What is this man hiding?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

AP Photo/Patrick Semansky

House Minority Whip Steve Scalise, Republican from Louisiana, has asked a great question. What is House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff trying to hide? Why, if Mr. Schiff truly believes that President Trump has committed high crimes and misdemeanors necessitating his impeachment and removal from office, are star chamber-like hearings being held behind closed doors in the basement of the Capitol?

Overturning a duly constituted presidential election is a very serious matter. It is the very epitome of the people’s business and should thus be carried out in full sunlight in the people’s House. Too much in Washington now happens behind closed doors as it is. The process of collecting evidence to impeach a president is a time when the doors and windows should be flung wide.

The impeachment of a president being the people’s business carried out in the people’s House, all of the people’s representatives should be included. Yet Republicans not on one of the three investigating committees are specifically excluded.

If witnesses are providing “damning” evidence against the president, as Schiff constantly says they are via highly selective leaks to the media, the American people should be able to hear that evidence. Impeachment, after all, isn’t a criminal proceeding. It’s political. It’s an action taken on behalf of the electorate. That electorate – read: us – should enjoy full transparency.

With the exception of material that could negatively affect national security – and little having to do with national security is germane to the Dems’ current effort – We the People should know everything.

This is not to mention that so should Donald Trump. His attorneys should be present. They should be able to advise Republican committee members. They should be able to aid Republicans in cross examining witnesses.

Of course, we know why Schiff is operating this way. In the absence of fully open hearings, Schiff is free to selectively leak material of his own choosing on his own time. Schiff can leak reports to the media that include adjectives like “devastating” and “damning,” secure in the knowledge that the media will uncritically run with them. For their part, Republicans, being in the minority, are bound by House rules to avoid making statements to the media lest they be brought up on ethics charges. (Democrats are similarly bound but, being in the majority, control the enforcement mechanisms.)

So, back to the question. What is Schiff hiding? Could it be that when it comes to actual, actionable evidence he’s got bupkis? Is this entire star chamber gambit simply the playing of a prolonged procedural game intended solely to hang a cloud over the president to weaken him politically?

It all stinks to the very rafters. But the Dems press on amid only token pushback from Republican leadership. It’s a risky gambit given the blow to Dem credibility arising from the Mueller investigation debacle. And it reeks of desperation.

But given the weak field of Democrat wannabes, it’s apparently all they’ve got.

Ah, there’s the answer! That’s what Schiff is trying to hide.

Paul Gleiser

Paul L. Gleiser is president of Gleiser Communications, LLC, licensee of radio stations KTBB 97.5 FM/AM600, 92.1 The Team FM & KYZS in Tyler-Longview, Texas.

You may also like...

23 Responses

  1. Ron Eagleman says:

    Holland’s link refers to the question of televised vs private hearings, and this interview was related to the Benghazi hearings when Trey Gowdy was chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. In that instance, Democrat members had the same access and privileges as Republican members, which is completely different from what is happening in this “impeachment inquiry” conducted by Adam Schiff. This short clip is very selective and deceptive, and I really do not see relevancy to Paul’s question. Let me take a stab at Paul’s question as to what Adam Schiff is trying to hide, other than the primary reasons that he gave in his piece. Adam Schiff is trying to hide any shred of human decency or integrity, and he seems to be succeeding! How could someone like this be elected to congress, and then to be in charge of such an important committee? It is because he is in a very “safe” district in California, where his constituents support such unconstitutional behavior, and Speaker Pelosi wants an unprincipled scoundrel to be in charge of the star chamber.

  2. Buddy Saunders says:

    The Democrat Party has become a clown car out of which tumbles idiots and idiot ideas. Democrats know any of their gaggle of clown candidates don’t have a chance defeating Trump. By eliminating him through impeachment, they hope they’ll have chance beating some establishment Republican–another dim bulb like Romney. Problem is, despite all Shiff’s behind-the-door efforts, there’s really nothing to impeachment. President Trump will be there to run and he will win. That’s where my money is, literally.

    • If it’s “the Democrat’ Party,” are the other guys “the Republic’ Party?”

      • Buddy Saunders says:

        Thanks, Holland. For the first time you’ve been right about something. Democratic Party it is. Sometimes I write a bit too fast, a consequence of my always having a very busy day at work. But one thing is certain, Democrat or Democratic, I know what that party stands for, and however names, I want nothing to do with them.

    • C M Solomon says:

      The 21st century rise of tyrannical despotism in America is defined by the Democrats (or other miscreants such as Socialists, Marxists, Communists, Fascists, etc.) that share a believe in total destruction of the American culture, heritage, heroes, ethical standards of conduct, Judeo-Christian foundations of moral behavior, the human rights of free men as a special creation by God (with the freedoms of thought, speech, property, association, religion, presumption of innocence, and life itself).

      The “DEMOCRATS” name is actually an acronym that is made up of three words as follows:

      The DEMOlition-bureauCRAcy-TyrantS, i.e., The DEMOCRATS.

  3. RE “hearings being held behind closed doors in the basement of the Capitol?”
    That’s where the SCIF is.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_Compartmented_Information_Facility

    RE “We the People should know everything.”
    These depositions are analagous to Grand Jury.

    RE “What is Schiff hiding?”
    Those-being-deposed, from each other.
    This is fact-finding testimony.
    Those testifying shouldn’t “get-their-story-straight.”
    Ask any cop if he or she does gang-interrogations.

    All of that said, were I advising the Republican resistance, I would’ve told them TO storm-the-chamber (“Pizza Rebellion,” “Brooks Brothers March”).

    Why: Cameras. This was Louie Gohmert’s opportunity to inveigle-himself-into the story.

    As you watch umpteen replays of The Aggrieved, note who is descending the staircase along with Louie: Some MEMBERS of the three committees, Republicans who ARE admitted.

    It’s a show.

    Meanwhile in the Senate, invertebrate Lindsey Graham can’t round-up 50 of 53 Republicans for his Resolution condemning the Impeachment Inquiry. Because it’s not too late to file to primary his 2020 re-election campaign in SC, he’ll likely keep trying.

    • C M Solomon says:

      Did a tree just fall in the woods and there was no sound to be heard since nobody was there to interpret the unintelligible noise?

      • You underestimate Paul’s following.

        • C M Solomon says:

          Are you saying that “Paul’s following” includes those (novices in political education/judgment) that YOU can influence with your radical and hate-filled Left-wing Democrat agenda as YOU spout the nonsense of your weak and illogical rebuttals? I believe that you are trying to piggyback on Paul’s wonderful web page to promote your own agenda to dilute his realistic and thoughtful commentary to YOUR followers for YOUR own purposes. Your comments don’t make any sense, otherwise. What thinking American could possibly be persuaded by your commentary? I’m glad, however, that we can see the how you think, as unbelievable as it is, when Paul lets your comments through.

          I believe the vast majority of us who greatly appreciate Paul’s commentary and respond accordingly do so to maintain our sanity in the swamp of LIES constantly promoted by the Marxist Media Mob Propaganda machine that dominates the so-called “Free Press” and Educational institutions in this country. Paul obviously doesn’t require agreement with his opinions on this web page, however, those of us who comment usually debate/comment with substance not just talking points distilled from and provided by the lying Leftist Democrat propaganda machine that hates the freedoms that we Americans enjoy.

  4. Ron Eagleman says:

    Holland must be a closet conservative, or possibly one taco short of a Mexican plate lunch. After watching the complete video, it has absolutely no relevance to Paul’s opinion piece, in fact, it supports his position. As someone in our group previously stated, when you have no cogent reply, just distract, deceive, or just refer to an irrelevant link. However, one must admit, profound replies like these do have a certain entertainment value.

    • Appalling as Trump is, in SO many ways, I do applaud him for imprinting the phrase “these stupid wars” upon undaunted followers who previously sang-along as Lee Greenwood warbled that he’s “proud to be an American” every time we bungled-into somewhere we don’t belong.

  5. Darrell Durham says:

    Republicans won’t commit one way or the other until they hear from BOTH sides. Innocent until proven guilty has served the justice system well. However, the Democrats would rather craft a story to fit the agenda, as in Benghazi, the IRS probe, the Mueller investigation, etc. This is more of the same, as is evident with the “leaks” to the media. ALL the facts would make for a continuous “spin cycle” trying to create a feasible story. I appreciate Holland’s comments. We can get some insight into how the left thinks. Better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

    • Thank you.

      And never forget: Those who happen to see things differently aren’t just wrong, they’re bad people…something the preacher might not have mentioned in this morning’s sermon.

      • C M Solomon says:

        My definition of “bad people” is clearly explained in my comment as follows:

        https://www.youtellmetexas.com/2019/10/24/what-is-this-man-hiding/comment-page-1/#comment-151804

        Don’t you agree?

      • C M Solomon says:

        The House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff is the chief saboteur assigned by the demolition Democrats in Congress to utterly subvert by slander, libel, defamation, sedition, and any other treasonous acts in order to totally destroy Donald Trump’s administration and his effectiveness as the duly elected President of the United States. The Schiff and the Democrat agendas are the same. This is NOT just a simple (and ultimately harmless) debate about policy differences between Republicans and Democrats. Paul has shown the unending depths of depravity that this Schiff miscreant will sink in order to peddle his agenda. One would need a complex labyrinth map to keep track of the new lies that are promoted every week by this creep.

        This is a deliberate attempt to use the BIG LIE to crush Trump’s Presidency in favor of a new Democrat era of subjugation of the Constitution in order to establish an iron-fisted tyrannical Government controlled by the Deep State (unelected bureaucrats) that would outlaw dissent of the Conservative kind. Schiff and the Democrats are really after those of us who are patriotic loyal Americans that hold to our fundamental beliefs of human freedom as defined by the Constitution. These Democrats are enemies of the fundamental American values we hold dear and should be seen as BAD and EVIL people that are bent on OUR destruction. Their mask of “benevolence and social justice” is gone and we have President Trump to thank for flushing these cockroaches out by the Light of truthful exposure of their deception. He has given these despicable Democrats the suicidal rope to hang themselves. It’s about time we rescued our country from these BAD people that wish to harm US.

        Thank you President Trump!

      • C M Solomon says:

        Since the subject of so-called “political differences between the two parties” can’t be defined as including BAD people (such as Democrats) for the country, let me risk wearing out my welcome by listing some astounding articles I discovered today that identifies the essence of REALLY BAD political enemies of our Republic. I hate to list links but our resident ultra liberal Democrat apologist has already set the precedence for quoting with links.

        https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/28/the-real-reasons-why-legacy-media-are-freaking-out-over-trumps-successful-baghdadi-mission/

        https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/28/how-the-obama-administration-set-in-motion-democrats-coup-against-trump/

        https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/29/the-head-of-joe-bidens-new-super-pac-is-a-foreign-government-agent/

    • Buddy Saunders says:

      The Democrats were once a party one could disagree with and still respect. Sadly, no more.

  6. C M Solomon says:

    It is a Federal Crime to use “Color of Law” to intimidate any person or organization in a kangaroo court such as this rogue (false and unauthorized by Congress at large) Schiff committee (chosen to be Intelligence to justify secrecy) to conduct any investigation in the name of “Impeachment” to slander by subversive LIES the Office of the Presidency when NO authorized investigation for the legal “Impeachment Process” is actually under way. This is ONLY a POLITICAL STUNT under “Color of Law” and the perpetrators should be arrested and charged with said Federal Crime since they have been intimidating persons out of fear of punishment if they don’t cooperate with Schiff’s demands. It is recommended that those who suffer from the dreaded “Holland Tunnel Vision” seek help from an Ophthalmologist specializing in Criminal Law.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *