Screenshot from this video

House Intel Chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the man behind these impeachment hearings, shocked folks this morning with the most unbelievable claim.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) called out Schiff, asking when they might have the opportunity to question the whistleblower, the person who started all this, who is believed to be Eric Ciaramella.

Jordan said no member knew who the whistleblower was except Schiff and his staff.

Schiff then claimed that even he didn’t know who the whistleblower was.

What utter bunk.

Let’s look at the contacts they had prior to this becoming public.

Schiff’s aide actually met with the whistleblower and was the one who recommended that he file his complaint with the ICIG.

The whistleblower then wrote a letter to Schiff on August 12 with an attachment. His complaint was filed August 12, so the attachment was likely the complaint which also had the whistleblower’s signature to attest the truth of his assertions on it.

Schiff then led the public to believe he had no prior contacts with the whistleblower as he tried to push the narrative that the Trump administration was trying to withhold the complaint from the Congress, when indeed it was his staff that knew about it before anyone else and indeed prompted it to be filed.

Here’s what he said in a September 17 interview with MSNBC.

Schiff: We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower. We would like to, but I’m sure the whistleblower has concerns that he has not been advised, as the law requires, by the inspector general or the director of national intelligence, just as to how he is to communicate with Congress. And so the risk for the whistleblower is retaliation. Will the whistleblower be protected under the statute if the offices that are supposed to come to his assistance and provide the mechanism are unwilling to do so? But yes, we would love to talk directly with the whistleblower.

He was given four Pinocchios by the Washington Post for that lie and the White House wasn’t shy about noting that.

Four (4) Pinocchios.

That’s what Adam Schiff earned for his claim that "we have not spoken directly with the whistleblower." pic.twitter.com/zR8McgiyOD

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) November 13, 2019

Here he is saying that Congress had been denied the complaint of the whistleblower when in fact Congress had been apprised of it by the whistleblower’s letter to him.

Then when he tried to clear up the lies about the prior contacts, he appears to have lied again.

From NY Post:

“I should have been much more clear and I said so the minute it was brought to my attention,” Schiff told CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

“I was referring to the fact that when the whistleblower filed the complaint, we had not heard from the whistleblower. We wanted to bring the whistleblower in at that time. But I should’ve been much more clear about that.”

This is an obvious falsehood, as it was his aide who recommended that the whistleblower file the complaint, so obviously, they had already “heard from the whistleblower.”

Now after all this and all the hearings, he’s going to claim he doesn’t even know who he is? Put him under oath and have him testify to that and to the contacts.

And how is he protecting him and redacting his name from documents if he doesn’t know who he is?

And if he truly doesn’t know who he is, then why are we even here, with an anonymous complaint, with no one, by Schiff’s own order, even able to talk about or question the veracity of the whistleblower?