Whistleblower identified

[Cow Poke]

Damn, that looks sincere.

With very good reason. The very first time I was made aware of it, I admitted I was wrong.

[Teallaura]

No, the fact is that it doesn't matter and he has a responsibility by law to protect the whistleblower. You need to stop swallowing the irrelevant stuff your favorite propagandists are feeding you.

1) Does matter.
2) No, he isn't.

[Cow Poke]

That's what makes this so insane - the Senate is talking full trial. Schiff, the gossip (what whistle blower), Joe Biden and Hunter Biden will all be called to testify.

It's like Schiff just didn't think this through -- he was SO SURE it was gonna be a slam dunk that the whole world would be swayed by him, and that the Republicans in the House would have no choice but to capitulate.

He kinds reminds me of the guy (when I was in High School) who always talked about leading a charge across the field at our "hometown rival" football game, and finally a bunch of guys decided to go along.

At the assigned time, just as halftime started, he went screaming across the field to the other side, yelling obscenities all the way, waving "the finger", only to discover midfield that nobody was following. Oooooops.

[JimL]

Yes, I am, because, like Ox said "it is unlikely he does not know...."

Well, that's fine, you can assume all you want, but you still don't know.

It would be nearly impossible for Schiff not to know, and if he knows, he's lying when he says he does not.

It's a moot point anyway, it's irrelevant. Whistleblowers are protected by law, their identities are not to be revealed, so you should stop falling for the right wing talking points.

Like I said - he's a Democrat, so, yeah, he gets a pass for lying.

No, it gets hand waved away because whistleblowers are protected, by law, for a very good reason, and their identity, or whether or not Schiff knows the identity, is irrelevant.

[JimL]

1) Does matter.
2) No, he isn't.

The whistleblower law, first of all is a law, and it is a law for a good reason, Tea

[JimL]

It's like Schiff just didn't think this through -- he was SO SURE it was gonna be a slam dunk that the whole world would be swayed by him, and that the Republicans in the House would have no choice but to capitulate.

He kinds reminds me of the guy (when I was in High School) who always talked about leading a charge across the field at our "hometown rival" football game, and finally a bunch of guys decided to go along.

At the assigned time, just as halftime started, he went screaming across the field to the other side, yelling obscenities all the way, waving "the finger", only to discover midfield that nobody was following. Oooooops.

No, it's like Schiff thought it his duty to carry out what the constitution charges him with doing whether republicans in congress are principled enough in their response to the evidence or not.

[Teallaura]

The whistleblower law, first of all is a law, and it is a law for a good reason, Tea

The statute does not obligate anyone other than the employer - and I don't think the requirement to withhold identity is even in it. Regardless, once the name became public knowledge the law no longer applied.

The statute does not apply to Congress - or even the executive*. Just the employing agency.













*except as employer.

[JimL]

The statute does not obligate anyone other than the employer - and I don't think the requirement to withhold identity is even in it. Regardless, once the name became public knowledge the law no longer applied.

The statute does not apply to Congress - or even the executive*. Just the employing agency.

The law is meant to protect federal whistleblowers who work in the government, Tea. The statute applies to all of government.

[Teallaura]

The law is meant to protect federal whistleblowers who work in the government, Tea. The statute applies to all of government.

No, it does not. I read the thing - go pull it yourself if you don't believe me.

[Cow Poke]

No, it's like Schiff thought it his duty to carry out what the constitution charges him with doing whether republicans in congress are principled enough in their response to the evidence or not.

Yes, that's the talkingpoints version.

[Tassman]

Fake news. Eric Ciaramella claimed that Trump repeatedly mentioned Biden in his phone call with President Zelensky

Once is sufficient and there’s no doubt that Trump DID mention Biden in his phone call - this has been corroborated many times, not least in the overheard Trump/Sondland phone conversation.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/21/impe...-sondland.html

[oxmixmudd]

Jim, take a deep breath and think about this a minute ---- EVERYBODY besides "lying for the Lord" Schiff knows who the alleged whistle blower is. If anybody wanted to do him harm, his name is already out there. It is absolutely preposterous to defend Schiff's lying on that basis.

You are doing exactly the same thing you accuse "Trumpsters" of doing.

I didnt know who he was because I was trying not to participate in the shameless attacks on him. Of course, with you guys around it was an impossible position to maintain forever. Fortunately, I dont remember names unless I actually try, so I'm still mostly good.

[rogue06]

The law is meant to protect federal whistleblowers who work in the government, Tea. The statute applies to all of government.

Actually, no. The law is pretty narrow in its scope.

[NorrinRadd]

Is this the law in question? Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989.

There are various "Whistleblower" laws. Really, none that I've found seem to be a perfect fit. This one only specifically bars the "Special Counsel" from identifying Ciaramella, and no such entity is currently involved AFAIK.

I do wish people like The Great One Levin would make a practice of citing the actual statute, by official name, H.R. number, Senate number, whatever -- something specific -- rather than just saying, "Ciaramella doesn't qualify as a whistleblower under the statute" or "The statute does not require anonymity."

[Cow Poke]

Is this the law in question? Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989.

There are various "Whistleblower" laws. Really, none that I've found seem to be a perfect fit. This one only specifically bars the "Special Counsel" from identifying Ciaramella, and no such entity is currently involved AFAIK.

I do wish people like The Great One Levin would make a practice of citing the actual statute, by official name, H.R. number, Senate number, whatever -- something specific -- rather than just saying, "Ciaramella doesn't qualify as a whistleblower under the statute" or "The statute does not require anonymity."

The Whistle Blower Protection Act (you posted a legitimate source) is a scam, because after 9-11, the FISA courts played havoc with it over National Security.

The Bush administration abused the system, in my opinion, then Obama really opened the floodgates - while pretending to be all about "protecting whistle blowers", he ended up, according to the Long Island Press and other sources, prosecuting them like crazy...

As for Obama’s record, here’s what history will show: In his eight years in office, the Obama Justice Department spearheaded eight Espionage Act prosecutions, more than all US administrations combined. Journalists were also caught in the crosshairs: Investigators sought phone records for Associated Press journalists, threatened to jail an investigative reporter for The New York Times, and named a Fox News reporter a co-conspirator in a leak case. In Texas, a journalist investigating private defense contractors became the focus of a federal prosecution and was initially charged for sharing a hyperlink containing hacked information that had already been made public.

and

The Obama administration has deployed the Espionage Act against whistleblowers with such devastating effect that it punishes leakers who believe they’re acting in the public good and creates a chilling effect from national security agencies on down—a show of force that may make potential whistleblowers to think twice about disclosing information, according to rights groups and whistleblower advocates.

“The Obama administration has presided over the most draconian crackdown on national security and intelligence community whistleblowers in US history,” said Jesselyn Radack, a whistleblower herself and a national security attorney, at an event last February in Washington, D.C. to support the imprisoned whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling, a lawyer and former CIA employee. “The Justice Department has used the antiquated Espionage Act as a bludgeon to threaten, intimidate, silence and imprison whistleblowers for allegedly mishandling classified information.”

Timothy Karr, senior director of strategy for Free Press, said one would have to go back seven presidential administrations to find someone as prodigious in cracking down on whistleblowers as Obama.

“The Obama administration is like the Nixon administration in many respects,” he said at the same event. “The Nixon administration tried to silence whistleblowers using illegal means. But the Obama administration is trying to silence whistleblowers using a misinterpretation of the laws that are on the books, and they have done it to greater impact than Nixon could ever imagine.”

One man's "whistle blower" is another man's traitor.