AP Photo/Andrew Harnik
Democrats had an absolutely brutal day so far during the impeachment hearings.
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman who was supposed to be their star witness, not only had never met President Donald Trump, he seemed to have contradicted his prior testimony.
Previously, he testified that he did not know who the whistleblower was. But when asked about to whom he had spoken about the July 25th call, he testified that he had spoken to two people over “interagency policy” George Kent and an individual in the “intelligence community.”
House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff then cut him off to “protect the whistleblower,” seemingly making it clear that the person who Vindman spoke to was in fact the whistleblower.
Nunes: Did you discuss the July 25 call or July 26 call with anyone outside the White House?
Vindman: George Kent, and someone in the intelligence community I'm not going to name.
Schiff interrupts to "protect the whistleblower."
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) November 19, 2019
The problem? He previously testified that he did not know the identity of the whistleblower.
Schiff also claimed that he didn’t know the name of the whistleblower.
Yet they just both didn’t name this guy, because Schiff said, it was “to protect the whistleblower.”
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) honed in on it more, and he pointed out how this shows that Adam Schiff is not telling the truth and “no one believes him” about not knowing the identity of the whistleblower.
.@Jim_Jordan calls out Schiff and Vindman:
"I don't see how this is outing the whistleblower. The witness has testified that he does not know who the whistleblower is. You have said, even though no one believes you, you have said you don't know who the whistleblower is…" pic.twitter.com/f7gT9PAFYt
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) November 19, 2019
But then Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-) put the cherry on top of the cake.
🚨WHAT A MOMENT 🚨
Dems are going to impeach Trump on "bribery" charges — because it polled well.
Rep. Ratcliffe searched all impeachment documents for the word "bribery" – he found nothing.@RepRatcliffe made a monster stack of testimony on his desk for effect.
Wow.
WATCH: pic.twitter.com/CwY8EyOTjT— Benny (@bennyjohnson) November 19, 2019
He noted on the Democrats had dispensed with accusing President Donald Trump of “quid pro quo” apparently assuming Americans were too stupid to understand what that meant and were going with the term “bribery” after they poll-tested that as a word that would resonate more.
He asked both witnesses, Jennifer Williams and Lt. Col Alexander Vindman, who testified today if they believed that what they had seen or knew about the Trump interaction was bribery. And both witnesses said, “No.”
In a case in which the Speaker has said is all about bribery, Ratcliffe said, not one of the witnesses has used the term. “None of them,” he said, dropping all the transcripts on the desk.
Ratcliffe noted there was only one reference to bribery in any of them and that was applied to Joe Biden, not Trump.
Case over.
HT: Twitchy
Join the conversation as a VIP Member