Democrats must be grateful that the Thanksgiving recess will bring to an end their horrible week. It’s not nice to laugh at other people’s misfortunes but this week has featured a smorgasbord of schadenfreude for those otherwise bored and irritated by the politics of the moment. In fact, the rigged “Schiff Show” went so badly that observers have reason to doubt that the Democrats will actually pull the trigger on passing articles of impeachment. Here are a few highlights from Adam Mill’s blooper reel.
Adam Schiff Drives Himself to Tears
With sunken eyes and a cracking voice, Representative Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) did not appear to be cloaked in victory as he gavelled to conclusion the public impeachment hearings. He can be seen here choking back tears after giving a soaring speech about how Donald Trump colluded with the Russians to sway the 2016 elections and then turned right around and did the same with Ukraine for the 2020 elections. “Why won’t anyone believe me?” he seems to be pleading.
Adam Schiff Claims Not to Know Who the Whistleblower Is
On October 4, the Washington Post awarded Adam Schiff “Four Pinocchios” for claiming he did not know the identity of the whistleblower. As noted by the New York Times and the Washington Post, the whistleblower went to Schiff and his staff “to seek guidance before filing a complaint.”
A spokesman for Schiff’s own committee said, “Like other whistleblowers have done before and since under Republican- and Democratic-controlled committees, the whistleblower contacted the committee for guidance on how to report possible wrongdoing within the jurisdiction of the intelligence community.” In spite of being outed by the left-leaning press and a staffer on his own committee, Schiff repeated the falsehood on the first day of televised hearings.
Schiff Intervenes to Out the Whistleblower (Again)
According to some unwritten law, we’re all in big trouble if we don’t pretend not to know who the whistleblower is. Here’s a hint: His last name begins with the letters C-I-A.
Representative Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) asked Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman who he talked to regarding the July 25 call between Trump and the President of Ukraine. Vindman quickly identified George Kent, a witness from the previous day, and then evaded identifying the other witness. Schiff interjected: “We need to protect the whistleblower.”
Nunes then extracted an admission from Vindman that he did not know who the whistleblower was. So how, Nunes asked, could Vindman out anyone as a whistleblower?
Vindman petulantly corrected Nunes for addressing him as “Mr. Vindman” instead of by his rank. Then he refused to answer any more questions. How did Schiff know to intervene to protect the whistleblower if he doesn’t know the identity of the whistleblower? Obviously, Schiff’s intervention itself outed the whistleblower, meaning Schiff has outed him twice.
Everyone Thinks They’re in Charge of Ukraine Policy
One of the more amusing aspects of the hearings was watching so many bureaucrats claim to be in charge of Ukraine policy. George Kent, the deputy assistant Secretary of State for Eastern Europe and the Caucuses, seemed to think he was in charge of Ukraine policy. So did Ambassador William Taylor.
Vindman claimed it was his job to “coordinate U.S. Ukraine Policy.” But Fiona Hill seemed to think she was responsible for coordinating U.S. policy on Ukraine. Likewise, Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland also thought he was running U.S. policy on Ukraine. A reminder: We live in a representative republic and not a single one of these self-important bureaucrats was on the ballot in 2016.
Nancy Pelosi’s Press Conference
On Thursday, a week before Thanksgiving, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) appeared to be celebrating early by lifting a glass of . . . well, watch the video for yourself and decide what you see after she swallows the liquid.
At one point, a reporter asked Pelosi why she’s proceeding without bipartisan support. “Well if the Republicans are in denial about the facts, if the Republicans do not want to honor their oath of office, I don’t think we should be characterized as partisan in any way because we’re patriotic,” Pelosi responded.
As another sign of the collapsing impeachment effort, to borrow from Samuel Johnson, a scoundrel seeks her last refuge in patriotism. In any case, it doesn’t seem like a very persuasive approach to seeking bipartisan support.
Pelosi also appeared to leave the door open to abort the impeachment effort before it can do any further damage to the Democrats, noting that no decision had yet been made on whether to pass articles of impeachment and that the decision would be left to the committees.
I had no idea these press conferences were so entertaining and I will begin tuning in more frequently.
When You Assume, You Make an Ass Out of U and Me
After the climax of the live hearings, Schiff made this breathless announcement in an impromptu hallway press interview, claiming that Ambassador Sondland confirmed “everyone knew” that President Trump wanted aid to Ukraine conditioned on the investigation of the Bidens.
Moments later, Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) demolished this claim. Sondland simply bought into the groupthink and “presumed” that Trump was guilty of quid pro quo conditioning of aid for investigating the Bidens. Further, Sondland confirmed that the president said he wanted nothing from Ukraine, “no quid pro quo,” and to tell Zelensky to “do the right thing.”
Joe Biden Makes a Gaffe that Isn’t
If you took a break from the impeachment circus, you might have tuned into the Democratic debates on Wednesday. The following morning, noted cross-dressing goat-abuser Lawrence O’Donnell jumped on former Vice President Joe Biden’s “gaffe” in claiming he had the endorsement of America’s only African American woman senator. Senator Kamala Harris retorted, “That’s not true . . . the other one is here.”
Harris does have dark skin, as O’Donnell noted. But her claim to being “African American,” the term Biden actually used, is controversial. Harris’s parents were born in Jamaica and India. One activist said, “You don’t voluntarily immigrate into a community that is supposedly segregated, and then claim the struggles of people who have been here chained to chattel slavery for multiple generations.” Biden’s “gaffe” may have been a subtle reminder of that to his base of support within the African American community.
The News Just Keeps Punching and Punching the Bidens
The uncooperative facts of the Biden/Ukraine scandal continue to refuse to be “debunked.” Earlier in the week, Mark Hemingway revealed that Hunter Biden actually had two streams of income from the Ukrainian company, Burisma holdings. As a board member, Hunter was paid “more than 12 times comparable board pay at similarly sized companies.” But he also worked as a paid consultant at the same time. This is a very serious conflict of interest because, as a board member, he would be part of the approving authority in charge of overseeing such expenditures. It’s self-dealing and would be illegal in the United States.
Additionally, Zerohedge reports that young Hunter Biden is just the tip of the iceberg. Other Democratic politicians also may be implicated. The Ukrainian investigation into Burisma appears to be heating up as announced in a recent press conference. According to this report, “Hunter Biden’s income from Burisma is a ‘link that reveals how money is siphoned [from Ukraine],’ and how Biden is just one link in the chain of Zlochevsky’s money-laundering operation which included politicians from the previous Yanukovich administration who continued their schemes under his successor, President Pyotr Poroshenko.”
Quoting Interfax-Ukraine, Zerohedge goes on to note that MP Andriy Derkach announced at the same press conference that “deputies have received new materials from investigative journalists alleging that the ‘family’ of ex-President Yanukovych funneled $7.4 billion through American investment firm Franklin Templeton Investments, which they claim have connections to the US Democratic party.” Maybe this explains the Democrat hysteria over Trump asking about Ukraine’s corruption?