Schiff’s lies about no advance knowledge of Whistleblower complaint looks like a conspiracy

When wrongdoing by Democrats is discussed, the media like to call charges against them “conspiracy theories,” implying that crazed partisans are imagining phony connections where none in fact exist. But when people with no visible connection with each other work together in secret to accomplish some goal and then lie about their collaboration, the dreaded word “conspiracy” becomes completely appropriate.

And that’s what the charges that Nancy Pelosi tasked Adam Schiff’s House Intelligence Committee (and 5 other House committees) with investigating, with an eye toward impeaching President Trump, now look like. A conspiracy including one or more Deep State operatives within the White House who acted as spies on a confidential conversation between two heads of state, and a separate intelligence officer who composed a “whistleblower” complaint with the help of Schiff’s staffers and a lawyer or lawyers unknown.

Adam Schiff has repeatedly lied to the media and American people by claiming that “we” (he and his staff) had no contact with the “whistleblower” before the complaint was filed. Schiff went on MSNBC on September 17 and flat-out lied:

SAM STEIN: Hey, Congressman, a couple questions here on this whistleblower front. First off, have you heard from the whistleblower? Are you — do you want to hear from the whistleblower? What protections could you provide to the whistleblower? And then you also said that the DNI’s refusing to turn over the stuff, citing a request from a higher authority. The insinuation left at least for me and others was that the president himself had intervened. Is that the insinuation you sought to provide and, if so, what basis do you have for making that insinuation?

FROM BOBBY HARR OF THE AMERICAN THINKER:

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/10/the_dems_are_doomed.html#ixzz61Ib31RMw

THE DEMOCRATS HAVE DOOMED THEMSELVES

The televised statement from Volodymyr Zelensky regarding his and Trump’s phone conversation has gotten significantly less media attention than the transcript and secondhand whistleblower report. But isn’t that testimonial the most critical piece of evidence here? If I’m alleged to have committed a crime against you, and you refute that allegation, there is no case — and that’s what we have here in the case of Trump and Zelensky.

But Democrats are ignoring that crucial factor and doubling down on the secondhand whistleblower report that’s led to a transcript of a call showing no impeachable offense. The president, being head of the Executive Branch, rightfully questioned Zelensky on Joe Biden’s quid pro quo scandal regarding his son Hunter Biden and his involvement with Burisma, a Ukrainian gas company.

The whistleblower complaint refutes allegations of Trump’s involvement in a quid pro quo with Zelensky in its very logic. The complaint states, “It wasn’t clear Ukraine was even aware that the United States was withholding military aid.” If one side does not know of the leverage the other side possesses to obtain what it’s looking for, a quid pro quo is not possible.

Regardless of what the House of Representatives decides on going forward with impeachment amid Speaker Pelosi’s declaration of an inquiry, the inquiry is dead on arrival in the Senate. Even if passed in the House, the action needed to remove the president would require a two-thirds majority vote in the Republican Senate in favor of the inquiry. A Mitch McConnell–controlled Republican Senate would shut down the inquiry, thus leaving egg on the faces of Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic Party.

Given the current circumstances, impeachment helps Trump and hurts Biden in every way. They’ve got nothing on the president aside from Adam Schiff’s “parody” rendition of the phone call between the two leaders, which also resulted in egg on face. He’s got nothing but political gain to acquire while watching Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden’s poll numbers decline rapidly as we inch closer to the Democratic primaries.

Democrats have placed the entire stack of chips on one hand nearly twelve months away from the next election, which is a precarious move. In the incredibly unlikely event of impeachment leading to removal from office, we get Mike Pence, whom Democrats hate nearly as much as the current duly elected president. In the event of impeachment trials that fail, Democrats have lost all credibility necessary to compete with Trump going into the 2020 election.

President Trump has the house advantage going into the impeachment circus, and the Democrats are sitting at a slot machine. If the bold move to undo the 2016 election fails, we will likely see a landslide 2020 victory for Trump along with a red House and Senate for the next four years.

” If I’m alleged to have committed a crime against you, and you refute that allegation, there is no case — and that’s what we have here in the case of Trump and Zelensky.”

This bothers me ... and what is happening in our civic understanding of the law. It should read for Americans, “If I’m alleged to committed a crime against you, I have to prove the crime was committed (and beyond a reasonable doubt). It may not be necessary for you to refute anything alleged if it cannot be proved that a crime was committed in the first place.” Justice Kavanaugh just went through this.

Right now the demokraps have NOTHING to prove a crime was committed.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.