Democrats are putting a lot – maybe everything – on House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff’s ability to bring the impeachment to fruition. At this moment, his committee is handling what they hope and claim is the singularly most important “evidence” of high crimes and misdemeanors by President Trump – that phone conversation between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Many of the most radical House Democrats have reached the count of 10 against Trump even though the President has not even hit the political canvas yet. They pontificate in the press how their investigations are only to discover the facts – however they may fall – before reaching a judgment about entering into a formal impeachment hearing.
In making Schiff the point man for the project, Speaker Pelosi is counting on a member of Congress within the lowest ranks of credibility – and he keeps sinking deeper every day. Through the entire three-year attempt to remove Trump from office, Schiff has been a leader in the #NeverTrump Resistance Movement. He has shown himself to be willing to deceive through selective fact-finding, outrageous interpretations of facts, lies and even creating false evidence.
For most of the past three years, Schiff has consistently claimed that Trump has committed crimes even when the evidence was lacking. He – by virtue of his own claims – declared that actions that were clearly not crimes were crimes. At one point, Schiff went on television to declare that in those closed-door meetings he had seen hard evidence of crimes of collusion with Russians committed by Trump – seemingly expecting Special Counsel Robert Mueller would cover his lie by producing some evidence. When the Mueller Report totally exonerated Trump of colluding with Russians, Schiff was left with a face full of egg.
At the opening of his impeachment hearing, Schiff read what appeared to most viewers to be Trump’s words in the phone conversation. They were most damning — so damning, in fact, that when I heard them, I made a mental note to verify. It was quickly revealed by Republican members of the committee that Schiff in his opening prepared statement had invented the words.
In response to the criticism, Schiff claimed that his words were just parody. That was no place for parody, and it was not very amusing. More likely, it was a crass and corrupt attempt to dishonestly hype the actual words of the President – to make them as a shakedown that the actual words failed to do.
Then there is the issue of the whistleblower. Schiff acted surprised upon learning that a whistleblower complaint had been filed when, in fact, the whistleblower had first come to Schiff with the complaint. One might expect that he would then want that person to appear before the Committee to tell his or her story. But rather, Schiff and his staff coached the person to get lawyered up and file a formal Whistleblower Complaint with the Inspector General.
When being pressed by ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on the false quote, Schiff claimed the criticism from the White House was NOT due to the words he made up but because of the whistleblower. Schiff said:
“I can tell you exactly why the President is furious with me, and that is because when I LEARNED that a whistleblower had FILED a complaint – an urgent complaint that was being withheld from Congress, and no one knew about this yet, I went public to demand that we get the complaint,”
The added highlights show that Schiff was lying again to hype the accusations. Schiff was well aware of the complaint BEFORE it was filed. His Committee had proposed the filing of the complainant rather than handling it directly. Why? The only obvious reason was to create a more spectacular potential – political theatrics, in a nutshell. One way or the other, the whistleblower was going to testify, but this added a lot more drama.
Pelosi now faces a dilemma. The first major impeachment inquiry will now be headed by a person with very little credibility. The entire process will take on the appearance of a kangaroo court – and that plays to Trump’s advantage.
So, there ‘tis.