The "Whistleblower"

[Dos Equis]

His protection and annonymity  is based on a 30 yr old federal law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower_Protection_Act

Please quote the part of the link you posted that precludes this "whistleblower" from being publicly identified. 

[Dos Equis]

No.

You are incorrect.

This piece of shit is not a whistleblower by legal definition and is not afforded anonymity.

You are a liar.

Proving it time and again.

[Soul Crusher]

His name has been on the internet for weeks.

Even in a Drudge article headline.

Then Trump Jr. tweet the article.

And gets accused of "outing" the whistleblower, even though it was.....out there.

Democrats are fucking imbeciles.

Truly unbelievable how insane the TDS inflicted have become

[Primemuscle]

No.

You are incorrect.

This piece of shit is not a whistleblower by legal definition and is not afforded anonymity.

You are a liar.

How so?

Legal Definition of whistleblower
: an employee who brings wrongdoing by an employer or other employees to the attention of a government or law enforcement agency and who is commonly vested by statute with rights and remedies for retaliation

[SOMEPARTS]

This whistleblower has already been shamed into nothingness for his and his attorney's partisanship. No use for him by the press or Schiff so they continue to act like we don't know his name or motivation.

[SOMEPARTS]

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/11/08/facebook-removes-any-news-reporting-on-or-even-mention-of-who-the-whistleblower-is-alleged-to-be/


So it goes on...not sure which is more dangerous - limit of free speech being okay for some or the willingness of these platforms to do it.

[JustPlaneJane]

How so?

Legal Definition of whistleblower
: an employee who brings wrongdoing by an employer or other employees to the attention of a government or law enforcement agency and who is commonly vested by statute with rights and remedies for retaliation

The so-called whistleblower is not a whistleblower at all. The complaint he filed against President Trump does not meet the two requisite conditions set forth in the ICWPA. That is, the alleged wrongful conduct must involve intelligence activity and it must be committed by a member of the intelligence community. This was meticulously explained in an 11-page opinion by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) when it issued the following opinion: "The president is not a member of the intelligence community, and his communication with a foreign leader involved no intelligence operation or other activity aided at collecting or analyzing foreign intelligence."  The OLC opinion made it clear that the complaint by the so-called "whistleblower" regarding Ukraine was so deficient that Congress should never have been notified. The acting director of national intelligence agreed with this assessment. The legal analysis and reasoning was sound. In our constitutional form of government, the president is a unitary executive. He is not a member of any department or agency - they report to him.

To put it plainly, there is no whistleblower statute that permits an unelected and inferior federal employee to blow the whistle on the president, the most superior officer in the U.S. government. Article II of the Constitution gives the president sweeping power to conduct foreign affairs, negotiate with leaders of other nations, make requests or solicit information. The Constitution does not grant the power of review, approval or disapproval to bureaucratic employees. Indeed, the whistleblower law explicitly excludes a complaint involving "differences of opinion concerning public policy matters.

Now both of you lying cocksuckers can fuck off and die.

[JustPlaneJane]

Please quote the part of the link you posted that precludes this "whistleblower" from being publicly identified. 

Nowhere in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA) is anonymity even mentioned. Nor is it found in Presidential Policy Directive 19, which also provides specific whistleblower protections.The Inspector General Act of 1978 prohibits the inspector general from releasing the name of a complainant, but this applies to no one else. Under this framework, whistleblowers are granted certain rights against retaliation or reprisal in the workplace. In other words, they cannot be demoted, transferred, fired or otherwise penalized for filing a complaint that meets the statutory whistleblower requirements. However, identity protection is neither provided for, nor contemplated, anywhere in the language.

[Dos Equis]

Nowhere in the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA) is anonymity even mentioned. Nor is it found in Presidential Policy Directive 19, which also provides specific whistleblower protections.The Inspector General Act of 1978 prohibits the inspector general from releasing the name of a complainant, but this applies to no one else. Under this framework, whistleblowers are granted certain rights against retaliation or reprisal in the workplace. In other words, they cannot be demoted, transferred, fired or otherwise penalized for filing a complaint that meets the statutory whistleblower requirements. However, identity protection is neither provided for, nor contemplated, anywhere in the language.

Thanks.  How did Howard "I fact check everything" miss this? 

[Primemuscle]

The so-called whistleblower is not a whistleblower at all. The complaint he filed against President Trump does not meet the two requisite conditions set forth in the ICWPA. That is, the alleged wrongful conduct must involve intelligence activity and it must be committed by a member of the intelligence community. This was meticulously explained in an 11-page opinion by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) when it issued the following opinion: "The president is not a member of the intelligence community, and his communication with a foreign leader involved no intelligence operation or other activity aided at collecting or analyzing foreign intelligence."  The OLC opinion made it clear that the complaint by the so-called "whistleblower" regarding Ukraine was so deficient that Congress should never have been notified. The acting director of national intelligence agreed with this assessment. The legal analysis and reasoning was sound. In our constitutional form of government, the president is a unitary executive. He is not a member of any department or agency - they report to him.

To put it plainly, there is no whistleblower statute that permits an unelected and inferior federal employee to blow the whistle on the president, the most superior officer in the U.S. government. Article II of the Constitution gives the president sweeping power to conduct foreign affairs, negotiate with leaders of other nations, make requests or solicit information. The Constitution does not grant the power of review, approval or disapproval to bureaucratic employees. Indeed, the whistleblower law explicitly excludes a complaint involving "differences of opinion concerning public policy matters.

Now both of you lying cocksuckers can fuck off and die.

To put it plainly, legal counsel for the Administration, which includes Trump, are representing their clients. They issued an opinion on the matter of the validity of the whistleblower. Joseph Maguire assumed the role of Acting Director of National Intelligence (DNI) on Aug. 16, 2019.

The whistleblower, who has not been identified publicly, filed the complaint Aug. 12 to the inspector general for the intelligence community, Michael Atkinson, who found it credible and urgent. Maguire and the Justice Department blocked Atkinson from passing the complaint to Congress immediately as required by law.

[Primemuscle]

Thanks.  How did Howard "I fact check everything" miss this? 

Probably Howard missed this because the source wasn't cited by JPJ. So here you are: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/gregg-jarrett-whistleblower-not-entitled-to-anonymity-hes-an-informant-acting-as-a-democratic-operative

Note: www.foxnews.com/opinion/gregg-jarrett

[Dos Equis]

Probably Howard missed this because the source wasn't cited by JPJ. So here you are: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/gregg-jarrett-whistleblower-not-entitled-to-anonymity-hes-an-informant-acting-as-a-democratic-operative

Note: www.foxnews.com/opinion/gregg-jarrett

Howard missed it for two reasons: 

1.  The contention that the whistleblower statute prohibits public disclosure of the person's name by anyone is absolutely false.

2.  Howard likely doesn't read past the title of links that pop up on Google searches. 

[JustPlaneJane]

To put it plainly, legal counsel for the Administration, which includes Trump, are representing their clients. They issued an opinion on the matter of the validity of the whistleblower. Joseph Maguire assumed the role of Acting Director of National Intelligence (DNI) on Aug. 16, 2019.

The whistleblower, who has not been identified publicly, filed the complaint Aug. 12 to the inspector general for the intelligence community, Michael Atkinson, who found it credible and urgent. Maguire and the Justice Department blocked Atkinson from passing the complaint to Congress immediately as required by law.

You have absolutely no clue what you’re talking about.

There are two requisite conditions to be a IC whistleblower and that lying piece of shit (the fake whistleblower, not you) meets neither condition.

Both you and Howard are lying liberal cocksuckers. I realize that is redundant.

[Skeletor]

Thanks.  How did Howard "I fact check everything" miss this? 

He has turned into quite a constitutional scholar recently. I'm surprised he's not (yet) advising the Supreme Court Justices on these issues.

[chaos]

Thanks.  How did Howard "I fact check everything" miss this? 

Maybe he was making fart noises through his rolled up PhD

[Primemuscle]

It is interesting that mainstream media still seems to be maintaining the whistleblower's anonymity.

[SOMEPARTS]

It's nonsense and only proves the media is in the tank for a Schiff brand of partisan impeachment. It also shows they can't stand to think that everyone has already heard from other sources. Walter Cronkite is rolling over in his grave.

[JustPlaneJane]

It is interesting that mainstream media still seems to be maintaining the whistleblower's anonymity.

It’s not interesting, it’s a corrupt MSM.

And the liberal lemmings lap it up.

Their hopes and dreams are based on inaccurate polls and sham investigations.

Their crushing defeat in 2020 will be a thing of beauty.

[Princess L]

Shifty Schiff released the name of the "Whistle blower" leaker, but the Left is fake outraged because Don Trump Jr. tweeted the guy's name.  

[JustPlaneJane]

Shifty Schiff released the name of the "Whistle blower" leaker, but the Left is fake outraged because Don Trump Jr. tweeted the guy's name.

The name has been out in public for a week. Schiff released it in a transcript.

More fake outrage by the libidiots.

I’d fucking subpoena Hillary, Obama, Pelosi, the Bidens, Nadler, Rice, Holder, Schiff and every crooked liberal in their Party and put them under oath in public in the impeachment inquiry

[Princess L]

ERIC C I A RAM ELLA

ERIC  C I A R A M E L L A

Eric C i a r a m e l l a

E R I C  C I A R A M E L L A

[JustPlaneJane]

ERIC C I A RAM ELLA

ERIC  C I A R A M E L L A

Eric C i a r a m e l l a

E R I C  C I A R A M E L L A

George Papadapoulos is about to go down for having sex with underage girls.

The Epstein fallout will include Bill Clinton.

Liberals losing is the gift that never stops giving.

[Princess L]

Liberals losing is the gift that never stops giving.

[Primemuscle]

ERIC C I A RAM ELLA

ERIC  C I A R A M E L L A

Eric C i a r a m e l l a

E R I C  C I A R A M E L L A

The Washington Examiner
Daniel Chaitin  & Jerry Dunleavy -  November 07, 2019 12:53 PM


Andrew Bakaj and Mark Zaid, lawyers for the whistleblower, refuse to confirm the identity of their client even as such high-profile figures as Donald Trump Jr. have named Ciaramella as the whistleblower.

"Identifying any suspected name for the whistleblower will place their family at risk of serious harm. We will not confirm or deny any name that is published or promoted by supporters of the president. Disclosure of any name undermines the integrity of the whistleblower system and will deter any future whistleblowers," they said in a statement Wednesday. "We will note, however, that publication or promotion of a name shows the desperation to deflect from the substance of the whistleblower complaint. It will not relieve the president of the need to address the substantive allegation, all of which have been substantially proven to be true."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/alleged-whistleblower-eric-ciaramella-was-biden-guest-at-state-department-banquet

[Straw Man]

Howard missed it for two reasons: 

1.  The contention that the whistleblower statute prohibits public disclosure of the person's name by anyone is absolutely false.

2.  Howard likely doesn't read past the title of links that pop up on Google searches. 

if the IG determines the whistleblower followed the proper procedure and his/her claims are validated then the IG makes the decision to protect their identity which is EXACTLY what the IG determined to be the case.

that is what the law says

Also, one of the guys who sponsored and wrote the law says the WB followed the law

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/grassley-whistleblower-followed-the-law-and-should-be-heard/