Whistle Blower in protection

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More on the #FakeNews:

So, seems as if both 60 Minutes and Adam Schiff need to issue corrections.


Jerry Dunleavy
@JerryDunleavy
“
@60Minutes
completely misinterpreted the contents of our letter. The letter is now published online at http://CompassRosePllc.com. Nor have we, as we stated earlier today, reached any agreement w/ Congress on contact w/ the whistleblower. Discussions remain ongoing.”
—
@MarkSZaidEsq

https://twitter.com/JerryDunleavy/status/1178478001891287040

Got any sources that aren't the DC Examiner or Fox News?

People may need to be reminded it's against Federal law to identify a whistle blower who has followed the rules as this person seems to have done. Trump is now tweeting he wants to meet the whistle blower so I'm sure he'll break another Federal law. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1178442765736333313

It looks like Trump has managed to tweet and retweet about 30 times today while going to and from his golf course. Not to be confused with the golf he played yesterday with Lindsey Graham and Gary Player. Does he do anything except play golf and tweet?

Yes he finds time to abuse the office of the presidency for his own personal gain, for example by shaking down foreign countries to manufacture dirt on his political opponents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This now appears to be a coordinated media strategy to protect the whistleblower from being questioned or scrutinized.

Oh really. I don’t think you understand how this works.

Oh, I am beginning to understand quite well.
Questions:
Why were the criteria changed just before this whistleblower's complaint was filed?
Or, were the criteria changed AFTER the whistleblower's complaint was filed?
When did Adam Schiff actually see the complaint? Evidence is coming to light that it was well before he claimed.
Why did Schiff travel to Ukraine shortly before this complaint was made public?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This now appears to be a coordinated media strategy to protect the whistleblower from being questioned or scrutinized.

Oh really. I don’t think you understand how this works.

Oh, I am beginning to understand quite well.
Questions:
Why were the criteria changed just before this whistleblower's complaint was filed?
Or, were the criteria changed AFTER the whistleblower's complaint was filed?
When did Adam Schiff actually see the complaint? Evidence is coming to light that it was well before he claimed.
Why did Schiff travel to Ukraine shortly before this complaint was made public?

When did Schiff travel to the Ukraine? I can’t find any reporting on that. Also, what’s the foundation for your claim that Schiff had the complaint earlier than claimed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This now appears to be a coordinated media strategy to protect the whistleblower from being questioned or scrutinized.

Oh really. I don’t think you understand how this works.

Oh, I am beginning to understand quite well.
Questions:
Why were the criteria changed just before this whistleblower's complaint was filed?
Or, were the criteria changed AFTER the whistleblower's complaint was filed?
When did Adam Schiff actually see the complaint? Evidence is coming to light that it was well before he claimed.
Why did Schiff travel to Ukraine shortly before this complaint was made public?

Somehow, none of your questions negate all of the facts of our current Ukraine policy, which can now be called "Giuliani". Or more properly, corruption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To every person who questioned why no one else came forward sooner to report, this is why. The whistleblower has taken enormous personal risk to come forward with this information. Can you honestly say it would be an easy decision for you to be separated from your family, worry about whether they are in danger, etc., when there’s no assurance that your complaint will do anything?

If my complaint was 100% true and I heard it first hand, I’d have no problem coming forward. If it was something I was told by someone else, and had no first hand knowledge of, I wouldn’t make a complaint. That’s called gossip.

You act as if the whistle blower's sources are cliquey teenagers spreading rumors. This is not the case. The WB's sources include numerous government officials with entire careers and decades of service to our country and credibility under their belts. So stop calling it gossip and find some other, more credible approach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This now appears to be a coordinated media strategy to protect the whistleblower from being questioned or scrutinized.

Oh really. I don’t think you understand how this works.

Oh, I am beginning to understand quite well.
Questions:
Why were the criteria changed just before this whistleblower's complaint was filed?
Or, were the criteria changed AFTER the whistleblower's complaint was filed?
When did Adam Schiff actually see the complaint? Evidence is coming to light that it was well before he claimed.
Why did Schiff travel to Ukraine shortly before this complaint was made public?

When did Schiff travel to the Ukraine? I can’t find any reporting on that. Also, what’s the foundation for your claim that Schiff had the complaint earlier than claimed?

Sorry - it was at least one of Schiff's staffers. http://clerk.house.gov/GTImages/ST/2019/500022181.pdf
Chris Murphy also went in September.
And, as for Schiff knowing earlier......
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/analysis-does-schiff-already-know-the-trump-whistleblowers-story

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This now appears to be a coordinated media strategy to protect the whistleblower from being questioned or scrutinized.

Oh really. I don’t think you understand how this works.

Oh, I am beginning to understand quite well.
Questions:
Why were the criteria changed just before this whistleblower's complaint was filed?
Or, were the criteria changed AFTER the whistleblower's complaint was filed?
When did Adam Schiff actually see the complaint? Evidence is coming to light that it was well before he claimed.
Why did Schiff travel to Ukraine shortly before this complaint was made public?

Somehow, none of your questions negate all of the facts of our current Ukraine policy, which can now be called "Giuliani". Or more properly, corruption.

You must be referring to Biden's involvement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This now appears to be a coordinated media strategy to protect the whistleblower from being questioned or scrutinized.

Oh really. I don’t think you understand how this works.

Oh, I am beginning to understand quite well.
Questions:
Why were the criteria changed just before this whistleblower's complaint was filed?
Or, were the criteria changed AFTER the whistleblower's complaint was filed?
When did Adam Schiff actually see the complaint? Evidence is coming to light that it was well before he claimed.
Why did Schiff travel to Ukraine shortly before this complaint was made public?

Somehow, none of your questions negate all of the facts of our current Ukraine policy, which can now be called "Giuliani". Or more properly, corruption.

You must be referring to Biden's involvement.

Read this, if you're interested in our country and foreign policy:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/how-the-diplomatic-pros-lost-ukraine-to-trump/2019/09/29/0d22be6c-e12e-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-h%3Ahomepage%2Fstory-ans

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This now appears to be a coordinated media strategy to protect the whistleblower from being questioned or scrutinized.

Oh really. I don’t think you understand how this works.

Oh, I am beginning to understand quite well.
Questions:
Why were the criteria changed just before this whistleblower's complaint was filed?
Or, were the criteria changed AFTER the whistleblower's complaint was filed?
When did Adam Schiff actually see the complaint? Evidence is coming to light that it was well before he claimed.
Why did Schiff travel to Ukraine shortly before this complaint was made public?

Somehow, none of your questions negate all of the facts of our current Ukraine policy, which can now be called "Giuliani". Or more properly, corruption.

You must be referring to Biden's involvement.

LOL, did you seriously just post that? Is this some kind of political MadLibs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This now appears to be a coordinated media strategy to protect the whistleblower from being questioned or scrutinized.

Oh really. I don’t think you understand how this works.

Oh, I am beginning to understand quite well.
Questions:
Why were the criteria changed just before this whistleblower's complaint was filed?
Or, were the criteria changed AFTER the whistleblower's complaint was filed?
When did Adam Schiff actually see the complaint? Evidence is coming to light that it was well before he claimed.
Why did Schiff travel to Ukraine shortly before this complaint was made public?

Somehow, none of your questions negate all of the facts of our current Ukraine policy, which can now be called "Giuliani". Or more properly, corruption.

You must be referring to Biden's involvement.

LOL, did you seriously just post that? Is this some kind of political MadLibs?

(Name of prominent member of Democratic Party) is totally guilty of (Illegal thing Republicans are actually doing)!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To every person who questioned why no one else came forward sooner to report, this is why. The whistleblower has taken enormous personal risk to come forward with this information. Can you honestly say it would be an easy decision for you to be separated from your family, worry about whether they are in danger, etc., when there’s no assurance that your complaint will do anything?

If my complaint was 100% true and I heard it first hand, I’d have no problem coming forward. If it was something I was told by someone else, and had no first hand knowledge of, I wouldn’t make a complaint. That’s called gossip.

So if your daughter told you that she was raped, you wouldn't report it to the police because that would be gossip?

Oh wait. No. I know how you will answer that one. Let me reformulate to your worldview.

If thousands of scientists claimed that global warming was real and a threat to human civilization, you would keep that to yourself, right, because you aren't a scientist and have no firsthand knowledge of such things.

Nope, that's not it.

If you were told that U.S. astronauts landed on the moon, you wouldn't believe it because you weren't there. Gossip right?

Am I getting hotter?

If Sean Hannity told you Hillary Clinton kept classified information on a private server, you wouldn't believe him right, because you've never seen the server yourself. Right?

Closer. Got it.

If the WaPo reported that Donald Trump shot someone on Fifth Avenue, you wouldn't believe them. You weren't there. The reporter wasn't there. All those witnesses are liberals. Gossip. Hearsay.

Here's the thing. Trump supporters have shown again and again and again that facts mean nothing to them. So when you label something as gossip or hearsay, it sounds like a tiny snowflake falling on a mountain a thousand miles away. Your words are meaningless.

+1 - Couldn't have said it better. Trumpsters - get another defense - this argument is weak at best.

[Anonymous]

How many of us would have the moral courage and fortitude to be the whistleblower? That person is a true patriot. Will his life ever be the same? What about his family? Can this man even be protected long-term?

Last week, as I was going about the mundane aspects of my life, the whistleblower was on my mind. The simple things we all take for granted, the little things we do with our kids each day, that run at the park to burn off stress…has the whistleblower given all this up for his country?

The PP who suggested that this sacrifice was too much for most was correct. What we see playing out is why others have not come forward before this point in time. God bless the whistleblower. I am praying for his safety and long-term health. No patriotic American should wish him anything but Godspeed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump wants the whistleblower dealt with. We have audio.

“The whistleblower is a spy. We used to deal with differently. When we were smarter.”

I hate Trump, but he didn’t say that about the WB, he said it about the person who confided in the WB. Not much of a difference, but still different.

Yes, let's split hairs even further.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does the accused not have a right to face his accuser?

If that's the hill you want to die on, then Trump can start by facing the 20+ women whom he allegedly assaulted sexually.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To every person who questioned why no one else came forward sooner to report, this is why. The whistleblower has taken enormous personal risk to come forward with this information. Can you honestly say it would be an easy decision for you to be separated from your family, worry about whether they are in danger, etc., when there’s no assurance that your complaint will do anything?

If my complaint was 100% true and I heard it first hand, I’d have no problem coming forward. If it was something I was told by someone else, and had no first hand knowledge of, I wouldn’t make a complaint. That’s called gossip.

The WB was told the information in the course of business. The complaint was reviewed by the IG and determined credible. Too bad the IG didn't have you to advise him.