House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., questions Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire,as he testifies before the House Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Sept. 26, 2019. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
Either Adam Schiff’s staff overlooked the name of alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella in the transcript of acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor before releasing it or Eric Ciaramella isn’t the whistleblower.
Turning Point USA’s Benny Johnson reported that on page 236 of Taylor’s transcript, Taylor is asked if the name “Eric Ciaramella” rings a bell for him. This question is asked by the Oversight Committee Republicans’ chief investigative counsel, Steve Castor.
Um – why is Eric Ciaramella's name in the congressional Impeachment testimony?
Dems said they would redact the name of the "whistleblower."
1. Ciaramella is not the whistleblower
2. Dems messed up BIG TIME & printed the name of the leaker in their own document pic.twitter.com/YrvUIwbt3y
— Benny (@bennyjohnson) November 6, 2019
Here is a screen shot of page 236.
Photo Credit: Screen shot: https://www.scribd.com/document/433753426/William-Taylor-testimony#from_embed (Taylor’s full transcript can be viewed here.)
There have been rumors that once Schiff’s staff saw that Ciaramella’s name had not been redacted, they pulled the transcript. However, as of this morning, his name is still unredacted on page 236.
According to the The Daily Beast, Democrats have accused Republicans of using witness interviews as a “backdoor” way of outing the whistleblower. Members of the conservative media have been publishing the alleged whistleblower’s name ever since investigative journalist Paul Sperry’s October 31st report which clearly named Ciaramella. His name began appearing on some conservative websites in early October.
Still, most large media outlets refuse to publish his name. Surprisingly, even Fox News has ordered their writers and contributors not to divulge the name claiming it hasn’t been confirmed. Others point to his status as a whistleblower who deserves protection under the whistleblower statute which I find to be ridiculous. This young man is anything but a whistleblower. He is a highly partisan Democrat who is part of a soft coup to take out the President.
Democrats want to prevent Ciaramella from testifying under oath before lawmakers, because their entire case depends on his credibility as a true whistleblower. Once the American people are presented with Ciaramella’s work history, his associations and his activities during the 2016 election and beyond, he will have zero credibility and voters will see for themselves that once again, the Democrats, rather than the Republicans, have tried to subvert the U.S. system of justice.