(09-27-2019, 10:55 AM)B2hibry Wrote:

(09-27-2019, 10:09 AM)mikesez Wrote: You're not contradicting anything in the redacted whistleblower report.
The author says he understands how the system usually works, and that multiple people protested that this was being handled in an unusual way.  He says that people who knew more about the call than he did argued with each other, some saying that nothing in the call had a national security sensitivity, but they lost the argument for the moment and it was being treated as if it did have national security sensitivity.  We know now that it did not.  Looks like an attempted cover-up to me.

What? What is your point? I'm not sure what part of this individuals third party account you are grasping out. My point absolutely speaks to how this is not and cannot be a cover-up. The President is a classification authority (OCA). This call and other foreign official call classification most times has nothing to do with "national security sensitivity." If a foreign government or the POTUS deems any part of the conversation walks the line, it can be wrapped up and subjected to SAP. This is not the grandiose scheme you believe it to be.