Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Schiff Changes Course: ‘We Don’t Need the Whistleblower’ to Testify Before Congress

Schiff Changes Course: ‘We Don’t Need the Whistleblower’ to Testify Before Congress

He also moved the goalposts again because now they all of a sudden don’t need that “quid pro quo.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnN2TlNu3CI

Is anyone surprised House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff changed his mind about the whistleblower testifying before Congress?

I’m not and not only due to the phone call transcript between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The whistleblower’s claim is the crux of the impeachment inquiry. But since Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi launched the inquiry, the case has slowly crumbled at their feet.

Oh, and Schiff would have to answer a lot of questions as well.

Could THIS be the main reason why Schiff wants Congress to avoid contact with the whistleblower? Report: Ukraine Whistleblower Worked With Biden When He was Vice President

On Face the Nation, anchor Margaret Brennan asked Schiff why he would even bring the whistleblower before Congress. Republicans and Democrats would like to ask the person many questions, but Brennan asked him why he should risk the person’s identity.

Schiff immediately latched onto the leading question. He agreed that both whistleblowers (I still only know of one) need protection. Brennan gave Schiff the perfect excuse:

REP. SCHIFF: Well our primary interest right now is making sure that that person is protected. Indeed, now there’s more than one whistleblower, that they are protected. And given that we already have the call record, we don’t need the whistleblower who wasn’t on the call to tell us what took place during the call. We have the best evidence of that. We do want to make sure that we identify other evidence that is pertinent to the withholding of the military support, the effort to cover this up by hiding this in a classified computer system. We want to make sure that we uncover the full details about the conditionality of either the military aid or that meeting with Ukraine’s president. It may not be necessary to take steps that might reveal the whistleblower’s identity to do that. And we’re going to make sure we protect that whistleblower.

Schiff also moved the goalposts on the inquiry because now Congress does not need that “quid pro quo” to impeach Trump. Without seeing the transcript, Democrats made up their minds that Trump threatened to withhold aid from Ukraine if Zelensky did not investigate former Vice President Joe Biden.

REP. SCHIFF: First of all, there doesn’t need to be a quid pro quo, but it is clear already I think from the text messages that this meeting that the Ukraine president sought was being conditioned on their willingness to interfere in the U.S. election to help the president. That is a terrible abuse of the president’s power. Now whether that abuse goes further that is the withholding of military aid also as leverage. There’s certainly strong indications that that is true as well. And we’re going to get to the bottom of it. But here you have a president of the United States abusing his power to the detriment of our national security and doing so to get yet another foreign country to intervene in our election it’s hard to imagine more of a corruption of his office than that.

Since the transcript did not show that, the Democrats cling to the fact that Trump casually suggested Zelensky investigate Biden’s role in the firing of former prosecutor Viktor Shoklin.

I have no idea what transcript Schiff read, but Zelensky said he already found the matter important to him. Zelensky has also stated many times the Trump did not pressure or blackmail him.

New Neo blogged that the investigation into Biden may have started before the July 25 phone call.

Again, I’m not surprised Schiff wants to avoid a Congressional hearing with the whistleblower. I doubt Schiff cares about anything other than taking down Trump so he can save his supposed concern for the whistleblower.

Now I want the whistleblower to come to Congress.

[Featured image via YouTube]

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Were the “whistleblower” to testify, he would have to do one of two things: 1

1. Tell the truth consistent with the transcript thus undermining the Democrats’ very purpose for the inquiry or

2. Perjure himself countless times thus paving the way for Schiff and his traitorous cabal to also perjure themselves.

But you know the NeverTrumper swamp rats, “Having again lost sight of their objective, they will again redouble their efforts.”

    Tom Servo in reply to Pasadena Phil. | October 14, 2019 at 10:08 am

    I think it’s even worse than that – I think the WB (who almost certainly is a former NSC official named Eric Ciamarella) knows that if he were to testify, he would be publicly confessing to having committed several felonies with respect to the mishandling of highly classified material. I think his lawyers have advised him to Plead the Fifth on any question he is asked from here on out, and now Schiff is faced with running a national campaign after his Star Witness has just walked out and refused to testify about anything.

    I’m sure that the original plan was for this to be Just Like Watergate (that’s been their fantasy for ages) and to have all their info provided by some mysterious “Deep Throat” redux who would not be identified for 30 years or so. But now, only 3 weeks in, we know who he is, we know he’s a loyal Joe Biden operative, and the entire operation has collapsed.

    nevertheless, they persist.

legacyrepublican | October 14, 2019 at 9:08 am

No one knows where the schiffing wind will come from next. It schiffs to and fro.

All you know is that it will amount to nothing more than a fart in the wind that smells like Schiff.

So…this too was fake from the beginning.

    Connivin Caniff in reply to MJN1957. | October 14, 2019 at 2:02 pm

    Reminds me of National Lampoon’s Vacation,when cousin-in-law Eddie serves hamburgers made entirely of Hamburger Helper.

Dumd question….did the whistle blowers protection end when he went to Congress first vs. the IG?

If a whistleblower doesn’t have to appear, then he doesn’t have to exist. The D’rats can come up with imaginary whistleblowers ad infinitum. Before long they’ll have whistleblowers giving solid hearsay that DJT is responsible for the bombardment of Vera Cruz, the Dutch Tulip Mania, and the Crucifixion. None of which will even be claimed during the impeachment proceedings which, it seems, will never happen. But these shocking revelations can be leaked to the press to keep the news cycle overheated a week at a time.

    Tom Servo in reply to tom_swift. | October 14, 2019 at 10:11 am

    Just imagine how terrible it would be if they tried to use a campaign of innuendo and anonymous smears to try to derail a Supreme Court nomination.

      tom_swift in reply to Tom Servo. | October 14, 2019 at 10:57 pm

      Kavanaugh’s bogus accusers appeared in person and on national TV. But now the D’rats are upping their game; they want accusers who can take their potshots from cover and don’t even appear. This strategy opens the floodgates to unlimited quantities of pure fantasy and invention posing as evidence and testimony.

The House Ds do not apparently require any high crimes or misdemeanors for impeachment, nothing of the sort, so it is no stretch to understand that they do not need any actual testimony, or facts, or anything, other than hatred.

The whistle blower would have to admit under oath that he lied on the application form when he didn’t check the box admitting that he had contacted someone from Congress and that he did check the box declaring that he had only first hand knowledge. He would also have to acknowledge in person that it was all hearsay and that he cannot divulge who the unnamed administration people were. It would be the end of the whole nonsense and the Republicans would ask that he be recommended for prosecution.

“Whistleblower,” my arse.

The word should always be put in quotation marks, in this context, because this so-called “Whistkeblower” is transparently a Dhimmi-crat zealot, spy and saboteur, orchestrating a Deep State coup attempt intended to either depose Trump, outright, or, alternately, to sufficiently wound him and influence public opinion, in order to give a giant assist to the eventual Dhimmi-crat candidate for President.

This is also exactly why Pelosi changed the rules so that the Republicans can’t call witnesses. Under previous rules for impeachment he could be demanded to appear by Trump and/or the Republicans. Mueller and the Grand Juries have been able to have secret closed door sessions when it suited them. To think that they can’t protect this person’s identity is lunacy.

    Zumkopf in reply to DanJ1. | October 14, 2019 at 5:34 pm

    The “whistle blower” doesn’t DESERVE to have his identity protected. This ain’t innocent high-school gossiping. You start down a road intending to nullify a Presidential election and throw out the choice of the people, you darn well need to go public and under oath. And be man enough to risk prison for the good of your country. I seem to recall Federal employees taking an oath to that effect.

I’ve yet to see the following simple question posed to the Dhimmi-crat Inquisitors:

“Why do you believe that Joe Biden’s past corruption, that took place in the Ukraine, is an off-limits subject of conversation between the U.S. President and the leader of the zukraine, and, why is POTUS’s clearly RETROSPECTIVE inquiry into said corruption at all inappropriate?”

Answer this, you vile, conniving and corrupt Dhimmis.

What if Pelosi told that sack of Schiff that he plugged in the fan and he had better unplug it before the Schiff hits it. He may be trying to cool this scam down to pure campaign lies to be exploited where the Dems can control the narrative. Then facts are less of a problem.

As it seems with all of Trump’s enemies, they overplay their hand.

Hang on…so lemme see if I got this all right.

The thing that kicked off this impeachment frenzy, the quid pro joe claims that Trump was strong arming the Ukrainians is now SUDDENLY not important enough to use for impeachment?

So let that sink in…the thing that was so important that the Democrats started to agitate more for impeachment is now SUDDENLY not that important. In fact its now so UNIMPORTANT that Schiff for Brains isn’t even bothering to use it to impeach Trump.

I guess it really is true. They gotta get a bigger hoax!!

Occasional Thinker | October 14, 2019 at 11:44 am

Schiff hired two former NSC aides, Abigail Grace in February and Sean Misko in August, to his committee staff and then this accusation hits. I no longer believe there is or was a “whistleblower”. I think this is all Schiff theater which has gotten out of hand. Schiff is a failed screen writer, I think this “script” shows why no one would buy what he wrote.

nancy must be so mad! Imagine her gin-soaked, loose dentures tirade: G-D it ADAM! YOU SAID THIS WAS GOING TO WORK! YOU SAID ALLLL WE HADDA DO, WAS DRAG THIS THING OUT ‘TILL… ‘TILL, ‘TILL WTF WAS IT WE WE WERE GONNA DO???”

I think his lawyers have advised him to Plead the Fifth on any question he is asked from here on out, and now Schiff is faced with running a national campaign after his Star Witness has just walked out and refused to testify about anything.

Sounds like a visit by the FBI is in order

    Barry in reply to Neo. | October 14, 2019 at 12:41 pm

    Well, if they FBI was on the side of the American people, then it would be. But they are not, so they won’t.

From weak to weaker. If threatening to withhold aid were a crime, then every President since Washington (who did the same with numerous Indian tribes) is guilty. Both Biden and Obama did exactly the same to the Ukraine.

Adam Schiff needs a Boston Cream Pie to the face… and then cue up the clown music.

The Friendly Grizzly | October 14, 2019 at 12:59 pm

A disgusting little man. How big of a landslide will he be re-elected with?

I always thought that Democrats would just have perfunctory impeachment hearings designed to generate a few sound bites before moving to a vote by the full House. The Republican minority would be severely curtailed or even blocked from asking questions or calling their own witnesses.

Now I think there is a chance Democrats won’t have any hearings on articles of impeachment AT ALL, and instead proceed directly to the impeachment vote by the full House.

BTW: some folks here think Pelosi made the mistake of her life by agreeing to start the impeachment inquiry. I beg to differ: I find a lot of what she does evil and detestable, but she is not stupid. There is no way she would have agreed to the impeachment inquiry (which in the eyes of the Democrats’ genocidal bade commits them to impeaching Trump) unless she had enough of her caucus to guarantee a successful vote on at least one article. You can also bet she has at least one House GOP member (maybe more) willing to vote to impeach to give the whole sleazy enterprise a “bipartisan” air.

    adam sold nancy this impeachment tactic from the old, obsolete playbook. PDJT snatched that playbook out of their hands and smacked schiff/pelosi upside his head with it. They never thought Trump would release the transcript so soon. It is looking more and more as if there is no actual “whistleblower,” just an amalgam of nsc/cia/former Ukraine ambassador and other assorted TDS inflicted operatives. When schiff is forced to produce one, they will have to grab some poor lackey to play the role. This is all blowing up on them BIGLY.

What if they’re looking beyond 2020?

The House impeaches Trump and it goes to the Senate for trial, where Mitch quickly disposes of the matter according to the law – the vote acquit Trump falls along party lines. It then becomes an election issue for the Dems – corrupt Trump saved by the Republican mafia. It becomes a “vote the bastards out” issue for the Dems. Even if Trump wins reelection, they Dems could be in a better position in the House and Senate for even more resistance until 2024 or a 2nd shot at impeachment in 2021.

    mailman in reply to MrE. | October 14, 2019 at 4:39 pm

    Democrats are gonna need a bigger hoax first.

      So far, the only thing they have is (falsely) imputing motive to Trump’s otherwise benign phone call. Their impeachment action now suggests they’ve already given up hope on the 2020 presidential election. Their candidates are all loons and they’re polling on the wrong side of issues of importance to independents – hell anyone who loves America. Any hope of removing Trump after 2020 requires they put the wheels in motion now – surely they know with the current Senate and Mitch in charge they’re firing blanks.

      One thing is for sure, this all sickens me – and I want to see the seditious bastards behind bars.

Republicans should say, “No, I insist. You asked for him to testify, and by God, we’ll make that happen. Thanks for the great idea.”

2smartforlibs | October 14, 2019 at 4:55 pm

That BAWOOSH your hearing is the impeachment narrative heading down the drain.

And not a single journo will challenge the big-eyed cretin.

Of COURSE they don’t need the whistleblower to testify. Even in secret, Adumb Schitt would feel foolish questioning himself.

Fox Business anchor Maria Bartiromo walked back her announcement that the Justice Department inspector general’s report on Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuses would be released on Friday.

“UPDATE: -IG report NOT out this Friday 10/18. Classifications being made. Likely end of month,” she tweeted on Monday.

UPDATE: -IG report NOT out this Friday 10/18. Classifications being made. Likely end of month. @MorningsMaria @FoxBusiness @SundayFutures @FoxNews @MariaWallStreet #FisaAbuse
— Maria Bartiromo (@MariaBartiromo) October 14, 2019

Over the past few days, Bartiromo reported her sources were saying Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report would be released by the end of the week.

“I’m hearing the IG report will be out this upcoming Friday, Oct. 18, and my sources say it’s as thick as a telephone book,” Bartiromo said on her Fox News show, Sunday Morning Futures. She added that the report, which focuses on actions by DOJ and FBI officials, covers “more than just FISA abuse.”

    tom_swift in reply to 4fun. | October 14, 2019 at 11:02 pm

    I expect it will thoroughly cover all sides of Lucy jerking the football out from in front of Charlie Brown. I doubt there will be much else.

    Relying on the Deep State to dismantle the Deep State is an act of unwarranted optimism.

      mailman in reply to tom_swift. | October 15, 2019 at 4:18 am

      And I suspect Horowitz will do what he has already done previously…he will outline all the crimes that have been carried out…all the laws that have been broken…and then absolve the FBI, CIA, NSA and who ever else has a small d after their name because it wasn’t their intention to break the law.

I do not know what is more absurd.
>
On one hand you have the impeachment case as presented by Schiff collapsing faster than a popped balloon while the Democrats, under Schiff’s direction, are abusing all the rules and precedents in an effort to make this Soviet gulag style political persecution obtain the results they demand. History will not be kind to Schiff and the Democrats over this abuse and the public should be outraged over this, but many simply are not.
>
On the other hand there are the major networks such as ABC, NBC, etc., who are treating this story with a breathless air of urgency reserved for some major crisis. They are acting as though all of Schiff’s decisions are reasoned and just while complaints by Republicans and others are just sour grapes. No where is the simple realization that impeachment is one of the most significant acts Congress can contemplate which means every effort involved in an impeachment effort should be well thought out. Instead, these networks want to paint this as just another everyday emergency with the Democrats as the just warriors pursuing justice.
>
On yet another hand is the clear demonstration of how powerful the media is. With their nonstop propaganda trying to make the story and Democrat’s actions appear legitimate, the public is being swayed quite noticeable in the direction of favoring impeachment despite the absence of any real crime. The Democrats and the MSM have successfully convinced much of the public that Trump must be impeached for conducting lawful acts and this is an incredible, yet absurd, accomplishment.

    Barry in reply to Cleetus. | October 15, 2019 at 11:42 am

    “… the public is being swayed quite noticeable in the direction of favoring impeachment …”

    “The Democrats and the MSM have successfully convinced much of the public that Trump must be impeached…”

    Why do you think this, Cleetus?

    The polls that show these things are demonstrably rigged. I don’t think the commies have moved anything their way, possibly just the opposite.

    Perhaps you have seen something I’m missing?

      DeplorableLanie in reply to Barry. | October 15, 2019 at 12:12 pm

      I think that you are absolutely right! The public is not on board with this sham impeachment! And apparently neither is the person who was so supposedly horrified by the call that they broke their oath of confidentiality to tell someone else about the call. That person is NOT the individual who made the complaint. And NOW the person who made the complaint is not neccessary to the process?!? Adam Schiff is running the most f’ed up investigation of all time and the public knows it. In my mind their is NO “complainant” (I refuse to call him a whistleblower, because he is not). There is NO person who heard the call and was “horrified”. There is Adam Schiff’s team that made the complaint. Somehow they found out about the date of the call and they used it, not thinking in a million years that President Trump would release the transcript. Now they are stuck, and are trying to bail out the boat with a thimble. It is a sh!t show and everyone knows it. So I don’t think you have missed a thing!

The entire impeachment thing is a Scam and Rep.Sack of Schiff should end up the one charged in this Scam

DeplorableLanie | October 15, 2019 at 9:09 am

I don’t know what is more dangerous; on one hand you have Adam Schiff sitting spilling lie after lie about the actual phone call, about what was actually said, about the Ukraine President and his testimony about the call and the investigation of the Bidens (which started in February a full 6 months prior to the call). About the Ukraine President not even being aware that President Trump was even thinking about withholding military aid until a full month AFTER the call. And on the other hand you have the press. Not acting like real journalists and asking hard hitting questions. But acting more like the Democrats press relations person. Asking leading questions that set up the exact narrative that Adam Schiff is trying to peddle! It is both the most frightening and the most bizarre thing that I have ever seen.

There were earlier reports that the Ukrainians were unhappy with the investigations of the prosecutor, and were already looking into his office for corruption. Of course Biden’s name would surface there: his presence on the board was as big a red flag for corruption as were Comey’s remarks about Hillary’s emails.

BobInBridgeport | October 15, 2019 at 12:07 pm

OH I SEE ! SO WE CAN IMPEACH A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES BASED ON “HEARSAY”, without ever knowing who the “whistel-blowers” are of if they even exist ? And a US CITIZEN, can be convicted of a crime without any witnesses even testifying against him ???

If this can be done to a US President, then what hope of justice is there for any of the rest of us ????

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend