IANAL, but does this not violate federal whistle-blower protection laws? Not that Barr would do anything of course, but still.
15 Likes
âThere is no overarching protection for the identity of the whistleblower under federal law,â said Dan Meyer, a lawyer and the former executive director of the intelligence community whistleblower program. âCongress has never provided that protection.â
Hmmm I wonder why they didnât include protection in the law? They might consider changing the name of the act to reflect itâs bullshitness.
16 Likes
It absolutely does. And those laws were written by Republicans.
12 Likes
To own the libs
10 Likes
@anon48584343 and @nungesser , so the answer would be yes and no, TBD by Trump-stacked judiciary? Why am I not surprised? 
It absolutely does. And those laws were written by Republicans. (Nungesser)
âThere is no overarching protection for the identity of the whistleblower under federal law,â said Dan Meyer, a lawyer and the former executive director of the intelligence community whistleblower program. âCongress has never provided that protection.â (Akimbo_NOT)
7 Likes
There was a whistleblower-turned-attorney interviewed on NPR yesterday, who said that there is no penalty in the law for someone who reveals a whistleblowerâs identity.
4 Likes
Might be the mediaâs way of simplifying âsulfuric acidâ rather than details in a police report. Both chemical formulations are equally dangerous.
indeed, from the nytimes
Mr. Villalaz said he rushed into the restaurantâs bathroom and rinsed his face with water, which may have lessened his injuries. The police described the liquid only as a âcorrosive substance,â though Mr. Villalaz said doctors told him they thought it was battery acid and it also burned a jacket, sweater and shirt he was wearing.
maybe this appeared somewhere else but itâs still fascinating. this was reported on by steve benen for msnbcâ
" Earlier this week, Donald Trump published a tweet suggesting heâd ânever even heard ofâ Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the top expert on Ukraine on the White House National Security Council. At first blush, that didnât make any sense: how could the president, whoâs been deeply engaged on U.S. policy toward Ukraine for months, not know his own top Ukrainian expert?
Yesterday, the answer to that question came into focus, though the answer wasnât altogether satisfying.
After Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyâs inauguration in May, Vindman was eager to brief Donald Trump on the implications of the change in leadership in Kyiv. Politico reported, however, on why that did not happen.
[H]e was instructed âat the last secondâ not to attend the debriefing, Vindman told lawmakers, because Trumpâs advisers worried it might confuse the president: Trump believed at the time that Kashyap Patel, a longtime Nunes staffer who joined the White House in February and had no discernible Ukraine experience or expertise, was actually the NSCâs top Ukraine expert instead of Vindman.
Vindman testified that he was told this directly by his boss at the time, NSC senior director for European and Russian affairs Fiona Hill."
13 Likes
Saw that report a day or two ago. It would explain a few things, but mostly says that Trump is so woefully ignorant that pretty much anyone can talk him into anything, but no one can talk him out of anything. And his handlers know this, and use it. Truly dumbest timeline, again.
12 Likes
indeed.
if this were fiction it would all be delightfully absurd like some backstory of some character in a pynchon novel but instead we have to live with it.
13 Likes
Don Jr seems to have beat him to it. Pray for this person and their family. I do applaud the wider media for not publishing the name, although it probably does not matter anymore.
16 Likes
Anything for Daddyâs attention.
What a useless PoS.
10 Likes
NPR had a guy on today whose job it is to deal with whistleblower complaints in the private sector, and asked him about secrecy around a whistleblowerâs identity. Besides being 100% illegal to do so, he impressed, itâs utterly pointless, because a whistleblower only alerts people of wrongdoing so that an investigation can start⌠and the investigation has, so far, produced a nonstop series of people to corroborate the allegations and expand on them.
So this is just illegal and vindictive.
13 Likes
It is also aimed at making sure other whistleblowers keep quiet. As there are rumors of others already lining up, making sure they stay low is of prime importance to the mob running this scam.
12 Likes
Wanna bet Twitter will refuse to take it down despite it being a clear and blatant violation of not only the law but their own TOS?
13 Likes
8 Likes
11 Likes
10 Likes
even better, the legislature may try to decide who wonâ
this maneuver hasnât been done since 1899. and if this fails, theyâll probably go for the wisconsin or north carolina approach of removing powers from the office of the governor while itâs in the hands of a subversive menace, i mean a democrat.
17 Likes
Only two? Well I guess only two we know of.
11 Likes
