Quote:
Originally Posted by u crank
There is probably a very good reason why the anti Trump side does not want the Whistleblower to testify. He is a liability. His motivation to do this, his association with other anti Trump people, his past work record and his dealings with Adam Schiff are all going to undercut this guys actions. He went from being a VIP to someone that Schiff does not want to be seen or heard. Wonder Why?
|
Well, first of all, what you listed is a collection of claims made by fervid pro-Trump defenders as a means to undercut what has already been an extremely damaging set of testimonies that does not bode well for the Chump-In-Chief. Since the testimonies, and other related data (including Trump's releasing of the Zelensky call transcript/digest, probably the stupidest thing Trump has done so far in this scandal), have done nothing but corroborate the Whistleblower's complaint, any testimony by the WB would be little more than a sworn "I told you so". I have a strong belief that the WB will ultimately testify, but probably towards the end of the House process, after all or most of the testimony and evidence has been presented and who or what the WB is would be irrelevant to the main charges...
Remember, regardless of whether the WB testifies or not, there is a whole lot of evidence, including that provided by the White House, and testimony that backs up the basic charges against Trump and the House really doesn't need the WB. Its sort of like a situation where some one reports a possible crime: the authorities take the report and investigate; they get other witness testimony, fingerprints, evidence (DNA, etc.), and build their their case. At trial, the actual evidence and other testimony is what really holds the weight before the judge and jury. The initial report of a possible crime very often is overshadowed by real evidence. In this case, the building evidence makes the WB little more than a spark to a much greater blaze...
Here's an odd thought that occurred to me as I was watching a Trumpette on TV railing against the alleged Whistleblower: What if the name being bandied about by the minions and the Trumpettes is a red herring? It occurred to me, if I were handling the securing of the WB's identity, I would 'selectively leak' a decoy name to the Far-Right press so they could chase their tails while still keeping the WB secure. I'm not saying this what is happening, but it is an interesting theory. Aside from my basically devious nature, what triggered this thought was the relative lack of extreme outrage the DEMs at the top of the investigations have expressed ovr the 'outing' of the alleged Whistleblower. There is also the specter of a truly awesome "Gotcha!!" against the Trump minions and Trumpettes if such a situation were to be true...
<O>