Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again - there is nothing in the whistleblower protection act that demands anonymity for the whistleblower.

In fact, if the House votes to impeach, I am certain he will be subpoenaed by the Senate.

The whistleblower only? Not Taylor, Vindman, Sondland, Hill, Morrison? No one else?

Oh, I am betting the whole lot of them will be subpoenaed. And, anyone the whistleblower spoke too.

And, BTW - it wasn't tough to figure out his identity after the details published by the NYTimes a few weeks ago.
I saw his name floated over a week ago.

Anonymous wrote:And yet, none of it changes the absolute corruption of this administration or any of the testimony given to date.

It is clear the defense is going to be "so what"

It's the only possible defense.

I guess we'll find out if it's a good one.

Iim trying to get it, but I don’t get it. Trump supporters: Is there any legitimate, non-shameful, reason to learn the whistleblower’s political leanings? Why is his/her motive relevant to the substance?

From drudge:
the public cannot assess his motives for striking out against the president. And they worry his political bias could color inquiry testimony and findings unless it’s exposed.
****
Let’s say he’s Obama’s nephew - how does that affect what’s happened?

Anonymous wrote:Once again - there is nothing in the whistleblower protection act that demands anonymity for the whistleblower.

In fact, if the House votes to impeach, I am certain he will be subpoenaed by the Senate.

The whistleblower only? Not Taylor, Vindman, Sondland, Hill, Morrison? No one else?

And yet, none of it changes the absolute corruption of this administration or any of the testimony given to date.

It is clear the defense is going to be "so what"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's so silly. All of these Twitterers think that the whistleblower's identity makes everything else go away. Taylor's testimony, Sondland, Vindman, everyone.

Are they that braindead?

They are that brain dead.

They need a name so they can start discrediting him and calling him a dog etc.

Oh they've got it all figured out. How he is actually a member of the Illuminati, is secretly in charge of everything. Somehow.

Once again - there is nothing in the whistleblower protection act that demands anonymity for the whistleblower.

In fact, if the House votes to impeach, I am certain he will be subpoenaed by the Senate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's so silly. All of these Twitterers think that the whistleblower's identity makes everything else go away. Taylor's testimony, Sondland, Vindman, everyone.

Are they that braindead?

They are that brain dead.

They need a name so they can start discrediting him and calling him a dog etc.

This. Poor guy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's so silly. All of these Twitterers think that the whistleblower's identity makes everything else go away. Taylor's testimony, Sondland, Vindman, everyone.

Are they that braindead?

They are that brain dead.

They need a name so they can start discrediting him and calling him a dog etc.

Anonymous wrote:It's so silly. All of these Twitterers think that the whistleblower's identity makes everything else go away. Taylor's testimony, Sondland, Vindman, everyone.

Are they that braindead?

They are that brain dead.

I don’t know how to link as I am 50+. But I am disgusted at our “democracy”...what can we do to protect this guy? I am sickened by this and by Republican Party (my family goes back a few generations R)

It's so silly. All of these Twitterers think that the whistleblower's identity makes everything else go away. Taylor's testimony, Sondland, Vindman, everyone.

Are they that braindead?

What’s to hide?

Link?

How can we protect him?? I can’t believe the Repubs and Trump. What can we do?