Democrats did not look good yesterday during the impeachment hearings… namely because they have no proof and were desperate to cover their tracks in creating the impeachment coup.
During an exchange between Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and ranking member Devin Nunes, Vindman accidentally exposed himself as the source for the so-called whistleblower, which forced Adam Schiff to a near apoplectic state, claiming he had to ‘protect’ the whistleblower.
But why? Is it because the person is rabidly anti-Trump and part of a larger unconstitutional democrat-led coup?
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, an Army officer at the National Security Council, told Nunes that he spoke with two people outside the White House about Trump’s July 25 call with Ukrainian President Voldomyr Zelensky in the immediate wake of the interaction, including State Department official George Kent and one member of the “intelligence community.”
Nunes then pressed Vindman about which agency the intelligence community member hailed from.
Schiff jumped in to interrupt the exchange, apparently worried the exchange could name the whistleblower — though Vindman later insisted he doesn’t know who the whistleblower is.
“If I can interject here, we don’t want to use these proceedings … I want to make sure there’s no effort to out the whistleblower through the use of these proceedings,” Schiff said.
“It’s our time, Mr. Chair,” Nunes shot back.
Schiff continued: “If the witness has a good faith belief that this may reveal the identity of the whistleblower, that is not the purpose that we are here for.”
Nunes then pressed Vindman on the fact he testified in his deposition that he did not know the whistleblower, asking “How it is possible for you to name these people and then out the whistleblower?”
Vindman cited his lawyer’s advice and Schiff’s ruling as a reason to not answer Nunes’ question.
“Are you aware that this is the Intelligence Committee that’s conducting this impeachment hearing?” Nunes asked. “Wouldn’t the appropriate place for you to come to testify would be the Intelligence Committee about someone within the intelligence community?”
Eventually, Vindman’s lawyer jumped in to make clear that Vindman was not invoking his Fifth Amendment rights, as Nunes implied, but simply following Schiff’s ruling. This prompted Schiff to jump in again, citing a whistleblower’s legal protections.
“The whistleblower has right, the statutory right to anonymity, these proceedings will not be used to out the whistleblower,” he said.
Nunes then mentioned that Republicans had made efforts to speak with the whistleblower but had been stymied by Democrats.
“We’ve attempted to subpoena the whistleblower to sit for a deposition,” he said. “The chair has tabled that motion and has been unwilling to recognize those motions over the last few days of this impeachment inquisition process.”
Tuesday’s sessions at the House Intelligence Committee started with Vindman and Jennifer Williams, an aide to Vice President Mike Pence.
HPSCI Ranking Member Devin Nunes questioned NSC official Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman about whether he had shared the contents of the phone call between President Trump and Ukraine President Zelensky with anyone outside the White House.
In responding Vindman stated “two people,” and then named State Dept George Kent, and a person from the intelligence community.
Then things get interesting. Vindman refused to name the intelligence agency because it would likely expose the CIA “whistle-blower.”
This non-answer makes Alexander Vindman the source for the CIA “whistleblower” Eric Ciaramella.