>>181010, >>181011, >>181012, >>181013, >>181014, >>181015, >>181016, >>181017, >>181018, >>181019, >>181020, >>181021, >>181022, >>181023, >>181024, >>181025, >>181026, >>181027, >>181028, >>181029, >>181030, >>181031, >>181032, >>181033, >>181034, >>181035, >>181036, >>181037, >>181038, >>181039, >>181040, >>181041, >>181042, >>181043, >>181044, >>181045, >>181046, >>181047, >>181048, >>181049, >>181050, >>181051, >>181052, >>181053, >>181054, >>181055, >>181056, >>181057, >>181059, >>181060, >>181061, >>181062, >>181063, >>181064, >>181065, >>181066, >>181067, >>181068, >>181070, >>181072, >>181073, >>181074, >>181075, >>181076, >>181078, >>181080, >>181081, >>181082, >>181083, >>181084
This guy came in with a phony baloney story about the phone call that he heard somebody talk about.
We have his whistleblower complaint. The guy who went to... Basically, this is like the human resources guy, right?
This is the guy you go to to get other people in trouble. Sometimes human resources does that.
This is on page one. I know it's a little bit hard to read here, but... This is the first thing.
This is the whistleblower. And he says, "I do not have direct knowledge of private comments or communications by the president.
However, I have direct knowledge of interagency discussions about Ukraine in which" blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
"I have no direct knowledge of private communications."
They should have thrown him out of the office right then and there. That's what the handbook says to do. Get out of here.
You can't blow the whistle.
Find somebody else to blow the whistle.
You don't have a whistle.
But they let this guy do the whole thing. And then they immediately sent it up to Congress. Next, we've got something else here: "Potential for bias, biases, or to be discredited."
It's very interesting that one of the key players in this - and I'm sorry to do this - Witness Number Two was the co-author of the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment on Russia Interference in the 2016 Election.
The main witness there was in on the Russia hoax!
Yeah, it's okay. I'm sure you're objective now! It literally says that. It literally says, oh no, but he's apolitical. Now he's apolitical.
Now we can trust him. There might be one more goodie in here.