What are you trying to hide, Adam?

Adam Schiff has been leading the charge

Democrats Block Witnesses From Testifying in House Intel Probe
By Geller Report Staff -
Democrats in the House are doing what they do best — opposing — and blocking as many witnesses as possible from coming forward to tell in Capitol Hill testimony what they know about Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.
Staffers in Congress said one of the witnesses, an informal adviser to Carter Page, one of President Donald Trump’s campaign officials, was supposed to speak before a House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. But Democrats stalled the testimony, saying they needed more time to prepare.
The Washington Free Beacon has the story:

“‘He’s the guy that many Democrats have been pointing to as the supposed mastermind and you would think they were interested hearing his story,’ said one Capitol Hill official.”
It’s Rep. Adam Schiff, the chief Democrat on the committee, who’s leading the charge to stall testimony."

Again, from the Free Beacon:

“Schiff has asserted in the past that evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign is “more than circumstantial,” contrary to other intelligence and congressional oversight members who have said there is no evidence.
“On Sunday, Schiff appeared to back off his earlier comments somewhat. Pressed on ABC News to explain the nature of the evidence of collusion, the lawmaker said: “Well, I think there is evidence. I can’t go into the particulars of our closed investigation. But I also think there is also evidence of obstruction. But in both cases, I would say, whether there is some evidence doesn’t mean there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”
“Schiff was referring to obstruction of justice charges against President Trump. His mention highlights a new tactic adopted by Democratic critics of the president regarding the Russian investigation: playing down charges of alleged collusion while playing up claims of a cover up.
“Schiff has asserted in the past that evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign is “more than circumstantial,” contrary to other intelligence and congressional oversight members who have said there is no evidence.
“On Sunday, Schiff appeared to back off his earlier comments somewhat. Pressed on ABC News to explain the nature of the evidence of collusion, the lawmaker said: “Well, I think there is evidence. I can’t go into the particulars of our closed investigation. But I also think there is also evidence of obstruction. But in both cases, I would say, whether there is some evidence doesn’t mean there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”
“Schiff was referring to obstruction of justice charges against President Trump. His mention highlights a new tactic adopted by Democratic critics of the president regarding the Russian investigation: playing down charges of alleged collusion while playing up claims of a cover up.
“The same people that say that there’s no evidence of collusion say there’s no evidence of obstruction,” Schiff said Sunday, noting claims presidents cannot be charged with that crime. “I don’t buy that,” he said.
“Schiff told ABC that the allegations of collusion are focused on Russian hacking of private emails and making them public, and that Russians were working with Trump campaign staff and coordinated the influence operation. “But I’m not prepared to say that there’s proof you could take to a jury,” he said. “But I can say that there is enough that we ought to be investigating.”
“Schiff was not asked about why witnesses have not appeared before the panel but said the committee is “far closer to the beginning of the investigation than we are to the end”—suggesting Democrats plan to draw out the probe for many months.
“The FBI has been investigating charges of Russia-Trump campaign collusion since July, based in part on a controversial private intelligence dossier produced by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele.
“Many of the dossier’s claims, including charges that Page met with Russians intelligence figures, have been debunked.
“In addition to Page, the House wants to hear from several current and former intelligence and law enforcement officials, including fired FBI Director James Comey and Adm. Mike Rogers, director of the National Security Agency.
“Paul Manafort, who served for a time as Trump’s campaign manager, also has said he is willing to testify before the House panel. Another figure in the controversy, former Trump adviser Roger Stone, also expressed an interest in testifying in a public hearing in March.
“Page, however, was the only witness who had been scheduled to appear before Democrats blocked the testimony.
“The House committee is also investigating whether the Obama administration improperly requested the unmasking of Americans’ identities that were kept secret in classified transcripts of communications intercepts.
“On May 31, the committee subpoenaed records from the FBI, CIA, and NSA related to requests for the identities of Americans caught up in foreign intelligence surveillance. The request is related to unmasking requests made by White House National Security Adviser Susan Rice, former CIA Director John Brennan, and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power.
“Some records have been supplied to House investigators, but more information is being sought by the panel.
“Additionally, the House panel announced it has issued subpoenas to Trump’s former White House National Security Adviser, Michael Flynn, and Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen.”

It’s interesting that Democrats, who supposedly want to know what Russia did in regards to the 2016 elections, and whether the results were compromised in any way by untoward foreign interference, are blocking so many key witnesses from telling what they know about Russian intervention. It’s almost as if they don’t really want to know — because they know it’s all bunk.

Source: Geller Report
Knowledge Is Power: The Realistic Observer is a non-profit blog dedicated to bringing as much truth as possible to the readers.