(Tea Party PAC) – The Democrats completely flopped with their public impeachment hearings this week as the GOP members of Schiff’s Intel Committee were able to tear apart the absurd narratives they claimed the “star witnesses” affirmed.
This week, White House Senior Advisor for Strategy, Tony Sayegh told Breitbart News in an exclusive interview that these “star witnesses” did nothing to bolster the Democrats’ claims, in fact, quite the opposite.
Sayegh, who was brought on by the White House to help message the president’s defense to the accusations being hurled against him, also provided the most in-depth commentary from the administration since the public hearings of George Kent and Bill Taylor on Wednesday and former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch on Friday.
“Well, look, the Democrats had a chance to present their three star witnesses and they went 0 for 3,” Sayegh said. “All three witnesses made very clear that there was nothing impeachable that they were discussing that the president did. None of them had any contact or conversations or even knowledge, direct knowledge, of what the president said on the July 25 call, which is the call in question. All three of them confirmed that they thought the Trump administration had a better Ukraine policy ultimately than the Obama administration because of the deliverance of lethal military aid for Ukraine and they made clear, especially Taylor and Kent, that Ukraine received the military aid and the support unconditionally. So, they obviously helped debunk the entire baseless narrative Democrats have decided to base this impeachment inquiry on which is quid pro quo. So what do Democrats do? They are now trying to change the conversation, change the language—they are now trying to call it a ‘bribe.’ That’s laughable, I think you and I both know for something to be a ‘bribe’ you have to get something in return. We gave the Ukrainians more than they’ve gotten from past administrations and it was all unconditional.”
He also explained that the weakness of the Democrats case was on full display this week, proving why House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) has up until this point held hearings behind closed doors.
Sayegh said that the White House is quite satisfied with how this week has gone, because the Democrats have shown their case to be “clearly thin and weak,” while the Democrats’ star witnesses actually proved the White House’s narrative and undermined the Democrat narrative.
“The bottom line remains the president did nothing wrong, and I think these three ‘star witnesses’ detail that very clearly. It’s the reason why Adam Schiff has to do this process first in private because the only way he could get even some energy behind these proceedings is by leaking selective parts of their testimony,” Sayegh said. “We feel at the end of this week that the substance of the Democrats’ case is clearly thin and weak, and we think their star witnesses actually proved our point, which we’ve been making all along and the president has been saying all along, which is the president did nothing wrong.”
Sayegh noted two key moments on Wednesday and Friday when all three of these witnesses testified that they had no evidence that Trump committed a crime or impeachable offense.
On Wednesday, under questioning from Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX) on Wednesday, both Taylor and Kent had no answer when asked for evidence POTUS should be impeached.
What’s more, on Friday, Yovanovitch answered with a “no” when Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT) asked if she had evidence that Trump had committed a crime or evidence that he committed an impeachable offense.
Sayegh also slammed Schiff for silencing GOP members of the panel, like Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), when they raised valid points of order or ask for unanimous consent to enter into the record documents and other pieces of evidence.
“The moment especially with Ambassador Taylor and Mr. Kent on Wednesday when Congressman Ratcliffe just looked at the both of them and said, ‘Hey you guys are the star witnesses, what’s impeachable here?’” Sayegh said. “The silence was deafening, because it’s very clear there is nothing there. When you see the way Adam Schiff has been conducting even the public hearings, it’s embarrassing. This is not due process. This is not democracy. He shuts down Elise Stefanik, he tries to clash every time a Republican brings up a legitimate point of order in exposing how this process is completely controlled by him and only him. It’s really not the way our democracy should be working.”
Sayegh also slammed Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) for at one point for saying that Schiff is above being questioned. He rightly pointed out that this behavior from Swalwell doe snot represent the values of the United States’ judicial process, and yet again, more proof this is a sham.
“There was a point in the deliberation on Wednesday, where I think it was Congressman Swalwell—one of Schiff’s minions and deputies—who actually tried to say that the chair cannot be questioned, that that was not permissible,” Sayegh said. “Could you imagine we have a congressional proceeding, a hearing, in the United States of America—not another country, not another time, but in 2019 in the United States of America—where questioning the chair is not permissible? It’s not permitted? I mean, this continues to expose what we’ve been saying all along—this impeachment process is a sham.”
He also added that the best way to address disagreements with the executive branch isn’t through sham impeachment inquiries, but through elections, and they’ve got less than a year to wait.
“Look, if you don’t like what the president did or you don’t like what the president said, you have an election,” Sayegh said. “It’s less than a year away. Run against him. That’s what we did with Barack Obama. We didn’t like Fast and Furious. We didn’t like the IRS targeting scandal. We didn’t like the fact he used the Department of Justice to spy on reporters. We ran against him. We lost. We didn’t like how Hillary conducted the Benghazi raid. We ran against her on the issue. We won. That’s how elections in democracies work. It’s not circumventing the process and rigging the process so you get the outcome you want. It’s about leaving it up to the voters. Don’t forget what this is all about: This is about the fact that Democrats are still upset about the results of the 2016 election and have been on a focused crusade and witch hunt since that time to remove Donald Trump as president. What’s accelerated this process is they know the president will win again in 2020 if they don’t try to do something different. This is not interfering in just the 2016 election, this is trying to circumvent the 2020 election and I really think that’s a huge injustice to the American people.”
With the president facing these accusations from the House, the public is less interested. This is demonstrated by the low television ratings this week. On Wednesday, just 13 million Americans watched the first hearing. This is millions upon millions less than Brett Kavanaugh’s highly controversial confirmation hearings in 2018, and even less than previous hearings with former FBI Director Comey.
“All along, we know the president’s done nothing wrong so there’s absolutely no concern on our part that the hearings were going to reveal anything or say anything,” Sayegh said. “The concern is are they able to fool the public or are they able to create some sort of false narrative that gets hold in the country. Look, as you point out, the Comey hearings had over 20 million viewers, the Kavanaugh hearings had close to 20 million, around 19 million. They had just 13 million viewers on this thing. The country is clearly disinterested in this charade and the fact that the Democrats are playing impeachment while the president is trying to govern. People care more about what affects their lives. I’ll tell you something: You know, Matt, we’ve known each other for a few years now and most of my career has been spent in political strategy and media. I’ll never forget a lesson I learned, actually from a Democrat strategist years ago, who actually ran a campaign—and I’ll leave the players out of this one—but he ran a campaign against my candidate and my candidate won. He said to me, ‘At the end of the day, you guys at least talked about the issues people care about, my guy would only talk about the issues he cared about.’ That’s how you lose: when you talk about what you care about, not what people care about. That’s what I think we see the Democrats doing right now.”