Page One: A Review of the Whistleblower Complaint of Trump's Extortion Attempts
Before we begin, it's worth mentioning that Trump has now threatened the Whistleblower's life by claiming they are a traitor. This is open witness intimidation and death threats, and can be added to his enormous list of public crimes.
From the following text:
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6430352/20190812-Whistleblower-Complaint-Unclass.pdf
The whistleblower complaint has been out for a day, and while I spent months on the Mueller report review and got jack all from the spineless democrats for ten counts of obviously criminal obstruction, I still hold out hope that maybe this time they'll actually follow through. So with no further ado, here is my review of the 9 page complaint.
Page 1:
Dated August 12th, 2019, directed at the intelligence committee
The whistleblower identifies this complaint as falling under the legal definition of "urgent concern." They cite a US code which reads as follows:
"(5)(A) An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employee assigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employee of a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General.
This establishes a few things:
1) The legal path of reaction to official complaint was followed
2) The IG made the determination that the complaint was credible
3) The Director was in violation of the US code by not sending this on to congress within 7 calendar days.
So we already have one crime here, albeit a procedural one. If it is found that the White House suggested or prevented it from being shared, they can also be charged with suborning criminal behavior, a much more potent charge.
The next paragraph is very important to the entirety of the complaint, so I'm going to include it verbatim:
From this we see that it is established that they were doing their official duty, that they received credible information from multiple sources alleging abuse of power, that these allegations had concrete examples provided, that Trump's personal lawyer was involved, and that AG Barr is also potentially involved in the abuse. This shows the scope and seriousness of the complaint, in that it implicates Trump, his lawyer, the AG, and any other state actor which may have colluded as well. It also establishes that this is sourced information, not their own observations, which while rhetorically weaker ("second-hand knowledge") is legally stronger (multiple sourced credible information).
They continue by describing the following:
- More than 6 US officials described as complaintents
- Timeline is the past four months (August, July, June, May)
- Information was obtained not through hearsay but through official interagency exchanges
They state clearly that they were not a direct witness. They also state that each allegation was backed up by multiple consistent officials, and by public information and reporting.
They refer again to the US code and describe the conditions (cited above) for it to be labeled as an "urgent concern." They also reiterate that this is the proper form and channel for the complaint, and that it is not a difference of opinions issue.
They claim the actions pose risks to US national security and countering foreign interference (the latter of which Trump openly has stated he will accept if offered).
The classification is also discussed, being considered unclassified when decoupled from a mentioned attachment (obviously not included). They also mention President Obama's Executive Order 13526, which created the National Declassification Center and whose major focus is "the idea that information should become declassified systematically as soon as practicable."
They start with the first example, a July 25th phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. This was the second call between the two leaders, as far as is publicly known.
They describe the call as being initially an exchange of pleasantries, followed by Trump pressing his personal interests. Specifically mentioned is his pressuring of Zelenskyy to take actions to aid Trump's presidential bid in 2020. These is exemplified by:
- Calling to initiate an investigation into Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, furthering a conspiracy theory Trump has created which has been thoroughly investigated and debunked.
- Asking assistance in locating and providing DNC servers related to another far right conspiracy featuring Crowdstrike, a US cyber security firm, who initially reported on Russia's 2016 hacking attempts of the DNC
- Meeting with Trump's personal lawyer as well as Attorney General Barr about these personal interests.
Footnotes:
1: They describe that they used statements by Trump and Guiliani and declassification policy to decide what was and what wasn't to be discussed in this complaint. They specifically cite that classification cannot be used to conceal violations of the law or prevent embarrassment.
This will come back on Trump as it has been found that the conversation was sent to a separate, secure server in an attempt to block anyone from seeing it. This is a violation of standing law.
2. They describe that there is some questions as to whether an investigation into Biden and his father still exists, or ever did. This will be expounded on later.
3. They wonder as to why Trump thinks Ukraine has the DNC servers.
That's all for Page 1! Read the piece and comment below! Page 2 will come next time.
From the following text:
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6430352/20190812-Whistleblower-Complaint-Unclass.pdf
The whistleblower complaint has been out for a day, and while I spent months on the Mueller report review and got jack all from the spineless democrats for ten counts of obviously criminal obstruction, I still hold out hope that maybe this time they'll actually follow through. So with no further ado, here is my review of the 9 page complaint.
Page 1:
Dated August 12th, 2019, directed at the intelligence committee
The whistleblower identifies this complaint as falling under the legal definition of "urgent concern." They cite a US code which reads as follows:
"(5)(A) An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employee assigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employee of a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information to the Inspector General.
(B) Not later than the end of the 14-calendar-day period beginning on the date of receipt from an employee of a complaint or information under subparagraph (A), the Inspector General shall determine whether the complaint or information appears credible. Upon making such a determination, the Inspector General shall transmit to the Director a notice of that determination, together with the complaint or information.
(C) Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B), the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate."This establishes a few things:
1) The legal path of reaction to official complaint was followed
2) The IG made the determination that the complaint was credible
3) The Director was in violation of the US code by not sending this on to congress within 7 calendar days.
So we already have one crime here, albeit a procedural one. If it is found that the White House suggested or prevented it from being shared, they can also be charged with suborning criminal behavior, a much more potent charge.
The next paragraph is very important to the entirety of the complaint, so I'm going to include it verbatim:
In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President's main domestic political rivals. The President' s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well.
They continue by describing the following:
- More than 6 US officials described as complaintents
- Timeline is the past four months (August, July, June, May)
- Information was obtained not through hearsay but through official interagency exchanges
They state clearly that they were not a direct witness. They also state that each allegation was backed up by multiple consistent officials, and by public information and reporting.
They refer again to the US code and describe the conditions (cited above) for it to be labeled as an "urgent concern." They also reiterate that this is the proper form and channel for the complaint, and that it is not a difference of opinions issue.
They claim the actions pose risks to US national security and countering foreign interference (the latter of which Trump openly has stated he will accept if offered).
The classification is also discussed, being considered unclassified when decoupled from a mentioned attachment (obviously not included). They also mention President Obama's Executive Order 13526, which created the National Declassification Center and whose major focus is "the idea that information should become declassified systematically as soon as practicable."
They start with the first example, a July 25th phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. This was the second call between the two leaders, as far as is publicly known.
They describe the call as being initially an exchange of pleasantries, followed by Trump pressing his personal interests. Specifically mentioned is his pressuring of Zelenskyy to take actions to aid Trump's presidential bid in 2020. These is exemplified by:
- Calling to initiate an investigation into Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, furthering a conspiracy theory Trump has created which has been thoroughly investigated and debunked.
- Asking assistance in locating and providing DNC servers related to another far right conspiracy featuring Crowdstrike, a US cyber security firm, who initially reported on Russia's 2016 hacking attempts of the DNC
- Meeting with Trump's personal lawyer as well as Attorney General Barr about these personal interests.
Footnotes:
1: They describe that they used statements by Trump and Guiliani and declassification policy to decide what was and what wasn't to be discussed in this complaint. They specifically cite that classification cannot be used to conceal violations of the law or prevent embarrassment.
This will come back on Trump as it has been found that the conversation was sent to a separate, secure server in an attempt to block anyone from seeing it. This is a violation of standing law.
2. They describe that there is some questions as to whether an investigation into Biden and his father still exists, or ever did. This will be expounded on later.
3. They wonder as to why Trump thinks Ukraine has the DNC servers.
That's all for Page 1! Read the piece and comment below! Page 2 will come next time.
Comments
Post a Comment