Meadows, Zeldin and Jordan: “‘whistleblower’ has right to protection, no right to anonymity”…

HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff has changed the proceedings from “interviews” to “depositions” in an effort to block republicans from discussing witness testimony.  While the minority is blocked from discussing the democrats are leaking to the New York Times and DC media. This is part of the political strategy to frame the impeachment narrative.

During an interview on Capitol Hill today Representatives Mark Meadows, Lee Zeldin and Jim Jordan outline how the Democrats now want to drop any discussion or use of the whistleblower.  Jordan righteously outlines to an antagonistic media how the ‘whistleblower’ has a right to protection, but no right to anonymity.

.

Meanwhile today Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent is participating in a closed-door deposition with House Intel, Foreign Affairs, and Oversight & Reform Committees.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Impeachment, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

155 Responses to Meadows, Zeldin and Jordan: “‘whistleblower’ has right to protection, no right to anonymity”…

  1. fanbeav says:

    I thought after President Trump’s attorney sent the 8 page letter, that no one would be cooperating with these sham hearings? What are they talking about for 8 plus hours?

    Liked by 12 people

    • Pedro Morales says:

      Schiff and Pelosi are in a bind. There is no way they can do articles of impeachment. If they have public hearings all of the uniparty dirty laundry gets exposed by Trump in House hearings. If they do not have hearings and have a sham impeachment vote that succeeds- then the uniparty can not allow Senate hearings where even more dirty deals gets exposed. Schiff can run a House kangaroo court, but there is NO WAY that mitch, chuck, warner, burr, mittens can ever allow a public trial with Seculow going medieval on everyone’s a$$! No freakin way. The uniparty will not allow a Senate trial. The Senate also can NEVER find 20 Reps to participate in a removal scheme. Nope. Nancy and Schiff have only one option. No hearings, an impeachment vote, AND THE IMPEACHMENT VOTE FAILS! The uniparty is going to force them to sandbag the vote. They will swing those swing district Dems to vote no. Nancy is already running candidates against AOC + 3. She will take out the wing nutz in 2020. She may lose the House in the short run. But there is no way a public hearing can happen in the House or Senate. Bank on it folks!

      Liked by 14 people

      • I really like your comment Pedro but I believe Pelosi and Schiff are so deranged they will go for broke and the impeachment – counting on the Deep State to deep six the President.

        Liked by 6 people

        • Pedro Morales says:

          The uniparty is more powerful than Nancy and Schiff. The uniparty is not Dems or Reps. The Uniparty has no interest in all of the dirty deals coming public. That can NEVER happen. They will have to tolerate Trump for 5 more years.

          Liked by 5 people

            • B Ropous says:

              Talk about liberal ‘splodey heads across the country the day after election night 2020! This time there might be suicides, too.

              Like

          • Nancy & Schiff are so blind with rage and TDS they may fall victim to the Uniparty. I hope they are purged BY SOMEONE (!) before they do more damage to PDJT in the court of public opinion.

            Liked by 1 person

          • TPW says:

            Pedro I understand your understanding of the Uniparty……but don’t you think this level and extent of criminality has to be forced out in the open …..I hope to goodness PT knows this because all he will be doing for those 8 precious years of what remains of his life… will be for 0………and our country its history and way of life is gone. The people of this country need to wake up to the severity of the problems we will face. When the Baby Boomers are gone…..it will be an easy win for them to complete. Our Generation are all that is left that actually lived through the US as it was meant to be. …A main street …..Family/ Faith first country…….we are so close to the edge …..it won’t take much to make us fall. So yes the Uniparty will fight the reveal that is why it will have to be Patriots that insist on sunlight.

            Liked by 2 people

            • drdeb says:

              Your thoughts become your reality! I have high hopes for a Spiritual Revival in our Nation. I am blessed to live in the South where we believe in the Word of God in the Bible and in Jesus Christ. Thus, we are NOT fearful. The younger generation are conservative. They are against abortion. There is HOPE for the Future VS Doom and Gloom. The Globalists want us to be afraid. I stand tall and strong through my faith. Thus, I have no fear. That is my prayer for you!

              Liked by 2 people

        • FrankieZee says:

          The CHICOMS are forcing PIGLOSI’s hand. They control her and they want their money back.

          Liked by 1 person

        • loteal2014 says:

          Changed it from interviews to depositions, and they want Pence also. Sounds like a plan to put Pelosi in charge, she would become president if they take out both.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Juvenal says:

          They have nothing to lose, they may as well shove all the chips onto the table and call Trump’s hand. I only hope that he has a royal flush.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Susan Bolle says:

          Schiff is a tool for his lawfare lawyers. He does their bidding.

          Liked by 1 person

      • Mike Robinson says:

        Their strategy is this … and it definitely can(!) work in both chambers.

        “We’re all guilty as hell, and for the first time in history we have a President who is not a co-conspirator. So, to save “The Family,” we work together to throw him out. We fire Barr, Durham, and all the rest, then we give Ukraine six hours to get rid of their President. The MSM closes ranks, we prostrate ourselves before Chairman Xi to beg his forgiveness, and maybe by the end of the year things will be back to normal.”

        “And we make damned sure that the pesky American People never get a chance to make this mistake again! We are the Deep State! We run this country!! Hundreds of millions of people can just go to hell!”

        Liked by 4 people

        • chiefworm says:

          Mike, it’ll be hard for them to prostrate to Xi or anyone else when they are hanging by the neck from a lamppost. I truly believe that the number of Patriots that will rise up will far exceed that percentage of those that did so during the Revolutionary War. “The Tree of Liberty” has been in drought conditions for far too many years and needs to be watered soon lest we lose it forever.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Kent Neal says:

            I was going to post a link here to a fictional essay about the hanging of deep state traitors, but was unable to find it. Perhaps someone who has it will post it. It would be timely to revisit the idea.

            Like

        • elsuperbus says:

          I agree except for the part about them recognizing their own guilt. The true mark of sociopaths and tyrants is lacking that capability. If they get cornered they typically off themselves.

          Liked by 3 people

          • None of us really knew just how bad it had become. And, I remain confident that these people’s evil plans will fail. But, in the process of failing, they are going to fully expose themselves.

            I see a new awakening of public awareness happening in other countries, too. Yukraine being an obvious and extremely relevant example. Ordinary citizens are becoming aware – and confronted – with the degree to which their governments had become International Organized Crime rings that were laughing in their faces and cracking jokes. And they are doing something about it.

            “Be not deceived: God is not mocked.

            Liked by 5 people

      • Rob says:

        There is a third option, that the House continues with the fake impeachment process while NEVER holding a vote.

        Liked by 7 people

        • Pedro Morales says:

          Possible but unlikely. It takes all the oxygen from the 2020 races. The swing state voters want a resolution. If it gets dragged out, swing state Dems will be punished at the polls for being a do nothing congress obsessed with impeachment. That wont fly. Nancy knows it. She has a very tough problem. She has a difficult if not impossible task to hold the House. Impeachment hands it to the Reps. No impeachment will piss off the left, but she already has the left. No impeachment helps the swing state Dems. She has to finesse this to not piss off the MSM. I believe she calls a vote and comes up a few short on pupose. “Hey I tried but the country is not there yet.” Her best bet to stay in power is for impeachment to fail and then she primaries all of the wing nut socialists. They are her version of the tea party.

          Liked by 5 people

          • Padric says:

            Pedro, this has been my analysis all along. Nancy set up the rules early in congress to do impeachment if the Mueller Report got them the info and backing they needed. It didn’t, so now she has to back off because she knows that doing impeachment now will have massive negative consequences at the ballot box for the Dems.

            But she has her far left base to appease too. She’s been whipping them into a frenzy over impeachment for the last 3 years but she can’t pull the trigger on it. She’s literally caught between a rock and a hard place.

            I do think that she might ultimately hold the vote knowing she’s short on the yea’s and do the ole “Well, we tried” routine only to turn around and primary out he more left leaning members. Truth be told, I think this is the second most likely scenario.

            What I think is the most likely scenario is that they continue pressing for the Grand Jury info in the court. It ultimately gets kicked up to SCOTUS where they reject their request yet again because no House Wide vote has been held. Nancy then comes out expressing outrage and voila…the election now becomes about SCOTUS, the need to impeach Kavanaugh (something else they’ve promised all along) so that they can ultimately impeach the president should he win re-election. The Dems are safe because they can blame the court on not providing them the info they need to continue impeachment and we’re off to the races for 2020.

            I am, however, going to float an idea that occurred to me as well. It’s the least likely scenario, but it would be a bold move on her part, would rattle DC to its core and would be a huge power move. Maybe, just maybe, she’s waiting just like we all are for the results of the IG/Durham investigations. If they turn out as damaging as we think they should be, she instantly pivots, impeachment gets swept under the rug under the guise of the Intelligence Community has been lying to everyone including Congress and then….she goes full bore into putting new restrictions on the Intel Community, I mean really turning the screws on them and bringing the hammer down, all while knowing she’d have the full support of Republicans. She’d have to have their support. After all, with the kind of allegations that are out there, with all that they’ve said, why would the Republicans oppose it?

            It’s the classic Clinton play: Steal your opponents ideas and present them loud and strong enough so everyone thinks they were yours. She plays the Dems as the magnanimous heroes who saved America from a shadow government and further increases the power of Congress and hers right along with it. Sounds crazy, I know, but if I were in her shoes this would be the exact play I’d go for. They’d be so under fire the IC wouldn’t dare do anything but wait until it was over to exact revenge and by then it’d be too late.

            Sorry, I do tend to be long winded. It’s the Irish in me. 😉

            Like

            • Pedro Morales says:

              What people dont get is that nobody truly KNOWS what Nancy is thinking. She is playing everyone- The Dems, the left, the swing states, lawfare, the media, even her house leaders. She has to tell everyone what they want to hear. That is how she stays in power. Retain support by throwing crumbs to everyone. The easiest to figure these things out is to see what is in her best interest. The options are right in front of us. And never forget nancy has her own financial scandals that she wants to keep hidden (paul pelosi jr).
              1- A real house hearing and a vote to impeach- with Trumps lawyers going all out- Ouch! This is way too dangerous. The uniparty will never let this happen even if nancy did. With a vigorous defense, the polls will change to trump and the swing state Dems would vote no with no real evidence.
              2- No house hearing and a vote to impeach- The swing state Dems would never support this kangaroo court. The due process chants will be deafening. If the Dems get voted out, nancy loses the speakership. Not an option.
              3- I think it morphs into something you theorize. IG/Durham/Horowitz/Senate hearings occupy the space for the next 2 months. Schiff does his interviews in private and she hopes spygate takes attention off Ukraine and Schiff. In November she announces something about the caucus, not ready, election coming up, the race, candidates, election season. Blah Blah Blah. “We will look it again after the election if he wins. No point in impeaching if we are 11 months out from the election. The whole process, house, senate, trials, motions, court challenges, stone walling will put us in election season. The house will not meddle in the election.” Something like that

              Like

        • repsort says:

          I think this is very likely.
          It’s a great way to sling as much mud at PDJT as possible in between now and the election.

          Liked by 3 people

      • dd_sc says:

        But McConnell gets to set rules for any trial in the Senate.

        Trent Lott did not want the House to impeach Clinton for perjury about an affair (wanted Clinton censured instead, I think). Lott worked a lot with Senator Daschle and came up with some restrictive rules.

        McConnell working with Schumer to set the Senate rules may not end well.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Rhoda R says:

          OTOH, Mitch IS up for re-election, Kentucky loves Trump and the media isn’t the gatekeeper that it used to be.

          Liked by 5 people

        • GB Bari says:

          Mitch is not required to work with Schumer. Apparently the majority party has carte blanche to set rules without minority party approval.
          Do you remember Pelousy working with McCarthy when she completely rewrote the House rules? I don’t.

          McConnell has already posted ads on his Facebook site saying the impeachment won’t get past him as Senate Leader. So that’s kind of a hint.

          Please don’t reply telling me what a unreliable swamp creature he is. I already know and dislike him greatly. But 2020 IS an election year for him and he’s neither blind nor deaf when it comes to re-election.

          Liked by 2 people

      • ChampagneReady says:

        I agree. Pelosi knows even in her final stages of dimentia that holding the a straight-line democratic vote impeachment will burn down the democratic party and put them in the minority for years.

        They are treading water on a case that is so weak it’s hard to quantify it and getting worse for them every day. If they had the senate, without a doubt they would do it but the upside is so pathetic if they dare send an impeachment to the senate, it will make them an international mockery.

        If you take a piece of paper and one side you have ten reasons not to do something and ONE reason to do it, do you say, “yeah, let’s do that.” This is how ludicrous it is. It’s a show for their sheep and keeping the word “impeachment in the news with their media whores.

        This is not even considering what is about to hit them like a 9.0 earthquake by what is going to be revealed in the IG report or what Durham is about to lay on them. They will be so busy doing damage control, they will be freaking out. In fact, they already are.

        Liked by 4 people

      • aarmad says:

        WOW! I HOPE you are right……. BUT when Trump wins in 2020, then what will happen? This is not over until 2024, unless Trump runs and wins a 3rd term!

        Like

    • Cayce Maxwell says:

      Maybe someone else has said this somewhere that I haven’t seen, but it seems like all the “witnesses” who are “testifying” are just people who will day what they want to hear so they can turn around and leak it to the fake news media and create their own “truth.” Kind of the way google develops algorithms to create their own “truth.”

      Liked by 2 people

    • Cayce Maxwell says:

      Maybe someone else has said this somewhere that I haven’t seen, but it seems like all the “witnesses” who are “testifying” are just people who will day what they want to hear so they can turn around and leak it to the fake news media and create their own “truth.” Kind of the way google develops algorithms to create their own “truth.”

      Liked by 2 people

    • jiminCO says:

      Has every dim-witted demo-socialist sheep forgotten that we still have a 4th Amendment right to confront our accuser(s)? I realize that socialist politicians wish to overthrow the Constitutional rights (and create perverted new ones), and that most of American public is just plain stupid in “Civics”, but Cmon!

      Liked by 6 people

      • TheLastDemocrat says:

        A whistle blower is supposed to expose a terrible or wrong thing going on; a subsequent investigation is supposed to then explore what has been thrown in their lap.

        A whistle blower is not the leading witness. they are the instigator that tips off everything else.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Rhoda R says:

          Since the ‘whistle blower’ is the source of the information used to initiate this particular star chamber and his/her information has turned out to be false I’d say that he, she or it are indeed a witness. He, she, or it, in fact, should be the primary defendant in a Fraud Waste and Abuse case and also for presenting false information on the Whistle Blower form.

          Liked by 2 people

        • Susan Bolle says:

          As Joe DiGenova says…he/she is not a whistleblower. The information was not sent to the head of the department to discern and therefore go through the proper channels and therefore cannot be classified as a whistleblower but an ‘informant’. He is very adamant to the claim but it’s a word that smacks of illegal activity and therefore is being used for propaganda.

          Liked by 2 people

      • Speaking of deficiencIes in civics education, the right to face an accuser (ONLY in a criminal trial, nothing to do with hearings or civil trials) is the “Confrontation Clause” of the 6th Amendment.

        The 4th Amendment is about unlawful searches and seizures.

        Liked by 1 person

      • aarmad says:

        ‘Civics’ or the knowledge thereof is what elected Trump. Not all of the public are ignorant of how our government works. Those educated 20-40 years ago have the basic knowledge in not only civics, but the three Rs. Not so with many in this generation. C’mon, give the deplorable s a little credit.

        Like

    • California Joe says:

      If the Whistler Blower is involved with the Biden Campaign as reported he cannot be still working for the federal government. It’s totally against the law for federal employees to be active in political campaigns especially at this level!

      Liked by 5 people

    • Tiffthis says:

      I feel the same way, fanbeav- why are these people cooperating- my best guess is the people showing up to testify would volunteer to do so even without a fake subpoena 💯

      Liked by 2 people

  2. John Wayne says:

    Entire “Biden Family” has more baggage than “Samsonite” – -Follow the MONEY – –
    Hunter Biden “Now” Says Ukraine Gas Board Service Was ‘Poor Judgment’
    [” Only after The Biden Family was caught in a major play for pay crime”]

    Service? Really? More like a $50K per month bribe. He had ZERO experience in the industry and was being paid $600K per year from a small energy company in Ukraine. Exon Mobile, BP, Shell, huge worldwide energy companies, all have VERY EXPERIENCED board members and they are paid half of what Biden was paid from a tiny company. The only reason he was paid that much is 1.US giving Ukraine aid at the time 2. Joe Biden was his dad.
    One thing for sure {You won’t hear at the Democratic Debate” , no one will bring up the Biden Family Ukraine / China connection, after all the “Biden’s” just committed crimes while Trump called them out. Doing is okay, calling it out is not okay in Democratic Parties Eyes- – -TRUMP 2020.

    What work did the “whistle-blower” do for Joe Biden —the 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate?

    Facts to come out — Whistle-Blower -Is Blowing in the Wind –Is Biased toward Joe Biden -even worked with him when Biden was VP – – -NOT A WORD FROM THE MEDIA – – –
    The 2020 Democratic ‘Joe Biden” candidate with whom the CIA whistle-blower had a “professional” tie is Joe Biden, according to intelligence officers and former White House officials.

    Lawyers for the whistle-blower said he had worked only “in the executive branch.” The Washington Examiner has established that he is a career CIA analyst who was detailed to the National Security Council at the White House and has since left. On Sept. 26, the New York Times reported that he was a CIA officer. On Oct. 4, the newspaper added that he “was detailed to the National Security Council at one point.”

    Michael Atkinson, the Intelligence Community’s inspector general, told members of Congress that the whistle-blower had a “professional tie” to a 2020 Democratic candidate. He had written earlier that while the whistle-blower’s complaint was credible, he had shown “some indicia of an arguable political bias … in favor of a rival political candidate.”

    A retired CIA officer told the Washington Examiner, “From everything we know about the whistle-blower and his work in the executive branch then, there is absolutely no doubt he would have been working with Biden when he was vice president.”

    As an experienced CIA official [ Whistle-Blower] who was on the NSC with the deep knowledge of Ukraine that he demonstrated in his complaint, it is probable that the whistle-blower briefed Biden and likely that he accompanied him on Air Force Two during at least one of the six visits the 2020 candidate made to the country.

    A former Trump administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters, said Biden’s work on foreign affairs brought him into close proximity with the whistle-blower either at the CIA or when he was detailed to the White House.

    “This person, after working with Biden, may feel defensive towards him because he feels [Biden] is being falsely attacked. Maybe he is even talking to Biden’s staff,” the former official said. “Maybe it is innocent, maybe not.”

    Last month, the whistle-blower accused President Trump of abusing his position by asking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, who sat on the board of a Ukrainian gas company. His complaint is now at the center of a Democrat-led impeachment inquiry, prompting Trump and his allies to cry foul.

    Biden was President Barack Obama’s “point man” on Ukraine, making a half dozen trips there in his eight years as vice president. Those trips involved briefings from senior intelligence officials and NSC officers, some of whom traveled with him to Kyiv and elsewhere.

    “The Whistle-blower has ties to one of my DEMOCRAT OPPONENTS,” tweeted Trump, after the “professional” link was revealed by the Washington Examiner. “Why does the ICIG allow this scam to continue?”

    Trump said Thursday he did not know the identity of the whistle-blower.

    The connection to Biden has emerged a week after Atkinson, the Intelligence Community’s inspector general, briefed the House Intelligence Committee on the whistle-blower’s complaint.

    After the report on what Atkinson said, lawyers for the whistle-blower immediately insisted their client was not motivated by political considerations, but their cryptic comment fueled speculation about his identity. The careful statement did not rule out that the whistle-blower worked with one of the candidates before they started running for president.

    “First, our client has never worked for or advised a political candidate, campaign, or party,” said Andrew Bakaj and Mark Zaid. “Second, our client has spent their entire government career in apolitical, civil servant positions in the Executive Branch.”
    Coming Soon – – -When you drink too much at ” Mueller time ” you will get slammed by the “

    Liked by 2 people

    • SAM-TruthFreedomLiberty says:

      And they’re worse on hiding and obfuscating it than the Clintons.

      Liked by 5 people

      • SAM-TruthFreedomLiberty says:

        Think about this:

        Liked by 5 people

        • American Heritage says:

          Why is Hunter Biden doing an interview on TV? If he were a Republican, he would be answering questions in front of a House investigating committee. Democrat chutzpah can only be explained by their smug reliance on the all-powerful protection of Deep State corruption.

          Liked by 8 people

        • OlderAndWiser says:

          I saw that clip. Amazing!
          To his credit, at least he was being honest about his prior shenanigans. To his father’s discredit, Joe still thinks nothing wrong happened!

          Liked by 3 people

          • American Heritage says:

            Have to admit, I surfed past it on TV without the sound. Couldn’t bring myself to listen to another loathsome Lefty performance in their cheesy theater of the absurd.

            Liked by 2 people

        • GB Bari says:

          “ lots of things would not happen in my life if my name wasn’t Biden.”

          I actually took that differently. I think he meant that his entire life would possibly have been different if his father and grandfather were not high profile politicians.

          I also think he might have been inferring the bad stuff may not have happened – like his drug / alcohol addiction. He may be doing some wishful thinking there but who knows…

          Those problems do seem to occur frequently among the rich when their kids are second fiddle to the high profile careers. And I’m sure he also surely meant that opportunities may not have arisen as easily. Both good and bad opportunities.

          Liked by 2 people

  3. magatrump says:

    Who are they interviewing ? I thought President trump said in his interview that they would not comply with the Dems because they were not following proper procedure for impeachment?

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Nom de Blog says:

    Dow over 27k. Democrats think impeachment can dull the wits of enough people to matter.

    Predictions:
    Trump is re-elected.
    Increases in House and Senate if conservatives.
    Republicans hold the Senate.
    Republicans regain the House.

    Liked by 8 people

  5. jus wundrin says:

    Yet the fascist dems can leak whatever to their fave media allies? It would nice if one of these repubs would break from this fascist ‘decorum’ and speak out.

    What would happen? Would tlaiban come and arrest them?

    ……and where are the other repubs? Hello? We the People are calling!

    Liked by 4 people

  6. jean0404 says:

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/guidelines-for-comments
    John Wayne, fellow percher…..please read (or maybe re-read) Sundance’s thoughtful guidelines for commenting.
    ‘Brevity is the Soul of wit.’

    Liked by 5 people

  7. jean0404 says:

    3.) NARROW YOUR THOUGHTS – Quality beats quantity. Construct your comments to target specific areas and not broad generalizations about the discussion topic at hand. If you have four or five disconnected points, break them up into individual comments.

    Liked by 4 people

  8. fangdog says:

    Some of the republicans are starting to take off their velvet gloves and exposing their steel claws. This has got to unnerve some of the democrats. Trump is finally getting a little help and with it, we will see some success. The truth will finally triumph over lies. The life span of a lie is very short when compared to the life time of a lie.

    Remember, no matter how successful the democrats they lack; judgment, rationale and commonsense. Otherwise they would not be democrats unless they are; crooked, criminal and corrupt. Eventually, no matter how long it takes, it finally catches up with them.

    Liked by 7 people

  9. JoeMeek says:

    What these Sons of the KKK Democrats are doing is a Lynch Mob inside a Kangaroo Court inside a Star Chamber.

    Liked by 6 people

  10. scooger says:

    Ahem – Dems opted for depositions to enforce ethics violations against minority for leaks. Well – since the Dems have leaked – all Dems participating in the deposition should be placed under ethics investigation and recused from participation in any further hearings until the guilty party is identified.

    Liked by 8 people

    • Well – since the Dems have leaked – all Dems participating in the deposition should be placed under ethics investigation and recused from participation in any further hearings until the guilty party is identified.

      I’d sharpen that point –
      House Democrats are the only people will access to the leaked information
      Individual House Democrats know whether or not they leaked this information.
      They are protecting lies, liars and Democrats.

      Time for Republicans to turn THIS into the BEST CAMPAIGN ADS EVER.
      House Republicans each record a video statement. Tight shot, bright light. Annie Liebovitz lighting. Each looks into the camera, and says:

      “My name is ____ I serve YOU on the House Judiciary/Intelligence/Oversight Committee.”
      “I swear and affirm to you that did not leak deposition information”
      “I swear and affirm to you that I do not know know who leaked deposition information”
      “I swear and affirm to you that, as a Republican, I do not lie to you, the voters in my district”.
      “My opponent is unable or unwilling to make these same sworn statements.>

      And THAT is how the Republicans retake the House in 2020.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Rhoda R says:

        How about adding a statement to the effect that “I swear and affirm to you that I have not had access to the committee proceedings as our democrat colleagues have locked us out of the chambers.”

        Like

  11. PCS says:

    Clapper seemingly throwing Barry under the bus was, I fear, by design.

    The Democrats know this entire fact set and pattern isn’t going away, right?

    So, are they setting the stage to pull a “You’re damn straight I ordered the Code Red and I would do it again!” moment from Mr. Sotero?

    I think so. They’ll claim that it was so obvious that Trump was a criminal and a reprobate and a secret agent and, and, and… that they’ll roll that theme out with the entire MSM chorus barking out that song.

    Everybody on the Prog Commie French Revolutionary Left is a hero and a Patriot and, … job well done.

    They’ll throw a parade too.

    Bank it.

    Like

  12. Gil Stonebarger says:

    EXACTLY what have any of these jokers done to fix any of this lawlessness? They have seen files and documents….if they KNOW facts, they should be up there stating it NOT spewing talking points. The three of them are COWARDS. Along with Gaetz. HE HAS SEEN proof…he should stand on the floor of congress and proclaim what he has seen at the top of his lungs…regardless of consequences

    Liked by 3 people

  13. John55 says:

    Well, why don’t the Republicans reveal his name? Just leak it to the press, or announce it on the House floor.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. jx says:

    Non-whistleblowers do not have any protection. BTW – leaking is a crime.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Rob says:

      So Dems found a way to protect all the leakers, just call them whistleblowers. Now they won’t even be able to be fired.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Boknows says:

      Jx, exactly right. Good post.

      There is no whistleblower.

      There is a biased Democrat who was not even on the conversation who leaked hearsay which has been proven to be incorrect.

      The Democraps planned this out thinking the transcript wouldn’t be released!! The fact that it has been and they proceed makes them look feckless. What clueless desperate fools!

      It’s like they are magnetically drawn to step in dung.

      Every day they proceed with this only proves they are digging their own graves. The leaders of the Ukraine confirm the actual transcript, which is there for all to view. Plus any corruption is found in their own ranks.
      And they are rank…

      Notice how they don’t mention the actual transcript or have a response to the comments from the Ukranian leaders.

      So they continue to play pretend, hurting themselves and hurting the country.

      The tables of justice need turned now so this level of corruption and idiocy never take over our national discourse again.

      Like

  15. justlizzyp says:

    I can’t help but recall the noticeable lack of outrage over the governments treatment of the Clinton Foundation whistleblower….

    Liked by 3 people

  16. GW says:

    I don’t get it……. If these so-called subpoenas are indeed nothing but “demand letters” as Sundance has explained, and they indeed carry no judicial enforcement authority, as Sundance has explained…….. Then why is anyone at all showing up for hearings, testimony, depositions, interviews… Whatever they’re called ????
    Why isn’t the Whitehouse blocking them ? Exercising Executive Privilege ?
    I thought the Dems would be getting nothing at all !

    Liked by 2 people

    • jrapdx says:

      Seems pretty obvious. The ones showing up now are disgruntled (ex-)employees who have been sidelined by the President precisely because of their poor performance or outright obstruction to the President’s goals. Therefore they defied the President’s instructions and participate in the “impeachment” farce. IOW people who support the Democrats all the way down “testifying” dishonestly to further the ambitions of Schiff and his fellow dishonest comrades.

      Liked by 5 people

    • Shyster says:

      Great point. Regardless of whether those testifying are friendly and volunteering to appear verses having been subpoenaed, they are all current or former state department employees and accordingly executive privilege should apply. If the Dems claim no executive privilege is available because it is an impeachment inquiry or proceeding, then it seems that issue/dispute is the direct path to judicial intervention/the courts to determine if executive privilege applies to the current proceedings or not., I.e., are the current hearings legally an impeachment inquiry or proceeding vitiating any claims of executive privilege. If so and executive privilege is vitiated, then that will create a legal challenge opening on the issue of whether impeachment proceedings must be conducted in away that affords the president, the right to hear and question the witnesses who are called, the right to notice and opportunity to be heard, the right to also call witness of his choosing, the right to review all documentary evidence that may be inculpatory and the right to be provided any exculpatory evidence and other due process rights. ANY THOUGHTS BY ANY LEGAL BEAGLES OUT THERE ON MY POINTS WOULD BE HELPFUL.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Pew-Anon says:

      It is profoundly disturbing to hear the likes of Rep Jordan, who is supposedly a MAGA patriot, parrot the “subpoena” disinfo. The fact that even Freedom Caucus Republicans are not screaming the bloody murder of sedition and treason right now is as informative as anything else in this whole process of what is really going on.

      Liked by 1 person

  17. Raised on Reagan says:

    Come on Republicans, time to fight fire with fire. Leak the names.

    Liked by 3 people

  18. dom elp says:

    Start listening to reporters talking around still onmike after presser.

    Like

  19. Reserved55 says:

    Liked by 5 people

    • jx says:

      Thank you. It needs to be said more often.

      Republicans need to stop playing pattycake with these lying jackasses. They must stop operating within the confines defined by the liars.

      Liked by 5 people

  20. hokkoda says:

    I think the GOP should record the hearings and release them publicly, including full transcripts. Don’t leak, just flat out disobey they Democrats. This is an utterly lawless sham, and the GOP should flat out ignore whatever bs rules they are given.

    Democrats expect the GOP to “play by the rules” even when there are no rules. Some widespread civil disobedience is needed.

    Liked by 3 people

    • J.Thomas says:

      I agree with this. This is actually a really good idea.

      That room needs to be filled with republicans, staffers, and conservative activists. They need to make a spectacle of it and force their way in there, chain themselves together and remain silent. Record the testimonies and read them on the floor.

      Force Schiff to either cancel his hearings or have all of the conservatives arrested and dragged out.

      Liked by 3 people

    • TPW says:

      Kinda like what is needed from us….civil disobedience?

      Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      Most likely the Republicans are unable to record anything.
      Schiff-for Brains has the depositions taking place inside a SCIF. NO devices are allowed in a SCIF. And it’s shielded to prevent transmissions from audio bugs or secret cams worn on the persons of attendees. I’m not sure but they may have to walk through a scanner on the way in to detect any devices.
      But if they don’t have to pass through a scanner and can wear a recording device that has 8 hours of recording capacity and battery….I’d be in favor of it..

      Like

  21. hokkoda says:

    I think the GOP should record the hearings and release them publicly, including full transcripts. Don’t leak, just flat out disobey they Democrats. This is an utterly lawless sham, and the GOP should flat out ignore whatever bs rules they are given.

    Democrats expect the GOP to “play by the rules” even when there are no rules. Some widespread civil disobedience is needed.

    Liked by 1 person

    • thedoc00 says:

      Consider the threatened indictment of Rudy Giuliani by the DoJ, for FARA, is a shot across the bow of the Republicans, from the Uni-Party.

      Plus, the House Committee leads get declare which bits of material are releasable or not.

      There is only so much wiggle room for the President’s House support team. Mitch and deceptacons have to pick up the battle to put it on level ground. The democrats have the votes in the House to punish them using House Rules; no matter if existing, new or made up on the fly.

      Once again, the President either bows to senate blackmail or he and his allies fight on under current conditions.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Shyster says:

        Did you mean “house” blackmail or senate blackmail as you wrote? If senate blackmail, please explain what the senate is holding over POTUS head and what they are asking from POTUS in return. Thanks.

        Like

        • thedoc00 says:

          Mitch has power of appointment in the Executive Branch, Mitch controls the impeachment hearing if it gest that far and he has power of legislation in the only neutral to semi-supportive legislative body. I clearly meant the SENATE.

          Liked by 1 person

      • TPW says:

        Why do all of us act as spectators to all of this as though no participation is required on our part….baffles my mind.

        Like

    • That’s what I think; if the Dems don’t play by the rules why should the Republicans.

      Like

  22. John55 says:

    There’s this rumor that the Republicans have control of the Senate. If true, perhaps they could hold some hearings of their own to highlight just how badly the House Dems are behaving.

    Liked by 6 people

  23. trumpmemesandreams says:

    Democrats scheme, connive, and gleefully engage in unlawful measures to further their political agenda at the cost OF ALL ELSE. Neither tradition, nor precedent, nor rule of law can stop their fury from taking shape in Washington DC… yet the elected class of Republicans are still slow to realize that the game is not only afoot, but indeed we’re in the end-stages. Yes, Mr. Jordan, you’re completely right — it’s a sham. Millions of us are screaming it at you every day.

    So what the hell are you going to do about it?

    Why won’t Republicans won’t simply leak the name of this “whistleblower” though we all know if the situation were reversed this person’s name, address, and medical history would be up on billboards from Walla Walla to Key West. We all know why, and the duplicity is astounding.

    Where are the Republican court cases to block action against Democrats… even if premised on the flimsy and ridiculous? Lawfare goes both ways, and there is no shortage of Republican-paid (and ideologically aligned) lawyers. There are still many friendly circuits and districts, so why not utilize them? We know the reason.

    It’s the same reason why a Republican Congressman doesn’t simply read into the record any of the various damning ‘classified’ information’ that would convincingly expose the 2016 election criminal conduct, or otherwise.

    It’s the same reason why county by county, state by state this Country is being lit on fire and yet nothing ever seems to be done about it by politicians.

    In California, Washington, New York, and elsewhere Democrats push through ‘laws’ that violate a citizen’s innate rights to speech, religion, association, and arms. We, Citizens (regardless of party), are disenfranchised by the day as illegal aliens are given ALL same legal protections as citizens plus additional protections because of their national origin, skin color, or other exigencies. Illegal aliens are not only gifted the very same (or more) social welfare as citizens, but now in California — as a final middle finger to the legal citizenry of this country — illegal aliens may hold actual seats of power within the government at the local and state level.

    When the citizens of these states do stand and are counted, when they somehow manage to pass initiatives to uphold local and traditional values — when the combined majority stands athwart History, yelling “Stop!” — they are swatted down by the Kritarchy in short order. The very same happens for actions from President Trump himself — from low to high, none can stand the jaundiced eye of the unelected and unaccountable judiciary backed by the machinations of the bureaucratic state.

    States may run their own affairs under the Constitution, you say? Well, tell me how States may also choose to run immigration, trade law, foreign relation, etc. when it pleases them, too? Let alone the withering of our fundamental Rights?

    Clearly this so-called Constitution is a magical document, indeed. It’s a talisman that blocks anyone with a (R) after their name from taking decisive action yet somehow Democrats do what they will to seize power regardless and justify it ex post facto. A neat trick indeed.

    But, wait “Oh, President Trump can’t just ignore the Courts… ” or what? He’ll be impeached? Or the Democrats will? Reality check.

    The Constitution is dead. It has not only been shredded to pieces, it has also been balled up into spit wads and blown back in our faces.

    Patience is wearing very thin.

    Liked by 2 people

    • TPW says:

      Preaching to the choir here and very well said…..so now take it to the social media and start making some noise…..thats what I am doing although I hate social media……call them out over a loud speaker for all to see ….Just got did it with Graham and Jordan. Public shaming.

      Like

  24. ChampagneReady says:

    Schiff would have to rise up three levels in order to qualify as scum.

    Liked by 3 people

  25. ristvan says:

    Some tactical observations, gently rebutting some upthread suggestions.
    —There is no way for House Freedom Caucus to directly or legally challenge Schiff’s unjust ‘impeachment inquiry’ process because of A1§5.2 clause 1.
    —It is easily possible for them to continuously voice fairness and secrecy aspersions, as here, following Cippolone’s letter outline last Tuesday. Those will resonate with at least some of the general public. And, those same issues will make it ever harder for Dems in PDJT districts to vote for any resulting possible articles of impeachment.
    —And, they can also use the Collins floor ‘read into the record’ A1§6.1 speech and debate clause trick to pierce the unjust testimony secrecy. IMO that time is NOT yet, because there haven’t been enough cherry pick leaks worth countering.

    Schiff made a big mistake with his made up ‘whistleblower’ version of the call AFTER the transcript was released. Now 132 resulting censure signatures. Dems cannot afford that again. The absence of unfavorable leaks by Schiff says there really isn’t a there, there—yet.

    As for long drawn out witness ‘depositions’, my personal experience says that usually means the Dem lawyer questioners are fishing but not catching fish.

    Liked by 8 people

    • Louisiana Tea Rose says:

      Thanks, Ristvan. The water is so muddy in this Dem effort. So many opinions on the actual process itself, and the power of “judicial authority” as Sundance explained some of this in the past couple of weeks. I am having a hard time figuring out how R’s should go about stopping or bypassing this illegitimate “inquiry” and understanding the Constitutional power they are wielding. Is anyone going to jail over ignoring “subpoenas”, for example? I thought the only way they could compel was if the Dems voted on articles. And I see Jordan is trying to skew the effort by claiming the lack of “due process”, but what I see in your comment tells me that argument ain’t happenin’.

      I have to believe I am not alone in my confusion.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Pew-Anon says:

      The Democrats are calling things “subpoenas” that are nothing more than letters, and do not have the legal force of subpoena for their stated purpose because of the lack of a constitutionally mandated inquiry vote, as this site has so crucially documented. My question is, in the same way they are claiming things to be subpoenas that are not legally subpoenas, at the end of this process will they produce something — a floor vote, a committee decision, whatever — that they claim to be an impeachment, but is not legally an impeachment, again because of the lack of constitutionally mandated foundation?

      Like

      • Shyster says:

        Hate to disagree with Sundance on the issue; however, there is no law saying that there must be a full vote of the house to trigger an official impeachment inquiry. That being the case, until tested in court, no one knows what the current legal status, official vs.unofficial impeachment inquiry, is. This question itself is most probably subject to a Federal Declaratory Relief Action such that the rights and obligations of the parties can be determined. To make clear, I personally believe the “official” designation requires a full house vote; however, until the question is resolved via a judicial ruling, no one and I mean no one, knows what the rights and obligations of the parties are in the case of a declared official impeachment inquiry without a full house vote.

        Like

        • Pew-Anon says:

          There is, to my understanding, as articulated on this sight, “case law” that requires a house vote to initiated an impeachment inquiry in order for subpoenas to have the legal force necessary to penetrate executive privilege, hence the current fake subpoena fiasco. This was the impetus of my question: If their subpoenas are fake under this current arrangement, will their final impeachment product suffer from the same defect and be equally as fake?

          Like

          • Shyster says:

            There is no case law on the point and the constitution in stating that the house can impeach leaves the mechanics to do so silent. Past impeachment proceedings, Nixon impeachment inquiry and Clinton actual impeachment inquiry and actual impeachment all held full house votes with a simple majority deciding. Though these do set a historical precedent, it is an open question of whether legal precedent, starry decisis, applies. It is doubtful given that there is no accompanying legal opinion, analogous to case law, authored by the house that fully vets the reasoning and rational. Bottom line, is a full house vote required for an impeachment inquiry, probably, but we will never know for sure until the issue is litigated. Until then, their is risk to both sides if one is determined to have guessed wrong.

            Like

        • elsuperbus says:

          I agree with the first and last part, not a lawyer/educated about the middle part. My reading of what Pelosi and Schiff are prepared to do is two fold. They’re seeing what they can get with minimal effort (without voting or going to court) and hoping something finally dirty turns up as well provoking Trump into actions that can support their public case to try and wrangle enough votes- which they don’t currently have. They don’t mind this ruse going on for as long as possible. Once they go to court as you suggest they just get the usual leftist judge ruling against Trump even though the Constitution clearly says “House of Representatives” not a select few members. As usual, it has to go to SCOTUS, but by then the 2020 election is long passed and the feces has been flung.

          Like

        • MustangBlues says:

          ”’Hate to disagree with Sundance on the issue; however, there is no law saying that there must be a full vote of the house to trigger an official impeachment inquiry.”

          Not law, Customary procedure, honored tradition, hallowed precedent, for bipartisan governing. Otherwise, it’s E Tu Brutus.

          Like

  26. Deplorable_Vespucciland says:

    Rudy Giuliani stated today that he will NOT be turning over any documents to House inquisitors and will not cooperate with them on any further requests or demands. Now what? Maybe Rudy ought to be prepared for a middle of the night visit by DeepState jackboots? Expect the unbelievable from these globalist democrats because, so far, it appears as though they are still ABOVE THE LAW.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Rhoda R says:

      I hope Rudy is storing his Ukraine papers in the White House because that’s just about the only place that the globalist FBI can’t raid at 4AM with guns drawn.

      Like

  27. The Sixth Beatle says:

    The whistleblower fears for his/her safety? I didn’t know this whistleblower was connected to the Clintons.

    Like

  28. Mike in a Truck says:

    The reason why we have stupid politicians is because stupid people vote them into office. The “right to vote” should not be absolute. Before one could vote they should have to take a test. Make it multiple choice for the dimwits. One should know about the Founding Fathers. The Federalists/Anti Federalists. Etc. Go to one machine to take your test. Pass then go to the voting booth. Fail then your recycled into a classroom and taught friggin history.Maybe no more stupid voters.

    Like

  29. Sherri Young says:

    Liked by 7 people

  30. Sherri Young says:

    Ruh roh. Not sure that Nancy is making herself popular with this impeachment nonsense.

    Liked by 2 people

    • GB Bari says:

      I Like the poll but that alone doesn’t provide enough info to tell if her unpopularity is due to a perception of her supporting impeachment or due to her LACK of support for the Dem Radicals’ desire for full bore impeachment right NOW.

      Do we know the stated public position on impeachment for each of the candidates in that poll? That might indicate the polled electorate’s level of desire for impeachment.

      Like

  31. Merkin Muffley says:

    Two whistleblowers for the Clinton Foundation were raided by the FBI. Who says this whistleblower is entitled to any more protection?

    Liked by 3 people

  32. bessie2003 says:

    Is the House still on vacation?

    When the full House returns, will the secret kangaroo hearings be forced to comply with regular order, or whatever it’s called when doing things ‘by the book’?

    Liked by 1 person

  33. Cheese says:

    There is no whistle blower

    Like

  34. What role did the SDNY have in moving Epstein to the Metropolitan prison?

    What’s happening with the Epstein case, SDNY? Now that he’s dead, you guys just dropping it? Lot of tough talk after Epstein’s death, any action?

    Remember Pelosi’s daughter’s ominous tweet about some of “our favorites” being implicated? Whatever happened to all that? Any justice for the victims? Is this just another in a long line of DOJ/MSM coverups?

    Liked by 2 people

  35. Occam’s Razor says:

    It’s feeling a bit like, when the Democrats say “Jump”, the Republicans say “How high?”

    Liked by 1 person

    • 56packardman says:

      It’s been like that as long as I can remember and I started following politics in 1956 when I was all of 8 years old. Repugnican sell-outs led me to change my voter status to “I” in 2000.

      Like

  36. Whistleblower rules do not exist to protect liars. And, there is very good reason why they [are supposed to …] require the possession of first-hand evidence. These rules exist to encourage bearers of “inconvenient truth” to come forward with what they know. The Democrats ineptly eviscerated this critically important program, transforming it into exactly what it has become: a mechanism for vengeance based on lies. The program is so important, however, that it should not only be immediately restored to its previous definition, but that definition should become law.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Also: the tribunal is entitled to know who the whistleblower is, and may examine the credibility of their testimony – which would be given in a confidential setting that would protect the identity of the witness from those who might seek to do that person harm. Any member of the Committee, whether Republican or Democrat, should be entitled to know who the witness is, and to subpoena that person to testify under oath in a closed session. To attempt to deny any Member this access is an obstruction of Congress … even if it is done by Congressmen.

      Liked by 1 person

  37. swamph8er says:

    A whistleblower loses reprisal protections if they don’t tell the truth.
    They also aren’t a whistleblower if they don’t have 1st hand knowledge…but I digress.
    -signed an IG

    Liked by 1 person

  38. so, Pelosi says no impeachment vote….. for now.

    What a joke.

    Now, Fiona Hill selective testimony leaking.

    Biden and Hillary corrupt crooks, so Mueller and Schiff after PDJT. Banana republic junk.

    Liked by 1 person

  39. Mr. T. says:

    I can only hope that America’s citizens have had their fill of this impeachment BS, and the fact that the House has done little to nothing since January of this year when the dems gained control of the House. After the elections in 2020, one can only hope that there will be a whole lot less demodopes in the House and the Senate. No doubt we need term limits.

    Like

  40. kevin says:

    That’s ex – Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent

    Like

  41. 8675310 says:

    Protection? Like Epstein? No one can protect you from the Clintons and their associates. They can “suicide” you, any way they want. AG Barr will ignore the evidence and rubber stamp it for them.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s