Attorneys for the whistleblower whose complaint about President Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukraine’s president sparked the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry issued a statement Thursday threatening legal action against journalists who publish “the name of any person who may be suspected to be the whistleblower.”
The New York Times was first to provide some details about the whistleblower behind the complaint that started the impeachment inquiry, reporting in late-September that the whistleblower is allegedly a CIA agent who was “detailed to work at the [Trump] White House at one point.” The Times noted that the whistleblower’s attorneys confirmed their client’s position with the CIA. In the following weeks, speculation continued to swirl and pressure mounted from Republicans, including Trump, for the identity of the whistleblower to be revealed.
This week, multiple outlets revealed the name that, as RealClearInvestigations’ Paul Sperry put it, is reportedly “an open secret inside the Beltway.” In response, the whistleblower’s attorneys, Andrew P. Bakaj and Mark S. Zaid, issued a release Thursday addressing “speculation” on the whistleblower’s identity.
“Our client is legally entitled to anonymity,” the statement reads.
More here
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
Legally entitled to anonymity? What legal theory did that come from? I guess if someone repeats a lie often enough some people will actually believe it.
ReplyDeleteEveryone knows who he is; a CIA political operative for the DEMS and Deep State...too late el stupido.
ReplyDeleteNo he is not entitled to anonymity he is entitled to maintain his job
ReplyDeleteThen they should have to keep him anonymous, this is now the commicrats taking away the rights of media outlets. Again trying to stifle free speech, but it's ok now because it serves their crooked ways.
ReplyDeleteCommunist mentality from shiff, and his comrads
Under the 6th amendment of the constitution, the accused has the right to cross examine the accuser.
ReplyDeleteBut since when do the dumbocrats respect ANY of the constitution?
Puglosi stands in front of 30 flags and spouts out that she and the dumbs are protecting the constitution all while they are trying to take it down!
Hey dumbocrats out there, are you proud of your party?
He is not a whistleblower according to the guidelines set forth since he did not follow the proper procedure and tell the IG before going to a Politian for advice. That makes him a leaker / spy who does not have any rights that are granted to a whistleblower. Wished you idiots would read the requirements to be considered a whistleblower. Screw his lawyers.
ReplyDeleteWhistle blower on a document that probably billion people have read. Ridiculous it’s gone this far. Only in congress
ReplyDeleteThe lawyer is all talk. The last thing he wants is what would come out in the discovery process. The other thing he just confirmed that yea the pretend whistleblower is Eric Ciaramella. A lawyer doesn't threaten action for someone who isn't a client. Ciaramella should now sue the lawyer for confirming but Ciaramella isn't the brightest bulb in the pack. I mean who in their right mind would ever retain a lawyer recommenced by your co conspirators?
ReplyDelete