Thursday Night, the Hour Grew Late For Democrats in More Ways than One

Posted on January 31, 2020 by LifeZette

By David Kamioner | January 31, 2020

As news of the Bolton and Schiff videos, clips that destroyed their witness argument, closed in on the Democrats the president’s opponents got stranger and more rabid. They knew they were likely to lose the whole match on Friday and they began to lash out at the GOP legal team, themselves, and at their real enemies, the voters of the United States of America.

Developments included:

GOP attorney Pat Cipollone made the argument that if a partisan impeachment like this was to remove the president from office for the vague charge of “abuse of power” then all future presidents, GOP and Democrat, would be subject to the same type of witch hunt.

Elizabeth Warren, in a question, tried to impugn the credibility of Chief Justice John Roberts. Roberts sighed after he read the question and even Adam Schiff defended Roberts during his response to the question.
The Democrats made repeated attempts to classify any negative information as “conspiracy theories”, even going as far as to label the legal record and established facts as such.When they didn’t do that, when repeatedly shown the record, they just merely punted the question and went back to their tired redundant talking points.
The GOP team made the point that numerous people, including Joe Biden, thought there was no need for witnesses in the 1998 Clinton impeachment trial.
Democrats consistently fell into GOP traps when it came to the CIA informer. When a GOP senator hinted at Ciaramella, a member of the Democrat legal team would whine about it, thus talking about the subject and using up their time. Which is exactly what the GOP team wanted them to do.
The Democrats began to insinuate that the American people are not fit to decide the presidency. Thus the Dems had the duty to it for them through impeachment. We’ll see those clips again.
As Schiff and his pals watched the day grow later, the pressure started to get to them in a very obvious manner. We heard more about “Russian propaganda” and “baseless smears.”The GOP legal team was hitting nerves and it was showing in the words and demeanor of all the Democrats in the room.

In the last question, and we’ll have more on this later, Jerry Nadler bolted out of his seat and stole the podium from Adam Schiff. Schiff seemed stunned by the move and tried to call after Nadler, as Nadler made his way to the podium. Nadler ignored him and proceeded to throw a tantrum.

The trial resumes, perhaps for the last day, Friday afternoon.

This piece originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post Thursday Night, the Hour Grew Late For Democrats in More Ways than One appeared first on The Political Insider.

Roberts Not Allowing Rand Paul’s Question About Whistleblower Is Ruffling Feathers

Posted on January 31, 2020 by Wayne Dupree

Chief Justice John Roberts isn’t merely a disappointment. He is part of the cabalist infrastructure.

Roberts, who is presiding over President Trump’s Senate impeachment trial, has rejected questions from Sen. Rand Paul on a few occasions and gone to the Democrats and asked theirs. Paul let it be known he wanted to know about the whistleblower and if that individual would ever be called as a witness, but Roberts has decided to shelve that opportunity.

Why do you think Justice Roberts denies the president the opportunity to confront his accuser? Why does he deny the Senator’s right to freedom of speech? There is no legal nor constitutional guarantee or even offer of anonymity for a whistleblower. There is no credible fear of death or physical harm; after all, he did not blow the whistle on a Clinton.

MORE NEWS: Dave Chappelle: “I Don’t Look at Trump Supporters as My Enemy”

Beginning but not ending with his handling of the FISA court and the appointments thereto, the next impeachment should be his. Justice Roberts’ behavior saddens me, but not surprised. He has been suspect since the Obamacare trial.

None of this corruption in Washington would ever have seen the light of day if it were not for Donald Trump. The exposure of the fraud and treasonous behavior within the government itself and the complicit media will make him the single most important person in American history if the country is to go forward as it was founded.

Chief Justice John Roberts again refused to read Republican Sen. Rand Paul's question to the Senate. Roberts then immediately read verbatim a question from a Democrat senator.

Incredible cowardice, arrogance, and abuse of power by an unelected judge to hijack the U.S. Senate.

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) January 30, 2020

Can we add John Roberts to the witness list? I mean, he appointed the judges who authorized the unlawful warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. In fact, why isn’t he recused on that very basis? The IC IG worked for the agency that submitted all 4 applications to the court…

— Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) January 30, 2020

Interesting question:

How does John Roberts know the name of the whistleblower?

We don’t. And the question wasn’t about that.

— Doug Stafford (@dougstafford) January 30, 2020

John Roberts is rigging the impeachment trial. Withholding crucial evidence.

Whole system is rigged and needs to be destroyed.

— John Ocasio-Nolte (@NolteNC) January 30, 2020

How can one of the jurors in the senate trial be denied the right to do his job?

— Jim Marcello (@jimmarcello) January 30, 2020

The text of the question confirms this. So why was it censored? https://t.co/cUTRk7f3fv

— Mollie (@MZHemingway) January 30, 2020

Why was Rand Paul's question not asked? By what law or what justification was he silenced? This is extremely scary to witness and answers are needed.

— Mollie (@MZHemingway) January 30, 2020

There are some things we need to keep in mind?

MORE NEWS: 2020 Dem Michael Bloomberg Will Run $10 Million Gun Control Ad During Super Bowl

First, Chief Justice Roberts is the reason Obamacare initially survived in the Supreme Court when during the eleventh hour and 59th minute, he switched sides. It was so late in the process that Justice Ginsburg’s concurring opinion ends with the following words: “I respectfully dissent.” The only problem is that when you file a concurring opinion, you are not dissenting. What happened? Justice Ginsburg wrote her opinion when she thought she would be in a 5-4 minority.

Second, in my opinion, there is absolutely no legal basis for Chief Justice Roberts to refuse Paul’s question. The question is far more relevant than other questions that have been posited by the Chief Justice. Also, there was nothing in the question that identified the whistleblower as Eric Ciaramella or any other person.

Third, even if somebody wants to argue that the question “outs” the whistleblower, that is not a basis for Chief Justice Roberts to not read the question. Nowhere in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998, 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(8)-(9), Pub.L. 101-12 as amended (“ICWPA”), which amended the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 and the Inspector General Act of 1978, is anonymity even mentioned. On October 10, 2012, President Barack Obama issued Presidential Policy Directive 19, which provided specific whistleblower protections. Nothing in this directive provided anonymity for an intelligence community whistleblower; the directive prohibited retaliation against a whistleblower.

MORE NEWS: Fox Refuses To Air Super Bowl Ad About Abortion Survivors – Greenlights Commercial Featuring Drag Queens

The Inspector General Act of 1978 prohibits the inspector general from releasing the name of a complainant, but this applies to no one else. Under the statutory framework, whistleblowers are granted certain rights against retaliation or reprisal in the workplace. In other words, they cannot be demoted, transferred, fired, or otherwise penalized for filing a complaint that meets the statutory whistleblower requirements. However, identity protection is neither provided for nor contemplated, anywhere in the statutory language.

Senator Paul should submit another question about Ciaramella, and when Roberts refuses to read it, object, and demand a count of Senators willing to overrule Roberts. It’s time to find out how many Senators believe that the accused has the right to face his accuser!

Sections 7(B) of the Inspector General Act of 1978 “provides for the identity of an employee making a complaint, such as a whistleblower, to remain undisclosed to the extent practicable: “The Inspector General shall not, after receipt of a complaint or information from an employee, disclose the identity of the employee without the consent of the employee, unless the Inspector General determines such disclosure is unavoidable during the investigation,” according to FactCheck.org.

Since Senator Paul is not the Inspector General (and neither am I), he is not precluded (and neither am I) from releasing the name of Ciaramella as the whistleblower.

More Stories From WayneDupree.com

The post Roberts Not Allowing Rand Paul’s Question About Whistleblower Is Ruffling Feathers appeared first on The Political Insider.

SHOWDOWN: Rand Paul Vows to Fight after Justice John Roberts Blocks Question Naming Whistleblower

Posted on January 30, 2020 by Rusty Weiss

Tensions were on the rise Wednesday evening as Chief Justice John Roberts blocked a question from Senator Rand Paul that would have identified the alleged whistleblower at the center of the impeachment trial.

Roberts’ actions prompted shouting from the Kentucky Senator as he vowed to “fight for recognition.”

Sean Davis, a co-founder of the Federalist, reported that Roberts, at the behest of Democrats, “previously vowed to ban any questions about the whistleblower whatsoever, named or not.”

“Roberts’ arbitrary and unilateral censorship of senators and Senate business raises serious questions about whether he would similarly ban any and all motions to subpoena by name the whistleblower … to compel his testimony,” Davis said.

GOP senators previously suggested having the whistleblower testify should witnesses be approved for the trial.

After Republicans threatened a vote to rebuke Roberts on the record, the Chief Justice retreated and said the actual name of the whistleblower would be the only thing earning a block.

Even that should be challenged.

During the last break in the impeachment trial, “I don’t want to have to stand up to try and fight for recognition,” @RandPaul said loud enough to be audible from the galleries above the chamber.

“If I have to fight for recognition, I will,” he said.https://t.co/E8EOwenvbF

— Niels Lesniewski (@nielslesniewski) January 29, 2020

Paul Fuming

Roberts move at the encouraging of Democrats, reportedly, left Paul fuming and vowing to engage in a fight to be heard.

“I don’t want to have to stand up to try and fight for recognition,” Paul was heard shouting during a break in the trial. “If I have to fight for recognition, I will.”

Reporter Niels Lesniewski said Paul’s complaint was “audible from the galleries above the chamber.”

Paul, who has been insistent on testimony from the whistleblower for the record, said “tbd [to be decided]” when asked if he would force the issue.

Shameful and arbitrary abuse of power by Roberts, who has already done incalculable damage to the Supreme Court’s legitimacy as a non-political institution via his tortured defense of Obamcare’s constitutionality. Is he Chief Justice, or Chief Censor? https://t.co/KH83VjnkLZ

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) January 30, 2020

Outing the Whistleblower

As Senator Paul has explained time and again, whistleblowers are protected by federal law from retaliation in the workplace but are not guaranteed anonymity.

“The whistleblower statute protects the whistleblower from having his name revealed by the inspector general,” Paul previously noted when threatening to out him. “Even The New York Times admits that no one else is under any legal obligation.”

He has noted that the whistleblower is a material witness in the case “because he worked for Joe Biden at the same time Hunter Biden was receiving $50,000 per month.”

The Political Insider has identified the alleged whistleblower as CIA officer Eric Ciaramella, a registered Democrat who worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan.

A picture of the alleged Ukraine whistleblower shaking hands with @BarackObama has been unearthed.

“This picture raises serious questions about how this sham impeachment process started,” a senior Trump administration official said. https://t.co/5PwJbzzL62

— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) November 20, 2019

His identity is crucial because House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and his office have allegedly coordinated the effort with him to take down President Trump.

Stunning that Adam Schiff lies to millions of Americans when he says he doesn’t know the identity of the whistleblower.

He absolutely knows the identity of the whistleblower b/c he coordinated with the individual before the whistleblower’s complaint! His staff helped write it!

— Elise Stefanik (@EliseStefanik) January 29, 2020

Ciaramella’s work history and coordination with Schiff’s office would indicate a political bias – not a concern over truth and justice – in trying to impeach the President, something that is thoroughly relevant to the trial.

Attorney to the whistleblower, Mark Zaid, was revealed to have discussed a coup and other devious secret plans to oust the President.

“Democrats must be accountable for their hoaxes and their crimes,” Trump said regarding the ‘coup.’

Roberts, by protecting Schiff and the whistleblower, is assuring they will not be held accountable. Paul must continue to fight this and his Republican colleagues must stand with him.

The post SHOWDOWN: Rand Paul Vows to Fight after Justice John Roberts Blocks Question Naming Whistleblower appeared first on The Political Insider.

Adam Schiff Claims ‘I Don’t Know Who the Whistleblower Is’

Posted on January 30, 2020 by Guest Author

On Wednesday, House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff insisted that he did not know the identity of the so-called “whistleblower” who filed the original complaint about President Donald Trump that led to the impeachment trial.

‘I don’t know who the whistleblower is’

“First of all, I don’t know who the whistleblower is, I haven’t met them or communicated with them in any way,” Schiff said Wednesday during the Senate impeachment trial.

What Schiff failed to mention was that the “whistleblower” approached a House Intelligence Committee aide with supposed details about Trump’s phone call with Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

How is it that EVERY SINGLE reporter and political operative in Washington, DC knows who the "whistleblower" is, yet Adam Schiff claims he doesn't?

The pencil neck geek has no credibility #FullOfSchiff https://t.co/3LOoGUZAWA

— Andrew Surabian (@Surabees) January 29, 2020

The New York Times reported that a Schiff committee staffer told the “whistleblower” to meet with the inspector general and file a whistleblower complaint.

Schiff Denies His Staff Did Anything to Help Whistleblower

Yet Schiff is still denying that any member of his staff did anything to help the “whistleblower.”

“The committee staff did not write the complaint or coach the whistleblower what to put in the complaint,” Schiff said.

Schiff condemned what he called a “conspiracy theory” that someone on his committee staff allegedly “colluded” with the whistleblower to craft a complaint that launched the impeachment investigation.

A spokesman for Schiff told the NYT that the whistleblower, “contacted the committee for guidance on how to report possible wrongdoing within the jurisdiction of the intelligence community.”

Schiff said his staff has shown “complete professionalism,” adding that members of his staff had become subject to threats on social media thanks to “smears” committed by President Trump and his allies.

Schiff Vowed Not to Reveal Identity

Schiff vowed he would not do anything to reveal or endanger the identity of the “whistleblower” as the trial continues.

Republican Congresswoman Elise Stefanik of New York accused Schiff on Twitter of lying about the “whistleblower.”

“Stunning that Adam Schiff lies to millions of Americans when he says he doesn’t know the identity of the whistleblower,” she wrote. “He absolutely knows the identity of the whistleblower because he coordinated with the individual before the whistleblower’s complaint! His staff helped write it!”

Stunning that Adam Schiff lies to millions of Americans when he says he doesn’t know the identity of the whistleblower.

He absolutely knows the identity of the whistleblower b/c he coordinated with the individual before the whistleblower’s complaint! His staff helped write it!

— Elise Stefanik (@EliseStefanik) January 29, 2020

Many Republicans have called for the “whistleblower” to testify as part of the impeachment process, with Schiff repeatedly refusing at each turn.

On Wednesday, Schiff told the Senate that the “whistleblower” testifying was no longer relevant because President Trump released the transcript of the call.

“There’s no need for that whistleblower any more except to further endanger that person’s life,” Schiff said.

The post Adam Schiff Claims ‘I Don’t Know Who the Whistleblower Is’ appeared first on The Political Insider.

Clashes Continue in Trial on Wednesday, GOP Holds Advantage

Posted on January 30, 2020 by LifeZette

By David Kamioner | January 30, 2020

The mood was legal yet the elements of fiery controversy were there on Wednesday during the Democrat Combover Festival and Senate impeachment trial of President Trump.

Most GOP questions were handled by attorney Patrick Philbin. But Alan Dershowitz, Pat Cipollone, Pam Bondi and Jay Sekulow also got their turn at bat. The Democrats inexplicably continued to go with the hard on the ear team of Nadler and Schiff, relegating better litigators like Jeffries and Crow to the general sidelines for most of the day.

The Democrats also continued to let the unintentionally comic Val Demings take the podium. She is so inarticulate that her time on camera has become the designated bathroom break time for Democrat and GOP Hill staffers alike.

Other developments were as follows:

The questions from the senators were mostly contrived set ups to their own party’s lawyers. When they addressed the other side the questions became increasingly aggressive as the day wore on.
Supposed swing vote GOP Senator Susan Collins of Maine was seen to be visibly upset at Democrat insults to her and other senators. The Democrats are pushing her towards acquittal.
GOP Senator Rand Paul had a question thrown back at him by Chief Justice John Roberts when Paul named Eric Ciaramella as the informer. More details on that in a following article.
The Democrats focused on Bolton. Yet the GOP, and you will be sure to hear of this today, unearthed videos where Bolton states there was nothing amiss with the president’s communications with the Ukrainians.
A constant GOP theme during the day was that policy or political differences are not sufficient to meet the standard of impeachment set forth by the Founders.The Democrats countered with their usual “big lie” strategy of ignoring reality and focusing on their fictional talking points. Schiff even revisited his old trick of making up lines he then insinuates were the president’s real meanings.
The Democrats stoked the fire on their love affair with the hapless Lt. Colonel “Flounder” Vindman, even though his was perhaps the worst and most discredited testimony during the House hearings.
Jay Sekulow showcased the poison pill defense, as we predicted. He said he would call both Bidens, Schiff, and Ciaramella to the stand, at the very least, if the Senate voted for witnesses.

The New York-California Axis was on display during the Democrat presentations, as the leftist party can’t seem to find very many legal acolytes or elected supporters much distant from the Big Rotten Apple or the Left Coast.
Swing vote possibility Democrat Senator John Tester, given the nature of a question he sent to the Chief Justice for the Democrat House managers, may be leaning against the president.

More to follow…

This piece originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post Clashes Continue in Trial on Wednesday, GOP Holds Advantage appeared first on The Political Insider.

Toomey Proposes One Witness Deal in Senate Trial

Posted on January 28, 2020 by LifeZette

By David Kamioner | January 28, 2020

Pennsylvania GOP Senator Pat Toomey, a Trump supporter but not particularly close to the White House, is reportedly floating a plan that would permit the Democrats and the Trump defense team one witness each during the impeachment trial of President Trump in the Senate.

He bills it as a compromise that would limit the time spent on witnesses and would avoid a potential Trump loss on the question when it comes up soon to a Senate vote.

The vote could be won with a simple majority of 51 and several Senators out of the 53 member GOP caucus, to include Alexander, Collins, Romney, Murkowski, McSally, and Gardner, are said to be thinking about supporting the current Democrat proposal for unlimited witnesses.

The Democrats would need four GOP turncoats to win that vote.

Collins, McSally, and Gardner are up for reelection this year in light red to purple states and they may be thinking they need to vote for the Democrat measure to keep swing and moderate support. Toomey believes this gambit will keep them and the other possible rebels on board.

LifeZette has learned that Toomey has spoken directly with Romney and Collins on the issue and they have not shot it down out of hand.

Who would those witnesses be?

According to Capitol Hill staffers on both sides of the aisle the Democrats would go with John Bolton and the GOP defense team is leaning towards informer Eric Ciaramella or Adam Schiff.

If Bolton testified against Trump and said the president directly linked Ukrainian military aid to a political hit on Biden it would mark the greatest case of political betrayal DC has seen in a while. It would also be the Fort Sumter in outright political warfare between the Warhawk and America First wings of the GOP.

Putting Ciaramella on the stand could expose his partisan nature and his lack of direct knowledge of everything he alleges, thus undercutting the entire Democrat case.

Watching Schiff squirm under cross examination from Jay Sekulow, Eric Herschmann, or, please God, Alan Dershowitz, would not only be spiritually satisfying on the order of a Bach High Mass but would set forth the firm case that the entire House process was a sham from the beginning.

Witnesses would also add to the drama of the proceeding and the media feeding would only get more frenzied.

The vote on the issue could happen this week.

This piece originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post Toomey Proposes One Witness Deal in Senate Trial appeared first on The Political Insider.

Bolton Manuscript Leaked, Romney and Collins May Vote Against the President

Posted on January 27, 2020 by LifeZette

By David Kamioner | January 27, 2020

Reports out of DC, on the heels of the selective leaking of John Bolton’s new book, is that Republican Senators Mitt Romney of Utah and Susan Collins of Maine are likely to go south on the GOP trial process and vote to bring in witnesses.

If that happens the trial won’t be over by late this week/early next week. It could go on for weeks. If the duo votes against the president’s trial agenda the Dems would still need two more votes to win on the subject. They are targeting GOP Senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee.

The pressure to vote for witnesses was ratcheted up over the weekend with leaks from John Bolton’s new book that claim that the president directly told Bolton that the delay in military aid to Ukraine was tied to Biden.

Bolton is using the same team and strategy as has James Comey and the leak was coordinated to coincide with the impeachment trial, a vote on witnesses and, most importantly to Bolton, the availability to preorder his book online.

But bringing on witnesses is a two-edged sword for the Dems. Yes, the Dems may get Bolton. But the GOP could call Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, Adam Schiff, and Eric Ciaramella. As spiritually satisfying at it would be to watch Jay Sekulow munch on their still warm legal carcasses for lunch, the sooner this charade is over is the sooner the president can get back to undistracted work and the Congress can get back to whatever it does on a daily basis aside from fundraisers and hitting on lobbyists.

Bolton’s move can not only be seen as revenge for being fired by Trump, but as another chapter in the intramural GOP fight over a Cold War national security stance or the America First approach of the president.

If Collins and Murkowski vote for witnesses it is likely to throw some meat to their moderate supporters. Alexander is a lame duck and can vote the way he chooses without electoral repercussions.

Though if he desires an appointment in a second Trump administration this would not be the way to get it. And then there’s Mittens.

This would be a way for him to play to the press and shiv Trump at the same time. Given Romney’s notorious sanctimony and ego, it may be a temptation he is unable to resist.

This piece originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post Bolton Manuscript Leaked, Romney and Collins May Vote Against the President appeared first on The Political Insider.