This past Sunday on Meet the Press, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) admitted that the alleged “whistleblower” who instigated the current impeachment- but let’s- not-call-it-that inquiry may not testify before Congress. This was followed up by a report in the Wall Street Journal that lawyers for the “whistleblower” have asked Congress whether questions could be submitted in writing, then answered. In other words, said “whistleblower” does not physically appear before Congress. If so, the Intelligence Committee has not responded to the request.
To this writer, Schiff’s statement that the “whistleblower” may not testify at all spells dangerous writing on the wall for Schiff himself. If some intelligence blowhard got his knickers in such a twist that it would trigger an “impeachment” inquiry, then said blowhard should be willing to testify. Now his lawyers are suggesting that if there is any testimony, his voice must be disguised and the “interview” occurs anywhere BUT Capitol Hill. This suggests that the “whistleblower” likely wishes to hide more than just their identity.
It is assumed this “whistleblower” is some intelligence community operative, possibly working in the CIA. They are likely a registered Democrat and likely were in the Obama/Biden administration. In other words, they epitomize the so-called Deep State. If all of that is true, it is likely this person has some knowledge of Biden’s dealings in Ukraine along with those of Biden’s son, Hunter.
There is a reason why Pelosi is reluctant to hold a House vote. Allowing such would allow Republicans to cross-examine the “whistleblower.” This would, in effect, open up a counter investigation and they would be on a firm legal footing to do so. This would open up questions about any contacts this person had with members of Congress before they officially made their complaint. Further, it would open up that person to question why they failed to check the “Under penalty of perjury” box on the complaint.
Under the Whistleblower Act, individuals are granted a blanket of immunity. It protects people from retaliation by anyone. The only exception is if the person uses the Act for nefarious purposes. Under the Act, this person who has apparently triggered some kind of impeachment inquiry is clearly protected. So it begs the question of why this person would fear retaliation? Why is their lawyer suggesting disguised voices, interviews beyond Capitol Hill, and written questions-and-answers in lieu of in-person questioning? In other words, what does this person really fear?
Schiff seems to lay the groundwork. Opening up a counter investigation would and should naturally lead to questions of motivation. More importantly, they would open the person to questions of contact and cooperation with Schiff himself. Already there are reports that the Trump intelligence community may cease providing information to Schiff because he leaks information readily for the cameras.
Adam Schiff sits a position of particular importance as Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. These people are charged with sometimes life-and-death situations and oversight. Intelligence is nothing to be played with for partisan purposes and Adam Schiff is about as partisan as they come. As Trey Gowdy commented in response to nine GOP members of the Committee demanding that he step down as Chairman, “…He did everything he could to make sure Hillary Clinton became president. And he’s done everything he could to keep a cloud over the Trump Presidency.”
This is Schiff’s motivation for clinging to power. Perhaps worse than false accusations born of partisan hatred by some intelligence community person is a sitting Congressman with equally partisan designs and using the intelligence apparatus- perhaps one single person- to bring down a duly elected president. While falsely pointing an accusing finger at President Trump, Schiff is guilty of a bigger wrong. The man is just either too stupid or too filled and blinded with partisan hatred that he fails to realize he is inflicting on the country with this charade.
My guess is that people are really growing tired of these partisan witch hunts despite the best efforts of the media to create a maelstrom of “bad” press for Trump. NBC seems particularly invested these days given its news feed. Regardless, this writer fails to see the harm in any President whether they be Trump, Obama or whoever asking another foreign leader to look into alleged corruption no matter who is the target of that inquiry. If Joe and Hunter Biden are innocent, let the investigation exonerate them. If not, let the legal system take its course.
An innocent man has nothing to fear. A guilty man will obfuscate, deflect and obstruct. Granted, it is all part and parcel of what we call “due process.” In this case and despite the protections afforded under the Whistleblower Act (and a blanket of immunity is about as good as it gets when we talk of “protections”), the question then arises: What does Schiff and the Democrats have to fear? They may not like the answer which roughly translates into yet another “I told you so” scenario by President Trump.
Adam Schiff is not only a petty, bug-eyed partisan hack, but he is also a dangerous man. Why anyone would give this person any position of power shows that Nancy Pelosi has lost control of her caucus. The best solution is rendering the Democrats to minority status come January 2021 and hopefully allowing this President to get on with making America yet again great.