'No further discussion': Talks halt between whistleblower lawyers and Schiff staff amid expectation

[Right_in_Virginia]

'No further discussion': Talks halt between whistleblower lawyers and Schiff staff amid expectation he won’t testify
Washington Examiner, Oct 31, 2019

The whistleblower whose complaint launched impeachment proceedings against President Trump is unlikely to testify to Congress, as talks have ceased between his legal team and committee leaders.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, who has overseen depositions in Democrats' impeachment proceeding, was initially eager for the whistleblower to testify before citing concern about the person being identified.

Republicans accuse Schiff, a California Democrat, of changing course to prevent inquiries into his staff's dealings with the whistleblower before he filed his Aug. 12 complaint to the Intelligence Community inspector general.

A source familiar with the discussions told the Washington Examiner that talks halted over potential testimony from the whistleblower and there is no discussion of testimony from a second whistleblower, who supported the first's claims.

“There is no indication that either of the original whistleblowers will be called to testify or appear before the Senate or House Intelligence committees. There is no further discussion ongoing between the legal team and the committees,” the person said.


More: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/no-further-discussion-talks-halt-between-whistleblower-lawyers-and-schiff-staff-amid-expectation-he-wont-testify

[Right_in_Virginia]

“There is no indication that either of the original whistleblowers will be called to testify or appear before the Senate or House Intelligence committees. There is no further discussion ongoing between the legal team and the committees,” the person said.

How the hell is this even possible?   

[Cyber Liberty]

How the hell is this even possible?   

The Rats are finished using them.

[PeteS in CA]

Face down the Dems' stagecraft. Subpoena the suspected leakblower and ask him, under oath, if he is the leakblower.

[mystery-ak]

‘Whistleblowers’ not expected to testify as talks between legal team and Schiff staff reportedly cease
November 1, 2019 | Frieda Powers

The whistleblower who sparked the impeachment frenzy against President Trump will likely not be testifying before Congress.

Talks between the whistleblower’s legal team and Rep. Adam Schiff’s staff have ceased, and the second whistleblower who backed the claims by the first will also not be testifying, according to a report Thursday by the Washington Examiner.

“There is no indication that either of the original whistleblowers will be called to testify or appear before the Senate or House Intelligence committees. There is no further discussion ongoing between the legal team and the committees,” a source familiar with the discussions told the newspaper.

Republicans have complained that Schiff has been blocking any questions into how his staff has been dealing with the whistleblower who filed a complaint to the Intelligence Community inspector general in August about Trump’s July phone call with the Ukraine president. The House Intelligence Committee chairman had previously said he looked forward to the whistleblower’s testimony and asserted “We need to speak with the whistleblower” in a statement in September.

more
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2019/11/01/whistleblowers-not-expected-to-testify-as-talks-between-legal-team-and-schiff-staff-reportedly-cease-846818

[Wingnut]

No whistleblower.  No impeachment. 

[skeeter]

No whistleblower.  No impeachment.

Don't be so sure. I've already heard some 'coverup' horsesh*t.

You know how rats roll.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Face down the Dems' stagecraft. Subpoena the suspected leakblower and ask him, under oath, if he is the leakblower.

 

[libertybele]

No whistleblower.  No impeachment.

Logically, yes,  but the DEMS are making up the rules of impeachment as they go along.  One way or another they are going to impeach him and IMHO if they weren't confident that the Senate and Roberts were going to vote to remove him, they wouldn't be doing this.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Face down the Dems' stagecraft. Subpoena the suspected leakblower and ask him, under oath, if he is the leakblower.

Since we know the name of at least one whistleblower is there some reason Spkr McConnell and Sen Graham can't subpoena him under a Senate committee right now?

under the new rules the House Republicans can request subpoenas too, so I don't see how the whistleblowers don't testify.  I'll be disappointed if they don't.

[Bigun]

It is impossible for people who do not exist to testify anywhere.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

It is impossible for people who do not exist to testify anywhere.

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,380847.0.html
BREAKING: New Report Identifies Whistleblower as CIA Analyst Eric Ciaramella

Is Paul Sperry part of the conspiracy to take down Trump?

[Right_in_Virginia]

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,380847.0.html
BREAKING: New Report Identifies Whistleblower as CIA Analyst Eric Ciaramella

Is Paul Sperry part of the conspiracy to take down Trump?

Now that you know the name, you should understand why Schiff cannot put him under oath and testify. 

[Bigun]

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,380847.0.html
BREAKING: New Report Identifies Whistleblower as CIA Analyst Eric Ciaramella

Is Paul Sperry part of the conspiracy to take down Trump?

Once again - I'm typing slow just for you @Once-Ler - he IS NOT a "whistleblower" in any commonly understood sense of that word.  He IS a part, a coconspirator if you like, of the ongoing effort to undo the 2016 presidential election.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Once again - I'm typing slow just for you @Once-Ler - he IS NOT a "whistleblower" in any commonly understood sense of that word.  He IS a part, a coconspirator if you like, of the ongoing effort to undo the 2016 presidential election.

 

[truth_seeker]

Who holds the authority, to order an operative, to listen to a confidential call, including the Potus and a foreign person?

Written Order? Verbal order? Witnessed by whom?

Legal order?

[Jazzhead]

Now that you know the name, you should understand why Schiff cannot put him under oath and testify.

That's right - he was a CIA mole in the White House, and clear evidence of the deep state's animus toward the President.   He puts a face and a name to Trump's charge that nefarioius actors have been out to get him from the beginning. 

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Once again - I'm typing slow just for you @Once-Ler - he IS NOT a "whistleblower" in any commonly understood sense of that word.  He IS a part, a coconspirator if you like, of the ongoing effort to undo the 2016 presidential election.

@Bigun
Thanks for typing it slowly.  I didn't know your definition of "whistleblower."  Now I understand.  I'm gonna keep referring to him as the whistleblower because everybody else is, but feel free to post your definition again if you see me post the word.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Now that you know the name, you should understand why Schiff cannot put him under oath and testify.

I understand Schiff may not want that, but I think the people want to hear from him.  I wanna know why McConnell and Graham can't subpoena him.

[Bigun]

Faux whistleblower Eric Ciaramella: His parents must be so proud

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Faux whistleblower Eric Ciaramella: His parents must be so proud

@Bigun
HE'S NOT A WHISTLEBLOWER!!!

am I doing that right?

[Cyber Liberty]

@Bigun
HE'S NOT A WHISTLEBLOWER!!!

am I doing that right?

I'm pretty sure you know what "Faux" means....

[Bigun]

faux
[fō]
ADJECTIVE
made in imitation; artificial.
"a string of faux pearls" · [more]
synonyms:
imaginary · imagined · pretended · make-believe · made-up · fantasy · fantasized · fancied · dream · dreamed-up · unreal · fanciful · invented · fictitious · fictive · mythical · [more]
not genuine; fake or false.
"their faux concern for the well-being of the voters didn't fool many"

[Formerly Once-Ler]

I'm pretty sure you know what "Faux" means....

I honestly read past that word in my zeal to present my punch line.  Nevermind @Bigun .

[Victoria33]

@mystery-ak

Forget political parties/politics - consider any whistleblower whose information will cause trouble for millions of people one way or another - if the whistleblower name is released, his/her life may/will be in danger and maybe for the rest of his/her life.  I am for not releasing the name.

IF it is CIA Analyst Eric Ciaramella, as long as that name is not legally identified as the person, he is likely safe in his person.  Should he be legally identified in this proceeding, his life is not safe now and forever.