Skip to comments.Rep. Ratcliffe Explains Why One Transcript Is Missing From the Impeachment Trial [Schiff withheld exculpatory evidence]
Posted on 01/26/2020 2:15:42 PM PST by Kaslin
While presenting the Democrats' case for impeachment on the Senate floor, lead impeachment manager Adam Schiff (D-CA) kept referencing 17 witnesses who testified during the House impeachment inquiry. But there were 18 of them. Schiff and the Democrats are refusing to release the testimony of Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, and according to Republicans who were present during Atkinson's closed-door testimony, the reason the transcript hasn't been released is because it proves both the whistleblower and House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff did not tell the truth about their contact with each other.
Fox News' Maria Bartiromo interviewed Rep. John Ratcliffe on "Sunday Morning Futures" about the 18th transcript the Democrats are refusing to release. Rep. Ratcliffe was there for Inspector General Michael Atkinson's testimony and says the transcript is damaging to Chairman Adam Schiff and the whistleblower.
"The House managers kept putting up charts talking about the 17 witnesses," Ratcliffe began. "But there were 18 ... I was there. It's the one transcript out of 18 that hasn't been released. It's a 179-page transcript ... It's the one transcript that talks about Adam Schiff and the whistleblower. Now, everyone knows by now that Adam Schiff was not truthful about his contacts with the whistleblower. What they don't know and what's in that transcript is that the whistleblower wasn't truthful about his contacts with Adam Schiff. This whole thing started, Maria, when the whistleblower filed a complaint with the inspector general under penalty of perjury that wasn't true and correct, made representations in writing and verbally that weren't true and correct. And when we found that out and tried to get into the details of that, Adam Schiff, who was in charge of this investigation, shut it down, and now he's trying to bury that transcript."
Bartiromo noted that it wasn't the first time Chairman Adam Schiff has withheld exculpatory evidence. Despite looking at the same evidence as Chairman Schiff, Rep. Ratclffe and former Rep. Trey Gowdy both saw abuses in the FISA warrant process used against Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, something that has since been confirmed by Inspector General Michael Horowitz's investigation. At the time, Adam Schiff denied any abuses in the FISA process and accused Republicans and the president of lying.
"That's the very same person who is now out there spinning this Ukraine hoax in his latest impeachment effort," Rep. Ratcliffe continued. The congressman said he expects the president to be acquitted "by the end of this week."
The Democrats keep insisting on new witnesses. How about we hear from the old one first?
Why has Adam Schiff not been expelled from Congress ?
After this coup-attempt is finally put-to-bed, Schiff, the “ whistleblower “, and the Bidens need to be hauled before a congressional investigative committee, and thoroughly interrogated.
Why can’t the Senators resolve that ALL the evidence and testimony collected by the Dems be provided to them immediately, including this transcript in particular?
Atkinson’s testimony surely will come up during the “Questions” phase. Hope the Defense brings it up too.
Next your going to tell me that the Easter bunny isn't real...
Because the whole Democratic case is a farce.
Well, it has worked before...
we can possibly look forward to a two step procedure:
1. pass a motion to request, by a date certain in the very near future, all evidence from the house investigations, including any and all exculpatory evidence; and
2. when the date comes, but the missing evidence is not provided, pass a motion to dismiss for lack of complete (that is, including any and all exculpatory) evidence.
an observation is that following this procedure involves calling no new witnesses (lindsey gets a reprieve).
Why has Adam Schiff not been expelled from Congress ?
1. If Adam Schiff refuses to turn over every page of every transcript of his secret House committee proceedings to the Senate and to the President's legal team, then President Trump should be acquitted on principle and the Senate should make a very public statement that the entire impeachment was a case of prosecutorial abuse.
2. The House managers should not be permitted to call a single witness who has not already testified before one the House committees involved in the impeachment.
Schiff, the whistleblower , and the Bidens need to be hauled before a congressional investigative committee, and thoroughly interrogated.
Never going to happen.
The GOP hasn’t done a damn thing to support Trump so there’s no reason to expect that they will ever investigate this outrageous travesty.
Has the Trump legal team mentioned this?
Part 2 of this should be vote to acquit, not vote to dismiss. The reason is, a dismissal would mean the house can bring it up again in the future, and keep on impeaching. With an acquittal they can’t.
we can possibly look forward to a two step procedure
The only steps the Republicans in the senate will be taking are steps backwards.
You said it.
the whistleblower filed a complaint with the inspector general ... made representations in writing and verbally that weren’t true and correct....
Then there exists hard copy evidence of the w’blowers perjury and a federal crime was committed. Did Adamn S’hitt suborn perjury?
Do I hear the sound of bagpipes?
Why can’t the President declassify?
It’d be something if Schiff ends up getting some jail time after all this is said and done. Schiff and maybe a few other coup conspirators serving time might make them think twice before trying these stunts again.
Now, as a slight shift in gears, I want to touch on one last point before I yield to one of my colleagues, and that relates to the whistleblower--the whistleblower, whom we haven't heard that much about--who started all of this. We know from a letter that the inspector general of the intelligence community sent that he thought the whistleblower had political bias. We don't know exactly what the political bias was because the inspector general testified in the House committee in an executive session, and that transcript is still secret. It wasn't transmitted up to the House Judiciary Committee. We haven't seen it. We don't know what is in it. We don't know what he was asked and what he revealed about the whistleblower.Saturday, January 25, 2020 - President's Counsel
Now, you would think that before going forward with an impeachment proceeding against the President of the United States, that you would want to find out something about the complaint that had started this, because motivations, bias, reasons for wanting to bring this complaint could be relevant. But there wasn't any inquiry into that.
Recent reports, public reports suggest that, potentially, the whistleblower was an intelligence community staffer who worked with then-Vice President Biden on Ukraine matters, which, if true, would suggest an even greater reason for wanting to know about potential bias or motive for the whistleblower.
Yup. Caught red handed in a planned coup conspiracy. Lock ‘em up!
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.