Rep. John Ratcliffe Asks Schiff’s Top Witness To Name A Crime Trump Committed; The Response Is Mind-Blowing

(Tea Party PAC) – Just about anyone who has eyes to see and has kept up with the current happenings in the impeachment inquiry against President Trump is well aware that what’s been going down has been nothing short of a total sham.

It’s becoming clear the Democratic Party is reaching, desperately, for any reason whatsoever to nail the president so they can remove him from office and have what they think will be a clear shot at the White House next year.

A good example of the kind of nonsense happening in these hearings, Rep. John Ratcliffe ripped into Adam Schiff’s top witness to find out what crimes he thought Trump actually committed. He couldn’t name a single one.

Here’s more from Gateway Pundit:

Rep. Ratcliffe, a former US Attorney from Texas, destroyed the Democrats’ star witnesses.

At one point Ratcliffe asked Ambassador and George Kent to name the crime that President Trump committed on his call with President Zelensky?

Rep Ratcliffe: So in this impeachment hearing today where we impeach presidents for treason or bribery or other high crimes, where is the impeachable offense in that call? Are either of you here today to assert there was an impeachable offense in that call?


They sat in silence. They could not answer.


How can anyone take the proceedings seriously when the key witness can’t even identify an actual crime the president has committed?

Ben Shapiro over at The Daily Wire recently penned a piece about why he himself is not taking these proceedings to seriously and why you probably shouldn’t either:

Everybody knows where this is going. The Democrats are going to vote to impeach President Trump in the House, and then the Republicans are going to vote to acquit in the Senate. It’s that simple. That’s where this is going.

[The question] is whether there is some sort of new bombshell that is dropped; and, given the witness testimony that we expect, the answer is probably not. The only other question here is whether Democrats are going to be capable of sinking President Trump’s sort of public relations stance. Are you going to see the support for impeachment rise just because there is so much bad press surrounding impeachment and because President Trump continues to insist, against pretty much all the evidence, that the phone call with Ukraine was absolutely perfect — nothing wrong with it, absolutely 100% what Abraham Lincoln would have done.

The reason that’s not a smart strategy, honestly, in terms of public relations — in terms of impeachment, it doesn’t really matter what his strategy is, what’s going to be is what’s going to be. But in terms of public relations, the reason that’s not a smart strategy is the same reason it is not a brilliant idea to go out at the beginning of your presidency and say we are going to have 5% growth every year for the rest of my tenure. The reason it’s not smart to say that is because if you come in at 4%, which is great, then everybody goes, “Oh, well you said five and you completely missed the boat.”

Well, if you say that everything with Ukraine was absolutely 100% perfect, unbelievable, and then people are like, “Well, it doesn’t look that perfect to me,” it makes them more suspicious of your entire claim. That is why it is a bad public relations strategy. As I’ve been saying from the beginning, the president is not his own best lawyer. But of course, [Wednesday] is when the public impeachment hearings begin, and all of these hearings are basically going to repeat the testimony that we saw behind closed doors. There are no real surprise witnesses here, Democrats have not approved many of the witnesses the Republicans want.

Yesterday, I talked a little bit about the witnesses that Republicans wanted. President Trump had put out a list compiled by Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio, who is currently sitting with the House Intelligence Committee — sorta been swapped in, sort of a ringer brought in to do some of the questioning because he’s good at this sort of thing — and Jordan had released a list of the witnesses that Republicans would like to see.

On that list were people like Hunter Biden and Joe Biden, because Jordan wanted to ask, “Okay, well, was there something nefarious going on in Ukraine?” And if there was something nefarious going on in Ukraine, or suspicious with Hunter Biden, Why is it illegitimate of Trump to ask the Ukrainian government to investigate all of that?

Apparently, they also wanted to bring in the whistleblower. Democrats have been quite reticent to bring forward the whistleblower. Why? Well, because they understand that there is pretty good information the whistleblower is a Democratic operative — that the whistleblower is somebody who’s a lifelong Democrat, who works from the Obama administration, who is good — or at least close, relatively speaking, with Vice President Joe Biden, who is close with James Clapper, the director of national intelligence. And because of that, the Democrats are concerned that if this person is brought forward in question, it’s going to turn out this person was coordinating with the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, that this whole thing was put together behind closed doors.

The key passage in the quoted piece above is that the Senate, which is controlled by the GOP, will acquit the president if the measure gets that far.

So what’s the point of all of this if the left pretty much knows they are going to lose?

It’s a Hail Mary play. They’re hoping that a big bombshell revelation comes out and they can hang Trump out to dry, that the Senate will flip on him. But in actuality, that’s probably not going to happen. It’s a long shot, anyway.

Not only that, but it’s a move to try motivating the Democratic Party voter base. They can look at their failure and say, “we tried,” and rally the base around the notion that they now have the power to defeat the big, bad Trump.

It’s ridiculously stupid. Nonetheless, they’re doing it.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here