Will Schiff Go Down for This Obstruction?

When the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee ignores something as paramount as FISA abuse, we know Democrats have no intentions of acting with integrity.

And now we sit at a pivotal moment. We have the Horowitz Report. It revealed an epic amount of misconduct. And the impeachment is over (unless of course Democrats go for round two). So what’s next? Do we just keep putting one foot in front of another, or do we avenge the attempted take down of the greatest President in modern history?

Stop, Hammer time.

While Democrats are anxious to dish out another set of charges, I think it’s high time we put these looney leftists in the hot seat. And we should start with none other than Adam Schiff.

As Fox News explains:

In a letter obtained by Fox News, Reps. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., and Chris Stewart, R-Utah, the ranking members of the committee and subcommittee, respectively, joined GOP colleagues in blasting Schiff, D-Calif., for not holding hearings on FISA in the wake of the IG report.

“Under your chairmanship, the House Intelligence Committee has strayed far from its mandate of overseeing the Intelligence Community. In fact, we have gone months at a time in which we’ve hardly held any oversight-related briefings or hearings at all,” they wrote Wednesday.

During this period of inadequate oversight, numerous critical issues pertinent to this Committee’s jurisdiction were ignored,” they continued, noting that DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz issued his FISA report on Dec. 9 which identified “seventeen serious shortcomings related to the conduct” of the surveillance of former Trump campaign foreign policy aide Carter Page.

As Republican members pointed out, who else could dig into this any better than the House Oversight Committee? Clearly, Horowitz found too many discretions for his own comfort. Now, we need to rectify the situation and hold the right people accountable for their transgressions.

And who better to start with than shifty Schiff?

From the moment the Russian narrative was hatched, Schiff engaged in bold faced lies in an effort to incriminate the president. In fact, we started calling this nonsense an attempted coup three long years ago.

It’s no wonder Republicans now feel the need to boycott.

The Republicans argued that the committee is “uniquely positioned to consider” the “serious legal and policy questions” that arose from Horowitz’s report.

“The IG Report was followed by the release of a declassified assessment by the Department of Justice acknowledging that at least two of the four FISA applications lacked probable cause,” they continued. “Despite the seriousness of these issues and our clear jurisdiction, you have failed to hold a single briefing or hearing on this matter.”

They added: “Until the Committee prioritizes oversight activities related to urgent and critical concerns, Republican Members cannot support distractions from our core responsibilities.”

“We hope this Committee can move past political investigations and publicity stunts and get back to the important work we traditionally have undertaken on a bipartisan basis,” they concluded.

The letter, penned by Nunes and Stewart, was signed by Republican Reps. Michael Conaway, Michael Turner, Brad Wenstrup, Rick Crawford, Elise Stefanik, Will Hurd, and John Ratcliffe.

Meanwhile, after subcommittee Chairman Jim Himes’, D-Conn., opening statement at the hearing Wednesday, he acknowledged that no Republicans were in attendance.

Especially considering the proof that Schiff pontificated a web of lies. Clearly, Schiff knew the Steele dossier was a bag of bologna. Still, he contends that the FBI’s initial Russian probe had “sufficient factual basis” and was opened for an “authorized purpose.”

But Schiff has a long history of evading the truth. I recall little article we wrote in March of 2017.

Hot Topic: Unmasking

At that time, Deven Nunes uncovered illegal unmasking of private citizens bolstered by the left. The initial, seemingly illegal unmasking led to other surveillance, causing other private citizens being wrongly unmasked as well.

Schiff criticized Nuñes for his handling of the investigation. Next, Schiff claimed Nuñes should not brief Trump. Right then and there we knew who the dirty dog would turn out to be. But we still danced through three more years of wild accusations as the witch hunt continued.

In fact, shortly after the unmasking scandal came to light, Schiff refused to allow testimony that could’ve exposed the witch hunt long ago.

At the time, we noted:

High-Ranking Democrats BLOCKED Witnesses in the Russian Probe. And House Intelligence Committee ranking member Adam Schiff isn’t talking.

It’s because we caught Adam Schiff in a lie. A scam in fact. Democrats claim they want to know what happened in Russia. At least where Trump is involved, which is nowhere. Yet, Schiff wouldn’t allow certain witnesses to testify before his committee.

When asked for a reason, he refused to answer the question.

Thus, Democrats cancelled about a dozen witnesses scheduled to testify. They were told the committee needed more time to prepare. More likely, they needed more time to evade the truth.

Isn’t it ironic? The same democrats begging for more witnesses during impeachment didn’t want to hear the whole story a few years back?

Schiff was obstructing justice from the get-go.

So before Democrats throw down the gauntlet with another impeachment, maybe they should look at one of their own. Considering Schiff plays a leading role in investigating the Trump-Ukraine scandal, his own ties need to be scrutinized.

Schiff raises a few eyebrows with his connection to a Soviet-born businessman. The man, Igor Pasternak, raised funds for Schiff. And he gained lucrative defense contracts from the Ukraine. Isn’t that ironic?

In fact, reports say Pasternak also partakes in the manufacture of weapons such as the M4 and M16 under the umbrella of the Worldwide Aeros Corp.

Dial it down a bit further, and we find a few more odds and ends. Namely, Pasternak held a fundraiser for Schiff in 2013. Later, Schiff evolved into a strong supporter of giving the Ukraine substantial military aid. Before 2013, you don’t find Schiff referencing the Ukraine. But one little fundraiser, and old crazy eyes is demanding we send money and help arm them.

Now, clearly I’m no leftist. But if I was, I think I’d wonder what turned my pal into a Ukraine funding vein. And how that extrapolated into an attempted coup against the President of the United States. Further, how did Trump end up in the Ukraine hot seat when clearly, several democrats should be sitting there.







Back to top button