Whistleblower identified

[rogue06]

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...



and



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

What did anyone expect from someone who sicced the federal government on a couple reporters for having the temerity to break a story that Obama wanted to be the one to do so.

[Cow Poke]

What did anyone expect from someone who sicced the federal government on a couple reporters for having the temerity to break a story that Obama wanted to be the one to do so.

But that was perfectly acceptable because it was THEIR guy abusing the system and going after other people.

The hypocrisy is absolutely stunning.

[rogue06]

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."

Ken Star, who knows a thing or two about these things, said that Ciaramella does not qualify for whistleblower status since he went to Adam Schiff first before filing any sort of complaint. When he did that he became nothing more than a common leaker.

[Cow Poke]

Ken Star, who knows a thing or two about these things, said that Ciaramella does not qualify for whistleblower status since he went to Adam Schiff first before filing any sort of complaint. When he did that he became nothing more than a common leaker.

AND, we're to believe that Schiffty Adam doesn't have a clue who it is, or that maybe he does, but it's "ok" to lie about it because everybody else on the planet is clueless about who the alleged whistle blower is. You really can't make this stuff up.

It amazes me how otherwise intelligent people can get duped into believing - and even defending - this crap.

[rogue06]

AND, we're to believe that Schiffty Adam doesn't have a clue who it is, or that maybe he does, but it's "ok" to lie about it because everybody else on the planet is clueless about who the alleged whistle blower is. You really can't make this stuff up.

It amazes me how otherwise intelligent people can get duped into believing - and even defending - this crap.

And let's be brutally honest, if this was a "whistleblower" who was seeking to get Obama impeached the MSM would have their name in headlines and by now we'd know what sort of grades they got when they were in Elementary School. There would be a mini tent city populated by reporters on the whistleblower's front lawn waiting to excoriate them with questions like "How long have you been a racist?"

[Cow Poke]

And let's be brutally honest, if this was a "whistleblower" who was seeking to get Obama impeached the MSM would have their name in headlines and by now...

They'd be camped in his front lawn demanding a statement.

[Watermelon]

Ken Star, who knows a thing or two about these things, said that Ciaramella does not qualify for whistleblower status since he went to Adam Schiff first before filing any sort of complaint. When he did that he became nothing more than a common leaker.

How does he know he went to Adam Schiff first?

[Cow Poke]

How does he know he went to Adam Schiff first?

It's pretty common knowledge that the alleged whistle blower went to Schiff (and or his committee) before filing papers.

Whistleblower spoke to Schiff aides before filing complaint



Why would the alleged whistleblower - presumably a really smart guy - go to a politician rather than legal counsel?

It's hard to believe that things went just like the "boiler plate language" suggests - that the committee (and or Schiff himself) didn't at least get a general layout of the complaint before passing him along.

[JimL]

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

"No it does not" what? It does not protect federal whistleblowers? Is that what you're suggesting? Whistleblowers are protected from retaliation, that is the whole purpose of the law, so I'm not sure what you were reading.

[JimL]

Yes, that's the talkingpoints version.

Talking points are either true or false, CP, they're not false just because you call them talking points. In this case they're true, it's the job of Congress to oversee the executive, and that means to investigate alleged abuses of power, and then to impeach if it's deemed by them to be necessary. Simply saying "that's the talking points version" amounts to saying nothing.

[Cow Poke]

Moderator Notice

Since the identity of the alleged whistle blower has not been officially revealed as of this date and time, it is the position of the owners and staff of this board that his or her identity not be stated as fact. Any statement revealing his/her identity is solely the responsibility of the poster making such claim or reference.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Psychotherapy Room unless told otherwise.

[Cow Poke]

Talking points are either true or false, CP, they're not false just because you call them talking points.

When the talking points are from a fringe perspective, Jim, they're not likely to be facts. Or, at best, very selective facts.

In this case they're true, it's the job of Congress to oversee the executive, and that means to investigate alleged abuses of power, and then to impeach if it's deemed by them to be necessary. Simply saying "that's the talking points version" amounts to saying nothing.

Jim, your Impeachment hopes are smashed, brother. Your hero, Schiff, is largely to blame, because he turned this "oversight" into an intensely partisan circus, making himself both chief prosecutor, judge, media commentator...

I'm so glad he's on your side.

[Watermelon]

It's pretty common knowledge that the alleged whistle blower went to Schiff (and or his committee) before filing papers.

Whistleblower spoke to Schiff aides before filing complaint



Why would the alleged whistleblower - presumably a really smart guy - go to a politician rather than legal counsel?

It's hard to believe that things went just like the "boiler plate language" suggests - that the committee (and or Schiff himself) didn't at least get a general layout of the complaint before passing him along.

I don't know if it's that hard to believe based on this.
Based on the article the conversation could have just been:

Whistleblower - Hello! could I get some advice on how to report possible wrongdoing?
Staff - contact the the inspector general and seek legal counsel.
Whistleblower - thank you! bye!
Staff - bye!

---end---

[Cow Poke]

I don't know if it's that hard to believe based on this.
Based on the article the conversation could have just been:

Whistleblower - Hello! could I get some advice on how to report possible wrongdoing?
Staff - contact the the inspector general and seek legal counsel.
Whistleblower - thank you! bye!
Staff - bye!

---end---

Sure, that's possible. I just can't see Schiff doing that, knowing the way he has played fast and loose with other matters.

I suspect he got the information, then it was more like, "ok, this conversation never happened, take this complaint to ...."

I'm just not very trusting of partisan politicians.

[JimL]

When the talking points are from a fringe perspective, Jim, they're not likely to be facts. Or, at best, very selective facts.



Jim, your Impeachment hopes are smashed, brother. Your hero, Schiff, is largely to blame, because he turned this "oversight" into an intensely partisan circus, making himself both chief prosecutor, judge, media commentator...

I'm so glad he's on your side.

I'm glad as well, I appreciate honest ethical leaders like Schiff as opposed to the liars, hypocrites, and propagandists like Trump, Moscow Mitch, Jim Jordan, and the Lindsey Grahams of the world that you look up to.