Whistleblower’s Attorney Targeted Trump In Old Tweets

[jimnyc]

This entire thing STINKS, and smells like a major league setup from the get go.

And this is the attorney for the whistleblower. It seems like every last connection is somehow related to another. WAY too many coincidences.

---

‘We Will Get Rid Of Him’: Whistleblower’s Attorney Targeted Trump In Old Tweets

Whistleblower attorney Mark S. Zaid targeted President Donald Trump in a 2017 tweet saying, “We will get rid of him.”

Zaid now serves as an attorney for the whistleblower accusing Trump of demanding that Ukraine assist the United States in an investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter over the latter’s work for Ukrainian gas company Burisma.

The attorney initially responded to a tweet from the U.S. State Department wishing a happy Canada Day to Canadians on the nation’s 150th anniversary. “Since Jan 20th, I would much rather be in Canada. What a great country! We’ll be great again when @realDonaldTrump leaves,” he tweeted.

Zaid then responded to another comment asking whether America would be able to get rid of Trump, adding, “It’s very scary. We will get rid of him, and this country is strong enough to survive even him and his supporters. We have to.”

https://dailycaller.com/2019/11/06/whistleblowers-attorney-targeted-trump-old-tweets/

[Kathianne]

This seems even more elaborate:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/coup-has-started-whistleblowers-attorney-said-in-2017-posts-calling-for-impeachment.amp

[pete311]

Professionals have opinions!? OMG... serious guys... you are looking desperate. Instead of taking on the facts you look back at old tweets from a lawyer. When you can't attack the facts, you attack the person. Why you guys think this whistleblower is still relevant is beyond me. We have like a dozen career diplomats and a Trump appointee corroborate the claims.

[jimnyc]

Professionals have opinions!? OMG... serious guys... you are looking desperate. Instead of taking on the facts you look back at old tweets from a lawyer. When you can't attack the facts, you attack the person. Why you guys think this whistleblower is still relevant is beyond me. We have like a dozen career diplomats and a Trump appointee corroborate the claims.

Can you have a civil discussion?

I have seen quote a few go in to be interviewed, leaks come out from the Dem that these folks corroborate, only to find out no such thing happened. Volker, Yovanovitch were the latest 2. In fact, it seems like they are saying similar no matter who is interviewed. For that fact, I haven't seen ONE witness make a connection of anything at all illegal that has been corroborated.

I would suggest waiting until they do the right thing, and make everything public and allow both sides of congress the legal access. Kinda like prosecutors barking out accusations and never allowing the defense to speak up and/or defend themselves. But when the do, or when the full truth comes out, seems these leaks don't nearly add up to what the original claims are.

I believe starting sometime next week they will do the right thing. Republicans should and can be able to have subpoena rights as well, and full access to interviews.

And you keep saying things like "we" keep looking desperate and what not. Why the need to take it personal? These are simply news stories being reported daily that we re-post and all discuss.

And yeah, I guess you're right, the current lawyer involved, talking about a coup, that wouldn't be the slightest bit relevant or important. Talking of a coup, and then being involved in one directly. Also no need to know who the whistleblower is, and the endless connections to democrats and this setup.

Sorry, I feel differently. I see all of this prior crap that took place to be great evidence, and part of a story, a very clear one. I see the way the Dems are running this "inquiry" to tell a clear picture. It's a repeat of what they did with Russia.

Discussion of a coup of the president is not an opinion. And then moving on to being involved in one, also not just an opinion.

Can you tell me seriously why you ignore 99 posts, with good and valid information in them, and then often come in the tail end just to scoff at things, while continuing to ignore the 99 things posted prior? No interest in the discussion as things happen and get released by the MSM? A Sentence of 2 is decent, when on topic, but if it clearly ignores the past 2 weeks of facts coming out.....

Lastly, I made NO attack on any person. I just again stated the entire thing stinks., and seems like a setup from day one. Kath comes from behind linking to another story, simply commenting that it seemed more elaborate. - And then you somehow claim we are attacking someone??? WHO is being attacked?

[pete311]

The problem Jim is that your bias makes conspiracies attractive to you. The facts are staring you in the face. The transcript memo shows Trump asked Ukraine to investigate a political opponent and several career diplomats back up the concerns that he and Rudy were running a shadow diplomacy campaign to help Trump's re-election. Sondland, who mind you donated $1m to Trump's campaign, admitted the money was tied to an investigation announcement. Yet you keep digging for lawyer tweets. Something stinks alright and it's obviously coming from Trump.

[jimnyc]

The problem Jim is that your bias makes conspiracies attractive to you. The facts are staring you in the face. The transcript memo shows Trump asked Ukraine to investigate a political opponent and several career diplomats back up the concerns that he and Rudy were running a shadow diplomacy campaign to help Trump's re-election. Sondland, who mind you donated $1m to Trump's campaign, admitted the money was tied to an investigation announcement. Yet you keep digging for lawyer tweets.


Pete, what you call a conspiracy is called "daily news". If it's a conspiracy theory alone, my ass isn't posting about it most likely. But if it's covered on many sites, and appears to be factual or extremely debatable about that, then I will post it as news. You have for a long time shunned at this as something else. I understand, and wish you wouldn't do differently, but I simply scour news sites for current news and post it. The fact that you miss a fair amount of important things being posted might account for things too. We often discuss from the initial news throughout, and doesn't seem you like to do that very much.

Sondland had to come back in a 2nd time and alter/add to his testimony. A little odd to me. And add it into the overall picture, and so many others stating differently...

And again, speaking of wanting to know the TRUTH and the ENTIRE truth, I WANT them to 100% investigate everything from the very moment Joe and Son opened up lines of communications and money with them, up until current times. Show us EVERYTHING, not just cherry picked things to leak, or to "leak" something and claim it's fact when it's not. I think Schiff's actions should alarm ALL Americans, but sadly it does not. If Joe and Son & Trump were all guilty, then so be it then. But ALL has to be investigated properly, none of this shit the left is pulling right now.

And yes, while I do discuss this lawyer, as it simply made the news, there has been a TON SHITLOAD to this point that we have all been discussing, that you have viewed, that you have ignored & then jumped in to things you like down the road though.

And lastly, I don't "dig for tweets". Again, simply daily news, in order as it comes to us.

[pete311]

Sondland had to come back in a 2nd time and alter/add to his testimony. A little odd to me. And add it into the overall picture, and so many others stating differently...


Other diplomats in their testimony outed Sondland's role, so either Sondland adjusts the testimony and tells the truth or he's liable for perjury. He's a Trump appointee that donated $1M to Trump campaign. The last thing he wants to do is piss off Trump, but it appears he wants to not end up in jail even more.

I don't know what you are crying about. The testimonies are being released (at least 3 so far) and public hearing are next week. There is a process ya know.

[jimnyc]

Other diplomats in their testimony outed Sondland's role, so either Sondland adjusts the testimony and tells the truth or he's liable for perjury. He's a Trump appointee that donated $1M to Trump campaign. The last thing he wants to do is piss off Trump, but it appears he wants to not end up in jail even more.

I don't know what you are crying about. The testimonies are being released (at least 3 so far) and public hearing are next week. There is a process ya know.

"You're reaching and concentrating on donations instead of facing the truth...."

I don't believe what I just wrote, honestly, Pete. But that's similar to much I get posted back to me, like the prior. I don't think it matters, until it does, like as in something illegal.

Anyway, back to where we were.

And I'm not crying pete. Can we try to dismiss things like that and try to stick with facts and what not, so as not to insult one another?

The process, from day one, should have been 100% equal access from both sides in any committee, not a one sided attack and releasing tidbits of news. The hearings are a start. But they need a full vote, and allowing for full unfettered access to the right as well.

And we are welcome to not only discuss the one or 2 or even 3 people you feel show Trump did something bad or illegal. But before that, you missed tons of sworn statements to the otherwise from quite a few in Ukraine. More than quite a few here in the US stating otherwise as well. I understand you want to point at a person or 2 and state that proves guilt. But what about the other folks who swore otherwise or testified otherwise? They count too.

And in the end, what they produce needs to be so damning, that they can get a minimum of 20 republican senators to vote for removal in the senate. If that doesn't happen, this entire thing was once again a waste of time, other than pointing out more Dem wrongdoing we were fully unaware of.

[pete311]

"You're reaching and concentrating on donations instead of facing the truth...."

I don't believe what I just wrote, honestly, Pete. But that's similar to much I get posted back to me, like the prior. I don't think it matters, until it does, like as in something illegal.

Anyway, back to where we were.

And I'm not crying pete. Can we try to dismiss things like that and try to stick with facts and what not, so as not to insult one another?

The process, from day one, should have been 100% equal access from both sides in any committee, not a one sided attack and releasing tidbits of news. The hearings are a start. But they need a full vote, and allowing for full unfettered access to the right as well.

And we are welcome to not only discuss the one or 2 or even 3 people you feel show Trump did something bad or illegal. But before that, you missed tons of sworn statements to the otherwise from quite a few in Ukraine. More than quite a few here in the US stating otherwise as well. I understand you want to point at a person or 2 and state that proves guilt. But what about the other folks who swore otherwise or testified otherwise? They count too.

And in the end, what they produce needs to be so damning, that they can get a minimum of 20 republican senators to vote for removal in the senate. If that doesn't happen, this entire thing was once again a waste of time, other than pointing out more Dem wrongdoing we were fully unaware of.

The process has been fair and within house rules. There are republicans in all the committees. What is the issue? Republicans changed the rules a few years ago and now you don't like it. Elections have consequences. Remember you tell me that like a billion times? Again, you attack the process, when the facts are all staring you in the face and you reject dealing with them. Goal posts continue to be moved. Remember the trial is in the senate. The house investigates.

[Gunny]

Professionals have opinions!? OMG... serious guys... you are looking desperate. Instead of taking on the facts you look back at old tweets from a lawyer. When you can't attack the facts, you attack the person. Why you guys think this whistleblower is still relevant is beyond me. We have like a dozen career diplomats and a Trump appointee corroborate the claims.People like you make me laugh. At you. You have attributed YOUR entire handbook on debate to others because you are incapable of addressing the topic.

You're really something else, Pete. If you believe your own bullshit, you're dumber'n a box of rocks. If you don't believe it, then who do think you're fooling? I used to think you couldn't possibly be this stupid. I'm re-thinking that opinion.

[pete311]

People like you make me laugh. At you. You have attributed YOUR entire handbook on debate to others because you are incapable of addressing the topic.

You're really something else, Pete. If you believe your own bullshit, you're dumber'n a box of rocks. If you don't believe it, then who do think you're fooling? I used to think you couldn't possibly be this stupid. I'm re-thinking that opinion.

You lie! You've always had nothing but a rock bottom opinion of me :laugh:

[jimnyc]

Sorry Pete, and I shouldn't even bother with this as I feel it's a waste of my time. But you made it like one post today before the insults came out. I'm doing my best to stop with that, so I'm not entertaining it or anything that may lead to me doing otherwise. But I also post so you don't expect a reply, or think I can't answer your posts. I choose not to keep being a part of the problem or be a part of non-stop lameness of insults and what not instead of discussing subjects at hand.

[STTAB]

Professionals have opinions!? OMG... serious guys... you are looking desperate. Instead of taking on the facts you look back at old tweets from a lawyer. When you can't attack the facts, you attack the person. Why you guys think this whistleblower is still relevant is beyond me. We have like a dozen career diplomats and a Trump appointee corroborate the claims.


What facts Pete. All we have seen is OPINIONS that Trump did something wrong. No facts.

I'll repeat this again for the stupid among us. If you believe Trump did something illegal , you must also believe that BIden did something illegal. I mean that motherfucker actually BRAGGED about bribing the President of Ukraine to fire a prosecutor who was looking into his son's company. Or how about the 4 Democrats who sent a letter to Ukraine threatening to vote against an aid package unless Ukraine investigated Trump? How can you POSSIBLY say that is legal if you believe what Trump did is illegal?

[STTAB]

People like you make me laugh. At you. You have attributed YOUR entire handbook on debate to others because you are incapable of addressing the topic.

You're really something else, Pete. If you believe your own bullshit, you're dumber'n a box of rocks. If you don't believe it, then who do think you're fooling? I used to think you couldn't possibly be this stupid. I'm re-thinking that opinion.


People like Pete make me sympathetic to ANTIFA's opinion that it is okay to hit people in the head with a bicycle lock if they have opinions you don't like.

[pete311]

What facts Pete. All we have seen is OPINIONS that Trump did something wrong. No facts.

I'll repeat this again for the stupid among us. If you believe Trump did something illegal , you must also believe that BIden did something illegal. I mean that motherfucker actually BRAGGED about bribing the President of Ukraine to fire a prosecutor who was looking into his son's company. Or how about the 4 Democrats who sent a letter to Ukraine threatening to vote against an aid package unless Ukraine investigated Trump? How can you POSSIBLY say that is legal if you believe what Trump did is illegal?

You are apparently living in the past. We've moved on from this like over a month ago. Please keep up with the developments. I don't have time to type out a paper to get you updated.

[STTAB]

You are apparently living in the past. We've moved on from this like over a month ago. Please keep up with the developments. I don't have time to type out a paper to get you updated.

In other words you have no response.

As I've said before Pete. One of the many differences between you and I is that I use reasoning, logic, and the law to form my opinions on such matters. You use feelings. Therefor you are rarely if ever right, and I'm always right.

As I said earlier in the thread, you can not seriously both argue that what either Biden or the 4 Democratic Senators did in regards to Ukraine was on the up and up AND argue that what Trump did is illegal. PERIOD.

Of course we already had this discussion a year ago when you were screaming about Trump trying to get dirt on a political opponent from foreigners , but were completely silent about Adam Schiff being exposed for trying to get dirt on Trump from who he thought were foreign government officials.

The bottom line Pete is that you don't actually care about the law, and it's obvious to all of us. You have an extreme case of "orange man bad" and that's all you give a shit about.

[pete311]

In other words you have no response.

As I've said before Pete. One of the many differences between you and I is that I use reasoning, logic, and the law to form my opinions on such matters. You use feelings. Therefor you are rarely if ever right, and I'm always right.

As I said earlier in the thread, you can not seriously both argue that what either Biden or the 4 Democratic Senators did in regards to Ukraine was on the up and up AND argue that what Trump did is illegal. PERIOD.

Of course we already had this discussion a year ago when you were screaming about Trump trying to get dirt on a political opponent from foreigners , but were completely silent about Adam Schiff being exposed for trying to get dirt on Trump from who he thought were foreign government officials.

The bottom line Pete is that you don't actually care about the law, and it's obvious to all of us. You have an extreme case of "orange man bad" and that's all you give a shit about.

I'd rather go take out my dogs and let you win than spend an hour writing our the past month's developments. Enjoy.

[jimnyc]

What facts Pete. All we have seen is OPINIONS that Trump did something wrong. No facts.

I'll repeat this again for the stupid among us. If you believe Trump did something illegal , you must also believe that BIden did something illegal. I mean that motherfucker actually BRAGGED about bribing the President of Ukraine to fire a prosecutor who was looking into his son's company. Or how about the 4 Democrats who sent a letter to Ukraine threatening to vote against an aid package unless Ukraine investigated Trump? How can you POSSIBLY say that is legal if you believe what Trump did is illegal?

Sttab - apparently all one need to do is run for presidency, and then all crimes are apparently forgotten and impossible to investigate in any manner. Additionally, if enough time passes, all crimes are forgiven and forgotten.

I've moved on from NOTHING, nor has congress, as some are still calling for investigations into Biden and Son. So it has not moved on, nor should it. Fact is, Trump was correct, the shit was corrupt as hell and deserved to be investigated and people should know what went down. Biden shouldn't get a pass. They are investigating the cop who found a crime and decided to investigate, and the the guilty got scared and fought back.

[Gunny]

I'd rather go take out my dogs and let you win than spend an hour writing our the past month's developments. Enjoy.:bye1:

[pete311]

Sttab - apparently all one need to do is run for presidency, and then all crimes are apparently forgotten and impossible to investigate in any manner. Additionally, if enough time passes, all crimes are forgiven and forgotten.

I've moved on from NOTHING, nor has congress, as some are still calling for investigations into Biden and Son. So it has not moved on, nor should it. Fact is, Trump was correct, the shit was corrupt as hell and deserved to be investigated and people should know what went down. Biden shouldn't get a pass. They are investigating the cop who found a crime and decided to investigate, and the the guilty got scared and fought back.

That's fine, but one man's possible unethical behavior should not negate another man's possible illegal behavior.

[Gunny]

That's fine, but one man's possible unethical behavior should not negate another man's possible illegal behavior.How many years has it been, Pete? 3+? Still praying for that unpaid traffic ticket, huh?

That's some serious unfounded, blind hatred you're allowing to limit any ability to think/reason that you might have. Y'all just look so petty and stupid which reflects on me none at all :)

[pete311]

How many years has it been, Pete? 3+? Still praying for that unpaid traffic ticket, huh?

That's some serious unfounded, blind hatred you're allowing to limit any ability to think/reason that you might have. Y'all just look so petty and stupid which reflects on me none at all :)

Rich coming from a crowd that invokes Obama and Hillary 3+ years out of relevance.

[Gunny]

Rich coming from a crowd that invokes Obama and Hillary 3+ years out of relevance.I don't recall mentioning either as I have better things to think about. Unlike you who apparently don't have to walk your dogs, my grandson just woke up and much as I'd love to stay and play with you, you're just not high on the priority list. DO try to have a nice day anyway :)

[jimnyc]

This seems even more elaborate:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/coup-has-started-whistleblowers-attorney-said-in-2017-posts-calling-for-impeachment.amp

To show the words, so everyone can see what this attorney stated while Trump IS in office, currently is, and the attorney has stated he "doubles down" on his comments or whatever that means. But I can't imagine such comments should be taken lightly.


---

Mark Zaid, one of the attorneys representing the intelligence community whistleblower at the center of the Democrats' ongoing impeachment inquiry, tweeted conspicuously in January 2017 that a "coup has started" and that "impeachment will follow ultimately."

..

Then, in July 2017, Zaid remarked, "I predict @CNN will play a key role in @realDonaldTrump not finishing out his full term as president." Also that month, Zaid tweeted, "We will get rid of him, and this country is strong enough to survive even him and his supporters."

..

Amid a slew of impeachment-related posts, Zaid assured his Twitter followers that "as one falls, two more will take their place," apparently referring to Trump administration employees who defy the White House. Zaid promised that the "coup" would occur in "many steps."

----

So this man, who currently represents the whistleblower - has outright stated in 2017 that a "coup has started". Now how do you say as much, and we see evidence of such... be any sort of legal? Now we know what Zucker was busted stating, and their involvement in wanting to destroy Trump, and we see this lawyer stating that CNN will play a key role against Trump in not finishing his term??

[jimnyc]

That is true, didn't think of that. This attorney, the attorney for the whistleblower Eric Ciaramella, is not only defending him - he will also now be called as a witness in the case. And no matter our personal feelings on this case - in a court, it is simply not going to look good upon an attorney being found out to be trying to bring harm upon the defendant, Trump.

--

David Bossie: Trump impeachment witch hunt must end – Whistleblower lawyer is Trump-hater who forecast coup

An attorney for the anonymous member of the intelligence community whose complaint about a call between President Trump and the president of Ukraine kick-started the unhinged partisan impeachment witch hunt now underway has been unmasked as a rabid Trump-hater who predicted a “coup” against the president.

As a result, attorney Mark Zaid – who represents the anonymous person now commonly described only as “the whistleblower” – has just become a witness in the case, which is really a Democratic coup attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 presidential election.

A Fox News article published Wednesday exposed Zaid’s furious Twitter tirade against Trump that began just days after Trump’s inauguration in 2017. Zaid tweeted that a “coup has started” against Trump and that “impeachment will follow ultimately.”

At a campaign rally in Louisiana Wednesday night for Republican gubernatorial candidate Eddie Rispone, President Trump called out Zaid for writing the angry tweets.

Zaid tweeted in response to Obama holdover Acting Attorney General Sally Yates’ defiance of a presidential order over the new administration’s travel ban on people wanting to enter the United States from countries that are incubators for terrorism. The president imposed the ban as a national security measure.

Months after his original January tweet about an anti-Trump coup, Zaid tweeted the prediction that “@CNN will play a key role in @realDonaldTrump not finishing out his full term as president.” As if we needed more proof that CNN is nothing more than an arm of the Democratic National Committee.

In response to these new revelations, President Trump confronted the situation head-on Wednesday by repeating his mantra that the left’s sick obsession with trying to remove him from office is “all a hoax.”

The president is right and has been right all along. The left has been trying to destroy him for three years and will never stop, because they hate him more than they love our country.

On Thursday the president tweeted to call for an end to the impeachment inquiry, writing: “Based on the information released last night about the Fake Whistleblowers attorney, the Impeachment Hoax should be ended IMMEDIATELY!”

The president’s hard shot caused Zaid to issue a weak and defensive statement that read in part: “The coup comment referred to those working inside the Administration who were already, just a week into office, already standing up to him to enforce recognized rules of law.”

Zaid is so impeachment-crazed that he confirmed the existence of a coup in a statement that was designed to deny it.

If House Democrats are going to force the president’s attorney, Rudy Giuliani, to testify in their farcical impeachment investigation, then Zaid is fair game as well.

The American people must hear from Zaid about who he’s been conspiring with on this coup attempt, as well as who is financing the coup attempt and who authorized it to move forward in the first place.

The revelation of Zaid’s tweets comes at a time when the credibility and motives of his client – the anonymous so-called whistleblower – are being justifiably questioned as well.

Rest - https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/david-bossie-trump-impeachment-witch-hunt-must-end-whistleblower-lawyer-is-trump-hater-who-forecast-coup