Posted on Sep 26, 2019
The five most serious charges in the whistleblower's complaint
574
38
24
5
5
0
Many of us on RP support POTUS but as former military all of these things should be troubling. Put yourself in an office at the Pentagon and think about what would go on if the DOD IG came to you with allegations such as these.
The five most serious charges in the whistleblower's complaint
Posted from thehill.comPosted in these groups: 
Constitution
Politics
Constitution Politics
Posted 5 y ago
Responses: 9
4
4
0
@ Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen - Where did this come from? I totally disagree with it my friend...but you are entitled to your opinion...
(4)
(0)
LTC David Brown
I disagree also, the Hill is partisan and contains a lot of spin. I remember a lot of people breathlessly assuring us Trump was going to be impeached over Russia. Then it was obstruction. Then they were going to impeach Kavanaugh. Now it is impeach Trump. It was reported last week Pelosi doesn’t have the votes. I predict this is going no where.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I'd like to address these
1. "The White House sought to hide details of Trump's phone call... This effort, the complainant alleges, took the form of removing the "electronic transcript" of the call from the computer system where such transcripts would usually be stored and transferring it to a separate, more secure and more restricted system. The core allegation is clear: The White House engaged in a cover-up."
- I find this almost too hilarious. Trump's opponent in 2016 moved all her communications (from where they would normally be stored to use a phrase from the opinion piece), to a less secure and unauthorized server. But that wasn't a cover up right? Please... There is nothing illegal about taking an official record and securing it better on an approved government system. Perhaps Trump is trying to protect this information from getting leaked by individuals who think they know better (or have a political objective of their own).
2. "Trump allies used leverage to get Ukraine to 'play ball'"
- This is all speculation on what some might believe was Trump's true intent. The transcript proves nothing to that effect. There is zero evidence that his allies pushed military aid to get what they want. The Ukrainian President and officials have stated this is not the case.
3. "The White House has hidden the details of other phone calls"
- So let me get this straight... In item one it clearly stated this transcript was removed "from the computer system where such transcripts would usually be stored" to be place on a more secure server. But if he's done this for other calls, wouldn't that indicate they are not all normally stored on the mentioned computer system? Again, with the leaking we have going on, I'm not sure I blame him. Damned if he does damned if he doesn't.
4. "Officials were 'deeply concerned' by Giuliani's activities"
- Which officials? What National Security decisions has he made? This is all speculation and hearsay (or simply made up).
5. "Ukrainian officials knew U.S. aid could be in jeopardy"
- Sorry but I know for a fact that since Trump has taken office, he's been extremely helpful to the Ukrainians militarily. There are also reports from Ukrainian officials stating they had no idea the aid was in jeopardy or even held back initially. The only person we know definitively that used military aid as leverage is VP Biden.
1. "The White House sought to hide details of Trump's phone call... This effort, the complainant alleges, took the form of removing the "electronic transcript" of the call from the computer system where such transcripts would usually be stored and transferring it to a separate, more secure and more restricted system. The core allegation is clear: The White House engaged in a cover-up."
- I find this almost too hilarious. Trump's opponent in 2016 moved all her communications (from where they would normally be stored to use a phrase from the opinion piece), to a less secure and unauthorized server. But that wasn't a cover up right? Please... There is nothing illegal about taking an official record and securing it better on an approved government system. Perhaps Trump is trying to protect this information from getting leaked by individuals who think they know better (or have a political objective of their own).
2. "Trump allies used leverage to get Ukraine to 'play ball'"
- This is all speculation on what some might believe was Trump's true intent. The transcript proves nothing to that effect. There is zero evidence that his allies pushed military aid to get what they want. The Ukrainian President and officials have stated this is not the case.
3. "The White House has hidden the details of other phone calls"
- So let me get this straight... In item one it clearly stated this transcript was removed "from the computer system where such transcripts would usually be stored" to be place on a more secure server. But if he's done this for other calls, wouldn't that indicate they are not all normally stored on the mentioned computer system? Again, with the leaking we have going on, I'm not sure I blame him. Damned if he does damned if he doesn't.
4. "Officials were 'deeply concerned' by Giuliani's activities"
- Which officials? What National Security decisions has he made? This is all speculation and hearsay (or simply made up).
5. "Ukrainian officials knew U.S. aid could be in jeopardy"
- Sorry but I know for a fact that since Trump has taken office, he's been extremely helpful to the Ukrainians militarily. There are also reports from Ukrainian officials stating they had no idea the aid was in jeopardy or even held back initially. The only person we know definitively that used military aid as leverage is VP Biden.
(2)
(0)
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin
MCPO Roger Collins - You know, I have never been a Trump fan. Ever since he announced his run I have been disappointed with his antics, his lack of tact, and his need to take on battles which do not need to be taken. To be blunt, he is good at acting like an ass. But being an ass does not take away (completely) from one's ability to promote conservative policies. I hate that it takes Trump to push these policies as I believe how you get there is important. But as I observe his antics, I've noted many from the Democrat party are showing their true colors as they demonstrate their ability to operate at the same level as Trump. But in their case, their is more than tactless snipes, and senseless battles. It's shortsighted, unhinged hatred to a point where they don't care what happens to this country in the long term, as long as they can prevent Trump from becoming successful. It's one thing to debate policy and challenge ideas. This is not what the Democrat party is doing. At this point I don't know if Trump is simply getting lucky or he's a political genius (or both). But much of what has been thrown at him is very much like what I saw directed at President Bush (like his military service for example), but so much more.
This is becoming a scorched earth situation and it plays right into our enemies hands. The Democrats need to back off because right now, they are definitely throwing me into his voting block for 2020. 2016 was their election to lose and they did so because of these same antics (and because the HAD to put Hilary up as their candidate).
This is becoming a scorched earth situation and it plays right into our enemies hands. The Democrats need to back off because right now, they are definitely throwing me into his voting block for 2020. 2016 was their election to lose and they did so because of these same antics (and because the HAD to put Hilary up as their candidate).
(2)
(0)
Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen
You are entitled to your opinion. Oh BYW have you ever tried getting information transferred into a compartmentalized server? Isn't easy.
(0)
(0)
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin
I am entitled to it and I am confident mine is just as much, if not, more likely than the opinion of the article you posted. As for the transfer of information, yes, I absolutely do know what it takes to perform those actions. Getting the information transferred is not so difficult once the approvals and method is in place. First you must have authorized access to the system in question, you must have the training, and then you must follow the guidelines with the transfer authority. Bear in mind this is the President of the US, so getting all this set up for him is a LOT more trivial than it is for me or someone at my level. But I have performed such actions in the recent past (the transfer of a lower classification document into a high level classified (compartmented even) network/file server. For my missions in cyber, this is essential. Once I got the approval done (after hours of training and seeking out the methodology), it has become something I can have done within a few minutes to a day.
All that said, why do you ask? It seems like you believe to come extent that the act of doing it is a big deal. It really isn't.
All that said, why do you ask? It seems like you believe to come extent that the act of doing it is a big deal. It really isn't.
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Yes. The most disturbing acknowledgement of this alleged abuse of office for personal political gain is his use of a civilian lawyer named Giuliani and not actual DoJ investigators that would imply this was a national security issue.
(2)
(0)
Patricia Overmeyer
MAJ James Woods: I'd consider that the second most disturbing. Most disturbing is using Attorney General Barr. So much for being America's Attorney General. From this, it looks like he's Trump's attorney.
(1)
(0)
MAJ James Woods
Patricia Overmeyer Playing devils advocate, one could argue AG and DoJ being mentioned in regards to Crowdstrike could’ve been to re-investigate a 2016 counter-intel investigation. But I agree mentioning Barr and Giuliani to investigate the Biden family proves Barr is doing nothing but protecting Trump not America.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google