nChrist
|
 |
« on: February 03, 2020, 03:25:02 AM » |
|
________________________________ The Patriot Post - Alexander's Column 1-29-2020 From The Federalist Patriot Free Email Subscription _______________________________
The Patriot Post® · Topping My Impeachment Witness List: Adam Schiff
By Mark Alexander · Jan. 29, 2020
https://patriotpost.us/alexander/68226-topping-my-impeachment-witness-list-adam-schiff-2020-01-29
“In disquisitions of every kind there are certain primary truths, or first principles, upon which all subsequent reasoning must depend.” —Alexander Hamilton (1788)
Senate Democrats are posturing to force a vote adding witnesses for their installment of the impeachment inquisition1. Apparently the “overwhelming evidence” the House claimed was the basis for its articles of impeachment, is not so overwhelming — but these chess moves are all calculated in advance.
It’s not that they actually want witnesses; what they do want is swing-state Republican senators up for reelection this year (Arizona’s Martha McSally, Colorado’s Cory Gardner, Iowa’s Joni Ernst, Maine’s Susan Collins, and North Carolina’s Thom Tillis) on the record voting against witnesses. Of course, there are some Democrat Senators who would prefer not to be on the record voting for witnesses, including Doug Jones and Joe Manchin, who are from states Donald Trump2 carried by very wide margins.
Democrats know that when they propose their list of witnesses, Republicans will counter with their own list, which may result in deadlock. And they believe that if the Trump defense team ties up some witnesses in an executive privilege legal challenge that could drag on for weeks, and if the court decides in the administration’s favor, that will still be a win for Democrats, who will claim Trump used the courts to hide his guilt.
The Demo ruse has two goals.
First, it places the aforementioned handful of Republican senators at greater risk, which increases the Democrats’ chances of retaking the Senate and blocking all future judicial nominees of President Donald Trump — provided Trump is reelected in November. This election is of paramount importance to both parties, since the next presidential term will likely yield multiple Supreme Court appointments. (The two oldest justices — Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 86, and Stephen Breyer, 81 — are both leftists.)
Second, if no witnesses are called, that extends, in perpetuity, the fake narrative that Trump is guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors” and Senate Republicans covered it up by not allowing witnesses during the trial. This is precisely why, even though Democrats had authority to call any and all witnesses during their House inquiry, they did not do so.
And what about the “bombshell3” New York Times allegation (on the eve of Trump’s defense team’s Senate rebuttal) that former National Security Advisor John Bolton3 allegedly heard President Trump affirm a connection between aid withheld to the Ukraine government and an investigation of former VP Joe Biden and his scandal-plagued son Hunter? The NSC had demanded Bolton scrub classified content4 from his manuscript before the NYT report, so it is not clear if the information disseminated was classified. But the Times’ “revelation” ramps up pressure on Republicans to vote for witnesses.
So, what if Senate Republicans do agree to call additional witnesses? As the administration’s team was concluding their defense of Trump5, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said he doesn’t yet have the votes to deny witnesses — a vote that could come Friday.
If there are to be witnesses, which could be a perilous gambit for Trump, at the top of my list would be lead House impeachment manager Adam Schiff. Of course, recall that House Democrats called 17 witnesses to support their case and allowed no Republican witnesses – perhaps Senate Republicans should vote for witnesses and then allow only their list of 17 to even the score!
If Demos want John Bolton and White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, among others, I want Schiff and his so-called “whistleblower” both called as fact witnesses. let’s find out what Schiff knew and when he knew it. And naturally, Republicans would also have to call Joe and Hunter Biden, to discover what corruption Trump wanted investigated. It will likely be downhill for the Democrat Party6 from there.
Why is Schiff at the top of my list?
As predicted for two years, the Demos’ Russia-collusion7 investigation was a dead-end fabrication8.
That fact was further sealed by the recent determination that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant applications9 used by the deep-state cabal10 in its attempted coup11 were both erroneous and likely felonious. That finding was based on the “17 significant errors or omissions12” discovered by Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz.
According to a DoJ investigation, the FISA warrants were “not valid” due to “material misstatements and omission.” The FISA Court determined that a handful of FBI agents had “insufficient predication to establish probable cause to believe that [former Trump campaign adviser Carter] Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power.” In other words, Obama administration officials were lying, and when U.S. Attorney John Durham concludes his criminal investigation13, we’ll likely learn exactly who was involved in this conspiracy.
Though Democrats would like to keep the collusion lie on life support, Adam Schiff, with the help of other deep-state actors, came up with plan 2.0 — impeachment14 — to stop the Trump administration’s successful efforts to Make America Great Again15.
Schiff has coordinated the entire impeachment narrative16 and is its principal author and director17. Thus, subjecting Schiff to Republican cross-examination would reveal his collusion with the “whistleblower18” — which would unravel the entire case against Trump.
Recall the questions about the altered whistleblower reporting form19 and the fact that Schiff has continued to lie about knowing the whistleblower’s identity20 — though he used intermediaries to collude with him before the Trump/Ukraine complaint was filed.
That is precisely why Schiff vigorously resisted21 any effort to identify his whistling leftist co-conspirator, Eric Ciaramella22, during the House inquisition. That is also why Schiff reversed his promise23 to allow calling him24 as a House witness. (For the record, this whistleblower’s identity is the worst-kept secret in Washington.)
Ciaramella’s leftist political views25 are well documented, and it’s no coincidence that he was Joe Biden’s Ukrainian adviser during the years Hunter was profiteering from his patently corrupt position on the board of directors of Burisma, a Ukrainian oil and gas company that paid him more than $83,000 in monthly graft to buy access to his then-VP father, and by extension the entire Obama administration.
|