Some thoughts on how to handle the (1st) CIA whistleblower in the @HouseIntelComm. I worked 5 yrs on this committee staff. Also worked for CIA, State, DIA and NSC.
@HouseIntelComm 2/ According to the @washpost, @HouseIntelComm majority members are considering ways to have the WB testify to the committee but with identity concealed from the committee's GOP members. This could be by having him testify from a remote location and/or behind a screen . . .
@HouseIntelComm @WashPost 3/ . . . and obscuring the WB’s appearance and voice. According to the @washpost, "Dem @HouseIntelComm members are plannihng such extrordinary measures because of their "deepening distrust of their GOP colleagues whom they see as fully invested in defending a president . . .
@HouseIntelComm @WashPost 4/ . . . who has attacked the whistleblower’s credibility and demanded absolute loyalty from Republicans." If this happens, it will do serious damage to the ability of @HouseIntelComm to conduct intelligence oversight.
@HouseIntelComm @WashPost 5/ It would incredibly insulting to GOP members
for @RepAdamSchiff to take such steps. HPSCI regularly deals with extremely sensitive information. Schiff could hold a member-only hearing with the WB & have each member sign a statement agreeing not to disclose his identity.
for @RepAdamSchiff to take such steps. HPSCI regularly deals with extremely sensitive information. Schiff could hold a member-only hearing with the WB & have each member sign a statement agreeing not to disclose his identity.
@HouseIntelComm @WashPost @RepAdamSchiff 6/ All @HouseIntelComm & SSCI members need to question this WB face to face in closed hearings to assess him, his allegations & motivations. This is especially true now that the ICIG has disclosed this WB has "a prior working relationship with a prominent Democratic politician"
@HouseIntelComm @WashPost @RepAdamSchiff 7/ Schiff's efforts to prevent an in-person, closed door
@HouseIntelComm hearing with the WB looks like he wants to hide the WB's partisan motivations for filing his complaint.
@HouseIntelComm hearing with the WB looks like he wants to hide the WB's partisan motivations for filing his complaint.
@HouseIntelComm @WashPost @RepAdamSchiff 8/ Also, the claim that the WB would be at risk if his identity was revealed is false and misleading. There's no chance CIA will retlaite against him. CIA Director Haspel and other CIA managers would never allow this.
@HouseIntelComm @WashPost @RepAdamSchiff 9/ Moreover, the likely name of this alleged WB has been widely circulated among reporters. I've heard this name from them and it seemed credible. @HouseIntelComm GOP members have heard it too. I dont condone the WB's identity being revealed without his permission.
@HouseIntelComm @WashPost @RepAdamSchiff /10 Finally, it is the height of hypocrisy for @RepAdamSchiff to claim GOP @HouseIntelComm would leak the WB's name given allegedrf leaks by Schiff and other HPSCI dems over the last 2 years.
insider.foxnews.com/2018/02/05/dev…
insider.foxnews.com/2018/02/05/dev…
@HouseIntelComm @WashPost @RepAdamSchiff /11 The 1st WB should testify face-to-face before all @hpsci & SSCI members w/o staff. Ideally, there will also be a public hearing so Americans can judge this WB for themselves. If his name is revealed he wont be in danger -- he will just join the legion of Trump haters in DC
@HouseIntelComm @WashPost @RepAdamSchiff @HPsci /12 One other possibility: there could be a Gang of 8 face-to-face meeting with the WB (McConnell, Schumer, Burr, Warner, Pelosi, McCarthy, Schiff and Nunes). Very sensitive classified information is often briefed to Congress in this way.
