H/T Clash Daily.
Will anyone be held responsible for breaking the law?
I have my doubts.
If the NYT thought they were offering damage control in framing the leaks to Schiff in a favorable light, they were mistaken.
The NYT article went out of their way to make it appear as though everything happening may have looked bad, but actually proceeded ‘by the book’. In reality, they were shining a light on potential criminality on the part of the so-called whistleblower.
And as a result, his claims to whistleblower status may be, in fact, invalidated.
The sequence matters.
Under federal law, whistleblowers within the intelligence community are required to report any allegations of wrongdoing to the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) in order to receive statutory whistleblower protections for their disclosures. The law does not provide any protections to employees or contractors who bypass the process required by law and go directly to Congress, nor does it provide any avenue to disclose classified information to Congress without first going through the ICIG. If the complainant or a colleague leaked classified information to Schiff or his committee, those individuals could be subject to criminal liability for illegal and unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
“The employee may contact the intelligence committees directly [after filing a complaint with the inspector general] if the employee…before making such a contact, furnishes to the Director, through the Inspector General, a statement of the employee’s complaint or information and notice of the employee’s intent to contact the intelligence committees directly…and obtains and follows from the Director, through the Inspector General, direction on how to contact the intelligence committees in accordance with appropriate security practices,” the federal whistleblower law, known as the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, or ICWPA, states.
Source: The Federalist
Well THAT’s a problem, isn’t it Shifty?
And don’t even THINK about going the bleach-bit route. It would end badly.
<blockquote class=”twitter-tweet” data-conversation=”none”><p lang=”en” dir=”ltr”>ALL THESE THINGS ARE TRUE:<br><br>- <a href=”https://twitter.com/AdamSchiff?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw”>@AdamSchiff</a> colluded with the anti-Trump “whistleblower”<br><br>- Schiff helped craft the complaint which was full of lies against Trump<br><br>- “Whistleblower” broke multiple laws<br><br>- This was a partisan hit-job to Impeach Trump & disenfranchise 63 M Americans</p>— Benny (@bennyjohnson) <a href=”https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1179500261045411843?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw”>October 2, 2019</a></blockquote>
If Shifty and Pelosi thought their little circus act would go off without a hitch, they were wrong. They’ve already run into a couple of snags.
One more thing: the original report claimed the ‘whistleblower’ had a mixture of first-and-second hand information, didn’t it?
Don’t be so sure about that. Click through to the tweet to see the whole thread.
And if the whistleblower isn’t REALLY a whistleblower… what happens to all the grand plans of impeachment?
They go up in smoke, don’t they?