**Breaking** Trump's communications w foreign leader part of controversial whistleblower complaint
National Security
Trump’s communications with foreign leader are part of whistleblower complaint that spurred standoff between spy chief and Congress, former officials say
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trumps-communications-with-foreign-leader-are-part-of-whistleblower-complaint-that-spurred-standoff-between-spy-chief-and-congress-former-officials-say/2019/09/18/df651aa2-da60-11e9-bfb1-849887369476_story.html
The whistleblower complaint that has triggered a tense showdown between the U.S. intelligence community and Congress involves President Trump’s communications with a foreign leader, according to two former U.S. officials familiar with the matter.
Trump’s interaction with the foreign leader included a “promise” that was regarded as so troubling that it prompted an official in the U.S. intelligence community to file a formal whistleblower complaint with the inspector general for the intelligence community, said the officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.
It was not immediately clear which foreign leader Trump was speaking with or what he pledged to deliver, but his direct involvement in the matter has not been previously disclosed. It raises new questions about the president’s handling of sensitive information and may further strain his relationship with U.S. spy agencies. One former official said the communication was a phone call.
= new reply since forum marked as read
I don’t like the sound of that. 
Surely, you jest! 
Trump not only never proves anything, he thumbs his nose at Congress, and has turned the Justice Department into his very own Roy Cohn.
Last edited Thu Sep 19, 2019, 10:37 AM - Edit history (1)
<snip>
The dispute is expected to escalate Thursday when Atkinson is scheduled to appear before the House Intelligence Committee in a classified session closed to the public. The hearing is the latest move by committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) to compel U.S. intelligence officials to disclose the full details of the whistleblower complaint to Congress.
<snip>
The inspector general “determined that this complaint is both credible and urgent,” Schiff said in the statement released Wednesday evening. “The committee places the highest importance on the protection of whistleblowers and their complaints to Congress.”
The complaint was filed with Atkinson’s office on Aug. 12, a date on which Trump was at his golf resort in New Jersey. White House records indicate that Trump had had conversations or interactions with at least five foreign leaders in the preceding five weeks.
Among them was a call with Russian President Vladimir Putin that the White House initiated on July 31.
</snip>
THIS is probably why tRUMP wants to always talk with putin with NO-ONE around!!! 
And they're VERY poor "actors".
When I hear the word “promise”, I think of Helsinki, where it appeared that DF45 had “promised” to turn ex-Russian ambassador Michael McFaul over to Putin, and some people who had helped Bill Browder write the Magnitsky Act as well...but that was so long ago...
Anyway, have a really shitty night, all you traitorous motherfuckers
Throw another impeachable log on the bonfire. 
years ago after our team blew out the English team. 
Open the door to ANY and ALL future subpoenas!! 
This is HUGE!
Oh well .....
Trump can kill the whistleblower on Fifth Avenue, and get away with it. Trump could even record the deed and include it in one of his tweets.
.."Yet any Intelligence official who turned whistleblower knows that and was still alarmed enough to put themselves at tremendous risk, both careerwise and otherwise ! to follow the very specific legal mechanism to bring this to the attention of Congress. "
......".There is no way that this is "explainable" or less than ....the most highly serious issue that puts our very democracy at risk. No way..."
Your words say it all.....This is not some sort of " nothing comment"...Whoever the whistleblower is, he/she knows how important this is....
Link to tweet
Full unrolled thread: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1174515385204445184.html (it may be easier to read at that link, but here is most of it) :
2. I'll first outline the best argument for Trump. The President enjoys wide latitude in foreign affairs. When it comes to the "outside world," the President represents the sovereign:He is basically the voice of the United States and can negotiate with world leaders on its behalf
3. I wrote about this very early on in the context of Trump's possible defense to obstruction charges involving Russia, which is also relevant here
Could Trump Really Say He Fired Comey in the Service of Foreign Policy?
Trump’s motive laundering could turn out to be a brilliant legal strategy—or just brilliantly stupid.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/05/23/trump-comey-russia-obstruction-of-justice-foreign-policy-215179
4. There is a separation of powers argument here: The President should be able to have confidential and diplomatic communications with other heads of state without undue interference from Congress: World leaders should feel secure that their convos won't be made public
5. HAVING SAID THAT -- there are limitations. First, as @jedshug has written (also in context of obstruction of justice), the President has a fiduciary obligation to act in the *best interests of the United States*. In other words, he cannot abuse his powers for personal gain
mentions
6. Further, the "slice" of his "exclusive" Art. II powers is fairly narrow. Congress does have a say, for instance, whether we go to war in the absence of an emergency defensive action. It can also say that certain types of foreign policy actions are illegal
mentions
7. So, for instance, while President Reagan might have argued that his actions in Iran Contra were in the best interest of the U.S. (preventing spread of Communism), they were nevertheless in violation of the Boland Amendment and still illegal
mentions
8. In fact, much of the extensive congressional oversight over intelligence functions stems from things like Iran Contra -- you want to balance POTUS' foreign affairs/nat sec powers with transparency, individual rights (e.g., warrantless wiretapping after 9/11),and accountability
mentions
9. The ICWPA tries to balance these interests in the context of nat sec/classified information: It makes the whistleblower go to an independent entity (agency IG or ICIG) to basically "vet" the complaint and make sure it is urgent
mentions
10. The IG has to look at the complaint, determine that it is credible, and that it is urgent: That it is "[a] serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to to...an intelligence activity involving classified information"
mentions
11. I direct you to an excellent resource from @NatlSecCnslrs who wrote an excellent Q&A on the statute for @just_security here
Q&A on Whistleblower Complaint Being Withheld from Congressional Intelligence Committees
A look at the issues at play with the acting director of national intelligence refusing to turn over a whistleblower complaint to Congress.
https://www.justsecurity.org/66211/qa-on-whistleblower-complaint-being-withheld-from-congressional-intelligence-committees/
mentions
12. Note that under the definition of "urgent," the complaint cannot simply be a difference in policy opinion. And the IG is an independent entity making the determination that it is serious enough to come to the attention of Congress
mentions
13. This IG is a *Trump appointee* as @EricColumbus astutely notes
mentions
14. Sooooo...we're basically left with the fact that a Trump appointee, found this complaint to be "urgent," meaning that it is not merely a policy dispute, beyond the broad Art. II foreign affairs authority POTUS enjoys, and likely illegal -- and which Congress must look at
mentions
15. I will leave you with my evergreen piece on the two main issues the Framers were concerned about wrt to the POTUS: Self dealing and foreign influence
mentions Sorry, wrong link for my piece (but Eric's tweet is worth a second read! 😂
Trump’s Moscow Deal Is Exactly What the Framers Worried About
Self-dealing and foreign influence were their biggest fears for the presidency.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/12/03/donald-trumps-moscow-deal-framers-222752
to protect intelligence whistleblowers and thus, there is no judicial review. I have been nauseous all morning with this realization. I can scarcely even write about it. 
