Pres Trump can legally "out" the whistleblower

Mar 2012
59,855
41,343
New Hampshire
This is interesting.

In recent days, President Trump and his allies have amplified their calls for the whistleblower who sparked the impeachment inquiry to be identified, presenting the question of whether it would be a crime for the president to unmask the anonymous whistleblower.

According to four former top federal government officials who worked in intelligence and national security, the answer is no.

"If Trump thinks he knows the name, he can come out and say it, and he's probably as protected as anyone is," said Robert Litt, former general counsel for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence under President Barack Obama. Litt and several other legal experts who talked to NPR said Trump uttering or tweeting the name could in theory trigger an article of impeachment for retaliating against a whistleblower, but it would not run afoul of any federal criminal statutes.

Similarly, if a news outlet, member of Congress or member of the public outed the whistleblower, legal experts said, no criminal law would be violated.

"There is no overarching protection for the identity of the whistleblower under federal law," said Dan Meyer, a lawyer and the former executive director of the intelligence community whistleblower program. "Congress has never provided that protection."

Workplace retaliation against the whistleblower following disclosure would constitute a federal crime. But the act of unmasking itself is not unlawful, unless the person is a covert agent.

There is a patchwork of whistleblower protections under federal law. The specific framework that applies to the whistleblower who filed a complaint against Trump is outlined in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998. The law bans retaliation against an employee for blowing the whistle on perceived wrongdoing. It requires the inspector general to keep the lid on the whistleblower's name, but it does not stop a member of Congress, a president or anyone else from identifying a whistleblower.

"[The Whistleblower Protection Act] provides no protection. It's the worst-named statute Congress has ever passed," Meyer said.

 
Jan 2015
54,185
16,211
Great State of Texas
This is interesting.

In recent days, President Trump and his allies have amplified their calls for the whistleblower who sparked the impeachment inquiry to be identified, presenting the question of whether it would be a crime for the president to unmask the anonymous whistleblower.

According to four former top federal government officials who worked in intelligence and national security, the answer is no.

"If Trump thinks he knows the name, he can come out and say it, and he's probably as protected as anyone is," said Robert Litt, former general counsel for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence under President Barack Obama. Litt and several other legal experts who talked to NPR said Trump uttering or tweeting the name could in theory trigger an article of impeachment for retaliating against a whistleblower, but it would not run afoul of any federal criminal statutes.

Similarly, if a news outlet, member of Congress or member of the public outed the whistleblower, legal experts said, no criminal law would be violated.

"There is no overarching protection for the identity of the whistleblower under federal law," said Dan Meyer, a lawyer and the former executive director of the intelligence community whistleblower program. "Congress has never provided that protection."

Workplace retaliation against the whistleblower following disclosure would constitute a federal crime. But the act of unmasking itself is not unlawful, unless the person is a covert agent.

There is a patchwork of whistleblower protections under federal law. The specific framework that applies to the whistleblower who filed a complaint against Trump is outlined in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998. The law bans retaliation against an employee for blowing the whistle on perceived wrongdoing. It requires the inspector general to keep the lid on the whistleblower's name, but it does not stop a member of Congress, a president or anyone else from identifying a whistleblower.

"[The Whistleblower Protection Act] provides no protection. It's the worst-named statute Congress has ever passed," Meyer said.

This is a no brainer.

Eric Ciaramella is no whistleblower.

He is a leaker and that is not covered under the whisleblower status.

And, even if he were, he is also an accuser and the 6th Amendement to the US Constitution supercedes any "whistleblower" status.
 

Babba

Former Staff
Jul 2007
78,163
70,079
So. Md.
This is a no brainer.

Eric Ciaramella is no whistleblower.

He is a leaker and that is not covered under the whisleblower status.

And, even if he were, he is also an accuser and the 6th Amendement to the US Constitution supercedes any "whistleblower" status.
You are helping to endanger that man. You don't even know for certain that is the original WB. There is no bottom for you people.
 
Feb 2007
11,575
9,924
In my mind
The right wing obsession with the identity of the man or woman who reported the presidents behavior is bizarre.

Clearly the president did what was discussed in the whistleblower's report, notably by the admissions of the president himself. It is as if Trump fans have no defense of anything and simply wish to smear a person in some sort of vengeful act.

Why doesn't the president just have a Clinton moment and apologize?
 
Jan 2015
54,185
16,211
Great State of Texas
You are helping to endanger that man. You don't even know for certain that is the original WB. There is no bottom for you people.
His name is all over the Internet.

And, there is a reason for that.

This man does not qualify for anonymity under the Whistleblower Protection Act ...

Despite what the Fake News MSM is telling you to think and parrot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gooseberrymesa
Feb 2007
11,575
9,924
In my mind
His name is all over the Internet.

And, there is a reason for that.

This man does not qualify for anonymity under the Whistleblower Protection Act ...

Despite what the Fake News MSM is telling you to think and parrot.
Which is just silliness.

The Trump fans seem intent on simply attacking a person, who was fucking right, instead of acknowledging the cunt-ness of their leader.

Identity of the whistleblower is meaningless. Trumps own admissions confirm the whistelblower's accounts, supported by Trump's attorney, and a whole slew of diplomats.

This is why Trump is failing at this. He focuses on nonsense rather than actual problems.
 
Jan 2015
54,185
16,211
Great State of Texas
Ah yes ...

Bill Krystol ....

The psychologically disturbed Never Trumper who killed the Weekly Standard with his Trump hatred.

And, how do you out someone who does not qualify under the Whistleblower Protection Act ..... :think:
 

Babba

Former Staff
Jul 2007
78,163
70,079
So. Md.
His name is all over the Internet.

And, there is a reason for that.

This man does not qualify for anonymity under the Whistleblower Protection Act ...

Despite what the Fake News MSM is telling you to think and parrot.
The WB did EVERYTHING by the book. Do you think the IG is part of the deep state?