Nunes Aide Is Leaking the Ukraine Whistleblower’s Name, Sources Say

[woolfe9998]

It is criminal to release the identity of the whisteblower, but grossly irresponsible to publish it. Trump era politics would be impossible without social media.

Except according to several sources, CNN and other news outlets either know or are fairly certain of the WB's identity, yet haven't reported on it.

If the repugs illegally out the WB, "reporting on it" will be a moot point. It's going to get out somehow, if only in social media. Trump will liklely just tweet it out if no one else does.

 

[Indus]

You can't argue with Trump supporters. They are die-hard to say the least.
My Donald Trump loving sister was spreading around on social media that fake news of Nancy Pelosi diverting social security retirement money to fund the house impeachment investigation. And people on social media were eating it up as if it were all true, as if Nancy Pelosi had the power to divert any government money yet alone social security money solely on her own.
I guess it does show some progress when Trumpies believe Nancy Pelosi has such amazing powers.
Trumpies will believe whatever they want to believe and that includes house and senate republicans.
Exactly as Vladimir Putin wants it.
Truly pathetic.

We need a solution for Trumpanzees. Stalin had a solution: Siberia.

I say deport them to Russia with their belongings and everything.

 

[Jhhnn]

So, please tell me....why are Republicans seemingly so intent on getting the whistleblower's name out there in the first place? It seems to me someone is salivating to get his name out there, and it isn't the media or Democrats.

Snitches get stitches! The whistleblower is a dirty stinking rat!

 

[Sunburn74]

Snitches get stitches! The whistleblower is a dirty stinking rat!

I don't get the republican hysteria over the whistleblowers identity and why there isn't more hysteria on how everything he cited has been totally corroborated.

 

[outriding]

Gaetz has been censured for the Cohen threat. Dollars to donuts he is pushing this and this should get him disbarred

 

[brycejones]

I don't get the republican hysteria over the whistleblowers identity and why there isn't more hysteria on how everything he cited has been totally corroborated.

It’s very simple, it’s distraction since they can’t defend Trump on the facts.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Which is worse?

Releasing the name is worst. Enabling or capitaling it should also receive scrutiny.

 

[Starbuck1975]

So, please tell me....why are Republicans seemingly so intent on getting the whistleblower's name out there in the first place? It seems to me someone is salivating to get his name out there, and it isn't the media or Democrats.

Trump’s last and only line of defense is his deep state conspiracy nonsense. He wants to demonstrate that the whistleblower was a Clinton donor or supporter or something along those lines. Impeachment is not polling well in a few key battleground states, so his brazen arrogance is born of survival and political opportunism, aimed at discrediting the intent of the investigation against him.

The narrative he is attempting to create isn’t whether or not he committed crimes. It’s whether or not the exposure of those crimes was entirely above board.

 

[dawp]

It's almost unbelievable the level of stupid I read and hear every day. There is no level of mental gymnastics these crazy people won't go to just to justify anything that the conservatives tell them is the truth. DJT could literally walk up to them and slap them in the face, and somehow they'd walk away wondering why the Demoncrats made him do it, because he's innocent, it's the deep state after all.

The things that would normally give a person pause like exposing a whistle-blower aren't even a consideration despite coming back to bite them in the ass at a later date. In a way the Democrats are in a good position. The Republicans are burning everything to the ground despite knowing that they are only obfuscating and the truth is not on their side. They will not win in the end simply because the facts and evidence are not there, yet they persist anyway, and in the end the same illegal/immoral tactics they tried unsuccessfully to use will likely be used against them at a later date. That's a win/win for the truth.

that seems to be the SOP for the GOP, change the rules to benefit themselves without a thought it might be used against them, like the rules for holding tn inquiry.

 

[dawp]

We need a solution for Trumpanzees. Stalin had a solution: Siberia.

I say deport them to Russia with their belongings and everything.

north slope of alaska, fence them in next to the shore and let them worry how long it'll be until their barracks fall into the sea as the permafrost thaws.

 

[SMOGZINN]

that seems to be the SOP for the GOP, change the rules to benefit themselves without a thought it might be used against them, like the rules for holding tn inquiry.

Because they know quite well that when it turns to bite them they can successfully claim it is unfair and blame the Democrats and somewhere north of 50% of Americans will believe them.

 

[Jhhnn]

Trump’s last and only line of defense is his deep state conspiracy nonsense. He wants to demonstrate that the whistleblower was a Clinton donor or supporter or something along those lines. Impeachment is not polling well in a few key battleground states, so his brazen arrogance is born of survival and political opportunism, aimed at discrediting the intent of the investigation against him.

The narrative he is attempting to create isn’t whether or not he committed crimes. It’s whether or not the exposure of those crimes was entirely above board.

That's a tough proposition wrt the whistleblower complaint. That was done pro forma up to the point where DNI Maguire withheld it from Congress. The White House synopsis of the Velensky conversation confirms the allegation, as does all the credible testimony thus far. Trump Co's only defense is the same sort of shameless character assassination they've used against all his accusers including Vindman.

 

[Jhhnn]

Because they know quite well that when it turns to bite them they can successfully claim it is unfair and blame the Democrats and somewhere north of 50% of Americans will believe them.

I figure 50% is an extreme exaggeration.

 

[zinfamous]

Devin Nunes is an indefensible POS, but let’s not pretent the media isn’t salivating at the idea of exposing who the whistleblower is, not to mention the exhaustive invasion of privacy that the whistleblower will inevitably suffer

Yes, I imagine that the legitimate media is salivating over the opportunity to endlessly report on the scumbag GOP agents that illegally out the federally-protected identity of the whistleblower.

LoL: how many have already forgotten that Trump actually pardoned Scooter Libby earlier this year? (or last year; I forget)

 

[VRAMdemon]

It doesn't even matter who the whistleblower is at this point. Everything they have said has been completely corroborated. We now know that the phone call was what the whistleblower reported. The "transcript" was sanitized by removing references to Biden. Sondland and Perry were lying.

Only some Republicans care to know who he/she is. The desperation behind trying so hard to get the name after the horse is already out of the barn is telling me they're just looking for some way to get revenge and smear the person in some way. It's the SOP of today's GOP under Trump.

It seems the Republican "strategy" at this point is:

- Deny the sky is blue
- Personally attack and smear anyone who says the sky is blue
- Attack the procedures of the "color of the sky committee"

It helps that they have a whole network dedicated to repeating their bullshit lies (or making their own lies) and a group of gullible fools who will mindlessly follow them.

 

[glenn1]

It doesn't even matter who the whistleblower is at this point. Everything they have said has been completely corroborated. We now know that the phone call was what the whistleblower reported. The "transcript" was sanitized by removing references to Biden. Sondland and Perry were lying.

Only some Republicans care to know who he/she is. The desperation behind trying so hard to get the name after the horse is already out of the barn is telling me they're just looking for some way to get revenge and smear the person in some way. It's the SOP of today's GOP under Trump.

It seems the Republican "strategy" at this point is:

- Deny the sky is blue
- Personally attack and smear anyone who says the sky is blue
- Attack the procedures of the "color of the sky committee"

It helps that they have a whole network dedicated to repeating their bullshit lies (or making their own lies) and a group of gullible fools who will mindlessly follow them.

Who this whistleblower is matters to the career and reputation of the whistleblower once they're outed. It wouldn't be a complete shocker if the person had partisan motivations but as you said that's irrelevant at this point.

 

[Jhhnn]

Who this whistleblower is matters to the career and reputation of the whistleblower once they're outed. It wouldn't be a complete shocker if the person had partisan motivations but as you said that's irrelevant at this point.

Truth is truth no matter who speaks it. Except in post-truth Trumplandia, of course.

 

[zzyzxroad]

Releasing the name is worst. Enabling or capitaling it should also receive scrutiny.

One can't happen without the other. Fix the crime and problem solved.

 

[glenn1]

Truth is truth no matter who speaks it. Except in post-truth Trumplandia, of course.

So then you support Edward Snowden for doing a service as great or greater than this whistleblower? After all truth is truth like you said.

 

[hal2kilo]

Snitches get stitches! The whistleblower is a dirty stinking rat!

Hoodlums hate rats.

 

[zinfamous]

So then you support Edward Snowden for doing a service as great or greater than this whistleblower? After all truth is truth like you said.

Yes and no--as I mentioned in the earlier thread, Snowden is no whistleblower. The Trump WB, or at least the reports of those contained in their statement, all tried the normal route of going through proper channels to lodge their complaints. Some multiple times, according to testimony. When they saw deliberate stonewalling towards what they believed to be a very real crime(s) (and remember this is actually the reports of several people), their complaints became the WB complaint. ...this is how we define whistleblowers--generally career servants that "believe in the cause" of wherever they are, and upon discovering general or gross malfeasance, feel pushed to testify against certain crimes after being constantly rebuffed in their attempts to shed light on/correct these problems from within the institution that they had otherwise trusted. They observe a defined break down in rules and standards, recognize the problem of such, and seek to remedy it.

...none of that applies to Snowden, who specifically took a job in order to gain access to classified information for the express purpose of exposing it, "whatever it was." (again, Snowden was and remains ignorant of the content in the vast majority of what he collected--and all of this by his own words, by the way, in his biography. I'm not inferring his behavior here--just repeating what he actually says about his actions and intent.) ...I wouldn't go so far to say that this is a distinction without a difference, when it comes to how we really do benefit overall with what Snowden did, but it is a significant distinction, nonetheless. Snowden was extremely careless in how he went about it, and I don't think he is anybody that future whistleblowers should emulate. For one thing, he is a perfect example of how such a person could be honestly excoriated and their actions called into question--laws weren't really what interested him. His was fueled mostly by isolation and paranoia, and a very real sense of "revenge against the world." (again, his own words. Not mine)

 

[Jhhnn]

So then you support Edward Snowden for doing a service as great or greater than this whistleblower? After all truth is truth like you said.

The whistleblower had the legal right to speak the truth in the way that they did & should therefore suffer no ill consequences for having done so. It's black letter law. Snowden has nothing to do with it.

 

[hal2kilo]

The GOP has a long history of attacking americans for public service when it suits their partisan political needs.

Republicans smear a military combat veteran — because that's just what they do - Salon.com

Republicans claim to "support the troops." Going back to JFK, McGovern and John Kerry, their true record is ugly

www.salon.com

 

[glenn1]

The whistleblower had the legal right to speak the truth in the way that they did & should therefore suffer no ill consequences for having done so. It's black letter law. Snowden has nothing to do with it.

So you changed your argument to be about process (legal right) rather than about what was disclosed being the truth? If we found out the whistleblower didn’t actually use proper legal channels or wasn’t eligible for the program then you’d be OK with them being fired or prosecuted?

 

[glenn1]

The GOP has a long history of attacking americans for public services when it suits their partisan political needs.

Republicans smear a military combat veteran — because that's just what they do - Salon.com

Republicans claim to "support the troops." Going back to JFK, McGovern and John Kerry, their true record is ugly

www.salon.com

Or people making sexual assault allegations. Sone quote about “dragging $100 bill through a trailer park” seems to ring a bell. So does “vast right wing conspiracy.”