flyangler

Trump Jr. Going On Limbaugh Right Now, will Discuss “Outing” Eric Ciaramella.

Rate this topic

37 posts in this topic

Why did Don JR “out” the whistleblower? 
 

He’s going on Limbaugh right now, a first, to discuss at 1:00. 
 

My thinking, to force Ciaramella’s name out into the public domain so that someone can ask Vindman: “Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, do you know Eric Ciaramella?”  
 

And then sit back and wait for an answer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think what this guy did was anywhere near what the intent of the whistleblower concept is.

The whistleblower was never intended to make the case, it was intended to alert the authorities so that they could investigate independently.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 mins ago, Mokes said:

Wheels are coming off yet another hit job by the Keystone Cops.

 

7 mins ago, RiverRaider said:

 

Holy Messily Mixed Metaphors Batman!!!

I concur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 mins ago, Dave S said:

kind of ironic he went on the view to promote  "Triggered: How the Left Thrives on Hate and Wants to Silence Us."

 

:laugh:

Without seeing it I cannot say, but I wonder is he just did a QED when done with them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Billybob said:

I don't think what this guy did was anywhere near what the intent of the whistleblower concept is.

The whistleblower was never intended to make the case, it was intended to alert the authorities so that they could investigate independently.  

Nor has he.   He blew the whistle, that is all.   Those responsible for investigating are doing there part.  

 

"...But the Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General established in a statement Monday that the complainant met the legal qualifications to be treated as a whistleblower.

According to the main law governing this complaint and complainant is the Intelligence Community's Whistleblower Protection Act, which requires that the complainant be "an employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employee assigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employee of a contractor to the intelligence community."

"The ICIG confirmed the Complainant was such an employee, detailee, or contractor," the office said in its statement.

The law also requires that the complainant submit information related to an "urgent concern," and the ICIG concluded that the complaint filed on August 12 had been appropriately filed and "determined that the complaint was both urgent and that it appeared credible."...

 

"The whistleblower's complaint is in alignment with what was released yesterday by the president," the acting director of national intelligence testified before the House Intelligence Committee.

 

"...Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, an ally of the president but also a longtime advocate of whistleblower protections, noted in a statement Tuesday that the whistleblower appears to have followed protocols and should be protected. 

"This person appears to have followed the whistleblower protection laws and ought to be heard out and protected. We should always work to respect whistleblowers' requests for confidentiality," Grassley said. .."

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 mins ago, KnewBee said:

Nor has he.   He blew the whistle, that is all.   Those responsible for investigating are doing there part.  

 

"...But the Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General established in a statement Monday that the complainant met the legal qualifications to be treated as a whistleblower.

According to the main law governing this complaint and complainant is the Intelligence Community's Whistleblower Protection Act, which requires that the complainant be "an employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employee assigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employee of a contractor to the intelligence community."

"The ICIG confirmed the Complainant was such an employee, detailee, or contractor," the office said in its statement.

The law also requires that the complainant submit information related to an "urgent concern," and the ICIG concluded that the complaint filed on August 12 had been appropriately filed and "determined that the complaint was both urgent and that it appeared credible."...

 

"The whistleblower's complaint is in alignment with what was released yesterday by the president," the acting director of national intelligence testified before the House Intelligence Committee.

 

"...Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, an ally of the president but also a longtime advocate of whistleblower protections, noted in a statement Tuesday that the whistleblower appears to have followed protocols and should be protected. 

"This person appears to have followed the whistleblower protection laws and ought to be heard out and protected. We should always work to respect whistleblowers' requests for confidentiality," Grassley said. .."

 

 

 

Blah, blah booooooooooring......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KnewBee said:

Nor has he.   He blew the whistle, that is all.   Those responsible for investigating are doing there part.  

 

"...But the Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General established in a statement Monday that the complainant met the legal qualifications to be treated as a whistleblower.

According to the main law governing this complaint and complainant is the Intelligence Community's Whistleblower Protection Act, which requires that the complainant be "an employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employee assigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employee of a contractor to the intelligence community."

"The ICIG confirmed the Complainant was such an employee, detailee, or contractor," the office said in its statement.

The law also requires that the complainant submit information related to an "urgent concern," and the ICIG concluded that the complaint filed on August 12 had been appropriately filed and "determined that the complaint was both urgent and that it appeared credible."...

 

"The whistleblower's complaint is in alignment with what was released yesterday by the president," the acting director of national intelligence testified before the House Intelligence Committee.

 

"...Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, an ally of the president but also a longtime advocate of whistleblower protections, noted in a statement Tuesday that the whistleblower appears to have followed protocols and should be protected. 

"This person appears to have followed the whistleblower protection laws and ought to be heard out and protected. We should always work to respect whistleblowers' requests for confidentiality," Grassley said. .."

 

 

 

My point is that once the whistleblower blows the whistle, his job is over.

He is not needed to make the case, if it's done properly.

And if he's not needed further, his anonymity is easy to protect, however if they are going to use him that becomes difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.