1. He claimed publically to have evidence of Russian collusion all through the Mueller investigation. We now know that was a lie through the Mueller Report which stated there was no evidence of Russian collusion $40 million dollars later. He had no evidence.
2. We know and have tape recordings of a phone call he had with a Ukrainian prankster who claimed he had "dirt" on Trump and Russian collusion. He wanted the person to contact his office.
3. When reading what was supposed to be an actual transcript of the Ukranian phone call to the public, he changed the wording..not expecting that Trump would actually get clearance from the Ukraine to release it for the public to read themselves.
There is also some confirmed reporting of his staff being involved with the whistleblower prior to it's submittal. A whistleblower's information has always had to be first hand information only. The form was changed only days before it's release to include hearsay. Very little of the information given aligned with the actual call, the basis for this hearing in the first place.
The actions taken in this instance are contrary to any known proceedings. Given how the facts and circumstances are questionable, it would not be overreach to be concerned that with this kind of secrecy and our level of mistrust, the audio tapes and transcripts might be subject to tampering
Message Thread | This response ↓
« Back to index