If Trump is guilty of extorting the Ukrainians to dig up dirt on Joe Biden, then why does it matter if the whistleblower testifies?
- Justin ThymeLv 73 weeks ago
Postings lies, huh? https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.Qa2xPhnJw_Ewqge...
- AnnLv 63 weeks ago
Because Schiff lied about knowing him before he went public. If he testifies, Schiff will be revealed as the guy who orchestrated it.
- RockItLv 73 weeks ago
So that America can see that the whistleblower
a.) has 0 first hand knowledge of anything
b.) a team of lawyers wrote the report not the whistleblower
c.) the team of lawyers were working with Schiff and met with Schiff on many occasions
d.) is filled with anti-Trump bias
e.) worked for prominent liberals and Democrats and Biden
f.) is a traitor
- humptyLv 73 weeks ago
It doesn't. Whistleblowers, by law, cannot be suppoenaed. Their identites are protected under penalty of law. These laws date back to the ratification of the Constitution.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- FutureLv 73 weeks ago
Trump already threatened the whistle blower with execution, so there's good reason to keep his name private.
- Anonymous3 weeks ago
The whistleblower’s testimony will almost certainly add nothing to what we already know.
Moreover, by now almost everything in the whistleblower’s complaint has been verified by documents or individuals with first-hand knowledge. The committees have the memorandum reflecting President Trump’s call with Zelensky, which closely tracks the whistleblower’s description. They have testimony from State Department and National Security Council officials describing the president’s insistence on pressing Ukraine to investigate both the Bidens and the Clinton email server, and his sidelining of career officials who declined to do his bidding in favor of a shadow foreign policy run by political loyalists and his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani. And we have the admission by Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, since unconvincingly recanted, that there was, in fact, a quid pro quo—that military aid would not be delivered unless Ukraine agreed to open an investigation for the president’s personal political benefit.
Given all this, there is no point in having the whistleblower testify.
- atheistLv 53 weeks ago
Because no evidence has come forth that he is guilty.
- 3 weeks ago
The whistle blower does not want fat Donnie to Epstein him or her.