The “Whistleblower” in the first Trump Impeachment lied and Adam Schiff had it buried until Today.
This took six years, but we finally have it. Lying and disgusting Adam Schiff covered up a transcript from corrupt former Inspector General Atkinson, who testified that the BS “whistleblower” in the first bogus Trump impeachment was caught in a lie. This was buried in the basement of the Capitol until today.
We’ve been begging for this record to be released for years because we know sleazy Schiff was hiding it for some scrupulous reason. Now we know the reason.
Adam Schiff buried the truth so that he could commit another coup against President Trump in their effort to remove him from power.
Where is the testimony from former and fired corrupt ICIG Atkinson that Adam Schiff hid in the Capitol basement?
We asked this question in 2025 and 2023. This goes back to 2019 when the Democrats went after President Trump for discussing the Bidens’ actions in Ukraine, one interview was covered up by corrupt Rep. Adam Schiff – until today.
President Trump fired ICIG Atkinson in April of 2020 after he could no longer be trusted. Atkinson had gone after the President to apparently cover up his own crimes.
I wrote about this at TGP at that time.
Here are some highlights from this piece:
President Trump announced in 2020 that he was firing ICIG Atkinson because he could no longer be trusted. The President had lost all confidence in Atkinson.
Here is the President’s letter to the US Senate announcing the move:
Atkinson was identified in the FISA abuse report by the DOJ IG Horowitz as one of the individuals who was involved in FISA abuse, which provided President Trump cover for firing Atkinson:
But corrupt politicians like lying Adam Schiff, who pushed forward the unconstitutional and criminal impeachment of President Trump, were up in arms about the President’s action:
Trump’s dead of night decision to fire ICIG Michael Atkinson is another blatant attempt to gut the independence of the Intelligence Community and retaliate against those who dare to expose presidential wrongdoing.
It puts our country and national security at even greater risk. pic.twitter.com/Pnm7chdIkl
— Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) April 4, 2020
Schiff was scared. His actions related to President Trump’s impeachment were corrupt and horrendous.
Schiff ran with a story pushed by a whistleblower that was likely put together by Deep State attorney Mary McCord, who was fired ICIG Atkinson’s former boss:
Prior to becoming IC Inspector General, Michael Atkinson was the Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division, Mary McCord.
It is very safe to say Mary McCord and Michael Atkinson have a working relationship from their time together in 2016 and 2017 at the DOJ-NSD. Atkinson was Mary McCord’s senior legal counsel; essentially her lawyer.
McCord was the senior intelligence officer who accompanied Sally Yates to the White House in 2017 to confront then White House Counsel Don McGahn about the issues with National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and the drummed up controversy over the Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak phone call.
Additionally, Mary McCord, Sally Yates and Michael Atkinson worked together to promote the narrative around the incoming Trump administration “Logan Act” violations. This silly claim (undermining Obama policy during the transition) was the heavily promoted, albeit manufactured, reason why Yates and McCord were presumably concerned about Flynn’s contact with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. It was nonsense.
McCord and Atkinson were also involved in the bogus FISA warrants investigated by the DOJ IG.
We reported that Atkinson took the ICIG position after working for McCord at the DOJ. McCord, on the other hand, found a position working for lying Adam Schiff.
We then reported that Atkinson changed the IC whistleblower form in September of 2019, shortly after a CIA Agent, who was spying in the Trump White House, drafted a complaint on President Trump.
Margot Cleveland at the Federalist noted the following about the timing of when Atkinson changed the form and requirements that complaints be based on first-hand information:
As Davis noted, the revised form “was uploaded on September 24, 2019, at 4:25 p.m., just days before the anti-Trump complaint was declassified and released to the public. The markings on the document state that it was revised in August 2019, but no specific date of revision is disclosed,” and the whistleblower’s complaint was dated August 12, 2019.
It is unclear whether the whistleblower submitted a form with his nine-page dossier, and if so what form, as none was declassified. One suggestion that a form was submitted is the OIG’s summary of the complaint: “According to the ICIG, statements made by the President during the call could be viewed as soliciting a foreign campaign contribution in violation of the campaign-finance laws.”
Yet nothing in the whistleblower’s complaint mentioned potential foreign campaign contributions. Was that the ICIG’s gloss of the complaint, or was that the summary the whistleblower used on the form?
Frankly, it does not matter which, if any, form the whistleblower used: What matters is whether the ICIG changed its position on accepting complaints under the ICWPA. If, prior to this charge against Trump, the ICIG refused to accept complaints based on second-hand information, but altered its procedure to trigger the ICWPA for the president, that is a huge scandal and implicates many besides the so-called whistleblower.
While the whistleblower’s plot to manipulate the ICWPA is obvious from the complaint, and so is his inaccurate partial quote of the statutory definition of “urgent concern,” the change in the form suggests complicity in the ICIG’s office. The director of national intelligence, who oversees the ICIG, should immediately investigate the investigator and determine whether there was a change in policy, when it occurred, why it occurred, and who initiated the change.
President Trump spoke about Atkinson, and he said that the White House offered to provide a copy of the discussion the President had with the newly elected President of Ukraine, which was the object of the ‘whistleblower’s’ complaint, but instead, Atkinson went to Congress with the application.
The whistleblower attempted to edit the form he originally provided. The original form stated that the whistleblower did not talk to Congress before filing the form, but after it was discovered that he had met with Adam Schiff’s team in Congress, the whistleblower attempted to edit his form.
President Trump questioned who the leaker was on the call and who provided the whistleblower with the bogus story about President Trump. President Trump also asks, what happened to the second whistleblower, who was discussed right before the President released the transcript of the call with Ukraine? Why did Atkinson not bring this individual forward? The President indicates that the second whistleblower could be the corrupt and dishonest Adam Schiff!
The most repulsive action by the Democrats and the Deep State is withholding ICIG Atkinson’s testimony in the House basement during the Schiff impeachment sham. This testimony is reportedly damning and will exonerate President Trump while highlighting the criminal activities of Schiff, Ciaramella, Atkinson, McCord, and other crooks in the Deep State.
It’s time for America to see this document. Today we have it.
Catherine Herridge released the documents this morning:
NEW RECORDS VIA @DNIGabbard @RepRickCrawford ATKINSON TRANSCRIPTS
– First Trump Impeachment + Whistleblower Motive
Whistleblower met with Democrats on House Intelligence Committee (then led by Adam Schiff) BEFORE reporting his allegations to the Intelligence Community Inspector General.
October 2019: then Congressman now @CIADirector Ratcliffe nailed the timeline in a closed door briefing with Intelligence Community Watchdog Michael Atkinson.
– Trump/Zelensky call July 25th 2019
– Whistleblower complaint filed August 12th
– Ratcliffe questioned what happened during those 18 days.Ratcliffe: The whistleblower did not disclose to you that he or she had contact with HPSCI (House Intelligence Committee)?
Atkinson: The answer to that is yes. The answer to that is yes.
Atkinson: On the urgent disclosure form, there’s a question that the complainant is asked about who they have reported the violation to…and one of the boxes is the congressional intelligence committees. The complainant did not check that box.
NEW RECORDS VIA @DNIGabbard @RepRickCrawford ATKINSON TRANSCRIPTS
– First Trump Impeachment + Whistleblower Motive
Whistleblower met with Democrats on House Intelligence Committee (then led by Adam Schiff) BEFORE reporting his allegations to the Intelligence Community… pic.twitter.com/x7A1IxHLLO
— Catherine Herridge (@C__Herridge) April 13, 2026