What Is Adam Schiff's Plan?

For John, BLUF:  As The Babylon Bee tells us,"Survey Finds More People Would Support Impeachment If They Knew What Crime Trump Was Supposed To Have Committed".  You can count on the The Bee.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Did Adam Schiff Just Admit There Was No Quid Pro Quo?

From Pajama Media, by Reporter Matt Margolis, 13 October 2019.

Here is the lede plus one:

Appearing on CBS's Face The Nation Sunday morning, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff essentially conceded that there was no quid pro quo between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky by saying "there doesn't need to be a quid pro quo."

We have discovered in short order not only the contents of that call, but also the preparatory work that went into the call.  The effort to condition something the Ukrainian president deeply sought, and that was a meeting with the president to establish that this new president of Ukraine had a powerful patron in the president of the United States that was of vital importance to Ukraine, was being conditioned on digging up dirt on the Bidens," Schiff told to Margaret Brennan.

"So, you see that as the quid quo pro, not just the military aid," she replied.

"Well, first of all, there doesn't need to be a quid pro quo," Schiff told her.  "But it is clear already, I think, from the text messages that this meeting that the Ukrainian president sought was being conditioned on their willingness to intervene in the U.S. election to help the president."

For weeks now, we've been told that the transcript was evidence of a quid pro quo, and now Adam Schiff is saying "there doesn't need to be a quid pro quo."  Does anyone see this a huge concession on Schiff's part?

This is, of course, the same Representative Adam Schiff who promised us that the evidence was there for Russiagate.

I am unimpressed.

I am, however, impressed that the Democrats in Congress are finally setting standards and trying to hold someone to some standard.

Regards  —  Cliff