Talks between the whistleblower whose complaint is at the center of impeachment proceedings and the House Intelligence Committee have broken down, and it's unlikely he will testify, according to a source who spoke to the Washington Examiner.

House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who has overseen depositions in the impeachment proceeding, initially was eager to have the whistleblower testify, the Examiner noted. But Republicans contend the chairman has reversed himself to avoid scrutiny of his staff's dealings with the whistleblower before the filing of the Aug. 12 complaint to the Intelligence Community inspector general.

There is no discussion of hearing testimony from a second whistleblower, who supported the first's claims, the source said.

On Thursday, attorneys for the whistleblower declined to confirm or deny that their client was CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella. RealClearInvestigations reported Wednesday that Ciaramella was the whistleblower, calling his identity "an open secret inside the Beltway."

TRENDING: Democrats reportedly preparing bill to put term limits on all new SCOTUS justices

The whistleblower is a career CIA officer with expertise in Ukraine policy who served on the White House National Security Council during the Obama administration, when 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden was "point man" for Ukraine, and during the early months of the Trump administration.

In September, Schiff said the whistleblower was willing to talk and the congressman looked forward to his testimony "as soon as this week." But Schiff has since backtracked, the Examiner reported, saying on Oct. 13, "Our primary interest right now is making sure that that person is protected."

The whistleblower, according to the inspector general, has indicated political bias against President Trump. Based on second-hand evidence, the whistleblower contends Trump used the threat of withholding aid to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion probe and Hunter Biden's profiting from a Ukrainian natural gas company while his father, then-Vice President Joe Biden, was President Obama's point man for Ukraine policy. The White House contends the transcript it released of the July 25 phone call with Zelensky shows there was no undue pressure. And it argues that the promised aid went through and the Ukrainian president insisted he was not pressured.

Republicans also argue that the president is required to ensure that serious allegations of corruption are addressed. And they point to a treaty passed in 1998 between the U.S. and Ukraine that establishes cooperation in criminal matters.

In closed-door testimony to Schiff's committee on Tuesday, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a former NSC official, struggled to back up his claim that Trump demanded that Ukraine conduct an investigation.

He was asked specify what part of the Ukraine call showed "demand" for investigation into political rivals. A source told Herridge that Vindman struggled for several minutes with the language of the phone-call transcript. Ultimately, he replied that because President Trump was the person in position of power, the whole phone call amounted to a demand of favor from the Ukrainian government.

Then, another former NSC official, Timothy Morrison, testified Thursday to lawmakers that he didn't think "anything illegal" occurred during Trump's July 25 phone call.