Does Anyone Remember Eric Ciaramella?

[Rightguide]

Impeachment Bombshell: Secret memos expose Ukraine accuser’s bias, hearsay, and false claim​

By John Solomon and Jerry Dunleavy
Published: April 12, 2026 10:20pm
Updated: April 12, 2026 11:15pm

The new memos declassified by Tulsi Gabbard were not available to the public during the 2019 impeachment trial.

The U.S. intelligence watchdog developed derogatory evidence about the CIA analyst who prompted the 2019 Ukraine-focused impeachment against Donald Trump, including that he submitted false information in his whistleblower complaint, offered hearsay to support his allegations and had the "potential for bias," according to newly declassified memos that were kept from Americans during the failed bid by Democrats to remove the president from office six years ago.

The documents declassified by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard at the request of Just the News provide a starkly different portrait of the alleged whistleblower whose name and face were never shown to the public and whose lawyerly written letter accusing Trump of hijacking Ukraine policy for political gain was heralded by Democrats to launch impeachment proceedings.

Investigators for the Intelligence Community Inspector General documented several concerns about the Trump accuser's political motives, noting he admitted he was a "registered Democrat" who had worked closely with Joe Biden on Ukraine issues and who disliked some of the conservative figures in the president's orbit, the memos show.

The investigators also elicited an apology from the Trump accuser for misleading the probe and were acutely aware his allegations were based solely on second- and third-hand accounts about what Trump was alleged to have said and done.

“I do not have direct knowledge of private comments or communications by the President,” the alleged whistleblower, who claimed Trump improperly tried to pressure Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to investigate Hunter Biden, admitted in his initial August 2019 intake form.

https://justthenews.com/accountabil...ecret-memos-expose-whistleblower-bias-hearsay

It's a long article but it shows why Adam Schiff needs to be removed from the Senate, prosecuted, and put in prison. It also proves that I and others were right so many years ago about an asshole named Eric Ciaramella.

 

[Wilson23]

That's justthenews, you idiot.

 

[ll74]

The impeachment relied on emails within the Department of Defense and the Comptroller about aid to Ukraine being held up because of Trump's demands for beef on Biden.

That exists without any whistleblower information and has been released publicly.

https://abcnews-com.cdn.ampproject....-ukraine-aid-released-trump/story?id=67669236

 

[Rightguide]

That's justthenews, you idiot.

Don't be an illiterate idiot.

 

[Rightguide]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2043714297822335113

 

[ll74]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2043714297822335113

The President withheld military aid that was passed by Congress in order to get dirt on his political opponent.

Whether you consider that impeachable or not does not deny those facts.

 

[Wilson23]

Don't be an illiterate idiot.

Don't cite zero-cred sources.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/just-the-news/
Overall, we rate Just the News Questionable and Right Biased based on story selection that mostly favors a conservative perspective. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to numerous failed fact checks and the promotion of conspiracy theories and right-wing propaganda.

 

[HisArpy]

I would like to see the Vindman's get charged, convicted and executed for treason.

 

[ll74]

I would like to see the Vindman's get charged, convicted and executed for treason.

How exciting for you.

I'd like to see dear leader impeached and removed for gross incompetence and abuse of power.

 

[HisArpy]

How exciting for you.

I'd like to see dear leader impeached and removed for gross incompetence and abuse of power.

Lol, the difference between us is that you're full of shit and wishful thinking and I'm reading about all the evidence of treason by the Vindman brothers. Since there are at least 2 of them involved and they both worked for the same common goal, that's also conspiracy to commit treason and a seditious conspiracy.

Those are death penalty level crimes and are authorized punishments under their respective laws.

An additional difference between us is that I am not expecting anything to happen and I'm good with it ending up that way. I don't like how the well connected get away with their shit, but realistically that's life and how it's always been.

YOU, on the other hand, already have a hardon for the culmination of your fantasy impeachment and removal for non crimes. What's even better is how your much anticipated orgasm over it all will be ruined right at the edge.

 

[ll74]

Lol, the difference between us is that you're full of shit and wishful thinking and I'm reading about all the evidence of treason by the Vindman brothers. Since there are at least 2 of them involved and they both worked for the same common goal, that's also conspiracy to commit treason and a seditious conspiracy.

The difference between us is that you're accusing Vindman of treason that never occurred, while I can appoint out $4bil of grifting that the President has driven for him and his family

Those are death penalty level crimes and are authorized punishments under their respective laws.

Yes, you dipshits really like killing people you don't like.

An additional difference between us is that I am not expecting anything to happen and I'm good with it ending up that way. I don't like how the well connected get away with their shit, but realistically that's life and how it's always been.

I never suggested that anything would happen. I don't give a shit what you don't like.

YOU, on the other hand, already have a hardon for the culmination of your fantasy impeachment and removal for non crimes. What's even better is how your much anticipated orgasm over it all will be ruined right at the edge.

There are plenty of impeachment level abuses that I have evidence of. I doubt it will ever happen, but will lobby for policies I want enabled as I feel necessary.

 

[Rightguide]

Alan Dershowitz: Trump could move to expunge 2019 impeachment after release of bombshell evidence​

"It's never been done. I don't see any reason why it couldn't be done," the famed law professor told Just the News.

https://go.ezodn.com/utilcave_com/ezoicbwa.png

Famed Harvard law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz says he believes President Donald Trump could have grounds to expunge his 2019 impeachment in the House after bombshell new evidence revealed the intelligence community failed to disclose that his main accuser had the potential for bias, made a false statement and only had hearsay to back up his allegations.

Dershowitz, a Democrat at the time who worked to defend Trump at the impeachment trial that ended in the president's acquittal, said it would be "an interesting, novel approach" for Trump to go to Chief Justice John Roberts, who presided over the case, or Congress and ask for the impeachment to be reversed because the defense team was denied the right to confront his accusers with exculpatory evidence.

"It's never been done. I don't see any reason why it couldn't be done," Dershowitz said during an interview Monday night on the Just the News, No Noise television show. "Impeachment is a quasi-judicial procedure, whether you have to go back to Congress and ask them to expunge it or go to the courts.

"But I have to tell you one thing, history will expunge it already based on your work, because what you've done is you've created so much doubt about the credibility of the main accuser that it's hard for anybody to sit back now and say that was a just, a just impeachment, but I don't know that there's going to be any remedy," he added. "Maybe we should try to create one."

Just the News reported Sunday night that the U.S. intelligence watchdog developed derogatory evidence about the CIA analyst who prompted the 2019 Ukraine-focused impeachment, including that he submitted false information in his whistleblower complaint, offered hearsay to support his allegations and had the "potential for bias," according to memos newly declassified by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard at the request of Just the News.

More here:https://justthenews.com/politics-po...ump-could-move-expunge-2019-impeachment-after

 

[ll74]

Alan Dershowitz: Trump could move to expunge 2019 impeachment after release of bombshell evidence​

"It's never been done. I don't see any reason why it couldn't be done," the famed law professor told Just the News.

https://go.ezodn.com/utilcave_com/ezoicbwa.png

Famed Harvard law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz says he believes President Donald Trump could have grounds to expunge his 2019 impeachment in the House after bombshell new evidence revealed the intelligence community failed to disclose that his main accuser had the potential for bias, made a false statement and only had hearsay to back up his allegations.

Dershowitz, a Democrat at the time who worked to defend Trump at the impeachment trial that ended in the president's acquittal, said it would be "an interesting, novel approach" for Trump to go to Chief Justice John Roberts, who presided over the case, or Congress and ask for the impeachment to be reversed because the defense team was denied the right to confront his accusers with exculpatory evidence.

"It's never been done. I don't see any reason why it couldn't be done," Dershowitz said during an interview Monday night on the Just the News, No Noise television show. "Impeachment is a quasi-judicial procedure, whether you have to go back to Congress and ask them to expunge it or go to the courts.

"But I have to tell you one thing, history will expunge it already based on your work, because what you've done is you've created so much doubt about the credibility of the main accuser that it's hard for anybody to sit back now and say that was a just, a just impeachment, but I don't know that there's going to be any remedy," he added. "Maybe we should try to create one."

Just the News reported Sunday night that the U.S. intelligence watchdog developed derogatory evidence about the CIA analyst who prompted the 2019 Ukraine-focused impeachment, including that he submitted false information in his whistleblower complaint, offered hearsay to support his allegations and had the "potential for bias," according to memos newly declassified by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard at the request of Just the News.

More here:https://justthenews.com/politics-po...ump-could-move-expunge-2019-impeachment-after

No he can't.

 

[Wilson23]

I've only ever heard of expungement in connection with criminal convictions. Getting that off your record makes your life easier. But what is the point of expunging an impeachment?

 

[DeluxAuto]

Lol, the difference between us is that you're full of shit and wishful thinking and I'm reading about all the evidence of treason by the Vindman brothers. Since there are at least 2 of them involved and they both worked for the same common goal, that's also conspiracy to commit treason and a seditious conspiracy.

Those are death penalty level crimes and are authorized punishments under their respective laws.

An additional difference between us is that I am not expecting anything to happen and I'm good with it ending up that way. I don't like how the well connected get away with their shit, but realistically that's life and how it's always been.

YOU, on the other hand, already have a hardon for the culmination of your fantasy impeachment and removal for non crimes. What's even better is how your much anticipated orgasm over it all will be ruined right at the edge.

You suck as a lawyer and get beat in legal arguments by perverts on the internet.

Sit the fuck down, Derpy.

 

[Baztrachian]

I've only ever heard of expungement in connection with criminal convictions. Getting that off your record makes your life easier. But what is the point of expunging an impeachment?

What's the point in upholding an impeachment that was based on false testimony and false evidence?

 

[ll74]

What's the point in upholding an impeachment that was based on false testimony and false evidence?

The impeachment wasn't based on either.

 

[Wilson23]

What's the point in upholding an impeachment that was based on false testimony and false evidence?

Identify it.

 

[Philthy_Phil]

I would like to see the Vindman's get charged, convicted and executed for treason.

I would like to see you executed for retardation.

 

[Wilson23]

I would like to see the Vindman's get charged, convicted and executed for treason.

There can be no treason in whistleblowing, nor in honest testimony.

 

[Wilson23]

What's the point in upholding an impeachment that was based on false testimony and false evidence?

I never heard one thing come out of those impeachment hearings that later turned out to be false.

 

[Rightguide]

No he can't.

You know more than him, right?

 

[Wilson23]

You know more than him, right?

I know "expungement of impeachment" would require a whole entirely novel set of legal doctrine. BECAUSE, as Dershowitz says, it has never been done before.

In fact, it has never been CONSIDERED before. If we're going to expunge impeachments, Clinton should be ahead of Trump in line.

 

[ll74]

You know more than him, right?

He knows it would just be a political stunt. A Congressional action is in the record and cannot be taken back.

Considering he was on the defense, he likely wants dipshits like you to believe his bullshit.

 

[Lazaran]

Can Rightard be any more of a simp clown cuck for DonOld???



Nah.



Rightard



We. Told. Them. So.