Posted on 11/12/2019 12:43:00 PM PST by Heartlander
“Welcome back, my friends, to the show that never ends. We’re so glad you could attend. Come inside, come inside.” Emerson, Lake and Palmer.
The curtain rises this week on Democrats’ latest effort to rid the nation of President Trump. This time with public impeachment hearings, hosted by House Intelligence Committee chairman and material witness Adam Schiff.
Three things you have to know right off the bat:
Long gone are the days of a stone-cold serious Rep. Barbara Jordan in the Watergate hearings, or even the even-handed procedural workings of the Clinton Impeachment. Back then, impeachment was serious business. Today its a grotesque cover-up of a failed coup mashed together with a massive hissy fit.
The hissy fit part we all understand. Democrats were screaming for Trump’s impeachment before Hillary had even recovered from whatever booze or sedatives knocked her out on Election Night. The so-called Whistleblower’s lawyer was already talking about a CNN- and lawyer-led “coup,” before Trump even reached his first full month in office. Obama, Comey and Brennan had left saboteurs throughout the White House. Federal workers were urged to “resist” in any way they could. Anyone with a MAGA hat or even tangential connection to Trump became fair game for violence.
The peaceful transfer of power? You know, the bedrock of our society? The envy of and model for the world? Smashed like Andy Ngo’s head at an Antifa rally.
The coup connection is not as easy to understand. Not because the evidence isn’t there. It’s because a vast majority of people who watch mainstream media news have absolutely no idea what’s been kept from them.
It’s no coincidence the rush to impeachment over the Ukraine call began the minute news broke Attorney General Bill Barr was looking at Ukraine and other countries for their role in the Russia Collusion black op. And that John Durham’s investigation had expanded beyond the 2016 election to activities leading up to the appointment of Robert Mueller .
Let’s take something simple. Namely, The Whistleblower. Let’s call him Eric Not-Idle. Official Washington and the news media know who he is and what he is, the same way they knew what Jeffrey Epstein was and the same way Hollywood knew what Harvey Weinstein was. They’re not protecting a whistleblower. They’re protecting a longtime source. They’re protecting a co-conspirator.
Do you know, dear liberal, that Eric Not-Idle was fired from the White House for leaking damaging and false stories about Trump? Leaks that undermined national security and international relationships?
Do you know that he was John Brennan’s guy in the Trump White House? (Brennan’s role in the coup effort against Trump being indisputable, as we’ve laid out often here.)
Did you know a case has been made that he’s the “Charlie” Lisa Page and Peter Strzok talk about in their texts, who was assigned to spy on the Trump White House? Dan Bongino lays it out. Oh, sure, YouTube has removed the video. But you can hear the audio here.
That’s just background. Wait until you see Eric’s central role in both plot lines in Trump’s Ukraine call.
The Democrats want to impeach Trump over his phone call with Ukraine’s president. Democrats insist Trump asked for dirt on a political opponent. Although both presidents and our top diplomats say it’s bunk, Democrats also insist Trump demanded an investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden as a condition for getting military aid.
The transcript is clear: Trump asked for a favor. He wanted Ukraine to fully reveal its role in interfering in the 2016 election. He also wondered about Joe and Hunter Biden and investigations into the notoriously corrupt Burisma.
What’s amazing is the Whistleblower, we now know, was central to both matters Trump wanted looked at. No wonder Eric Not-Idle went racing to Schiff and an impeachment-hungry lawyer when he got wind of the call. Trump was coming at him and his cohorts (and Democratic corruption) from two sides.
First, central to Ukraine’s efforts to undermine the 2016 for Hillary is a woman named Alexandra Chupra. She was tasked by Hillary’s DNC to coordinate with Ukraine on collecting dirt on Trump and Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign manager. The dirt was used as the earliest rumblings of what would become the Trump Russia Collusion hoax. According to White House visitor logs, Chupra was at the White House 27 times. And she wasn’t there for the Christmas Tour. Who was one of her White House hosts? According to Judicial Watch, none other than the Whistleblower himself.
Let CNN call it “conspiracy theory.” We deserve to know how much the Obama White House was coordinating with the DNC and the Ukraine in getting dirt on the Trump campaign. Wouldn’t Eric Not-Idle be just the guy to ask?
Second, we’ve known for a while Eric was tight with Biden. In fact, was his go-to guy on Ukraine. Now, on January 19, 2016, there was a meeting at the White House with Ukraine diplomat Andrii Telizhenko. John Solomon has reported on that meeting:
According to Telizhenko, U.S. officials told the Ukrainians they would prefer that Kiev drop the Burisma probe and allow the FBI to take it over. The Ukrainians did not agree. But then Joe Biden pressured Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to fire Ukraine’s chief prosecutor in March 2016, as I previously reported. The Burisma case was transferred to NABU, then shut down.
So who would be pressuring Telizhenko in that meeting to drop the Burisma investigation? Biden’s Ukraine guy, Eric Not-Idle? But Al, you don’t even know if he was there. Actually we do. Fool Nelson checked the Visitor Logs. Eric hosted the meeting.
This meeting also involved officials from the NSC, DOJ and FBI. DOJ officials also asked Telizhenko and investigators from Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau if they could help locate information on a Manafort-connected group called Party of Regions. All told, as Solomon writes:
That makes the January 2016 meeting one of the earliest documented efforts to build the now-debunked Trump-Russia collusion narrative and one of the first to involve the Obama administration’s intervention.
Only a few weeks ago, Schiff was saying how we need to hear from the whistleblower. And now, now that we know who he is, Schiff is rejecting the GOP’s official request to have him testify.
Yes, the guy at the center of all the Ukraine activity. The guy who triggered the whole wretched business. The guy who yelled “Fire!” in the jam-packed political theater. And Judge, Jury and Executioner Schiff is happy to let him wander off, whistling in the shadows.
Schiff also rejected the GOP request to have Hunter Biden testify.
See if this makes sense. During a 30 minute phone call with the new Ukraine president who’s vowing to fight corruption President Trump makes brief mention of the Biden’s … after Biden is caught bragging about blackmailing the former president into firing the prosecutor investigating the notoriously corrupt company paying Hunter Biden $83,000 a month.
The same Hunter Biden whose name Burisma kept dropping while bugging the State Department to pressure Ukraine into dropping its investigation. (That’s what the $83K a month was for … access.) A month later, Joe Biden does exactly what Burisma wanted. Strong-arms Ukraine.
Not for nothing, but that State Department was run by John Kerry. His stepson had been a business partner of Hunter Biden. But Chris Heinz broke the partnership because he thought the Burisma deal was far too shady to be involved in.
Heinz ketchup isn’t as thick as those who think the Biden-Burisma-Ukraine dance is on the level. Heck, The New York Times reports that Biden’s own staff was worried about it.
Yet, Trump asking about it is somehow a high crime. Somehow his inquiry is worth the savage, destructive, divisive spectacle of partisan impeachment hearing.
What a joke.
Al Perrotta is the Managing Editor of The Stream and co-author, with @JZmirak, of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration. You can follow him at @StreamingAl. And if you aren’t already, please follow The Stream at @Streamdotorg.
Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »
Some of us here knew immediatly the guy was angry and full of jealousey because he was out of the loop in Ukraine and moreso lost his personal control of the Ukrainian dynamics he prided
himself on for years.......His testimony reeked of it when released!
So this was pay back for him...jumped into bed with Schiff and it was a go.
There was no and is no political opponent here. There won’t be a political opponent until the DNC makes the official announcement. Which they hadn’t then nor have they now.
Actually, he spells it Eric CIAramella.
Pretty much nails it.
The Constitution explicitly prohibits titles of nobility, and the First Amendment rules out an established priesthood. But every claim that “the press” is “the Fourth Estate” is a claim that printers/broadcasters have rights not available to we-the-people.Antonin Scala (of blessed memory) made a very interesting point about the Bill of Rights. He said that the BoR was, as we all know, a promise on which the ratification of the entire Constitution was premised. The Federalists had to get an adequate bill of rights ratified into the Constitution before the Antifederalists might gather strength for a movement to secede from the Union. Which would have been very easy while the Constitution was novel, and respect for it not a tradition.
Therefore the occasion of the enactment of the Bill of Rights would have been a terrible place to try to modify the rights Americans believed they had from God. The design of the Bill of Rights is basically a list only of rights which tyrants had historically abused, plus the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, which codified the premise of the initial absence of a bill of rights by stating explicitly that the Constitution did not change any right by failing to mention it.
That is very germane to the freedom of the press. Note that 1A does not refer to “freedom of the press” but to “the freedom of the press.” The significance of that “the" is that it refers not to any novel right but to freedom of the press as it already existed. And that does not include the right to libel anyone without liability.
The right to sue for libel is therefore unaffected by the First Amendment. This is in direct contradiction to Justice William Brennan’s holding in the New York Times Co. v. Sullivan that "libel can claim no talismanic immunity from constitutional limitations. It must be measured by standards that satisfy the First Amendment.” In reality 1A does not touch libel law.
IMHO it is vitally important that Republicans aggressively file libel suits against wire service journalism. The wire services would not stand a prayer of passing muster if someone tried to start them up now. The utility of the wire services lies in saving telegraphy bandwidth - but telegraphy bandwidth is now a de minimum cost.
PERFECT...
As in the perfect bait, the perfect setup, the perfect sting.
Called it a couple of weeks ago!
Didn’t you get the memo -— it’s no longer quid pro quo (not something “a lot of Americans understand”, you know) -— now it’s EXTORTION and BRIBERY! The projection by the democrats is as plain as the sky is blue. Half the country is apparently in a hypnotic trance, hearing only the lies the democrats are pushing. So frustrating! Every single thing they’re accusing him of, they are doing/have done, themselves.
IMO, there’s only two pieces of actual evidence, so far as I know...the transcript and the video of Joe Biden.
________________
Isn't that inconvenient for Schifft.
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.