JohnP

The claim that the whistleblower got his phone call "almost completely wrong" is PolitiFact’s 2019 Lie of the Year

Rate this topic

15 posts in this topic

Can you disagree with reason and facts, and without referring to memes or inappropriate off topic comments?

 

 

Every year, PolitiFact editors review the year’s most flagrant inaccuracies in search of a significant false claim that can be elevated to Lie of the Year. 
 

The distinction is awarded to a statement that is more than ridiculous and wrong. The Lie of the Year — the only time PolitiFact uses the word "lie" — speaks to a falsehood that proves to be of real consequence and gets repeated in a virtual campaign to undermine an accurate narrative.

 

The whistleblower, who to Trump’s consternation remains unidentified, raised the concern that the president’s actions leading up to and on that phone call amount to interference in the coming presidential election. Agree or disagree with the conclusion, or whether the president’s conduct warrants impeachment, the actions described in the complaint stand up to factual scrutiny.

 

Since the Sept. 26 release of the whistleblower complaint about his call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump has insisted more than 80 times that the whistleblower’s account is fake, fraudulent, incorrect, "total fiction," "made up," and "sooo wrong." 

 

The readout is supported by firsthand accounts of officials listening from the Situation Room. Vindman told House members he was concerned by the request of a foreign government to scrutinize a U.S. citizen. 
 

"I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play, which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained," he said in his deposition before the House Intelligence Committee on Oct. 29. "This would all undermine U.S. national security."

Both Vindman, the security council’s top expert on Ukraine, and Williams said their notes show Zelensky brought up "Burisma" by name, even though it does not appear in the call record. 
 

The whistleblower claimed Trump urged Zelensky to "assist in purportedly uncovering that allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election originated in Ukraine, with a specific request that the Ukrainian leader locate and turn over servers used by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and examined by the U.S. cyber security firm Crowdstrike, which initially reported that Russian hackers had penetrated the DNC’s networks in 2016."

 

This is confirmed on page 3 of the White House call record. It quotes Trump as saying, "I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation, they say Crowdstrike… I guess you have one of your wealthy people… The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible."

 

Do the motivations of the complaint matter? 
 

"The whistleblower can have the worst possible motives in the world. The whistleblower can hate their boss. And the law doesn’t really take that into account," said Dan Meyer, an attorney who was executive director for Intelligence Community Whistleblowing and Source Protection from 2013 to 2017.

 

No matter the motivations or the political outcome, testimony from the whistleblower would not change the underlying facts of what Trump said. The whistleblower’s account is verified by the same set of facts supplied by Vindman, Williams and Morrison, and others who were in the know.

Edited by JohnP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 mins ago, Gotcow? said:

I would think the lie of the year should go to the Democrats Impeachment .


no way

 

the whistle blower complaint reads like Vindmans testimony. Under oath he said he relayed the same concerns to Eisenberg. Then Fiona Hill said pretty much that same thing, and also testified that she relayed John Bolton’s concerns to Eisenberg as well. 

so the whistleblower is just the 3rd or 4th person to relay the same concern. 
 

So many people here disagree, but nobody seems to give any details 

Edited by JohnP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 mins ago, JohnP said:


no way

 

the whistle blower complaint reads like Vindmans testimony. Under oath he said he relayed the same concerns to Eisenberg. Then Fiona Hill said pretty much that same thing, and also testified that she relayed John Bolton’s concerns to Eisenberg as well. 

so the whistleblower is just the 3rd or 4th person to relay the same concern. 
 

So many people here disagree, but nobody seems to give any details 

Trump demanded nothing and Vindman said the transcript was spot on and people like Moonie who said it was altered were completely wrong. The only first hand witness was Sondland and what did he testify what Trump said!? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gotcow? said:

I would think the lie of the year should go to the Democrats Impeachment .

-

Beat me to it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump demanded nothing in that call. A fact verified by all who were on that call. The "witnesses"  involved with this attempted coup didn't witness anything but heard rumors from other "witnesses" that didn't witness anything. The charges don't rise to impeachment level events are not crimes at all never mind " high crimes and misdemeanors" . Add to that the lack of proof will make it impossible to even prove the mickey mouse charges stated in the articles of impeachment. The Democrats have been running this partisan hack job since the votes were counted in 2016 but they only people getting hacked up by it are the Democrats themselves. This run-away impeachment debacle has Trump surging ahead of all comers in the swing states for the first time since .... ever!  I'm betting the Senate will just throw this out with the rest of the garbage. That's too bad because I would like to see some of the Democrats that put their party ahead of their country questioned under oath. 

 

Edited by epanzella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 mins ago, epanzella said:

Trump demanded nothing in that call. A fact verified by all who were on that call. The "witnesses"  involved with this attempted coup didn't witness anything but heard rumors from other "witnesses" that didn't witness anything. The charges don't rise to impeachment level events are not crimes at all never mind " high crimes and misdemeanors" . Add to that the lack of proof will make it impossible to even prove the mickey mouse charges stated in the articles of impeachment. The Democrats have been running this partisan hack job since the votes were counted in 2016 but they only people getting hacked up by it are the Democrats themselves. This run-away impeachment debacle has Trump surging ahead of all comers in the swing states for the first time since .... ever!  I'm betting the Senate will just throw this out with the rest of the garbage. That's too bad because I would like to see some of the Democrats that put their party ahead of their country questioned under oath. 

 


not

 

the witnesses implicated POTUS and senior cabinet members, who are now cowering and hoping there is no court ruling that they testify under oath. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 mins ago, JohnP said:


not

 

the witnesses implicated POTUS and senior cabinet members, who are now cowering and hoping there is no court ruling that they testify under oath. 

Rumor and innuendo! When asked "Anyone with direct evidence against the president raise your hand" not one hand went up. This circus is going nowhere!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.