Pres Trump can legally "out" the whistleblower

HayJenn

Former Staff
Jul 2014
72,230
63,245
CA
Donald Trump has made a systematic and highly dishonest attempt to discredit the whistleblower who filed the complaint about his July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump kept it up at his campaign rally in Louisiana on Wednesday night. Appearing to break from his script, he delivered such a rapid series of false, misleading and bizarre claims about the whistleblower that we couldn't type quickly enough to keep up in real time.

His barrage was in keeping with his general strategy toward the whistleblower: muddy the waters by saying such inaccurate and confusing things with such frequency that the public can't keep track of what's true and what's false. For example, Trump had claimed on 34 separate occasions through Sunday that the whistleblower, whose complaint was highly accurate, was highly inaccurate. That was more times than he had uttered any other individual false claim related to Ukraine or impeachment.

Trump has continued to focus on the whistleblower even as the public has learned of corroborating, damaging testimony from Trump's own officials, like Gordon Sondland, ambassador to the European Union, and Bill Taylor, the top diplomat in Ukraine. The President appears to be betting that he can have more success deceiving people about the words of an anonymous figure than about words his own appointees have said under oath
.

It's worth noting just how wrong and just how nonsensical Trump was at the rally. Here's a breakdown of five of the claims he made in succession

 
  • Love
Reactions: the bull59

HayJenn

Former Staff
Jul 2014
72,230
63,245
CA
Thank you Sen. Burr

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said on Thursday that he does not think the identity of the whistleblower at the center of the House impeachment inquiry should be publicly disclosed.

Asked by reporters if he wanted the individual's identity to be made public, Burr told reporters that he "never" thought that.

"We protect whistleblowers. We protect witnesses in our committee," Burr added.

His comments come as President Trump and some of his allies on Capitol Hill have called for the whistleblower to come forward and for the individual's name to be publicly released.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Eve1 and the bull59
Sep 2019
948
224
Idaho
Yeah, as soon as Trump confessed to it, I knew he was guilty. Between the summary memo, Trumps' own statements on live TV, Mulvaney's confession on live TV and the transcripts of the witnesses under oath that had first hand knowledge I don't need anything else, to see he is guilty . I don't give a crap what happens in the Senate. He's guilty because I can see and hear it myself . I don't need anybody telling me what to think.

.
Guilty of exactly what and if there's such strong evidence of guilt on the phone call why this so called investigation? Why not file articles of impeachment based on the incriminating phone call itself?
 

CtC

Mar 2019
11,607
4,104
California
The Punks name is Eric Ciaramella. I am telling everyone I can. Maybe some Tinhorn journalist will PRINT it. Even FOX is to chicken livered to blab it.
 
Sep 2012
14,752
19,304
SoCal
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.

Do you really think that tRump or any GOPer would reveal the WB for any other reason than retaliation by the great unwashed masses of tRump worshipers? What if the person they name is not the actual WB, what's to protect them from retaliation by those who eat up every word from tRump's stupid mouth or fingers?

Lawyer for Ukraine whistleblower sends White House cease and desist letter to stop Trump's attacks
A lawyer for the Ukraine whistleblower, whose complaint document triggered the House impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump, has sent a letter to the White House warning the President to "cease and desist" attacking his client.

"I am writing out of deep concern that your client, the President of the United States, is engaging in rhetoric and activity that places my client, the Intelligence Community Whistleblower, and their family in physical danger," Andrew Bakaj wrote to White House counsel Pat Cipollone in a Wednesday letter obtained by CNN's Anderson Cooper.

"I am writing to respectfully request that you counsel your client on the legal and ethical peril in which he is placing himself should anyone be physically harmed as a result of his, or his surrogates', behavior," he said.

...MORE...
 
Last edited:
  • Love
Reactions: the bull59