's responsibility to turn the complaint over to Congress. 5

[bobot]

It was also required that Trump's taxes be turned over to congress, and that was defied. Let's hope today's meeting was in some way tantamount to a handing-over of information. I doubt it was, though. Commence Republican wagon circling. 6

[Crotalus]

The inspector general didn't exactly spill his guts. I read on Twitter that the DOJ "reasoning" on this is that the subject of the complaint is outside of the intelligence community, so the IC whistle-blower law doesn't apply. But the director of central intelligence wasn't supposed to go to DOJ for guidance. The law says he "shall" give it to congress with seven days. 7

[Euphonious Polemic]

At this point, you've got to have to face that Republicans in congress, and many voters are just fine with anything Trump does. ANYthing.

They would be fine if Trump promised Putin that the US would abandon the Ukraine and put a stop to all sanctions, as long as Putin threw the entire support of his intelligence service behind getting Trump re-elected.

They would be fine if Trump promised Putin that the US would sell Alaska back to Russia in exchange for Trump Tower Moscow and $100 million in cash to Trump personally.

And they'd be fine with Trump ordering government officials to cover this up.

This is the simple state of affairs today. The USA has become a kleptocracy, run by a wanna-be dictator. So far, the Republican Party is indulging him in his dictatorial ways.

This may change. I doubt that it will though. I think that the entire party is in this shit-show all the way, and they know that they can't extricate themselves now. 8

[Euphonious Polemic]

Originally Posted by Crotalus

The inspector general didn't exactly spill his guts. I read on Twitter that the DOJ "reasoning" on this is that the subject of the complaint is outside of the intelligence community, so the IC whistle-blower law doesn't apply. But the director of central intelligence wasn't supposed to go to DOJ for guidance. The law says he "shall" give it to congress with seven days.

Unless the dictator tells him not to.

This is how things are being run now. The rule of law is on the way out. You had a nice country while it lasted. 9

[Fiveyearlurker]

Is the mystery contained in this article from yesterday?

"The house committees’ chairs say they will scrutinise a telephone call between the US president and Mr Zelensky on 25 July, during which Mr Trump allegedly told the Ukrainian president to reopen the Biden investigation if he wanted to improve relations with the US." 10

[Buck Godot]

That would certainly fit the bill. 11

[bobot]

And that is certainly waaaay fucked up. If true, that would be a shining example of Trump's so-called patriotism. And if true, what the hell does it say about those shielding him? Damn. 12

[Fiveyearlurker]

I mean, to be honest this is really just the equivalent of “Russia, if you’re listening...” but since it was done clandestine instead of completely in the open, it makes it seem worse. 13

[bobot]

It's worse, I'd say, because it would prove that Trump has learned exactly jack shit about the whole thing. And this time he's got the authority to promise aid, taxpayers' money, etc. 14

[Euphonious Polemic]

IOKITDI

It's OK If Trump Does It. 15

[Aspenglow]

Now being reported that the whistleblower complaint is based on multiple acts by Trump over the course of a lengthier period of time, culminating in his offer of a quid pro quo.

It just isn't that hard to figure out what's going on here. 16

[Fiveyearlurker]

Even the Republicans can't sweep this away, right?

Right? 17

[ElvisL1ves]

Hold their beer. 18

[enalzi]

Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker

Even the Republicans can't sweep this away, right?

Right?

"It's all Hilary's fault somehow." 19

[Akaj]

(Copied from another thread.)

Will this swing 20 R senators to vote for removal in an impeachment trial? Of course not.

Will it be a nice juicy nugget for the ongoing House impeachment hearings to expose and publicize with snowballing evidence throughout the course of the 2020 election? Let's fucking hope so. 20

[TimeWinder]

Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker

Even the Republicans can't sweep this away, right?

Right?

Sweep what away? We have already established that the President is above the law. 21

[ShadowFacts]

This NPR article includes letters from the IGIC to the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (that Rep. Adam Schiff chairs) and from Schiff to the Director of National Intelligence. Good reading - both in the lines themselves and between them. 22

[Euphonious Polemic]

Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker

Even the Republicans can't sweep this away, right?

Right?

Of course not.

They will use a sharpie. 23

[Fiddle Peghead]

Originally Posted by Aspenglow

The most common speculation I keep hearing is that Trump promised to lift Russian sanctions in exchange for Putin's help to win election in 2020.

Hearing from whom? 24

[iiandyiiii]

TPM has been up to date on this issue: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckra...-whistleblower

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog...line-of-events

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/prime/working-notes-2 25

[Aspenglow]

Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead

Hearing from whom?

The various talking heads on the tee vee speculating based on what is already known; e.g., the dates of Trump's calls to foreign leaders, what was stated by the "administration" to be the topics of those conversations (Siberian wildfires? Really?), the timing of the departure of former DNI Dan Coats, Trump's stated willingness to accept foreign subversion of the 2020 election, etc.

All presented with stout disclaimers, of course. But it seems to be the most common theme of where the "what is known" evidence leads. 26

[Leaper]

Originally Posted by enalzi

"It's all Hilary's fault somehow."

“Everyone who tells you anything odd is going on is lying.” 27

[JohnT]

Lol, RudyG just admitted on CNN that he asked the President of Ukraine to do this:

https://twitter.com/axios/status/117...048375296?s=09 28

[Paul in Qatar]

As a practical matter there must be tapes. I would assume the President's important calls are taped. If the President dodges that one, surely the Ukrainians record calls from the American president. Then on top of that is the possibility some third party is tapping the lines.

Is my reasoning reasonable? 29

[jasg]

Originally Posted by Paul in Qatar

As a practical matter there must be tapes. I would assume the President's important calls are taped. If the President dodges that one, surely the Ukrainians record calls from the American president. Then on top of that is the possibility some third party is tapping the lines.

Is my reasoning reasonable?

Yep, it is a solid bet that the intelligence services/administration for the foreign leader will have tapes of the conversation.

Ergo, they have influence over Trump if he said anything questionable.

Blackmail is so easy to win... 30

[MikeF]

Trump asks if anyone is dumb enough to believe that he would do something like is being alleged. The real question is does anyone believe that HE is dumb enough to have done it. Its a subtle difference but the first option implies that "you" are dumb if you believe it. I think we all know what the answer to the second question is.

"I would only do what is right anyway, and only do good for the USA!" seems like a tacit admission to me and, other than "Another fake news story", he doesn't deny it. Hmmm. 31

[Fiveyearlurker]

Do you think the information that Trump attempted to collude with the Ukrainians to interfere in the 2020 election will give any pause to the folks claiming that Trump attempting to collude with the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election was ridiculous? 32

[JKellyMap]

Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker

Do you think the information that Trump attempted to collude with the Ukrainians to interfere in the 2020 election will give any pause to the folks claiming that Trump attempting to collude with the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election was ridiculous?

If only. Their mentality has always been “He didn’t do it. But if he did, that doesn’t matter. Because reasons.” 33

[Snowboarder Bo]

Originally Posted by JohnT

Lol, RudyG just admitted on CNN that he asked the President of Ukraine to do this:

https://twitter.com/axios/status/117...048375296?s=09

Here's the whole 10 minute clip from CNN. Giuliani lies several times on camera, admits it several times, and just generally has a meltdown. 34

[JohnT]

I've had cleaner breakups with women than what RudyG & Cuomo had there. 35

[TimeWinder]

Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker

Do you think the information that Trump attempted to collude with the Ukrainians to interfere in the 2020 election will give any pause to the folks claiming that Trump attempting to collude with the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election was ridiculous?

A multiple hundred page report listing the specific collusions in great detail wasn't enough. Why would this new "fake news" be enough? 36

[Chronos]

Donald Trump, Jr. publicly publishing the very e-mails in which the collusion took place wasn't enough. 37

[Ravenman]

Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker

Do you think the information that Trump attempted to collude with the Ukrainians to interfere in the 2020 election will give any pause to the folks claiming that Trump attempting to collude with the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election was ridiculous?

Trump said in an interview that he would take the help of foreign nations in getting dirt on opponents. And yet, some people believe - without pause - that he is incapable of such a thing. 38

[SlackerInc]

I have been against impeachment for political reasons, but I don’t see how it can be avoided now. He has to be impeached, and then if the Senate does not remove him they can await the judgment of history. I don’t think at this point it would really torpedo Democrats’ chances in the election, because anyone who was inclined to vote against Trump cannot possibly want to punish Democrats for impeaching under these circumstances. 39

[ThelmaLou]

nm 40

[JohnT]

He means this, Thelma:

https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/s...455953413?s=19

(The tweet where DJTjr attached his collusion emails.) 41