Even the New York Times has reported on Schiff’s Coordination with the Whistleblower:



The “Whistleblower” gave an early account of allegations against President Trump to a House aide who outlined it to Schiff, who is now leading the impeachment inquiryhttps://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/02/us/politics/adam-schiff-whistleblower.html … 628 Twitter Ads info and privacy 376 people are talking about this

The allegations aren’t contested, nor are they even recent. One month ago today, The New York Post reported the following damning evidence:

What is already known is that on July 26, one day after Trump’s call with the Ukrainian president, Schiff hired Sean Misko to join his staff. Shortly after that hire, Schiff’s staff met with Ciaramella, a friend and co-worker of Misko’s in the ­intelligence community. Schiff’s staff gave Ciaramella “guidance” on how to make a complaint. A cozy arrangement. The emails will likely divulge more. Schiff concealed these dealings until the New York Times caught him in the lie. Schiff also withheld from House investigators documents detailing how his staff aided the whistleblower. The whistleblower filed his complaint with intelligence community Inspector General Michael Atkinson on Aug. 12, also concealing that he had met with Schiff’s staff. When the complaint became public in September, Schiff feigned surprise. NY Post

Even the New York Times reported on Schiff’s collusion with Ciaramella. And Judicial Watch (JW) has sued the Dept. of Justice and the CIA for communications between Ciaramella and Schiff, among others. We wish them luck and godspeed.

Even if Tom Fitton and JW succeed, the question remains: will Schiff, Ciaramella, and/or the CIA face justice? The answer, based on the history of this duct-taped and super-glued impeachment effort–this soft coup–is a whispered but insistent NO.

Why? Roberts represents the highest court in the land. If anyone is qualified to make a judgment in favor of shining a light instead of leaving the public in the dark, it is he.

Here are two theories. Take them as that, no more, no less.

Someone in the intelligence community has damaging information on Chief Justice Roberts. They have leveraged this information to prohibit some information from reaching public ears. There are theories online, but they are wholly unsubstantiated, and as such, CD Media will not enumerate or endorse them. That would explain Roberts’ shaking right hand at his swearing in. Then again, it was a big moment, and he’s only human. Roberts has made the decision that he is acting in the role of Senate trial judge, not as the voice of the Supreme Court. President Trump is on trial, not the CIA. Therefore, any decisions that expand the boundaries of the case are outside his purview. If investigations after the trial lead to lawsuits that reach the fully impaneled SCOTUS, he will hear them there.

As tempting as the first option is to frustrated conservatives in the heat of the impeachment, it also smacks of fake news. The second option is the most likely answer of the two. When it moves, justice moves slowly.

Dear reader, if you disagree–or have other substantiated theories–we would love to hear from you.