By PoliZette Staff | October 11, 2019
The so-called Ukraine whistleblower — the individual whom House Democrats are hoping will help them impeach President Donald Trump — said he does not want to testify in person before Congress.
Instead, lawyers for the whistleblower have asked that the unnamed person be allowed to testify in writing only.
The House and Senate Intelligence Committees reportedly have not yet responded to the request from lawyers representing the anonymous CIA official, according to The Wall Street Journal on Friday morning.
Democrats have been trying to protect the identity of the whistleblower from the start, while Trump and other Republicans have argued the president should have the opportunity to confront his accuser in person.
Lawyers for the whistleblower have already confirmed that the anonymous person is a Democrat who has worked with at least one 2020 presidential candidate — and new reports indicate this candidate is Joe Biden.
One former congressional intelligence official told WSJ it’s highly unusual for a witness to testify in writing.
The official added that while this kind of testimony is unprecedented, there also isn’t a precedent for this situation — as there has never been as high-profile a “whistleblower” report as this one. But some Republicans have said this isn’t a whistleblower at all.
Meanwhile, House Dems would like to have articles of impeachment brought forward by Thanksgiving of this year — a time frame that many people feel is unrealistic and likely will backfire on them.
Columnist Amy Stoddard, writing in Real Clear Politics on Friday morning, said bluntly, “No, House Democrats shouldn’t vote on articles of impeachment by the holidays.”
“Democrats right now are fretting over whether to hold a vote to formally launch an impeachment inquiry,” the associate editor at Real Clear Politics also wrote, “one that will put their members from swing or Trump districts on the record but will not lead to any cooperation from the White House. But they should take the vote on an inquiry,” she added.
She believes that “enough evidence of impeachable acts exists to warrant it” — but also said, “Democrats are in denial about their deadline, and they need to let it go.”
The whistleblower, should this individual testify, would be discussing the highly debated July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky — the transcript of which Trump has already released.
Democrats allege that in this call, Trump pressured Zelensky to launch an investigation into the business dealings of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.
But while the Left claims Trump made this demand in an attempt to have Ukraine influence the 2020 presidential election, the president and his supporters have said from the start there wasn’t anything illegal about his comments or his request — which had nothing to do with the election next year.
Trump has emphasized it’s his duty to protect the country from corruption or anything that amounts to corruption against the United States.
Trump made no mention at all of the 2020 election in the phone call.
The so-called whistleblower never even heard the phone call firsthand, but only heard about it from others.
Trump has long been trying to get more information about the whistleblower.
He tweeted earlier this month, “Why aren’t we entitled to interview & learn everything about the whistleblower, and also the person who gave all of the false information to him?”
And see these more recent tweets as well:
“I don’t think it’s a Whistleblower at all. I think this is an anonymous source for the Democratic Staff in the House of Representatives. This is an insult to real Whistleblowers. Actual Whistleblowers go on to have their whole lives upended.” John Kiriakou @TuckerCarlson
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 10, 2019
— Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) October 10, 2019
Attorneys for the whistleblower have argued the identity of the person is not relevant.
“The whistleblower is not the story,” the attorneys said in a statement earlier this week.
“To date, virtually every substantive allegation has been confirmed by other sources. For that reason the identity of the whistleblower is irrelevant.”
Trump slammed the whistleblower earlier this week in comments to reporters at the White House.
He called the entire whistleblower story a “con being perpetrated on the United States public.”
The Trump Administration and House Republicans should say HELL NO to this idea! https://t.co/P3ZkyJGfoH
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) October 11, 2019
“I don’t know why a person that defrauds the American public should be protected, OK?” the president said of the whistleblower, as Politico reported.
The fact that those on the Left appear so intent on concealing the identity of the whistleblower is suspicious at best.
In order for the testimony of the whistleblower to be taken seriously, the person is going to need to come forward and show his or her face.
If the person wants his or her actions to result in the impeachment of a duly elected president, the individual sure needs to come forward and be identified.
Share your thoughts on this issue.
This piece originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.
Read more at LifeZette.com:
Whistleblower Bombshell: Person Is Connected to Joe Biden
Trump Rally in Minneapolis: Watch the Livestream Here
Biden Bombshell: ‘All of This Is Calling into Question, Was There Coordination’ with House Dems?