The Democrats’ Soviet-style impeachment star chamber continued Tuesday with the interrogation of two Democrat-friendly witnesses in the morning. And the questioning of Jennifer Williams and LtCol Alexander Vindman didn’t quite work out the way the Democrats thought it would. For example, it was pretty clear from the Q&A that Vindman knows who the whistleblower is. He stated that he discussed the 25 July phone call between Presidents Trump and Zelensky with “someone in the intelligence community.” Never mind that he acted outside his chain of command and discussed it with that person and others who did not have the “need to know.” However, Shifty Schiff shut off the line of questioning about naming that person in the IC with whom Vindman spoke, implying that whoever it was almost certainly is the whistleblower-leaker. Plus, no crimes and no impeachable offenses came out of the morning’s testimony.
But before that all began, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), the ranking minority member of the House Intelligence Committee, gave another superlative opening statement that exposed the continued lying by the Democrats and their leftwing media allies. Let’s look at a few excerpts:
If you watched the impeachment hearings last week, you may have noticed a disconnect between what you actually saw and the mainstream media accounts describing it. What you saw were three diplomats, who dislike the President’s Ukraine policy, discussing second-hand and third-hand conversations about their objections. Meanwhile, they admitted they had not talked to the president about these matters, and they were unable to identify any crime or impeachable offense the President committed.
But what you read in the press were accounts of shocking, damning, and explosive testimony that fully supports the Democrats’ accusations.
If these accounts have a familiar ring, it’s because this is the same preposterous reporting the media offered for three years on the Russia hoax. On a near-daily basis, the top news outlets in America reported breathlessly on the newest bombshell revelations showing that President Trump and everyone surrounding him are Russian agents. It really wasn’t long ago that we were reading these headlines:
From CNN:”Congress investigating Russian investment fund with ties to Trump officials.” That was false.
From the New York Times: “Trump Campaign aides had repeated contacts with Russian intelligence.” That was false.
From Slate:”Was a Trump server communicating with Russia?” That was false.
From New York Magazine: “Will Trump be meeting with his counterpart or his handler?” That was false.
From the Guardian: “Manafort held secret talks with Assange in Ecuadorian Embassy, sources say.” That was false.
And from Buzzfeed: “President Trump directed his attorney Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about the Moscow Tower project.” That was false.
There was no objectivity or fairness in the media’s Russia stories—just a fevered rush to tarnish and remove a president who refuses to pretend that the media are something different than what they really are—puppets of the Democratic Party.
With their biased misreporting on the Russia hoax, the media lost the confidence of millions of Americans. And because they refused to acknowledge how badly they botched the story, they’ve learned no lessons and simply expect Americans will believe them as they try to stoke yet another partisan frenzy.
In previous hearings, I’ve outlined three questions the Democrats and the media don’t want asked or answered. Instead of shedding light on these crucial questions, the media are trying to smother and dismiss them. Those questions are:
First, what is the full extent of the Democrats’ prior coordination with the Whistleblower and who else did the Whistleblower coordinate this effort with?
What was the full extent of the Whistleblower’s prior coordination with Chairman Schiff, his staff, and any other people he cooperated with while preparing the complaint?
What are the Whistleblower’s political biases and connections to Democratic politicians?
How does the Whistleblower explain the inaccuracies in the complaint?
What contact did the Whistleblower have with the media, which appears to be ongoing?
What are the sources of the Whistleblower’s information, who else did he talk to, and was the Whistleblower prohibited by law from receiving or conveying any of that information?
What is the full extent of Ukraine’s election meddling against the Trump campaign?
In these depositions and hearings, Republicans have cited numerous indications of Ukrainians meddling in the 2016 elections to oppose the Trump campaign. Many of these instances were reported, including the posting of many primary source documents, by veteran investigative journalist John Solomon.
Since the Democrats switched from Russia to Ukraine for their impeachment crusade, Solomon’s reporting on Burisma, Hunter Biden, and Ukrainian election meddling has become inconvenient for the Democratic narrative, and so the media is furiously smearing and libeling Solomon.
In fact, the publication The Hill told its staff yesterday it would conduct a review of Solomon’s Ukraine reporting. Coincidentally, the decision came just three days after a Democrat on this committee told a Hill writer that she would stop speaking to The Hill because it had run Solomon’s stories, and she urged the writer to relay her concerns to Hill management.
So now that Solomon’s reporting is a problem for the Democrats, it’s a problem for the media as well.
And my third question: Why did Burisma hire Hunter Biden, what did he do for them, and did his position affect any U.S. government actions under the Obama administration?
We have now heard testimony from the Democrats’ own witnesses that diplomats were concerned about a conflict of interest involving Hunter Biden. That’s because he had secured a well-paid position, despite having no qualifications, on the board of a corrupt Ukrainian company while his father was Vice President charged with overseeing Ukrainian issues.
After trying out several different accusations against President Trump, the Democrats have recently settled on “bribery”—according to widespread reports, they replaced their “quid pro quo” allegation because it wasn’t polling well.
But if the Democrats and the media are suddenly so deeply concerned about bribery, you’d think they would take some interest in Burisma paying Hunter Biden $83,000 a month. And you’d think they would be interested in Joe Biden threatening to withhold U.S. loan guarantees unless the Ukrainians fired a prosecutor who was investigating Burisma. That would be a textbook example of bribery.
The media, of course, are free to act as Democrat puppets, and they’re free to lurch from the Russia hoax to the Ukraine hoax at the direction of their puppet masters. But they cannot reasonably expect to do so without alienating half the country who voted for the President they’re trying to expel.
<end of his opening statement>
It was particularly refreshing to listen to Rep. Nunes excoriate the legacy media for propagating Democrat lies, colluding with Democrats on both hoaxes – first Russian and now Ukrainian, and falsely besmirching and attacking contrary and truthful reporting by media colleagues like John Solomon. Republicans – less the President – have been reluctant to mount a frontal assault on whom I believe to be real enemies of the American Republic: the legacy media. They have abrogated their constitutional responsibility to speak truth to power and have become willing participants in enabling the Deep State and Uniparty to commit sedition against a duly elected president of the United States. They are doing great damage to the country by perpetuating lies and persuading many uninformed Americans to believe those lies. Nunes’s listing of just a few of the media headlines over the past few years that were subsequently determined to be completely false illuminated the media’s complicity in the ongoing attempts to lay the foundation for the impeachment of President Trump by any and all means necessary.
Rep. Nunes also turned a number of Democrat lies in their manufactured impeachment narrative inside out:
- The Democrats were originally all-in on having the whistleblower testify until it became known that he closely coordinated with Schiff’s own staff in preparing his whistleblower claim. Rep. Nunes wants to get to the bottom of that coordination, as well as the whistleblower’s highly partisan activities and motivations for making the claim, to begin with. And that also includes finding out who from the NSC staff told that whistleblower about the call since he didn’t hear it first-hand. That leaking is criminal.
- The notion that the whistleblower came forward on his own has now been debunked. The claim itself was written in legalese – almost certainly with legal assistance from Democrat lawyers. Rep. Nunes wants to find out about that coordination, too.
- The Democrats (with the media’s eager assistance, of course) have been conveying another false narrative to the American people – that any Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election “is just a Republican conspiracy that has been debunked.” By highlighting independent journalist John Solomon’s outstanding research exposing the real truth about Ukrainian meddling, Rep. Nunes debunked the Democrats’ false narrative. Think I’m just making a bold statement about this without foundation? Then you need to read Solomon’s own excellent summary here.
- Lastly, Rep. Nunes highlights the continuing need to get to the bottom of Hunter Biden’s actions with Burisma Holdings, including any related interactions with the US State Department that attempted to leverage his name. Democrats have been squawking about the notion that investigating Hunter Biden is nothing but an attempt to gain personal political advantage for the President going into the 2020 election, given that Joe Biden is currently the Democrat front-runner. But they conveniently side-step and ignore three important points: (1) they make the unfounded claim that the Ukrainian prosecutor who was removed was “corrupt” – which of course Democrats would do since he was investigating the Democrat Biden; (2) the Democrats claim that the intel community confirmed that it was the Russians, not the Ukrainians who meddled with the 2016 election, but that is misleading because Ukrainian meddling was NOT investigated, as the IC’s focus was exclusively on the Russians by design; and (3) there is a US-Ukraine mutual legal assistance treaty signed by Bill Clinton in 1999 that lays the framework for sharing law enforcement information associated with crimes committed, which makes the President’s desire to get to the bottom of the 2016 election meddling in Ukraine by the likes of DNC operative Alexandra Chalupa (an Ukrainian!), for example, entirely within his lawful authority. Refer to the text of that treaty here.
Rep. Nunes and his Republican colleagues are providing an enormous public service through their focused remarks and careful questioning of the various witnesses during this impeachment farce. Exposing the manufactured Democrat impeachment narrative in all respects is critical since the media absolutely will not do their jobs in that respect.