Speaking to Fox News, former Representative Trey Gowdy said that “both sides are wrong” in the fight as to whether or not to call the whistleblower to testify.
“I Don’t Need Him – I’ve Got the Transcript!”
Senator Rand Paul recently named the alleged whistleblower in a series of tweets, as his question was rejected by Chief Justice John Roberts.
My exact question was:
Are you aware that House intelligence committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella while at the National Security Council together 1/2
— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) January 30, 2020
My question is not about a “whistleblower” as I have no independent information on his identity. My question is about the actions of known Obama partisans within the NSC and House staff and how they are reported to have conspired before impeachment proceedings had even begun.
— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) January 30, 2020
Martha McCallum asked Gowdy whether it was acceptable for Senator Paul to name the alleged whistleblower.
“I like Rand but I think both sides are wrong on this,” Gowdy said. “We make 4-year-olds testify in court. We make women who have been sexually assaulted testify in court. So the notion that, if you are a relevant witness, that somehow you could escape being cross-examined, we don’t do it for anyone else, why would we do it for this whistle-blower?”
However, Gowdy continued, and noted that on the other hand, there is no need for the whistleblower to testify
“I don’t need him,” Gowdy said. “I’ve got the transcript. Why do I care what someone who overheard the conversation felt about it or thought about it or believed about it? I can read it for myself. Yes, the whistleblower is relevant, but he’s not material. There are 20 witnesses that I think would be more probative than a whistleblower of a transcript that you and I can read for ourselves.”
Why Was the Whistleblower on the Call?
McCallum then asked Gowdy if he was worried with the precedent that was set with the leak of the phone call between President Trump and Zelensky in the first place.
“I am, and the remedy for that is to limit the number of people who are on those calls,” he said. “There are consequences any time someone takes unprecedented acts, and if you’re going to listen to a conversation between the President and a leader of a foreign country, and then you’re going to violate that confidence and tell someone about it, the President should shrink the number of people who are on those calls!”
Gowdy went on to suggest that the calls should be limited to only a select few. ”
Maybe the Secretary of State and a subject matter expert [should be on], but there were what, a dozen people on that call? Do we really need a dozen people to take notes?” Gowdy asked. “I’d rather hire a court reporter and then let them read the transcript.”
I couldn’t agree more with Gowdy. I, for one, hope that the Senate will vote to stop taking witnesses, and get this “impeachment” sham over and done with! The American public are tired with wasting time on this nonsense. However, there must be a full investigation into the supposed whistleblower, and how the hell this got out in the first place, along with looking into Hunter Biden and his crooked dad, Sleepy Joe.
The American people need answers, but they also want impeachment finished.