There’s an ongoing debate about the “identity” of the whistleblower. Nevermind that we all know who it is by now, but Rand Paul, Jim Jordan, and President Trump want Eric Ciarmella’s name to officially go public, especially since he’s not actually a “whistleblower” and is instead a Deep State stooge who hates Trump and is working with Biden.
Rand Paul made the perfect argument for why his name should go public, despite the fact that these bonehead liberals seem to think he is under some lawful “anonymity.”
You can watch the video below:
Question: "The whistleblower laws protect the whistleblower. You know it's illegal to out a whistleblower?"
— The Hill (@thehill) November 5, 2019
Objective reporting for the educated American.
I’m sorry, but the fake “whistleblower” is not a member of the Witness Protection Program. Again, he’s a partisan hack, using a phony “label” to try and hide in the shadows while firing rounds at Trump.
No, that’s not how things work in the real world.
So, when Mark S. Zaid, the fake “whistleblowers” lawyer got a little too high and mighty and started touting so-called “statutes” allowing for anonymity for anyone who exposes wrongdoing, Brit Hume pounced.
Zaid took to Twitter where he said, “Whistleblower statutes – passed by Congress – were always intended to allow for anonymity (except in certain circumstances) & it is current USGOVT policy to permit anonymity. In fact, it is usually one of the first Qs asked by OIG of a #whistleblower: ‘do you want anonymity?'”
Whistleblower statutes – passed by Congress – were always intended to allow for anonymity (except in certain circumstances) & it is current USGOVT policy to permit anonymity. In fact, it is usually one of the first Qs asked by OIG of a #whistleblower: "do you want anonymity?" https://t.co/IfWDv9iXxB
— Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) November 5, 2019
Brit was already fact-checking Mr. Zaid, a well-respected lawyer, just seconds after he hit enter on his tweet.
Hume took to Twitter, where he responded to Zaid, saying, ““Note the key words here: ‘allow for anonymity’ and ‘permit anonymity,’” Hume said, introducing nuance into the equation. “The law requires no one to keep the whistleblower’s identity secret except the inspector general who receives the complaints.'”
Note the key words here: “allow for anonymity” and “permit anonymity.” The law requires no one to keep the whistleblower’s identity secret except the inspector general who receives the complaints. https://t.co/6EWJ50jBkl
— Brit Hume (@brithume) November 5, 2019
So, in short, what does all of this mean?
Well, it means that Democrats who are keeping the whistleblower’s identity a secret are not doing it because of some law or mandate.
They’re simply choosing to keep quiet.
Big, massive, and very huge difference.
This piece originally appeared in WayneDupree.com and is used by permission.
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Objectivist. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.