The ‘whistleblower’ was not acting alone, and members of the intelligence community inspector general’s office were likely providing an assist in the hoax attempt to bury President Trump.

Margot Cleveland:

“…After President Donald Trump released the transcript of his July 25, 2019, telephone conversation with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, the left’s “whistleblower” plot began to crumble. No, Trump didn’t condition foreign subsidies on Ukraine investigating Hunter Biden, son of the former vice president and presidential candidate Joe Biden. And no, Trump didn’t raise the question some eight times.

Then came the declassification of the “whistleblower’s” actual complaint against the president, which made clear the still-unnamed intelligence officer was peddling nothing but gossip and hearsay, seasoned with several factual falsehoods. This further exposed the Ukraine Purse Strings Hoax as the Resistance’s sequel to the failed Russia collusion hoax.

To fully grasp the depths of the deception and duplicity, however, requires a familiarity with the governing whistleblower laws. Once those laws are understood, the latest attempt by the Deep State to take down our duly elected president become even more obvious. It also becomes clear that the “whistleblower” was not acting alone, and members of the intelligence community inspector general’s office were likely providing an assist in the attempt to bury Trump. So here’s your lawsplainer…
…Frankly, it does not matter which, if any, form the whistleblower used: What matters is whether the ICIG changed its position on accepting complaints under the ICWPA. If, prior to this charge against Trump, the ICIG refused to accept complaints based on second-hand information, but altered its procedure to trigger the ICWPA for the president, that is a huge scandal and implicates many besides the so-called whistleblower.

While the whistleblower’s plot to manipulate the ICWPA is obvious from the complaint, and so is his inaccurate partial quote of the statutory definition of “urgent concern,” the change in the form suggests complicity in the ICIG’s office. The director of national intelligence, who oversees the ICIG, should immediately investigate the investigator and determine whether there was a change in policy, when it occurred, why it occurred, and who initiated the change…”

The Democrats have exhausted every other mechanism for destroying Trump—and they are running out of time before November 2020 election.

Victor Davis Hanson:

“…Aside from the emotional issue that Democrats, NeverTrumpers, and celebrities loathe Donald Trump, recently Representative Al Green (D-Texas) reminded us why the Democrats are trying to impeach the president rather than just defeat him in the 2020 general election.

“To defeat him at the polls would do history a disservice, would do our nation a disservice,” Green said.  “I’m concerned that if we don’t impeach the president, he will get re-elected.”

Translated, that means Green accepts either that Trump’s record is too formidable or that the agendas of his own party’s presidential candidates are too frightening for the American people to elect one of them. And that possibility is simply not permissible. Thus, impeachment is the only mechanism left to abort an eight-year Trump presidency—on a purely partisan vote to preclude an election, and thus contrary to the outlines of impeachment as set out by the Constitution…”


“…Be prepared for a half-dozen Christine Blasey Ford-type witnesses to pop up, and 20 or so unhinged Cory Booker-esque “I am Spartacus” performance acts, along with a whole slew of new Steele dossiers—all interspersed with breathless CNN bulletins announcing new fake news developments with “the walls are closing in” and “the end is near” prognostications. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) is already reading fantasies to the House Intelligence Committee and passing them off as the text of Trump’s phone call to Ukraine’s new president. Only after he was called on such absurdities did he describe his performance as a parody…”


FDR in 1936, Lyndon Johnson in 1964, Richard Nixon in 1972, Ronald Reagan in 1984, all won by over 20 points. Trump will gain a victory on that scale next year, and he will have earned it

Conrad Black:

“…Trump’s offence, and his strength, is that he doesn’t make much effort to disguise the fact that he is a fierce, tough and often ruthless alumnus of the very tough schools of American capitalism, entertainment and politics.

The Globe and Mail headline implies that he has ridden his luck to where he is now. In fact, in making billions of dollars in (principally) Manhattan real estate, inventing a television concept and pulling in 25 million viewers every week for 14 seasons, devising a concept of levering celebrity, through being a boxing and wrestling impresario, a tabloid star and a reality TV icon, and then changing party affiliations seven times in 13 years and using social media to end-run the national press, seizing control of one of the great political parties and gaming the electoral system into the White House, he achieved more prior to his inauguration than any of the 43 preceding U.S. presidents except Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Grant, Eisenhower, and possibly Hoover. He is the only person elected president of the U.S. who never sought or held a public office or high military command and only the sixth to win the office with fewer votes than his chief opponent. This wasn’t luck; it was ambitious calculation and flawless execution…”


Preposterous, the latest whistle blower scheme against the president

Roger Kimball:

“…An unnamed “whistleblower” (personally, I think it is a protégé of John Brennan or possibly Michael Avenatti) cites various rumors he has overheard second- or third-hand, writes it up as an official complaint, and the whole stinking pile of malignant calumny is carefully fed into the Trump outrage machine and takes over the media narrative for a week or so.

It is impossible to overstate how preposterous the whole whistleblower gambit is. As Sean Davis has pointed out at The Federalist, the “intelligence community” (another phrase that has entered the lexicon of political malfeasance) recently, and secretly, changed the rule that “whistleblowers provide direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoings.”

The new rules, which were made public only after the transcript of Trump’s July 25 call with the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky was released, “eliminates the first-hand knowledge requirement and allows employees to file whistleblower complaints even if they have zero direct knowledge of underlying evidence and only heard about [wrongdoing] from others.” Interesting, what?

Impeachment frenzy cascaded over airwaves and displaced every competing story, even the exploitation of that sick child crusader Greta Thunberg, for about 48 hours. But the floodwaters are rapidly receding and the malodorous muck and detritus that has been left behind are already being subject to the sanitizing scrutiny of people who don’t like being lied to…”


Headline of the day

Whistleblower Requirements Recently Amended to Allow Hearsay

This is another Kristine Blasey Ford type coordinated attack this time on the president and coordinated by Democratic operatives associated with congressional Democrats and Democrat affiliated law firms in Washington. Congressional Democrats will attempt to rush it through because the last thing they want is an in-depth investigation of the allegations against the president.

Weasels, cowards, spies, snitches, ugly, disgusting people.

Not all Democrats by a long shot, just the ones in and around Washington.

Doug Santo