New Bombshells Could Stop Impeachment at the Judiciary Committee

The House of Representatives “legal” hearings on potential articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump take place this week and next, based on “fact hearings” in the Intelligence Committee which were actually policy attacks on the President for opposing perpetual war. Those hearings moved neither the American public nor the Senate toward supporting impeachment. As always when the coup against Trump is being rejected by a sane and patriotic majority, new “revelations” and media-anointed “bombshells” are to be expected.

Now, however, real bombshells have hit, from the patriotic side. Scott Ritter’s “The ‘Whistleblower’ and the Politicization of Intelligence” in Consortium News Nov. 27 provides in-depth, exhaustive proof that top figures in the U.S. intelligence community under President Barack Obama are the ultimate source of the current “Ukraine” phase of the coup and the associated attempt to restart Ukraine-Russia warfighting.

Barbara Boyd’s LaRouchePAC lead on Nov. 29, “The Third Phase of the Coup: Treason in High Places, as the Fascist Ukraine Coup Comes Home to Roost in the U.S.,” based on her Nov. 27 “Fireside Chat” webcast with Bill Binney, locates the power of Ritter’s nailing the intelligence agencies for what Attorney General Barr has called “sedition.”

These weapons, if they are circulated everywhere, could actually stop the “impeachment” coup in its tracks over the coming weeks. They must be seized by every American who wants to tell Congress, “Stop this!” and do America’s business.

The Democrat-dominated House Judiciary Committee says it intends to hear testimony on the Constitutional grounds for impeaching President Trump from four legal scholars on Wednesday, Dec. 4, just one day after receiving the Intelligence Committee’s report on its own scandalous hearings. Inexplicably, three of the four scholars who were selected support impeaching President Trump. By the morning of Dec. 6, Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are told, they must list their other witnesses defending the President.

Republicans protest these “rules” as divergences from past procedure. For example, Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA), ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, has written a letter to Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), which states, “Historically, the committee has called upon a robust slate of academics—representing a spectrum of scholastic and political viewpoints—to expound upon the somber subject of removing a duly-elected President. For example, during the impeachment inquiry of President William J. Clinton, the Committee assembled two panels of ten and nine academics, respectively, to help the Committee grapple with impeachment.”

But Collins also said, on “Fox News Sunday” on Dec. 1, that the “first and prime witness” the Republicans would call, will be Democrat Adam Schiff, the House Intelligence chair. Thus the issue of the so-called “whistleblower” protected from all inquiry by Schiff, will come front and center, especially since that “whistleblower,” a top CIA/NSC official for Ukraine and Russia, improperly met with Schiff before complaining to the CIA Inspector General.

This means that the content of Scott Ritter’s masterful exposé, and Barbara Boyd’s amplification of it, if they are circulating very widely, could blow a huge hole in the Judiciary Committee hearing itself, not to mention the American people’s acceptance of it.

PETITION: TRUMP, DECLASSIFY UK DOCUMENTS