Schiff Says House Democrats May Not Ask Whistleblower To Testify

House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff (D-CA) said on Sunday that House Democrats may not ask the whistleblower at the heart of the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump to testify.


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1255654
1 Like

“Come on, shy whistleblowers. Don’t be scared. Blow your little whistles!”

8 Likes

Since virtually everything in his report has been admitted to by Trump or corroborated by other evidence, there is nothing to be gained by calling him. America doesn’t need the distraction from Republican hate media.

89 Likes

Fine with me, not sure what other information the whistle blower can provide in person, and keeping him/her anonymous helps prevent drump from attacking directly, and a side bonus it drives drump crazy not knowing who it is.

66 Likes

Excellent. No need to out the whistleblower and put him or her in danger from the dark forces. And more whistleblowers will come forward if the first one is protected.

65 Likes

Does that mean that there are no other unknowns that the whistleblower would say other than the call report? It sure seemed like there were more things than just the call in the WB report.

10 Likes

“Not anymore?” Brennan asked.

“Well, our primary interest right now is making sure that that person is protected,” [said Schiff].

Either the whistle-blower is terrified and Schiff is trying to be reassuring – or, well, perhaps there is some other decent explanation …

14 Likes

There are many reasons Schiff might choose to do this:

  1. Protect the whistleblower’s safety
  2. Signal other whistleblowers that they can come forward safely
  3. Avoid creating a target for Trump and RW media to use as a distraction
  4. Keep the focus on stronger evidence of wrongdoing, like the text messages and Trump’s own words
72 Likes

Mz. Lindsey has sworn to out the whistleblower and force him/her to testify in public.

This is certainly part of what’s behind Schiff’s statement.

67 Likes

Well, he doesn’t really need to testify. His information was admittedly second-hand, but was enough to get an investigation started and to prompt direct evidence to emerge.

I wouldn’t want to risk this brave person’s safety and career for that evidence either. The Rs will scream because they want to make the WB the focus to distract from the facts, but from an evidentiary perspective, it’s a reasonable call not to have him testify.

30 Likes

Maybe he’s just hedging to throw the WH criminal off.

2 Likes

Nunes cannot be trusted.

50 Likes

Scary that we have to protect our own government employees from other parts of the government.

85 Likes

What, you don’t trust Midnight Run Devin not to scamper off to the WH with the whistleblower’s identity as soon as night falls?

27 Likes

Any WB who appears before any Congressional committee is going to be outed by the traitorous Repukes on the committees. There might be one or two who wouldn’t but these committees are loaded with loathsome traitors who wouldn’t hesitate to put the WB’s in jeopardy to advance themselves in Trump’s esteem. They are not only traitors, they are also stupid – I am looking at you, Nunes, Meadows, Jordan, et al.

45 Likes

Best way to ensure that someone’s cover is totally blown, and Vladimir and others get the chance to go through the books to see who met the person and when when they were assigned covertly overseas. It’ll be Valerie Plame all over again.

42 Likes

Just anyone who is a Republican.

7 Likes

I like how Schiff is thoughtful, methodical, strategic, and putting the interests of the nation, the U.S. Constitution, and justice first, unlike the silly and corrupt histrionics of DJT.

60 Likes

Whistleblower: I have evidence of grave and serious misdeeds, unethical and illegal behavior by Trump.

Trump: Oh yeah? Hold my beer.

11 Likes

Isn’t that a sad truth?!

8 Likes