Friday, Rep. Devin Nunes sent a letter to House Intel Chair Adam Schiff formally calling for him to testify himself.
Here is the letter.
Nunes tweeted a video of his appearance on the Tucker Carlson show Thursday, discussing the Ukraine Scandal and Adam Schiff.
— Devin Nunes (@DevinNunes) November 7, 2019
DailyCaller reports Republican California Rep. Devin Nunes on Friday formally called on House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff to testify about his or his aides’ contacts with the Trump whistleblower as part of what he’s calling the impeachment “show trial” against President Donald Trump.
“Prior to the start of your public show trial next week, at least one additional closed-door deposition must take place,” Nunes wrote to Schiff on Friday.
“Specifically, I request that you sit for a closed-door deposition before the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, and Oversight Committees,” he continued, referring to the three congressional committees taking part in the impeachment inquiry.
In the letter, Nunes noted that Schiff supported calling two members of Congress — Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and then-Rep. Dana Rohrabacher — to testify as part of the House Intelligence Committee’s Russia investigation.
Republicans want Schiff to testify about what he knew of the whistleblower complaint that kicked off the impeachment push. In the complaint, which was filed Aug. 12 with the Intelligence Community Inspector General, an unidentified CIA analyst raised concerns about Trump’s actions toward Ukraine, including during a July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Schiff led the charge throughout September to force the complaint out into the open. In multiple media appearances, he indicated that he did not know the nature of the complaint, or the identity of the whistleblower. But Oct. 2, The New York Times reported that the whistleblower contacted a Schiff aide before filing the complaint. The aide reportedly told Schiff some of the details of the whistleblower’s allegations, and referred him to the Intelligence Community Inspector General.
Schiff has acknowledged that he should have been more clear regarding his office’s contacts with the whistleblower. But he has denied having direct contact with the whistleblower, and says that nothing improper occurred.
#ThrowbackThursday to when the whistleblower reached out to Adam Schiff’s office before coming forward:
*September 17, 2019* “We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower.”
*October 13, 2019* “I should have been much more clear.”
Adam Schiff is a proven liar. pic.twitter.com/3H8Qg1PDGJ
— Sen. Marsha Blackburn (@MarshaBlackburn) November 7, 2019
Nunes and other Republicans have not been satisfied by Schiff’s answer and have ramped up their calls for him to testify.
Fox News reported in October that the intelligence community whistleblower did not disclose contact with Schiff’s staff to the intelligence committee inspector general (ICIG).
The sources said ICIG Michael Atkinson told lawmakers in a closed session that the whistleblower did not disclose the contact with the California Democrat’s committee and that Atkinson didn’t investigate that contact as he had no knowledge of it.
Sources also told Fox News that Atkinson also revealed that the whistleblower volunteered he or she was a registered Democrat and that they had a prior working relationship with a prominent Democratic politician.
Schiff’s office acknowledged October that the whistleblower had reached out to them before filing a complaint in mid-August, giving Democrats advance warning of the accusations that would lead them to launch an impeachment inquiry days later.
The source said Atkinson told lawmakers he did not know how a Schiff tweet in August and other statements about Ukraine appeared to reflect the substance of the whistleblower complaint, which was not declassified and not shared with Congress until the end of September.
Schiff previously said that “we have not spoken directly to the whistleblower,” although his office later narrowed the claim, saying that Schiff himself “does not know the identity of the whistleblower, and has not met with or spoken with the whistleblower or their counsel” for any reason.
This article first appeared on TheConservativeOpinion.com