A review of the “whistleblower” complaint reveals it’s the latest in a series of hoaxes designed by Democrats and their sympathizers in the “intelligence community” to impeach a duly elected president who has done nothing wrong let alone commit a “high crime or misdemeanor.”
Similar to U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff’s fake parody of the now famous telephone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, the whistleblower complaint is a fraud.
The very first sentence proves the point: “In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that [Trump] is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election.” Yet, the whistleblower was not involved in any of the matters described in the complaint.
Notably, he was not in on Trump’s call with Zelensky, which serves as the basis of the complaint. None of what appears in the complaint was obtained in the course of his official duties. Listening to gossip around the watercooler is not part of any employee’s “official duties.”
Furthermore, Trump did not “solicit interference … in the 2020 U.S. election.” The only election discussed was the 2016 election in which there are credible allegations Ukrainians assisted the Clinton campaign by leaking damaging financial records of Trump’s then-campaign manager Paul Manafort.
Also, during the call Trump requested assistance getting to the bottom of what happened with the Democratic National Committee’s server that was allegedly hacked by the Russians. The server was never directly examined by the FBI or Special Counsel Robert Mueller. And, yet, this hacking formed one of the bases of the Democrats’ Russian collusion hoax.
Reading on we find the second sentence is also false. It states, “This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals.” However, the Ukrainian president and foreign minister both said there was no pressure.
Further, Trump asked that Ukraine assist in investigating credible allegations of corruption involving the Biden family; that’s not called election interference, that’s called law enforcement. It’s the president’s constitutional duty to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed. Joe Biden does not get a “get out of jail free card” because he is a political opponent of the president.
Apparently, the whistleblower was unaware that the U.S. Department of Justice has been investigating the origins of the Russian hoax and has been working with Ukrainians, with whom we have a criminal investigation mutual assistance treaty, and other foreign nationals and governments.
U.S. Attorney General Bill Bar has even made trips to Europe to work with foreign officials on this law enforcement matter. Media reports indicate that Barr asked Trump to make introductory calls to foreign leaders requesting their assistance in this investigation. None of these facts made it into the whistleblower’s complaint.
The whistleblower also writes, “I was not a direct witness to most of the events described.” In fact, he was not a direct witness to any of the events described, unless you count watching Rudy Giuliani’s appearances on Fox News or reading Giuliani’s tweets.
This false statement is compounded by the whistleblower falsely stating on the complaint that he had “direct evidence.” All the whistleblower has is hearsay, which is by its very definition not credible and inadmissible in court. This whistleblower complaint is so full of hearsay it wouldn’t even be admissible in a Summary Traffic case.
Most importantly, the complaint reveals the whistleblower is not a whistleblower at all. To qualify under the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, the “event” described must be, “a serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the Director of National Intelligence involving classified information…” Nothing alleged in the complaint satisfies that definition. None of this is an intelligence activity.
Even more, the whistleblower himself violated the very statute he seeks protection under by communicating with House Democrats about his concerns before he became a whistleblower. That’s expressly prohibited by the statute. He chose to confer with the staff of Schiff’s House Intelligence Committee, that’s the man who is hellbent on impeaching Trump and the committee that now just so happens to be the one leading the “official impeachment inquiry.”
After receiving advice and direction from Schiff’s staff, the whistleblower retained highly partisan Democrat attorneys to help him draft his complaint. And, here we are.
It’s a travesty that things have come this far — and that something riddled with hearsay, opinion and conjecture and tainted with partisan politics from the very beginning, and then later completely debunked by the actual transcript of the telephone call, will serve as the instigation and basis for the impeachment of a sitting U.S. president.
Will the American people stand for this?
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.