Since revelations emerged the whistleblower has deep ties to former Vice President Joe Biden all discussion between his lawyers and Congress immediately ended. The whistleblower reportedly got cold feet when it became evident that he isn’t this heroic, non-partisan figure that the mainstream media tried to paint him as.
Reports have also emerged that there is no discussion of testimony from the second whistleblower either. His complaint allegedly supported the first’s claims.
The alleged whistleblower has been rumored to be 33-year-old CIA officer Eric Ciaramella. Ciaramella allegedly filed a complaint that President Trump asked Ukraine President Volodomyr Zelensky to investigate corruption allegations against the Joe Biden and his son Hunter.
The Washington Examiner was one of the first to identify key facts about the whistleblower that helped lead to Ciaramella. They wrote, “The whistleblower is a career CIA officer with expertise in Ukraine policy who served on the White House National Security Council during the Obama administration, when 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden was ‘point man’ for Ukraine, and during the early months of the Trump administration.”
What this means is that House Democrats are set to impeach the President as the result of a second-hand whistleblower complaint from a partisan CIA officer, neither of which will testify about anything they have firsthand and verifiable knowledge of.
In other words, Adam Schiff and his cronies have nothing.
House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff, who lied about his contact with Ciaramella before the complaint was filed, told reporters on September 24, 2019, “We have been informed by the whistleblower’s counsel that their client would like to speak to our committee and has requested guidance from the Acting DNI as to how to do so. We‘re in touch with counsel and look forward to the whistleblower’s testimony as soon as this week.”
Not only did Schiff lie about his contact with the whistleblower pre-complaint, he hid the fact that two members of his staff are former colleagues of Ciaramella. It’s alleged that Ciaramella first went to Schiff’s two staffers for help with filing the complaint who then brought in Schiff.
Schiff claimed he had no idea who the whistleblower was less than three months ago, but he has since decided he did know who he is.
Schiff changed his story on October 13 and sidestepped questions about why he originally claimed ignorance as to the whistleblower’s identity saying, “Our primary interest right now is making sure that that person is protected.”
Patrick Boland, a spokesman for Schiff did not respond to the Examiner’s requests for comment.
Mark Zaid, the attorney for both whistleblowers, said his legal team is committed to cooperating with any congressional oversight committee’s requests so long as it properly protects and ensures his clients anonymity. He said his team remains “committed to cooperating with any congressional oversight committee’s requests so long as it properly protects and ensures the anonymity” of its clients.
Zaid and fellow attorney Andrew Bajak refused to confirm or deny to the Washington Examiner that Ciaramella was the whistleblower after the reports first named him.
Regardless of what happened in the potential impeachment hearings, Republicans are sure to push for an explanation from Schiff how he came to know the whistleblower and have two of his friends serving on his staff.
Should things proceed to a Senate trial, you can be sure that Republicans won’t forget Schiff’s lies.
