This is total garbage for two reasons.
1. He didn't reveal Eric Ciaramella's name. It's been reported by real journalists, hidden by corrupt big media.
2. He's not a whistleblower. Not as a matter of law nor practice.
He has ZERO statutory right to anonymity.
1. He didn't reveal Eric Ciaramella's name. It's been reported by real journalists, hidden by corrupt big media.
2. He's not a whistleblower. Not as a matter of law nor practice.
He has ZERO statutory right to anonymity.
So, let's knock off the faux outrage and stop pretending that referring to Eric Ciaramella as the whistleblower is some betrayal of principle.
It's only betrays those who don't want the American people to learn of his history, relationships, lies, and professional deception.
It's only betrays those who don't want the American people to learn of his history, relationships, lies, and professional deception.
It is unconscionable to argue a member of the intel comm—let alone one who is a fact witness w/ a long history of ideological activism—could even be a whistleblower against the POTUS.
He is not. Eric Ciaramella has NO STATUTORY RIGHT to anonymity.
This is all very Stalin-esque.
He is not. Eric Ciaramella has NO STATUTORY RIGHT to anonymity.
This is all very Stalin-esque.
