Despite the self-righteous speechmaking of House Intelligence Committee Chair, Adam Schiff insisting that the anonymity of the whistleblower is statutorily protected, apparently he may be dead wrong.
During the ongoing hearings of the impeachment inquiry, Schiff has repeatedly stated that the Ukraine whistleblower has “a statutory right to anonymity” and blocked Republican questions about him.
The problem with that is, many legal experts say that the committee chairman is incorrect in that assessment. Several legal experts have come forward to say that no such specific legal requirement to shield the whistleblower’s identity from the public, exists.
The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act establishes rules for whistleblowers to report on waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption in a lawful manner, and it, along with presidential directives, provides legal protections against reprisals and punishment. Anonymity, however, is not one of those guarantees.
“There is no language in the statute as written — or amended — that gives a whistleblower from the intelligence community the statutory right to anonymity,” Cully Stimson, a former Pentagon official and the head of the Heritage Foundation’s National Security Law Program, told the press. “That’s separate and distinct from whether Congress wants to make the decision to not provide the name — that’s at the discretion of the chairman.”
Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, who received the whistleblower’s original complaint in August, has said he must keep the whistleblower’s name secret, but it does not appear this legal prohibition extends to President Trump, his allies, or anyone else. Atkinson said his review of the whistleblower’s allegations related to a July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky “identified some indicia of bias of an arguable political bias on the part of the complainant in favor of a rival political candidate.”
He wrote, “Such evidence did not change my determination that the complaint relating to the urgent concern appears credible.”
Speaking to the Washington Examiner, Arthur Rizer, a former Army officer and current DOJ prosecutor, said he doubts the law guarantees whistleblower anonymity.
“I am pretty sure on its plain reading only the individual who receives the complaint has a ‘statutory obligation’ to keep anonymity — and, I think, even then, there are circumstances where the veil of anonymity can be pierced.”
Rizer went on to say, “So, as a starting point, the chairman’s comment is vague and overbroad — and legally speaking, that makes him wrong.”
Schiff has constantly shut down Republican efforts to subpoena the whistleblower and cut off GOP witness questioning that could unearth evidence about the whistleblower’s identity, saying he won’t allow efforts to “exact political retribution against the whistleblower“ or “out” the person.
seems to me the Democrats and their followers are the ones that attack those that do not agree with them. Following that it shos why they are afraid because they are putting their actions on to others. We should know who the WHISTLEBLOWER is o that motives and truthfulness can also be shown.
People are put in protection everyday.The I voted for Trump.He has made threats and even I do not trust him.Keep his identity protected and by law do what is required on the subpeonas.Heck I would be in jail by now
First of all, in spite of the republican, and Trump’s demand to expose the whistleblower so they can throw stones at him for exposing an act that brought on an impeachment proceding for Trumps act of trying to force Vladimir Zelensky to start an investigation on Joe Biden and his son Hunter is a violation of his presidential power! The whistleblower’s exposing this act was correct both morally and ethically in spite of what Donald the Coward Bone Spurs want’s and his, or her name is not needed. His tasteless lackies Devon Nunes, Jim Jordon and Lindsey Graham can cry all they want but it still doesn’t change the fact that the whistleblower’s exposer of the fact the Trump’s violation created a need for further investigation and brought out credible witnesses who are far more powerful than anything the whistleblower could contribute. With that in mind the name of exposing of the whistleblower for his or her testimony is not necessary and should be protected. However testimony from those who were part of the conversation but unable to testify because Trump is illegally claiming classified information should testify and is of more value for the american people.
The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989, 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(8)-(9), Pub.L. 101-12 as amended, is a United States federal law that protects federal whistleblowers who work for the government and report the possible existence of an activity constituting a violation of law, rules, or regulations, or mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority or a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety. A federal agency violates the Whistleblower Protection Act if agency authorities take (or threaten to take) retaliatory personnel action against any employee or applicant because of disclosure of information by that employee or applicant.[1]
Eric Ciaramella… everyone knows already, time to make it public and see what dirt lies inside this whistleblower’s dirtbag
We all know who the supposed whistle blower is – Eric Ciaramella, so stop playing charades here and subpoena Eric Ciaramella. It’s not rocket science. Then ask him under penalty of perjury if he is the dubious whistle blower.
His who entire SCHIFF show is based in LIES (perjury), innuendos, hearsay, that means that he is guilty of SEDITION and TREASON as per the U.S. Constitution, since he’s leading a COUP. LEAD him away in HANDCUFFS! . . . He’s NOT the emperor. America is NOT spelled with a “K”. Team Trump and his allies 2020 – KAGA (Keep America Great Again).
There is no whistleblower!!!!!!!
So Schiff is a liar, and that makes this whole hearing a lie as evidence that needs to be looked at cannot be done! Schiff needs to have charges brought against him and this whole fiasco thrown out!
AMEN jOEY, THE ENTIRE BS OF SHIFTY HAS BEEN A PLOY TO REMOVE THE EFFECTS OF THE 2016 ELECTION. THE DEMS ARE NOT CONCERNED WITH THE 2020 ELECTION AT THIS POINT THEY ARE TRYING TO PROVE THAT OUR PRESIDENT WAS NOT ELECTED LEGALLY. WELL, THEY BETTER START LOOKING AT THE LAST PRESIDENT WHO WAS NOT A LEGAL CITIZEN AND HE WAS ELECTED AND THEY WANT TO DESTROY THE GOOD NAME OF PRESIDENT TRUMP.
I have this weird feeling that there IS NO Whistleblower! That it’s a Shifty-Schiff ploy as part of the plan to get rid of Trump. Why else would the Demon-crats keep him/her hidden? He or she could testify without being identified. There is a VERY bad smell here.