GOP Senators Should Focus on Eric Ciaramella in any Witness Deal

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Rumors abound that small groups of Democrat and Republican senators are contemplating a “deal” on senate trial witnesses that would end up with Democrats getting their wish to have John Bolton testify in exchange for Republicans calling the scummy Hunter Biden in to soil the Senate chamber. This would be a terrible deal for the President.

Yes, there is no real doubt that Joe Biden and his son played a sleazy influence peddling game with the Ukraine while Biden was vice president. Yes, there should be legal consequences for both men, although we can be sure that our utterly corrupt Department of Justice will make sure no justice ever arrives for either of them. Yes, it was perfectly valid for President Trump to insist that the Ukrainian government do its duty to investigate the Biden corruption before releasing any U.S. aid to that country.

All of that and so much more is true and right and lovely. But it’s also a distraction from the heart of this impeachment scam, which was concocted out of whole cloth by Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi and their highly-paid team of Lawfare contract lawyers, working in concert with their fake “whistleblower,” Eric Ciaramella. Yes, I know we  are all supposed to pretend that we don’t really know that Ciaramella is in fact the fake whistleblower, but we all do know that he is, and I’m not really very good at pretending.

We know without any doubt at all that Ciaramella met with Schiff and his staff well before he filed his fake “whistleblower” claim targeting President Trump. We know there is a very high degree of likelihood that that claim was in fact written at least in part and perhaps entirely by Schiff’s lawyers. We know that Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson himself is an Obama loyalist holdover who illicitly changed the whistleblower rules in order to accommodate Ciaramella’s false claim against the President.

And we know without any doubt whatsoever that Ciaramella himself is an Intelligence Community plant who has been a part of the Deep State’s neverending coup d’etat against this President. This morning, Paul Sperry has a new report at RealClearInvestigations documenting that Ciaramella was already busy conspiring with other plants inside the White House barely two weeks after Mr. Trump took office in 2017.

Sperry identifies one of Ciaramella’s co-conspirators as Sean Misko, who left the White House last summer to join the staff of – wait for it – Adam Schiff! Oh, you don’t sayyyyy.

From the Sperry Report:

Sources told RealClearInvestigations the staffer with whom Ciaramella was speaking was Sean Misko. Both were Obama administration holdovers working in the Trump White House on foreign policy and national security issues. And both expressed anger over Trump’s new “America First” foreign policy, a sea change from President Obama’s approach to international affairs.

“Just days after he was sworn in they were already talking about trying to get rid of him,” said a White House colleague who overheard their conversation.

“They weren’t just bent on subverting his agenda,” the former official added. “They were plotting to actually have him removed from office.”

Misko left the White House last summer to join House impeachment manager Adam Schiff’s committee, where sources say he offered “guidance” to the whistleblower, who has been officially identified only as an intelligence officer in a complaint against Trump filed under whistleblower laws. Misko then helped run the impeachment inquiry based on that complaint as a top investigator for congressional Democrats.

If you want to make a deal for a witness exchange, Republicans, make it for Ciaramella, not Hunter Biden.

Oh, and you might want to make a 2-for-2 deal so that you can also force Mr. Atkinson to testify publicly about his own role in this clear conspiracy to take down a President. As Sperry points out, Atkinson already spent hours testifying in the basement of the Capital Building, but the equally sleazy Adam Schiff still refuses to release the transcript of that testimony:

The investigators say that details about how the whistleblower consulted with Schiff’s staff and perhaps misled Atkinson about those interactions are contained in the transcript of a closed-door briefing Atkinson gave to the House Intelligence Committee last October. However, Schiff has sealed the transcript from public view. It is the only impeachment witness transcript out of 18 that he has not released.

Schiff has classified the document “Secret,” preventing Republicans who attended the Atkinson briefing from quoting from it. Even impeachment investigators cannot view it outside a highly secured room, known as a “SCIF,” in the basement of the Capitol. Members must first get permission from Schiff, and they are forbidden from bringing phones into the SCIF or from taking notes from the document.

Atkinson’s transcript is the only one Schiff has refused to produce. Obviously, the Democrats are afraid to reveal its content to the American public.

If Republican Senators want to call the Democrats’ bluff on calling witnesses, they should be focused on the fake whistleblower and the guy who enabled him, not the sleazy, drug-addled son of a sleazy former vice president.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

17 thoughts on “GOP Senators Should Focus on Eric Ciaramella in any Witness Deal

  1. Jimmy MacAfee - January 22, 2020

    First of all, if Republican Congressmen have seen it, they should be witnesses and testify on the nature of the “secret” documents that Schiff won’t allow to be seen. The Senate should also consider closing the whole proceeding if the documents aren’t made available to McConnell and the President’s attorneys.

    As for Eric Cinderella (say off the soy, silly boy) – he should be made to testify under oath, and so should anyone who fed him information (Vendman?)

    Mark Warner should be forced to testify as well, and tell us who he got his information from – after all, he continued to insist, like Adam Squid (an animal he strongly resembles) that he had seen evidence of “Russian collusion.” We might also ask Warner why he attempted to contact James Bond (wannabee version) who put out the fake dossier. Additionally, we should be interviewing John “Squeaky” Brennan, except that it might interfere with John Durham’s prosecution.

    So many witnesses! I’ve just listed a few. But for now, these should do.

  2. Omar Habayeb - January 22, 2020

    The picture that you are using for this DB Daily Update is a picture of George Soros’s son and is NOT Eric Ciaramella

    1. Jimmy MacAfee - January 22, 2020

      Interesting. Do all soy-boys look alike, or what?
      It’s true, we don’t see Cinderella’s tiara in the picture!

    2. Jimmy MacAfee - January 22, 2020

      And by the way, it’s Gyorgi Schwartz. Goes by Gyorge Sorass.

  3. Jimmy MacAfee - January 22, 2020

    By the way, my name – MacAfee – is “son of no fee.” I’m not paid for my posts.
    Gyorgi sounds like a lasbian orgie. (Words not allowed by WordPress.)

  4. Gregg - January 22, 2020

    My big fear is that the weak republican senators (deliberately lowercase) will ultimately call for the allowance of “witnesses”. First up: a “willing” Bolton, who is a recently fired never Trumper warlord from Trump’s administration, then Pompeo, etc.

    Then it will be time for the Republican/pro Trump’s case “witnesses” to appear – take your pick. All will either plead the fifth, or skip the Schiff-show entirely, as Big Biden said he would. They will then be held in “contempt” of congress (so what, big deal – remember Holder) and that will end the pursuit of any pro-acquittal/Trump testimony.

    This bait and switch tactic goes back to at least the circa 1987 amnesty bill where Reagan signed on to amnesty for three million illegals in exchange for a boarder wall and proper enforcement of immigration law; we got the amnesty but no wall or meaningful enforcement.

    If there ultimately are witnesses, Mutt McRomney’s, Nancy Klink’s, and Lurch Kerry’s kids, and the Bidens, along with CIAramella, Schiff, and his staff, and the super-duper secret transcript MUST first appear, they MUST be forced to give legitimate testimony – even in exchange for immunity – and have it all be made public.

    Mitch, you have the power to make the rules on how this sham trial will be conducted. This is your chance to go down in history as a great American leader (an opportunity seldom bestowed upon a senate leader), or as a Deep-State Swamp-Dwelling feckless hack who betrays his oath to the constitution and America. The choice is yours.

    1. Jimmy MacAfee - January 22, 2020

      I’m prepared for phony Republicans to allow President Trump to be removed from office: have a kill switch on my investment assets, prior to the collapse; have a buyer for my real estate assets and will watch as this nation dissolves into anarchy and violence.

      There are three words I use when cutting timber (dead pines, and dead hardwoods for firewood)

      Should
      Could
      Would

      My father was good at mechanical things, but still had a “should” mentality. This “should” work.” With that, he thought an oak he was cutting should fall the right way, and it landed on his foot and broke a metatarsal. There is danger in a “should”-only way of thinking. He didn’t consider the could.

      “Could” can be for those who estimate all dangers to be insurmountable; no one who uses “could” all the time ever gets anything done, makes meaningful investments, or takes any chances. “Coulds” are Eeyore, never imagining any possibilities. There is an alter-ego “could” which imagines possibilities, and President Trump is one of those. Most “coulds” are mostly could-nots, like Obama.

      “Would” is for hedge-betters, but people who have some balance. Trouble is, they often use “would” theoretically, and don’t act, sometimes making them as ineffective as the “coulds.” Sometimes “woulds” are past-tense practitioners: that would have been great, had I made that investment and made my money work for me.

      All three, taken together in proper proportion, are beneficial.

      Right now, it’s proper to prepare – not like a Prepper, but like someone who has a Plan A, Plan B and Plan C…and more, all the way to Plan F. 6 plans of action, for should, could and would and variations. You have to have a working frontal lobe to make those things work.

      With Mitch not showing as much energy as I’d like, even though he’s fairly solid, better get your assets in order. Should-Could-Would are Operational words.

      1. Gregg - January 22, 2020

        Jimmy, I don’t often use “should, would, could”, I use the word MUST in many of my comments. Shoulda, woulda, coulda are words feckless weasels use. I’m only interested in results, in what will happen, what must happen, what does happen. I’m very much a bottom line guy. I merely try to help people understand why political things happen as they do.

        Make something real happen Mr. Barr, Mr. Dunham

        1. Jimmy MacAfee - January 22, 2020

          I never use “shoulda, woulda, coulda.” And I am not a weasel: I am describing the differences between risk taking and risk aversion, planning for the way things should go, and the way things could go. Planning in a way that a Special Ops team might use. (They are not weasels, either.) They have to program in contingencies, and can’t afford to paint a sunny side to everything. What do we need to do, what can go wrong, and what are the contingencies.

          For example: Trump SHOULD NOT be removed from office, but under the wrong set of circumstances, he COULD be. While not likely, we have to plan for such circumstances. Overconfidence is lethal, and so is paralysis and risk aversion.

  5. Jimmy MacAfee - January 22, 2020

    “After Flynn briefed [the staff] about what ‘America first’ foreign policy means, Ciaramella turned to Misko and commented, ‘We need to take him out,’ ” the staffer recalled. “And Misko replied, ‘Yeah, we need to do everything we can to take out the president.’ “

    https://noqreport.com/2020/01/22/eric-ciaramella-sean-misko-discussed-how-to-take-out-president-trump-in-2017-report/

    “Added the military detailee, who spoke on condition of anonymity: “By ‘taking him out,’ they meant removing him from office by any means necessary. They were triggered by Trump’s and Flynn’s vision for the world. This was the first ‘all hands’ [staff meeting] where they got to see Trump’s national security team, and they were huffing and puffing throughout the briefing any time Flynn said something they didn’t like about ‘America First.’”
    He said he also overheard Ciaramella telling Misko, referring to Trump, ‘We can’t let him enact this foreign policy.’“
    Alarmed by their conversation, the military staffer immediately reported what he heard to his superiors.
    “It was so shocking that they were so blatant and outspoken about their opinion,” he recalled. “They weren’t shouting it, but they didn’t seem to feel the need to hide it.”’

    If they don’t call Cinderella as a witness, expect Trump to be removed from office, and take the necessary steps to protect your assets. It may lead to a market crash, and worse.

  6. Jimmy MacAfee - January 22, 2020

    A little off-topic, but it appears that Schumer is suffering from serious dementia. Not just political dementia: actual dementia:

    http://www.theamericanmirror.com/video-schumer-motions-to-person-to-get-out-of-his-empty-chair/

    It looks, at first like he is confuses someone else’s chair for his; he may be talking to someone. But what is bizarre is what comes next, as he motions for someone who is not there to get out of his actual seat.

    1. phineas gage - January 22, 2020

      ‘Yesterday, upon the stair,
      I met a man who wasn’t there
      He wasn’t there again today
      I wish, I wish he’d go away’

      -Antigonish by Hughes Mearns

      Also the basis for the ‘The Man Who Sold The World’ by David Bowie

      Schumer is the Man Who Sold His Soul.

      1. alonzo1956 - January 22, 2020

        How could Schumer sell something the devil already possessed?

  7. phineas gage - January 22, 2020

    Dems will never give up Ciamerella. For reasons that are becoming increasingly obvious…

  8. tipirick - January 22, 2020

    There aren’t going to be any witness deals because none are needed. This suicide will be over before you know it. It’s disgusting to watch, but we just can’t look away, like an epic train wreck.

    1. Jimmy MacAfee - January 22, 2020

      As the President’s team is now saying: the SCIF information needs to be opened. I would suggest that if they aren’t forthcoming, a vote should be held to dismiss. Immediately. No negotiation.

  9. ray162 - January 22, 2020

    Impeachment is boring. Vote and return to confirming another hundred judges.

Comments are closed.

Scroll to top
%d bloggers like this: