Does Trump-Ukraine whistleblower have a right to anonymity? If so, does that right outweigh the public's right to know salient facts in proceeding to impeach and remove the president? 1/9 ow.ly/WiYF50wKCxW
Answer to first question is yes. Answer to second question is no, that right does not outweigh other rights in an impeachment battle. Three reasons whistleblower should be publicly identified: 2/9 washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editor…
1) The public has a right to know. This isn't mid-level bureaucrat calling out abuse of government credit card. There is no higher public concern than possible removal of president. 3/9 washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editor…
2) The whistleblower set the terms of the debate. Complaint laid out accusation Democrats would wholly adopt in effort to remove president. 4/9 washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editor…
3) He's not Deep Throat. Journalists have not made any agreement to keep his/her identity secret. 5/9 washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editor…
One more: Despite what Democrats say, whistleblower does not have absolute protection under Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act. Read it. 6/9 washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editor…
ICWPA: 'Inspector General shall not disclose the identity of the employee without the consent of the employee, unless the Inspector General determines that such disclosure is unavoidable during the course of the investigation...' A big 'unless.' 7/9 washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editor…
Now Democrats propose to take testimony from whistleblower with lawmakers unable to see him/her, unable to hear his/her real voice, and dependent on Democratic representations that it is in fact the whistleblower. Really? 8/9 washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editor…
Link from @dcexaminer 'The case for identifying the whistleblower.' 9/9 End. washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editor…
