Image 01 Image 03

Democrats Constructing Impeachment Star Chamber of Whistleblowers and Leakers

Democrats Constructing Impeachment Star Chamber of Whistleblowers and Leakers

Weaponization of whistleblower laws is yet another breach of norms in an effort to unwind the 2016 election and manipulate the 2020 election.

Circulating claims of Trump-Russian collusion prior to the 2016 election didn’t work.

Using foreign-supplied fake intelligence, from a British spy who utilized Russian sources, to obtain surveillance of the Trump campaign and transition team didn’t work.

Intimidating Electoral College Electors to change their votes after the election didn’t work.

Having the Director of the FBI lie to, set up and try to entrap the president didn’t work.

Having that same FBI Director leak memos to the media to manufacture grounds for a Special Counsel didn’t work.

Trying to invoke the 25th Amendment to declare the president unable to perform the job didn’t work.

Two years of the Mueller Investigation didn’t work.

Three years of a permanent crisis news cycle meant to paralyze the administration didn’t work.

After all these failures to unwind the 2016 election, Democrats and the mainstream media are trying a new tactic: Create a Star Chamber “impeachment” process fueled by anonymous whistleblowers and selective leaks that is not so much designed to remove the president, though they would if they could, but to manipulate the 2020 election.

The first intelligence community whistleblower is not so much a whistleblower as a politically biased operative (according to the Inspector General) who gathered information from various sources, went to Adam Schiff’s office for guidance, then filed a so-called Whistleblower Complaint that almost certainly was drafted by a team of lawyers. WhistleBlower No. 1, because he or she filed the claim as a whistleblower, is entitled to anonymity, there will not be the type of cross-examination and investigation of the whistleblower’s background and information that was so critical when Democrats rolled out a series of accusers against Brett Kavanaugh.

With Whistleblower No. 1 failing to fulfill the mission, there was a leak to the NY Times of a potential Whistleblower No. 2. That’s how this is going to work, there will be leaks to the media to frame the public narrative just like regarding supposed Russian-collusion.

That potential Whistleblower No. 2 is not actually a whistleblower, he or she is reportedly a witness already interviewed as part of the first Whistleblower Complaint. Whistleblower No. 2 is not blowing the whistle on anything.

But that witness now has invoked whistleblower anonymity and protection via the same lawyer representing Whistleblower No. 1. ABC News reports:

Mark Zaid, the attorney representing the whistleblower who sounded the alarm on President Donald Trump’s dealings with Ukraine and triggered an impeachment inquiry, tells ABC News that he is now representing a second whistleblower who has spoken with the inspector general.

Zaid tells ABC News’ Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos that the second person — also described as an intelligence official — has first-hand knowledge of some of the allegations outlined in the original complaint and has been interviewed by the head of the intelligence community’s internal watchdog office, Michael Atkinson….

Zaid says both officials have full protection of the law intended to protect whistleblowers from being fired in retaliation. While this second official has spoken with the IG — the internal watchdog office created to handle complaints — this person has not communicated yet with the congressional committees conducting the investigation.

Zaid tweeted:

NEWS UPDATE: I can confirm this report of a second #whistleblower being represented by our legal team. They also made a protected disclosure under the law and cannot be retaliated against. This WBer has first hand knowledge.

By cloaking witnesses with the protection of whistleblowers, the whistleblower protections are being abused. In response to the announcement of Whistleblower No. 2, we remarked:

Abuse of whistleblower protections. This person is simply a witness to someone else’s complaint who already has been interviewed. Weaponization of whistleblower laws is yet another breach of norms in effort to unwind 2016 election.

At the same time that evidence is being funneled through whistleblower secrecy, Democrats are intent on shutting Republican’s out of the investigative process by conducting a non-impeachment impeachment investigation. There has been no formal vote authorizing an impeachment investigation, so Republicans are without procedural mechanisms to fully participate in the process and to use congressional powers to conduct their own investigation.

Expect Schiff and team to leak like sieves, but only the information they gather in secret that they think helps them.

This has all the makings of a congressional Star Chamber of secret “whistleblowers” and Democrat leaks meant to manipulate both the public perception of the need for impeachment and the 2020 election.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Is there a whistleblowers version of “piercing the corporate veil”?

“One chamber to rule them all, One chamber to find them,
One chamber to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them;
In the Land of Deep state, where the Shadow government lies.”

We the people will stay with a legal insurrection until the next election hopefully stomps these cockroaches, but our patience has its limits…

Conservative Beaner | October 6, 2019 at 8:43 pm

Reminds me of Governor Palin. An anonymous person files a complaint which has no penalty or recourse of a false report. The charges are cleared and soon after another complaint is filed. Palin resigns to stop the harassment after she is chosen as McCain’s VP pick.

    legacyrepublican in reply to Conservative Beaner. | October 6, 2019 at 9:05 pm

    Interesting that you mention that. I have long since felt that they were inspired by the impeachment of Gov. Evan Mecham in their tactics.

    But, if you look at the treatment of both governors, you really do see some parallels here.

      Did you notice the story out recently about the #1 donor to and organizer of the campaign to impeach Ev Mecham? That was all done by Ed Buck, the big time democrat donor who was just indicted for murdering 2 or 3 gay men who he’d invited to his house in LA to have sex and do drugs with him. That’s who did the Ev Mecham hit, that was how he got big in dem party circles.

      But what really killed Mecham and Palin both was that big parts of their own party, the Republicans, conspired with the dems to destroy them. Because a big part has always hated actual conservatives.

    . Palin resigns to stop the harassment after she is chosen as McCain’s VP pick.

    No, she resigned most of a year after the election.

    IIRC Palin resigned in part due to the financial burdens of the piling on legal battles as well as being stymied from governing.

    The left really doesn’t change their play book much. They did the same to Moore, it is the death by a thousand cuts type action, and these people don’t care if they aren’t believed anymore. I almost wonder if that is part of the point of these, keep it coming, absurd or not, and cause the target of their hatred to quit under the sheer weight of having to face the thousand midgets who keep climbing on.

    Trump has flummoxed them so far, I doubt any other Republican would have stood up to this onslaught of lies without stepping down. I just pray Trump has the fortitude to keep going while working efforts to bring these thugs to justice.

    If he doesn’t, we have lost the Republic. It will mean that the left is the only power in this country, regardless of who is named holding the power. Truly frightening that they, thanks in large part to their propaganda wing, are having some success.

    The left calls every person on the right Nazis, yet they use almost all the tactics the Nazis used to gain power and take over Germany. The names of the thugs are different, but the tactics are there.

“Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not.”
— Donald Rumsfeld

Words to live by, Mr. President, if you can.

I agree with everything you said, but just want to pop in long enough to mention the fact that ‘breach of norms’ accurately describes every facet of the Trump presidency, all the way baxk to the 2016 campaign.

    Barry in reply to coolway. | October 7, 2019 at 12:23 am

    Look, LI’s own prog is back to tell us Trump is a bad orange man that breaks all the “norms”.

    Poor proggy, hasn’t figured out yet –

    That’s why we elected him and why we are going to re-elect him.

      coolway in reply to Barry. | October 7, 2019 at 3:09 pm

      Breaking norms by dems: Baaad.
      Breaking norms by trump: Gooood.

      Double standards much? (By the way, some folks would call that hypocrisy. Hypocrite.)

        Barry in reply to coolway. | October 8, 2019 at 9:30 am

        Ignorant or stupid?

        Find where I said breaking norms is bad for anyone.

        The true answer is you just pull it out of your behind, like all commie progs.

I predict Trump’s rally on Thursday in Minneapolis is going to be epic!!!

mr president–make pelosi call for a vote and follow the rules–otherwise, tell them to kiss your ass

    oldgoat36 in reply to texansamurai. | October 7, 2019 at 6:51 am

    I said this from the very beginning. If they are going to do this, the President should refuse to cooperate without there being a formal vote. Without the formal vote it is just a fishing expedition to see if they can piece things together to make it sound like a crime.

It’s patently obvious our country’s government is completely corrupt. Anyone who doesn’t see that at this point is either in denial, ignorant or part of the plot.

democrats: joe biden threatening Ukrainian President with cancellation of loan guarantees unless allegedly corrupt prosecutor is fired? “This is fine.”

Also democrats: PDJT asked Ukrainian President to look into corruption? “O-MF -G IMPEACH HIM!!!”

This really pisses me off. This is injustice.

FMC’s Steve Hilton had an excellent show Sunday night. The man’s reporting is excellent. I recommend you visit him @NextRevFNC and watch all the video replays from his show, especially this one:

    Eskyman in reply to Ghostrider. | October 7, 2019 at 7:00 pm

    Woah, that was an incredible video! Thanks for sharing the link, Ghostrider.

    I’m amazed that even Fox News would have that on, since it clearly laid out the corruption of one VP, one SoS and two Senators! All Dems, of course, as expected!

Emil de Blatz | October 7, 2019 at 1:55 am

One thought is that Trump as President, has the unilateral power to declassify information, and he may make use of this as the investigation by the hour bombards him with information requests. Let’s say House Democrats subpoena a 100 page memorandum. Declassify information about Sen. Kennedy’s entre to Soviet leaders in an effort to hamstring Reagan, and interleave them in the 100 page memo. Send to House. Do this with every thing that they request – litter formerly secret documents that will burn the Democrat’s into the material sent as a response. Then, Republicans on the committees can talk openly about them (they’re declassified, after all) and even leak them to the press. Make a real s***-storm out of this.

I read somewhere that the subpoenas coming out of the Dems aren’t really subpoenas but letters. That shocked me in that I’ve always thought a subpoena followed the filing of a formal case with the court – so to learn it’s in fact just a bunch of letters I don’t understand why Trump and Co. wouldn’t make more noise about that. At least be frank with the base what the Dems are doing while telling the Dems to pound sand. As in “file charges formally” or STFU.

It also seems to me like every constituent of a Democrat congressman would have a grievance with them in as much as they’re not legislating as is their purpose, but have been conscripted into full-time campaign work for whomever the Dem nominee will be. It’s been suggested that any elected official running for another office ought be required to resign their position in as much as it leaves their constituents without representation and footing the bill. How is that any different than the entire Dem caucus campaigning for the nominee and against Trump, for the next 13 months? There ought be remedy for their inattention to their basic responsibilities to their district / constituency.

    Milhouse in reply to MrE. | October 7, 2019 at 2:26 am

    Your comment makes no sense. What court? What has any court got to do with this, and why would you think one would be involved?

      The Dems have not begun a new inquiry to look into grounds for impeachment. Not wanting to go on record by voting, they have merely created a new facade for Dem committee chairmen like Nadler to continue their campaigns to harass Trump and breathe new life into their tired and phony narrative. Since they didn’t have a floor vote to launch a formal inquiry, they don’t have the authority to issue subpoenas. So it’s your comment that makes no sense.

    stevewhitemd in reply to MrE. | October 7, 2019 at 7:31 am

    Mr. Trump has already indicated that the White House will not release information in response to the letters, but will require a proper subpoena.

Christopher B | October 7, 2019 at 8:40 am


Andrew McCarthy at National Review discussed that in a couple recent articles. Proceeding without a vote definitely reduces the power of the House and various Committees to compel testimony but the Dems know they don’t dare go on record due to the unpopularity of impeached.

JackinSilverSpring | October 7, 2019 at 9:13 am

Here is what I think is the DemoncRats’ game plan: Run the impeachment hearing out of Schiff’s committee, and thereby neuter the Republicans’ abilities to be on a level playing field as the DemoncRats. Then have the whole House vote out articles of impeachment against President Trump, and then present them to the Senate. The question then is, whether the Senate will view thise articles as being Constitutional?

    “The question then is, whether the Senate will view thise articles as being Constitutional?”

    Sure, they can then hold an immediate trial and end it. The constitution is very thin on the act of impeachment.

Trump will survive this smear. The problem is that this is becoming the new normal:

1- Kavanaugh
2- Any Supreme Court nominee honestly at this point
3- any federal appointee: look at Bloomberg’s attempt on a minor appointee in Lief Olson

Not everyone will survive who should. The training starts earlier too:

1- Smearing campus speakers (including WAJ)
2- College Kangaroo courts
3- Campus hate hoaxes

Democratic activists graduate from that to bigger attacks that are largely fabricated.

What happens when they get good?
When they apply deep fake technology to their game?

This war is just beginning.

Now we have reports of a second “whistleblower,” all set to corroborate the reporting of the first. Considering that the reporting of the first snitch was based on second- or third-hand hearsay information, how much “corroboration” can there be? This sounds like copy-and-paste more than anything else. Can’t be, you say? Remember, these are the same people who construct a narrative, leak the narrative to tame reporters in the media, then use the reporting based on the leaks to validate the narrative. 

Haven’t we seen this movie before with the Kavanaugh hearings? If the first one doesn’t get the result you wanted, trot out another and another until you either get the result you wanted or you run out of saps willing to lie for you.

With Kavanaugh, it was Avenatti trotting out trollips claiming fictitious mopery with intent to creep or whatever, one after another to “corroborate” Blasey-Ford. This time, it’s a firm of anti-Trump, “we’ll pay whistleblowers to dish on Trump” lawyers (including one who donated to the Biden campaign) representing the snitches.

Copy Pasta.

Step aside Russia, Russia, Russia.

The Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine narative is here

Ukraine admitting they helped clinton in the 2016 election:

Juries like to see the witnesses. The voters are the jury. At some point they will expect to see the accuser(s). No witness, no case.

“Weaponization of whistleblower laws is yet another breach of norms in effort to unwind 2016 election.”

If the commies can’t control the country, they’ll burn it down instead. The only thing they fear is that the system stays intact and then holds them accountable for their crimes.