<p>Disturbing new facts emerged this week on the Trump-Ukraine &#8216;scandal&#8217; that perhaps reveal the true conspiracy behind the issue.</p>
<p>It turns out that the &#8216;whistleblower&#8217; was in contact with Adam Schiff&#8217;s office BEFORE he/she filed the complaint. This opens the specter of obstruction of justice, fraud and treason and much more.</p>
<p>Hear me out.</p>
<p>We now need to know what was the substance of the &#8216;advice&#8217; provided to the whistleblower. If it was a mere &#8220;We don&#8217;t want to know, get a lawyer and file it if you think it is right,&#8221; then perhaps there is no crime (at least in this part of the issue).</p>
<p>But if, as seems to be the case, Schiff&#8217;s office had a &#8216;discussion&#8217; with the whistleblower, that is a much different situation.</p>
<p><strong>Conspiracy to Defraud</strong> &#8211; 923. 18 U.S.C. § 371 &#8211; defines this : &#8221; [i]f two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose.&#8221; Wikipedia says &#8220;A person guilty of conspiracy to defraud is liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for any term not exceeding ten years, or to a fine, or to both&#8221;</p>
<p>If the whistleblower was advised to go to a particular lawyer, one who is known to hate the President, one who is associated, on who has done work with elected Democrats, then this was a conspiracy to defraud the justice system. The material in the complaint did not match the material in the transcript, demonstrating the fraudulent nature of the complaint. The fact that Schiff&#8217;s office provided material assistance (recommending a lawyer is sufficient) to the whistleblower makes this a crime.</p>
<p>Schiff had no evidence of a crime, only hearsay. He attempted to match it with corroborating evidence, i.e. the transcript of the conversation released by Trump, but failed to matched the charges in the whistleblower account to the transcript. He continues to pursue it, without evidence, without any foundation whatsoever.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em><strong>And Beria said to Stalin &#8211; &#8220;Show me the man and I&#8217;ll show you the Crime&#8221;</strong></em></p>
<p><strong>Obstruction of Justice</strong> &#8211; Wikipedia &#8211; &#8220;Obstruction is a broad crime that may include acts such as perjury, making false statements to officials, witness tampering, jury tampering, destruction of evidence, and many others.&#8221;</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s talk for a minute about &#8220;<em><strong>witness tampering.&#8221;</strong></em> When a partisan like Schiff gives advice to a whistleblower, directs them to partisan attorneys who are not exactly wed to the truth, encourages them to file a complaint that has no substance, this is tampering with a witness. And indeed, knowing that the recommended attorney would (and may have been instructed to) embellish the complaint beyond recognition to where a sympathetic media would go wild, is witness and evidence tampering.</p>
<p><strong>Treason</strong> &#8211; 18 U.S. Code §â¯2385. &#8211; &#8220;&#8230;Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so&#8230; Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.&#8221;</p>
<p>If you concur with the above reasoning, then you must accept the entirely of the activity as an attempt to overthrow or destroy the legitimate government of the United States through fraudulent means. <strong> Friends, this is a genuine coup attempt!</strong></p>
<p>Given the loose interpretation of laws in the attempt to impeach the President, given the loose, shoddy work use to spy on Trump when he was a candidate, given the loose interpretation of the laws used to convict General Flynn and attack Trump associates, this is a slam dunk on Schiff. Real conspiracy and real illegal actions to take down the President cannot be denied.</p>
<p>This is sufficient grounds to indict and arrest Adam Schiff.</p>
<p>What do you think? 20 years?</p>