If he is an honest whistleblower, I want to know why he hasn’t identified those who leaked to him. But Rush right, they are all leakers. Cabal.
“If he is an honest whistleblower, I want to know why he hasn’t identified those who leaked to him. But Rush right, they are all leakers. Cabal.”
The reason Rush is stressing the importance of this guy being already publicly identified is that then Congress can subpoena him (probably only the Senate for the impeachment trial) and pressure him, under oath, to tell what he knows about the “whistle blower”. Or, even when/why he had several meetings with Schiff’s staff...even Schiff himself. What was the purpose of those meetings? What was discussed? Did you agree on a common course of action? Who else was present during these meetings? Were notes created? Where did you meet?
The Democrats know they and the blower cannot withstand statements under oath, publicly given and in response to hostile questions. It would blow everything up, big.
But you can take this to the bank: If there’s an impeachment trial in the Senate, Charlie will be subpoenaed and will appear in front of a billion people watching the Tee Vee.
Surely Democrats are not stupid enough to think they can carry this scam to the Senate.
That’s why we can smell the panic.